Taking a look at poison, snipers, and gargantuan MCs.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Because everybody is totally keen on homebrew rules

Ignoring the other point about talking to your opponent just to make a snarky comment? You realise that 99% of the problems with the game are sorted with a pre-game conversation, right?

I find the culture talked about on the internet to be so strange. Where I'm at, discussing what armies we're thinking of bringing and organising games in advance is just how things roll, yet people talk about organising games and discussing armies pre-game as if such things are cripplingly difficult...

[Charon]

When I look at facebook or forum events it seems to be cripplingly difficult to just post "I intend to come"

So especially if your group is smaller questions like "who will be playing 40k tomorrow" will most of the time go unanswered or ansered with a "maybe"

And even with a "are you bringing Gargantuans?" "Yes" That is not helping my poison army to kill it, does it?
And i am the last on who will try and thell the other guy what he has to play and how he is supposed to build his army. Making rules and army compositions is actually the job of a certain company we happen to stick money up their ***** for RULEbooks.

[Archon Charybdis]

I think the issue is less about Poison and Sniper not working, but the fact that all GCs come with FNP now by default, and can get a 4+ cover save by having a toe in ruins. Drop FNP (which leaves it still as a possible upgrade for say Nurgle or Nid GCs), and require a GC to be 25% covered like a vehicle. It also wouldn't hurt to go back to the "only Witchfires can affect GCs/SHs." I had to deal with a Shrouded Wraithknight in a ruin the other day and I had absolutely no fun that game.

On a related note, how many GC's have actually been included in the basic 40K codexes since 7th ed? Just the Wraithknight? All the FW ones were pointed prior to the 7th ed power boost, and the only one that's actually been released in 7th ed (the Wraithknight) is pretty universally agreed to be undercosted. Rolling back some of the 7th ed changes for GCs might be the perfect fix.

[Arkhan Land]

I.... I just... wow. OK. No words.

what you dont like my hypothetical eldar driveby? you gotta be careful in the mean streets of the craftworld

but yeah seriously these weapons are symbolic, go score some points or keep your opponents from doing so for two turns and be happy it only took you 100-150 points.



on the original dilemna I think maybe what could help this out is some sort of in between

perhaps another way to view it is that its up to the monster to shrug it off:

GMCs ignore the effects of poison/sniper wound on the roll of 2+

[Mr Mystery]

Just makes them tougher, as you would have to wound, and then successful wounds would have the 1 in 6 chance of not being ignored.

- - - Updated - - -

Ignoring the other point about talking to your opponent just to make a snarky comment? You realise that 99% of the problems with the game are sorted with a pre-game conversation, right?

I find the culture talked about on the internet to be so strange. Where I'm at, discussing what armies we're thinking of bringing and organising games in advance is just how things roll, yet people talk about organising games and discussing armies pre-game as if such things are cripplingly difficult...

Yep.

I'm breaking my 7th Ed and Mechanicus duck on Sunday, having booked a game at my local GW.

2,000 points, and unbound. Immediate taker.

Had someone said 'I can do 2,000 but don't fancy Unbound' then I'd have happily come to terms with them.

Only reason I wanted to go Unbound is that I haven't played 7th Ed yet (been very, very busy at work. And usually hungover on a Sunday) and really don't have a handle on allies and how they work, let alone how I want to field my burgeoning Mechanicus and Skitarii units. Unbound lets me just plonk on what I've got, allowing me to get an idea of how each unit performs.

I'm reminded of a lost somewhere on BoLs by someone claiming the Ork Codex 'legitimised' the use of Super Heavies in standard 40k because of the Stompa's inclusion....yeah when the rules are in the rule book, it's about legitimate an option as you'll find.

Person A not liking Rule X does not mean Rule X is poorly written after all.

[Lost Vyper]

I love the whole Sniper idea, but couple of things annoy me in the 40K universe...

1. Illic is worst Sniper than Vindicare? Get the f*** outta here! There should be at least no Look Out Sir´s on his shots or something...
2. The whole Sniper rule should be tweaked a bit, there should be a way to at least glance any vehicle or something...i have terrible luck with my (now again awesome) Eldar Rangers, usually (with 5 man unit) only one or two wounds/round, no Rending...but that´s just bad dice rolling...

[LCS]

Person A not liking Rule X does not mean Rule X is poorly written after all.

At the same time, Rule X being included in the rulebook does not make Rule X well written. Which is where most of the problems in this game come from: poorly written and unbalanced rules.

[Haighus]

I don't want to see Godzilla get brought down by sniper rifles, that would be silly. In addition, poison probably delivers enough of a dose to seriously hurt an Infantry-sized target or even a larger creature, but Godzilla? Up the dose son, because he ain't feeling it.

Well, based on the weight of the current (largest) version of Godzilla, which is 81,500 metric tons apparently, it would take less than a 5th of a gram of botulinum toxin to kill it. Granted this would take a few days, potentially a few weeks to kill it, if it could survive falling over. Now, there is in no guarantee that botulinum would affect Godzilla, but considering it's mechanism of action, it is pretty likely. There are plenty of toxins out there that do not need to be in large quantities to kill, and I'm sure the IoM could locate/develop one that is capable of hurting Godzilla, and I am even more sure the Dark Eldar could. Needing a lot of a toxin isn't really an issue... although delivering it would be harder (eyes, gums, anywhere along it's digestive tract would be the easiest targets).

Interestingly, Fleshbane still wounds GC on a 2+ as far as I can tell, so maybe Hellfire rounds should be Fleshbane to represent this. I am pretty sure a bolt-round can fit in a gram of poison...

[CoffeeGrunt]

Interestingly, Fleshbane still wounds GC on a 2+ as far as I can tell, so maybe Hellfire rounds should be Fleshbane to represent this. I am pretty sure a bolt-round can fit in a gram of poison...

I thought Hellfire Rounds were more like an extremely reactive acid? In that case, they might not be able to melt away enough of, say, a Heirophant, to matter over the course of a game.

[Path Walker]

Why do people still seem to think area terrain is a thing?

- - - Updated - - -

Well, based on the weight of the current (largest) version of Godzilla, which is 81,500 metric tons apparently, it would take less than a 5th of a gram of botulinum toxin to kill it. Granted this would take a few days, potentially a few weeks to kill it, if it could survive falling over. Now, there is in no guarantee that botulinum would affect Godzilla, but considering it's mechanism of action, it is pretty likely. There are plenty of toxins out there that do not need to be in large quantities to kill, and I'm sure the IoM could locate/develop one that is capable of hurting Godzilla, and I am even more sure the Dark Eldar could. Needing a lot of a toxin isn't really an issue... although delivering it would be harder (eyes, gums, anywhere along it's digestive tract would be the easiest targets).

Interestingly, Fleshbane still wounds GC on a 2+ as far as I can tell, so maybe Hellfire rounds should be Fleshbane to represent this. I am pretty sure a bolt-round can fit in a gram of poison...

I think this is exactly why they still work but at a reduced effectiveness, its harder to get a real vulerance point on something whose eyelids are thick enough not to be penetrated by a round, so the Sniper (or Poison user) has to have much better timing/accuracy