More Leaked 5th Stufff

[SteveBerenyi]

From Bell of Lost Souls


Charge Response Move: The response move is exactly the same as the countercharge rule. Every unit gets it, but models that already have Countercharge (like Space Wolves) gain +1 Attack as if they had charged themselves.

Relentless USR: This applies mainly to bikes and terminators. You may move and fire heavy weapons and fire to full effect with rapid fire weapons and still charge.

Hit and Run USR: This is similar to the current rule but now you have to pass an initiative test to perform it.

Vehicles: Vehicle rules are apparantly identical to the leaked codex

"No-Argument" cover saves: Your opponent says what they think it is; if you disagree they still gets the cover save but with a –1 ~That's and interesting new concept for GW to throw into a ruleset.

Wound Allocation: This is performed per model (similar to Flames of War) exactly as listed in the leaked PDF. This can lead to the loss of key models within a unit.

No Retreat: Saves are limited to the amount of wounds caused (if you outnumber a fearless opponent 4:1 and you won the combat but only caused 1 wound you cause only an additional 1 wound; if you win and cause 5 wounds you only cause 4 wounds as your limited by how much you outnumber your opponent.)

Missions: Troops are the only scoring units but they count as scoring till the last man. They must be destroyed entirely to remove their scoring status.

There are 3 different deployment zones (Quarters, Deep and Shallow Long table Edges) and 3 different objectives (VPs, Take and Hold, Loot) means that there are 9 types of missions

~Its sounding like that leaked pdf was a lot closer to the final product than many initially thought. Its also interesting to see that they are formalizing certain common items of dispute that happen in games to keep things moving along (similar to Flames of War's very clean dispute rules).

[Warmaster Romulas]

great find steve
that seems ok
but im not sure about that no arguement covers
seems a little flaky to me

[SteveBerenyi]

indeed it does, but it streamlines the "yes he does" "no he doesn't" BS that seems to crop up quite often.


also they had this:


UPDATE!
We also have some additional 5th edition tidbits:

• Release Date: Saturday, July 5th
• Powerfists confirmed as not getting an additional attack unless equipped with a second PF.
• Secondary weapons on vehicles confirmed as Strength:4.

[Dan296]

cover saves shouldnt be a big controversy...
if theres any cover, say the saves before the game starts!

[Sir_Servo]

gotta agree with dan on this one. My opponents and I always clarify what terrain offers what kind of save at the begining of the battle. Other than that it looks interesting.

Servo

[experiment 626]

i like the power fist change too... i never ejoyed the fact that the game could easily devolve into 'who took more power fists' as they really are *that* good.
the fewer attacks means they're still nasty, but not to the point that a single vet sergeant can go through your entire squad in 2/3 rounds of combat!

the vehicle weapon thing is a bit disconcerting... it's a backwards step IMHO as it will make vehicles much more static so they can keep up a continuous rate of fire.

oh well, new rules simply means new tactics!
cheers!

[masterofweirdness]

Originally Posted by experiment 626

the vehicle weapon thing is a bit disconcerting... it's a backwards step IMHO as it will make vehicles much more static so they can keep up a continuous rate of fire.
oh well, new rules simply means new tactics!
cheers!

I agree here... tanks aren't supposed to be mobile... they are the cavlary of the modern era! Fast, hard hitting, and mobile.

I'm not sure what to make of the troops as scoring units only rule... it does seem to make some armies have a better time of it than others... most of my 1.5k lists for CSM only have 2 troop choices under that rule... I just throw in other units... like a raptor squad, predator, havocs, and chosen...

Oh, the other hand, necrons will like that rule alot...

I also don't agree with the terrain rule... terrain, to me, is simple. There is a chart in the book and you and your oppenent should declare sizes and cover saves granted before the battle begins. Still... its a nice rule if one forgets to do this...

[Drax]

Originally Posted by masterofweirdness

Oh, the other hand, necrons will like that rule alot...

them and Orks and Guard!

anyone want to buy 6k of Chaos Marines?

[Lord Commander Erus]

NOw do we for sure now this means Troop choices, or Troop models.. It could just be an ambigious wording. It could mean infantry models only. No source document has for sure said 'Troop Choice Only'.. Just troops... In my thinking, that would mean infantry... Which wouldn't be that bad, and would make sense really.

[Warmaster Romulas]

Originally Posted by Lord Commander Erus

NOw do we for sure now this means Troop choices, or Troop models.. It could just be an ambigious wording. It could mean infantry models only. No source document has for sure said 'Troop Choice Only'.. Just troops... In my thinking, that would mean infantry... Which wouldn't be that bad, and would make sense really.

thats what i was thinking when i saw troops

[Ikarus]

The issue is Tau vehicles and eldar.

Mobility IS key.

How the hell can you go on playing.. heh.

Thats why i hope tau get a redux, otherwise.. i see no future in mech tau.

I only see orks being the top dominate of this game.



Run! + Normal speed.

Kill points = Mass 30 boy squads
Troops = Scoring ? = Mass 30 boy squads

This new counter charge rule? Only benefits more ork cc.


so 3rd ed was hero hammer, with HQ's pwning, then 4th was serghammer, with protected sergs pwning, now 5th will be troophammer

[experiment 626]

when writen as 'Troops' it means actual 'Troops' choices on the FOC. if 'troops' is all lower-case, then it is a referance to infantry in general...

cheers!

[Dravenguild]

I'm glad with these changes, I'm not concerned about what is a scoring unit because I never liked missions anyways, to me its annihilate and thats all I care about.

And c'mon 626 beat on tanks anymore and they'll become immobile weapon platforms that can't even do firepower properly.

Though I liked how they were before, they were much to flimsy. IMO they should have kept rules the same, added ramming and the new damage table and it would've been great.



As for your opponent having to agree with you, that will make this game as loud as a yu-gi-oh match at the hobby shop i used to play at. (It got so horrible that we had to ban all card game playing in the store)

[Mart007]

Question:

In the leaked rules, for Skimmers, what did it say about what cover save we get now?

[masterofweirdness]

Originally Posted by experiment 626

when writen as 'Troops' it means actual 'Troops' choices on the FOC. if 'troops' is all lower-case, then it is a referance to infantry in general...

cheers!

This would help, except that troops is the first word used in the sentence!

But if it does mean infantry.... that still doesn't help me... or those who play more mobile army lists... 4 scoring units instead of 2 isn't bad, but still, necrons and orks and IG will PWN (speaking of IG, how would you could platoon? each squad as a scoring unit, or the entire platoon as one???)

And Ikarus is right, no matter how it works... this will be troop hammer... gone will be the small, mobile armies of old, and we will see armies with 6 squads of space marine, tones of Gaunts, and hordes of IG...

And Dravenguild, while you and your friends might like playing just kill everyone... most tournements (and lots of players) do like using a point scoring system of some sort. Of all the changes, I think this is the one that is going to most radically alter the way games are played for a LOT of people. All the others... meh... they will change the game, yes, but no matter how you put it, infantry will rule the day, which will make LOTS of army lists obsolete.

[Dragoon King]

Dual powerfists? How is that gonna work? Just double Str., Int. 1, and +1 Attack if you have 2?

[Warmaster Romulas]

Originally Posted by Dragoon King

Dual powerfists? How is that gonna work? Just double Str., Int. 1, and +1 Attack if you have 2?

and are they still gonna be 30pts a piece
thats CRAZY

[experiment 626]

Originally Posted by Warmaster Romulas

and are they still gonna be 30pts a piece
thats CRAZY

of corse power fists will stay around 20-25pts each! think about it; (typically) S8 and ignores armour saves... you honestly should pay through the nose when you consider that your single vet sergeant can kill anything!
or look at it this way; eldar star cannons got not only a pts hike, but lost a shot to boot! why? because just 2 star cannons used to be able to gun down a god-damned greater daemon!!!

was it really fair? of corse not! so the rules changed - just like how the power fist is changing.
before you had no reason not to take that power fist because;
a) it was cheap
b) S8 kills anything you can come across
at least now there's a reason for you to consider the plain old, reliable power toy...

cheers!

[Drax]

how many armies are going to have access to twin pfs though? with LCs, it is an established rule that you need 2 for +1 attack? for armies still with armouries it is possible (though at the expense of any ranged weapon, but for CSM, DA and BA they are going to have to wait a long time before they get the option!!!

its not that i dont think there should be sort sort of change for the fist, but this should really have been considered with the above dexs imo - its not like all those were finished before 5th ed was even started!

[Warmaster Romulas]

good point stitch
i only field 1 or 2 in my army anyway
i prefer firepower
for CC i like the pw personally

[masterofweirdness]

Stitch makes a good point, Powerfists are just too good for what we are paying for them in the current SM dex... 25 points for a S8 weapon that kills everything on a model impossible to kill...

While Drax is right that it makes it unfair for armies like the BA and DA and the like... thats what Errata is for, IHMO (though then you have to get everyone to follow the errata...)

[word bearers 81007]

i disagree the powerfist reducing your int to 1 is always a consideration. if you don't want to go last don't take the fist, in large squads i can see that it would not really matter and with the new codexs removing wargear you can't really make a super power sergeant anymore anyway. I always considered the powerfist rather fair since the trade off with intiative could mean that he never gets a chance to go before being disenboweled. so requireing you to have two is totally ridiculous, but does that you can carry a bolter with 2 fists?? model that one i dare you, and on top of that does anyone have any right handed powerfists there all left handed to my knowledge so how do you model.