So I actually spent several hours testing out the moral phase in actual dice test and statistical average charting. The thing is about the new morale attrition rules is that they are really interesting. Yes they will hurt Eilite units a little more, however, due to the fact that elite units (just going to look at Space marines for this) you have leadership 8, in order to even make these guys possibly fail, two need to die. Yes, that isn't hard to do with the right heavy weapons, but they also get a free reroll due to They shall know no Fear. In all my tests, High leadership was still paying off and helping out. When the tests did fail, i found that rollinng roughly 5-7 dice, only one d6 would show a 1. possibly 2 if unlucky. Now i also tested this with mob units, and was thrilled to see how it played differently. Mobs will now be able to hold the ground a little longer, but i found that since mobs still have usually poor leadership values, that they would almost always be having to test their morale every turn still, but with statistically less models fleeing. Of course i did have a few bad attrition rolls were a good chunk decided to run for the hills with their commissars shooting after them. My overall conclusion came down to this. Its a new meta where now if we want to ensure more elite units start to flee, we have to decide on which of our kill teams are going to hit them hard and where they will need to be. it will also make protecting said kill teams much more important, however, coming from Star Wars Legion (I still play 40k and AofS) I like the idea of a meta in 40k where it is less beneficial to constantly shoot out a unit just to wipe it off with bullets, now it can be more beneficial to keep shooting until a moral test is possible or likely and then hope to the next unit. effectively making your opponent have to roll for as many tests as possible. Sorry for the long post, just wanted to share my thoughts on the new mechanic :)
Another significant change: To fight in the fight phase, a model must either be in engagement range *_or within .5" of a model that is within .5" of the enemy._* If I've done my maths right, this means you can only ever have 2 ranks in combat, regardless of base size. Also, for models without a base, the "hull" has been redefined as meaning any part of the model, including weapons. And it's also been stated that when moving a model, you can rotate turrets etc. So moving the turrets on your tanks can potentially affect what you can shoot.
The fact that you roll off after setting up to go first. Instead of taking a big bid, deploying knowing you'll go first and nuking someone in one turn and shaking hands
12:20 already FAQed (13/07), shields modify the roll, not the characteristics now. Also, they said only Indomitus set shiels work this way, shields from elsewhere, even if it have the same name, operates as in their
@@vlogsdistinct "Please also note that while some weapons and other items of wargear (e.g. storm shields) appear in other places with slightly different rules, the rules for them that appear in Edge of Silence should not apply to other units - you should continue to use the rules as printed in your current Codex for the time being." ie. terminators arent changing
It also changes the Invulnerable Save from 3++ to 4++. I'd personally rather have the old rules thanks. And I doubt that, were they to change it, that the roll of 1 for Terminators would be successful. Just my 2 cents though as that seems like an exploit.
I love making terrain and as apart of that I need to understand how it will be used while I make it. These new rules seem to lay it out very clearly which is something I really apreciate.
I'm glad see you explaining the new rules. About two and a half years ago I had just got my first Death Gaurd pices and was almost exclusively learned how to play from your 8th edition videos. Thanks for the help once again.
Matt really great video again, you are very good at this! I think you have found your niche and made MWG videos relevant/interesting to me again. I hope you do this type of video for all the future GW rules/codex/faq/errata changes! Good job.
But the points changes weren't really balanced.... for the most part they either dont make sense or just seem arbitrary.... For example why would they increase the cost of Superheavies that were already never used? What about small units like Guardsmen being 5 points compared to grots or cultist? Gamesworkshop dosent know what they are doing.
I do not think the game is any more balanced than it was before, from my experience genestealer cults became even more unusable and tyranids got a point increase on everything with some models going up by 40 points, so there is that.
I think some of the point changes were to make the Armies smaller for each point bracket as pretty much everything went up in points by 20%. It would make sense in lieu of the maps being a little bit smaller as well. But still, yeah, I don't know what they are doing. I saw Reddit that my Shield Drones are now 15 instead of 10. That means 6 Shield Drones cost the same as 8 Gun Drones and have on average the same amount of wounds (when taking in account the average roll of 5+ FNP on the Shield Drones). I know they have a 4+ Invulnerable Save but most Tau players keep their Drones tuck away and you can't use it on Savior Protocol. In most cases I now take the Gun Drones along with a Drone Controller. At least then my drones can deal some damage before taking a sacrifice for the Battlesuits. If some reason someone wants to take shots at my Gun Drones, that means they aren't shooting at something else that is probably a way bigger threat than them.
@@kinkarcana1293 yea i dont get why an ork grot cost the same as a guardsmen when the grots have less armour, less range, lower strength and toughness, dont have access to clan abilities, no access to stratagems. where as a guardsmen for the same points has all of that, plus better stats and then also gets orders to be way more effective. makes literally no sense.
As a Tau player, I am for the most part enjoying the new rules. I think the no more than +1 and -1 to rolls is a great addition. It hurts the Ghostkeel as it no longer gets the -2 to hit it but I still take a stealth drone with it because now it makes it harder to counter that -1 to hit, but we will see if the FAQ/Codex change how the stealth drones work. The moral auto pass on a roll of 1 is nice since most of my units have an auto pass on a roll of 6. I am thankful for only INFANTRY getting the -1 to hit when moving and firing a heavy weapon. It now frees up a support slot for my battlesuits. The changes to detachments are a must have. It was annoying spamming attachments just to gain CP. My biggest worry is the limit of one commander per detachment. I am hopping they FAQ that because I think its unfair. The limitation is needed but should not be tied to the detachments. Maybe the size of the match is what determines the limitations or allow Battalions and/or Brigades to take an additional commander due to their size and the need for a subcommander. That would mean if I want more, I need more detachments (and spend resources to get them) and FSE still gets an additional one so they could get three in one detachment. The other concern I have is FLY units no longer can fall back and shoot. In most cases I think it is necessary; however, with Tau Battlesuits it think its hurtful especially since we don’t have the move 6” before and after shooting like they did when they were first introduced. It also doesn’t fit with the lore of Crisis Suits and Stealth Suits. I think a fair balance is “treat falling back as if the unit advanced” (not the same, about “as if” to prevent Stratagem and others from effecting it). This means they can shoot while falling back but only with assault weapons and at a -1 to hit. The Riptide still wouldn’t be able to fall back and shot its Heavy Burst Cannon. They very least, I expect a Strategam to allow me to fall back and shoot with battlesuits. Anyways that’s my two cents worth.
I think it's a given that the morale changes help horde more than hurt them. On paper at least, horde armies are things you deploy in droves, and lose in droves. Hordes usually didn't *barely* fail their morale test in my experience--they either used a way to pass it (Summary Execution, Breakin' 'Eads, 2CP Stratagem, etc), or they got wiped/close to it by morale.
"The fact you wrote in that rulebook has hurt my soul" - I hear you. Though I wish I could get over it. Adding notes, FAQ etc makes playing easier. It's not like I ever sell my stuff anyway. Yeah, I need to get over it :/
If you were an AdMech player you would understand that move. There are so many units missing in the Codex, the points have changed five times since it was printed. And on and on and on
@@Toxicmoe91 The app will change things but honestly I hope they stop putting points in codexes and just issue chapter approved more often. They should've sent out the admech codex in a 3 ring binder :p
I think they said that the new Storm Shield rule only affects the Indomitus models, while previous units of past editions with their Storm Shields remain with their classic 3+ invulnerable save.
Question about command reroll and miracle dice. I declare a charge and I use 1 miracle die and roll the 2nd die. I fail the charge. If I use a command reroll, do I just reroll the 1 die I rolled for the charge or do I need to reroll both?
at 10:12, you said you rolled a D6 to determine the number of MW inflicted so I'm guessing that would not be considered a damage roll? If that's correct, would I not be able to reroll damage from smite as well?
i love the new obscure rule for terrain. it just seemed unrealistic how a whole squad could "thread the needle" between two windows to be able to shoot a non-static target. this simulated a war much better, a not just a shooting gallery
CAn someone maybe help me with a rule problem? In our group people play the Reinforcements as it says in the rulebook. But what rules apply to for example Daemons that use the strategem to be set up in the warp? Most of our players play it, that they are allowed to come at the first battle round, because the rules say only units in "strategic reserve" can arrive at the second turn not the first. Is this played correct or is there a section where it explains this? Sorry for my bad english....
I'm really looking forward to the new cover mechanics and stuff. I always thought terrain didn't have enough of an impact for what it is on a battlefield.
Thanks for making these videos! Will you cover Line of Sight as well? How''ll it work in 9th edition? (like, can my Duencrawler shoot over my Skitarii, or can I shoot at some Custodes Bikes, looking over an armored crates?). Much appreciated.
That whole "dice modified below 1" thing as been there all along 8th edition ^^ It was explained in the "Stepping into a New Edition" FAQ released day 1 of 8th edition... nothing actually changed there...
@@meganobgutzkraka2398 No, because the wording has already been Errata'ed from "increase the save characteristic" to "modify the dice roll". And they also confirmed that wording was specific to the Indomitus set datasheets... which again is the normal course of actions, you always use the specific wording from the actual datasheet you use, regardless if other wording exists for the same ability in other books. Just like the issue with the Chapter Master ability wether you read it on Marneus Calgar's or Dante's datasheet...
For strategic reserves I have a question about that command point usage. I'm playing sisters and there is that seraphim ability that allows the unit to deep strike and then fire their weapons do I need to spend the point to put them in reserves and then spend the points to bring them out and use that ability?
I don't like that GW said troops will matter more, but they do not. If you don't have space marines with primaris marines, most factions will have a disadvantage using lots of troops. But what i realy like, is that you can put them in reserve. So you could have a brigadine detachment, and could spent the CP to put more units in reserve. It might affect some factions more than others. But for Eldar it is great because the range of shuriken weapons is so bad and placing them in 9inch range helps alot
Do any units allow the attacker to allocate wounds to the defending unit? For example could some range specialist indicate they want to remove a model in the middle of a chain and force the squad to lose members via coherencey checks?
@@anyemployee1873 And it's rule only allows the Harlequin player to select which will be the first model to flee when an unit it attacked fails it's morale test, it doesn't allows to select to which model the wound is allocated (which would be a very powerfull effect given how the wound allocation rules changed)
There's a handful of other things. Like when you divide numbers on die rolls (die rolls only so far), you round fractions up. So a half strength unit of 15, could be 8 or 7, not sure yet. There are no limits to strategic reserves. You can reserve your entire army and give your opponent a free turn. No part of the model (hull or base) may ever be outside the battlefield (for those flappy planes with big wings). Prepared Positions stratagem is gone, but some missions automatically give it to the Defender. Some missions you set up reserves and transports in secret, then reveal to each other, then deploy, in that order. Crazy strategic gamble there. Have not found any rules that say that if you don't have an army on the table you lose. You can field units under the minimum unit size and only pay for what you bring (great for players starting out with incomplete collections). At least storm shields got patched (they only apply to indomitus, and on top of that they just give a +1 to the save and a 4+ invul), other storm shields remain the same, for now.
Matched play limits Strategic reserves and reinforcements to half your units and half your power, just like 8th edition. There is a rule that says if you destroy your opponent's army you can still play the rest of the game. So no sudden death (still).
that Statue giving that "Inspiring IMPERIUM", makes me wonder, will other factions get new specific terrain soon? Would love to see more than those few kits Xenos terrain offer now..
Matt have you noticed the massive upgrade that Spore mine spawning units got now that over watch costs a command point since they wont have all the command points needed to counter all the charges
I'm really happy with the detachment changes. It was sad being punished for running lists with less troops, when the game should promote people building a variety of unique lists.
So it was mentioned you can reroll damage rolls with CP, but in the new crusade article they released today they mentioned using the command point to reroll a exorcists damage roll. Is there a crusade specific rule that allows that?
@@miniwargaming Is that a separate stratagem? From the (admittedly) limited bits I've seen from the book, damage rolls arnt included under CP rerolls. Is it a separate stratagem?
honestly, we don't know yet. MWG defines the damage roll as bound to a weapons D characteristic, but that's not written anywhere. For me, a damage roll is every roll that deals damage, and that includes the mortal wounds dice.
@@wesyoung9331 MWG have filmed the description of the command reroll strat in the core rules and your citation is not part of it. Rather the contrary, because it expressly mentions the reroll ability of the strata gem for random shots for weapons, which excludes special abilities and psychic powers. Which is does not for damage roll, which is a general term not defined by anything or that it can only be applied to weapon damage like for random shots.
@@sh4dowcl4w81 Damage is a characteristic on datasheets/weapon profiles as well as in the section on making attacks, so it is defined. Damage is part of an attack. Nothing defines rolling d3 mortal wounds as a damage roll. Effects that cause mortal wounds do not describe that as a damage roll and are not attacks. I can understand why you would think of it that way, but the rules don't support that.
Btw I know you guys pointed out the disembark rule but it's in unit coherence: if models can't be placed they're slain. I don't know if you resolved that one yet. If so ignore me. Lol
I am confused your storm shield example. With +1 to save characteristic, but with natural 1s being a fail, it basically comes down to AP. So, you roll a natural 2, which is not a natural 1 so is not an auto fail. BUT, your effective save of 1+ minus 4 ap from the melta means you still need a 5. Which means ultimately you should still do the storm shield invuln. How is this not clear?
AP modifies the dice roll, not the save characteristic. If a space marine rolls a 3 armor save vs an ap 1 weapon, the roll is reduced to a 2, a fail. Which in essence is the same thing as saying “he has to roll a 4+” but the distinction is important if the save is 1+. Ap will never modify the roll below 1, therefore ap has no effect whatsoever
Some of the changes seem like they over complicate things, but, maybe I just feel overwhelmed because I only just started learning 8th right as 9th was coming out and have yet to be able to play ANY edition!
Older editions were indeed much more complicated than 9th edition. They drastically simplified the rules going from 7th to 8th to be able to rebalance the game. Now that stuff is quite balanced they are increasing the complexity back, and some rules are new versions of what we had before. Just to give you an idea, in 7th edition you had over 110 pages of "basic" rules :P
This was me with 8th when I first started. Was watching a mix of games from 7th and 8th and was confused as to why I didn't need blast templates,scatter dice and why I couldn't find rules for Arjac's shield brother anywhere in my book. I think the transition from 8th to 9th looks a bit lest complicated, but there is some nuances that are going to take some play testing to pick up on. I would avoid watching anymore 8th personally. download the 9th rules from the website and follow along as you watch some batreps.
Most significant change? Actions far above all the others. They require you to "lose" a unit for a turn, while also giving you VPs. The difference between using a Platoon Commander with a Squad of Guardsman as chaff (70-75 points) and using, in my case, A Sorcerer and 10 cultists as chaff (150 points) means elite armies will on average have a harder time scoring points, and will have to sacrifice more in points to get those points.
1: Indomitus storm shields were erratad to give +1 to Sv and 4++, not to all saves 2: Stuff in codices still have their own rules and don't use the rules in Indomitus. To even if point 1 never occurred, your Terminators would still "only" have a 2+ Sv and 3++ invulnerable save, because their storm shields are picked from their codex and not Indomitus.
Great video as always. Keep up the great work. These are really helpful. Thank you. Quick question. What game mat are the models sitting on in the video? Thank you very much.
so the changes are mostly related to the rules and not so much the figures? so if I buy the Dark Imperium box rn I could still use those with the 9th gen rules?
Feeder tendrils are still ok. It's only rules or abilities that are used to refund/gain CP when CP is used that's affected. So only if you have an ability that gives you a CP when your opponent uses a strategem or refunds you CP when you use a strategem does the +1 cap apply.
@@miniwargaming The section that applies is "There are several rules that give you the chance to gain or refund CPs *when* you or your opponent either use a Stratagem or spend CPs to use a Stratagem." The "when" part seems to be the main point. The reason the rule is written this way because some abilities allow you gain CP when your opponent uses a Stratagem and others refund you your CP when you use a Stratagem. I'm sure they'll be forced to clarify because there's a fair number of stratagems that would be made useless and have not been updated in the 9th edition FAQ's for the codices.
@@miniwargaming The first sentence "There are several rules THAT GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO gain or refund CPs when you or your opponent either use a Stratagem or spend CPs to use a Stratagem." clearly describe a precise category of rules. And the second sentence to specify "Each player can only gain or have refunded a total of 1 CP per battle round AS THE RESULT OF SUCH RULES..." A stratagem whose effect is to gain CPs definitely does not fall into the category described in the first sentence.
For morale, what happens if pulling the first model you pull by failing the test puts you below half? Would the rolls go to 1s and 2s, or remain at 1s because the unit was at half size at the beginning of the phase?
You remove the model that automatically flee before starting to roll attrition, and Half-strength is checked in real-time, so yes, that fleeing model can totally makes the unit fall under half-strength...
So, with the coherency rule as written, if you had a unit with 6 models left and due to casualties 3 of which were within 2” of each and the other 3 were within 2” of each other but the 2 groups of 3 models were 6” apart they pass the requirement for being in coherency because every model is within 2” of at least 2 other models from that unit. Is that right?
I think they are primary and secondary coherency rules. 6+ models both apply less than 6 coherency of 2" from one other model applies. You would lose 1 of the groups of 3.
Matthew Stone yeah, in the spirit of the game it’s clear to see what they are going for but it definitely could cause some frantic mid-turn rules checking! 🤣
Games workshop address the storm shield question for now the storm shield with the indomitus box keeps that rule however other storms shields like Terminators or wulfen or smash captains keep their normal rules so they still keep the 3++
MWG ...I only got into Warhammer last edition and LOVE it but as much as I think this edition will be alot better .. my army has been made ... Useless... I play and love deamons! But two of the rules I loved about them and were unique are now nothing 1. Moral phase with the banner, on a roll of 1 we automatically passed And 2. We could deep strike ANY unit. Now everyone has these rules (except bringing units back after moral roll of 1) What are your thoughts? Or anytime this reading this would love to know.
I think the new moral test system will help armies/units/abilities that inflict Leadership penalties. Against small units it was practically useless and against big units you were better off just killing them instead. It should make hoards a little more resilient and small units a little more vulnerable.
@@miniwargaming Yes I mean the mortal wounds. I'd like to know why don't you consider it a damage roll ? Why do you think should an e.g. battle cannon damage roll (which inflicts wounds) differ from a smite damage roll inflicting mortal wounds ?
@@Sephiroth517 true, but smite deals damage, mortal wounds are damage, hence the mortal wounds roll (the d6 in this example) can be considered a damage roll. I understand what you mean but I don't think it's clearly explained what a "damage roll" is.
I’m really curious if they will modify Fearsome Aspect; Terror Troops; Fear Made Manifest; Death Mask of Sanguinius; Standart of the Emperor Ascendant; Hallucination; Spirits of Chogoris and/or Headtaker’s Trophies to affect Atrition instead of Moral. Personally, I think Fear Made Manifest, Standart and Trophies should all change to affect Atrittion INSTEAD of Moral (though Fear Made Manifest pehaps could affect both), non stackable with any other effects that modifies attrtition, except for “bellow half strenght”; While Fearsome Aspect, Terror Troops and Death Mask of Sanguinius stays affectting only moral and; Hallucination and Spirits of Chogoris hit both moral and attrition (again, attrition not stacking with anything but bellow-half-strenght). Anyway, I’m considering a B plan if my moral bomb (-9 moral) gets reduced to removing a single model and then forcing a default attrition test for the rest of the unit, but hopefully I will be looking forward to drop a -5 moral; -1 to attrition bomb with a pair of reivers flanking a phobos lieutenant (Fearsome Aspect + Headhunter’s Trophies + Master of the Vanguard)
Oh, also, 2 stratagems of the white scars became default rules (attacking someone that tries to disengage and “encirclement”, the new reserve forces rules), so there probably will be at least 1 new stratagem for them to replace those. I’m looking forward for something on the lines of: 0CP, use it when an enemy CHARACTER died by an attack made with a MEELE WEAPON of one of your WHITE SCARS (or sucessor) units. Regain 1CP.
A little heads up for people looking into Knights, they have a special rule that gives the CP refund if your Warlord is in a detachment to super-heavy detachments as well. Thought I might mention it in case someone sees this this and goes "Wait does that mean Knights basically start with 6?".
There I was, sitting and thinking "Matthew talked about those phases but what about other changes? And what about the psychic and morale?" Someone's a mind-reader ;)
The 1+ save with the Storm Shields that is mentioned, I am fairly certain that is how the Bastiladon works now in AoS, right? So maybe not likely to get changed since that hasn't been changed.
Great content as usual Matt! I've got a question vaguely related to terrain - if a unit has a special rule that grants it the benefit of cover even when it's out in the open, such as the Masters of Concealment rule, what benefit does it receive if its not actually on a terrain piece? Is it still +1 armor save, or is it -1 to hit, or what?
The back of the rule book has some FAQs that cover that. If you have a rule that grant you the benefits of cover even if you are out in the open, then you gain the Light Cover benefit (i.e. +1 save). If you have a rule that increases your save when you are in cover (like camo cloaks on Space Marine Scouts), then you get +1 save when in any cover, even cover that doesn’t normally boost your saving throw.
The way I understood it ObSec has been changed slightly: basically, with the new rules, 2 ObSec models and 10 non-ObSec models do outcontrol 10 ObSec models. Would’ve been a good type of video to mention it in - if I’m correct that it works like that, of course
It will be until we get a new codex or index. You get refunded the 2 cp for your warlord's detachment, and gain 4 for your extra patrols. Since the two extra patrols cost 2cp each, you technically get all 3 for free. Pretty nifty
They did verify that the new Storm Shield rule only applies to the Indomitus box models. It is in a FAQ. :) One of my least favorite changes is the change to Heroic Interventions. Allowing them to be attacked nerfs what is usually a fun little ability and part of the Space Wolf Chapter Tactic. :(
Jeremy Blankenship problem is it was used as a “gotcha, FU” ability to prevent characters taking damage when they were in combat. And GW never intended for people to be able to do it
@@anurientalnivarr9408 Fair, but it is less of a 'gotcha' ability than many of the strats as it is part of the Core Rules. The Space Wolf Chapter Tactic merely extended the range.
@@daemonnexusknight and as a result, had thunder hammer wielding characters waiting for a charge, so they could intervene at zero risk and pump massive damage onto whatever they went for, hitting on 2+, whereas other characters, being only 3" away at most, could generally be declared as a charge target.
@@benharrison8855 If someone did this, then they were playing correctly as it is a strategy that you can see coming from a mile away. Just don't charge that other unit, include the character in your charge, or go after something else. You can also end your charge outside the range of the 6". I still don't see the issue with that. It is like saying they need to take away For The Greater Good as it keep people from being able to charge T'au.
surely modifications happen at the same time, for instance the storm shield and the bonus to safe happen at the same instant therefore it could drop to 1 as it would ultimately be -3 at that point.
The storm shield modifier is to the save, not the save throw wheres the ap modifiers modifying the roll itself rather than your save itself. I hope that makes sense, it's difficult to word
The rule of 2" within 2 other models for 6 or more in a unit. If your unit of ten drops to 5 then I guess you just have to be within 2" of 1 other model. I hope this is right otherwise big starting units are screwed when attrition kicks in.
You mean with 1+ saves? For almost everything that modifies saving throws, the modifer applies to the dice roll. A terminator has a 2+ save. If he's in cover, he still has a 2+ save, you just add one to the dice roll. If you shoot him with a melta, he still has a 2+, and you take 4 off the dice roll. The new storm shields (until they FAQed it) worked differently. They changed the actual save characteristic, so the terminator could now have a 1+ save. You can beat this with a natural 1 (because a natural 1 automatically fails). But because a dice roll can't be modified to less than 1 (and there is no rule that says a _modified_ 1 fails), then no matter how good the AP is, you cant beat the save if you don't roll a natural 1 (effectively giving it a 2++ invulnerable save). Which is obviously stupid, but that was how the rules as written worked (and why they FAQed it to instead give +1 to the save roll instead).
In regards to Obscuring terrain the point about not being able to see something beyond it is only for seeing “over the top” of the terrain feature. If you can see something around it like a leg or arm then it can be targeted according to line of sight as it’s any part of the model to any part of the model
Exactly. You must finish with one before moving to the next. It never says you must manifest the maximum number of powers they are allowed to manifest.
Brian Cline it’s really only a true/false so you either fail or don’t, so I’d say it matter quite a bit more now than just meaning you lose 5 models instead of 6 because you have 1 more morale, now you can succeed, or fail and lose an amount that increases with the amount of models, but doesn’t scale too much statistically
i feel like im missing something here. Even if you have a 1 up armour save termy, if you are hit by the -4ap that turns into a 5+ armour save instead of a 6+ like it would be without the new rule.......... I fail to see how it becomes a 2+ invun save? Your counting the wrong way no?
@@SymSne but you still need to roll 5's to make a successful armour save in that situation no? SO the effect is exactly the same but with a overly complicated way of explaining to mechanic. only in extreme fringe cases does doing it by modifying the armour value and not the roll actually come up and when it does its retarded and makes no sense. Also this means me and everyone ive ever known and played with [tournaments included] across 2 continents have been doing it wrong for like 20 years lol
@@tylerschofield yeah, in almost all situations, AP and cover modifying the save characteristic would have the same effect as modifying the dice roll. But it makes a difference: 1) if someone somehow gets an actual 1+ save characteristic: because rolls can't be modified below 1, this works as a 2++ invulnerable save. 2) if someone is in "dangerous cover" that can explode if you roll 7+ on your save: this means that abilities that improve your save roll increase the risk of it exploding, while AP weapons reduce or eliminate it.
Unknown so far. I was a betting man, I'd say named characters like Abaddon, Shadowsun, Ghazkull, maybe Vect, Dante and Swarmlord will be, as soon as their respective codices come out.
I dont like the CP tax for wanting to bring a fluffy list to the table. If I want to play with two detachments, one Guard and a backup force of Marines, I shouldnt be penalized for it. I also shouldnt get bonuses for it. They should have just left it at you start with x CP based on size of battle and detachments give you nothing and cost you nothing
Yes, but for every "fluffy" army that utilizes two detachments, there are fifty "cheesy" armies that abuse the multiple detachments to bring as many bonuses to the table, or to farm CP. The detachment change in 9th is definitely going to add a lot more good than bad to the game.
I think bringing more than one detachment is a significant advantage whether you can justify it as fluffy or not and should cost CP, although I'd say they costs could be reduced by 1 each and still be okay.
MWG introductory rules videos are always worth watching :)
So I actually spent several hours testing out the moral phase in actual dice test and statistical average charting. The thing is about the new morale attrition rules is that they are really interesting. Yes they will hurt Eilite units a little more, however, due to the fact that elite units (just going to look at Space marines for this) you have leadership 8, in order to even make these guys possibly fail, two need to die. Yes, that isn't hard to do with the right heavy weapons, but they also get a free reroll due to They shall know no Fear. In all my tests, High leadership was still paying off and helping out. When the tests did fail, i found that rollinng roughly 5-7 dice, only one d6 would show a 1. possibly 2 if unlucky.
Now i also tested this with mob units, and was thrilled to see how it played differently. Mobs will now be able to hold the ground a little longer, but i found that since mobs still have usually poor leadership values, that they would almost always be having to test their morale every turn still, but with statistically less models fleeing. Of course i did have a few bad attrition rolls were a good chunk decided to run for the hills with their commissars shooting after them.
My overall conclusion came down to this. Its a new meta where now if we want to ensure more elite units start to flee, we have to decide on which of our kill teams are going to hit them hard and where they will need to be. it will also make protecting said kill teams much more important, however, coming from Star Wars Legion (I still play 40k and AofS) I like the idea of a meta in 40k where it is less beneficial to constantly shoot out a unit just to wipe it off with bullets, now it can be more beneficial to keep shooting until a moral test is possible or likely and then hope to the next unit. effectively making your opponent have to roll for as many tests as possible.
Sorry for the long post, just wanted to share my thoughts on the new mechanic :)
Pretty useful analysis o/ thanks
don't apologize for sharing your thoughts. Thank you!
Another significant change:
To fight in the fight phase, a model must either be in engagement range *_or within .5" of a model that is within .5" of the enemy._*
If I've done my maths right, this means you can only ever have 2 ranks in combat, regardless of base size.
Also, for models without a base, the "hull" has been redefined as meaning any part of the model, including weapons. And it's also been stated that when moving a model, you can rotate turrets etc. So moving the turrets on your tanks can potentially affect what you can shoot.
The fact that you roll off after setting up to go first. Instead of taking a big bid, deploying knowing you'll go first and nuking someone in one turn and shaking hands
12:20 already FAQed (13/07), shields modify the roll, not the characteristics now. Also, they said only Indomitus set shiels work this way, shields from elsewhere, even if it have the same name, operates as in their
lazy design means FAQs that drop almost the same day as the edition itself
The storm shields were FAQ'ed already to say add 1 to the saving throw
Its still good to explain because some people don't understand
Yeah, I had to check the date of the video. The crusade armour relic will need FAQing as well
Dam it my notifications was 4 minutes off but good to catch it early.. keep up the good work
Same
Yeh it came only after 4min to me
I don't like coherency.
Its great they changed storm shields to +1 to armour saving rolls for models from indomitus
And not for the rest
Did you read the FAQ? I thought it said only the new models get that rule (for now) and to follow the normal rules in your codex.
Yeah but how does it work on terminators
@@vlogsdistinct "Please also note that while some weapons and other items of
wargear (e.g. storm shields) appear in other places with slightly
different rules, the rules for them that appear in Edge of Silence
should not apply to other units - you should continue to use the
rules as printed in your current Codex for the time being."
ie. terminators arent changing
-Rayzer- -Wolf- thanks a lot I was thinking about it a lot
It also changes the Invulnerable Save from 3++ to 4++. I'd personally rather have the old rules thanks. And I doubt that, were they to change it, that the roll of 1 for Terminators would be successful. Just my 2 cents though as that seems like an exploit.
I love making terrain and as apart of that I need to understand how it will be used while I make it. These new rules seem to lay it out very clearly which is something I really apreciate.
there is a page in the new rule book which shows several different pieces of terrain, plus which rules they get. You should look that page up! :)
Oh sorry, it's in this video, th-cam.com/video/hLIpaLY6wwE/w-d-xo.html 18:00
Thanks for doing these videos, they are really helpful. I am really liking the new terrain rules also and look forward to your video on them
Actions shutting down character auras adds a bit of strategy and consideration during the course of the game.
I'm glad see you explaining the new rules. About two and a half years ago I had just got my first Death Gaurd pices and was almost exclusively learned how to play from your 8th edition videos. Thanks for the help once again.
Matt really great video again, you are very good at this! I think you have found your niche and made MWG videos relevant/interesting to me again. I hope you do this type of video for all the future GW rules/codex/faq/errata changes! Good job.
Im glad they balanced the points costs decently with the new update....
EXCEPT WARP TALONS WHAT THE FU-
But the points changes weren't really balanced.... for the most part they either dont make sense or just seem arbitrary.... For example why would they increase the cost of Superheavies that were already never used? What about small units like Guardsmen being 5 points compared to grots or cultist? Gamesworkshop dosent know what they are doing.
I do not think the game is any more balanced than it was before, from my experience genestealer cults became even more unusable and tyranids got a point increase on everything with some models going up by 40 points, so there is that.
It's a little thing, but thanks for making me laugh.
I think some of the point changes were to make the Armies smaller for each point bracket as pretty much everything went up in points by 20%. It would make sense in lieu of the maps being a little bit smaller as well. But still, yeah, I don't know what they are doing. I saw Reddit that my Shield Drones are now 15 instead of 10. That means 6 Shield Drones cost the same as 8 Gun Drones and have on average the same amount of wounds (when taking in account the average roll of 5+ FNP on the Shield Drones). I know they have a 4+ Invulnerable Save but most Tau players keep their Drones tuck away and you can't use it on Savior Protocol. In most cases I now take the Gun Drones along with a Drone Controller. At least then my drones can deal some damage before taking a sacrifice for the Battlesuits. If some reason someone wants to take shots at my Gun Drones, that means they aren't shooting at something else that is probably a way bigger threat than them.
@@kinkarcana1293 yea i dont get why an ork grot cost the same as a guardsmen when the grots have less armour, less range, lower strength and toughness, dont have access to clan abilities, no access to stratagems. where as a guardsmen for the same points has all of that, plus better stats and then also gets orders to be way more effective. makes literally no sense.
As a Tau player, I am for the most part enjoying the new rules. I think the no more than +1 and -1 to rolls is a great addition. It hurts the Ghostkeel as it no longer gets the -2 to hit it but I still take a stealth drone with it because now it makes it harder to counter that -1 to hit, but we will see if the FAQ/Codex change how the stealth drones work. The moral auto pass on a roll of 1 is nice since most of my units have an auto pass on a roll of 6. I am thankful for only INFANTRY getting the -1 to hit when moving and firing a heavy weapon. It now frees up a support slot for my battlesuits. The changes to detachments are a must have. It was annoying spamming attachments just to gain CP. My biggest worry is the limit of one commander per detachment. I am hopping they FAQ that because I think its unfair. The limitation is needed but should not be tied to the detachments. Maybe the size of the match is what determines the limitations or allow Battalions and/or Brigades to take an additional commander due to their size and the need for a subcommander. That would mean if I want more, I need more detachments (and spend resources to get them) and FSE still gets an additional one so they could get three in one detachment. The other concern I have is FLY units no longer can fall back and shoot. In most cases I think it is necessary; however, with Tau Battlesuits it think its hurtful especially since we don’t have the move 6” before and after shooting like they did when they were first introduced. It also doesn’t fit with the lore of Crisis Suits and Stealth Suits. I think a fair balance is “treat falling back as if the unit advanced” (not the same, about “as if” to prevent Stratagem and others from effecting it). This means they can shoot while falling back but only with assault weapons and at a -1 to hit. The Riptide still wouldn’t be able to fall back and shot its Heavy Burst Cannon. They very least, I expect a Strategam to allow me to fall back and shoot with battlesuits. Anyways that’s my two cents worth.
I think it's a given that the morale changes help horde more than hurt them. On paper at least, horde armies are things you deploy in droves, and lose in droves. Hordes usually didn't *barely* fail their morale test in my experience--they either used a way to pass it (Summary Execution, Breakin' 'Eads, 2CP Stratagem, etc), or they got wiped/close to it by morale.
The fact you wrote in that rulebook has hurt my soul
That's what books are for! It shows that it is loved. I love dogearring my books too. :)
"The fact you wrote in that rulebook has hurt my soul" - I hear you. Though I wish I could get over it. Adding notes, FAQ etc makes playing easier. It's not like I ever sell my stuff anyway. Yeah, I need to get over it :/
@@MentatOfDune Better to enjoy your toys than to be a collector IMO.
If you were an AdMech player you would understand that move. There are so many units missing in the Codex, the points have changed five times since it was printed. And on and on and on
@@Toxicmoe91 The app will change things but honestly I hope they stop putting points in codexes and just issue chapter approved more often. They should've sent out the admech codex in a 3 ring binder :p
I think they said that the new Storm Shield rule only affects the Indomitus models, while previous units of past editions with their Storm Shields remain with their classic 3+ invulnerable save.
Question about command reroll and miracle dice. I declare a charge and I use 1 miracle die and roll the 2nd die. I fail the charge. If I use a command reroll, do I just reroll the 1 die I rolled for the charge or do I need to reroll both?
at 10:12, you said you rolled a D6 to determine the number of MW inflicted so I'm guessing that would not be considered a damage roll? If that's correct, would I not be able to reroll damage from smite as well?
i love the new obscure rule for terrain. it just seemed unrealistic how a whole squad could "thread the needle" between two windows to be able to shoot a non-static target. this simulated a war much better, a not just a shooting gallery
Is that terrain rule going to prevent large models from going off the table first tern? If so, things are definitely going to become more intense
CAn someone maybe help me with a rule problem? In our group people play the Reinforcements as it says in the rulebook. But what rules apply to for example Daemons that use the strategem to be set up in the warp? Most of our players play it, that they are allowed to come at the first battle round, because the rules say only units in "strategic reserve" can arrive at the second turn not the first. Is this played correct or is there a section where it explains this? Sorry for my bad english....
@10:15 So why can't you reroll the damage from a smite? That is not a "damage" roll? I'm confused about that
Nvm some else asked the same question and I saw you answer. Thanks... I never conceptualized that mortal wounds and damage were two different things
I'm really looking forward to the new cover mechanics and stuff. I always thought terrain didn't have enough of an impact for what it is on a battlefield.
Thanks for making these videos! Will you cover Line of Sight as well? How''ll it work in 9th edition? (like, can my Duencrawler shoot over my Skitarii, or can I shoot at some Custodes Bikes, looking over an armored crates?). Much appreciated.
That whole "dice modified below 1" thing as been there all along 8th edition ^^ It was explained in the "Stepping into a New Edition" FAQ released day 1 of 8th edition... nothing actually changed there...
so aspect termies and weak termies DO get 2+ invuln?
jesus
@@meganobgutzkraka2398 No, because the wording has already been Errata'ed from "increase the save characteristic" to "modify the dice roll".
And they also confirmed that wording was specific to the Indomitus set datasheets... which again is the normal course of actions, you always use the specific wording from the actual datasheet you use, regardless if other wording exists for the same ability in other books. Just like the issue with the Chapter Master ability wether you read it on Marneus Calgar's or Dante's datasheet...
This was clearly recorded BEFORE the most recent FAQs.
lol, yup!
For strategic reserves I have a question about that command point usage. I'm playing sisters and there is that seraphim ability that allows the unit to deep strike and then fire their weapons do I need to spend the point to put them in reserves and then spend the points to bring them out and use that ability?
I don't like that GW said troops will matter more, but they do not. If you don't have space marines with primaris marines, most factions will have a disadvantage using lots of troops.
But what i realy like, is that you can put them in reserve. So you could have a brigadine detachment, and could spent the CP to put more units in reserve. It might affect some factions more than others. But for Eldar it is great because the range of shuriken weapons is so bad and placing them in 9inch range helps alot
Do any units allow the attacker to allocate wounds to the defending unit? For example could some range specialist indicate they want to remove a model in the middle of a chain and force the squad to lose members via coherencey checks?
The Death Jester for Harlequins is the only one I know of.
@@anyemployee1873 And it's rule only allows the Harlequin player to select which will be the first model to flee when an unit it attacked fails it's morale test, it doesn't allows to select to which model the wound is allocated (which would be a very powerfull effect given how the wound allocation rules changed)
Thanks for this brief video to give simple rules an changes. They're helping get the feel of 9th before I get my book.
If they FAQ stormshields, what would they do for my Custodes already being at a 2+ save? Gotta get some games in while I can.
If would mean you would ignore the first point of AP on weapons. So ap-1 would still be a 2+ and ap-2 would be a 3+ save
There's a handful of other things.
Like when you divide numbers on die rolls (die rolls only so far), you round fractions up. So a half strength unit of 15, could be 8 or 7, not sure yet.
There are no limits to strategic reserves. You can reserve your entire army and give your opponent a free turn.
No part of the model (hull or base) may ever be outside the battlefield (for those flappy planes with big wings).
Prepared Positions stratagem is gone, but some missions automatically give it to the Defender.
Some missions you set up reserves and transports in secret, then reveal to each other, then deploy, in that order. Crazy strategic gamble there.
Have not found any rules that say that if you don't have an army on the table you lose.
You can field units under the minimum unit size and only pay for what you bring (great for players starting out with incomplete collections).
At least storm shields got patched (they only apply to indomitus, and on top of that they just give a +1 to the save and a 4+ invul), other storm shields remain the same, for now.
Matched play limits Strategic reserves and reinforcements to half your units and half your power, just like 8th edition.
There is a rule that says if you destroy your opponent's army you can still play the rest of the game. So no sudden death (still).
Good to know :)
that Statue giving that "Inspiring IMPERIUM", makes me wonder, will other factions get new specific terrain soon?
Would love to see more than those few kits Xenos terrain offer now..
Matt have you noticed the massive upgrade that Spore mine spawning units got now that over watch costs a command point since they wont have all the command points needed to counter all the charges
That will definitely be helpful!
I'm really happy with the detachment changes. It was sad being punished for running lists with less troops, when the game should promote people building a variety of unique lists.
So it was mentioned you can reroll damage rolls with CP, but in the new crusade article they released today they mentioned using the command point to reroll a exorcists damage roll. Is there a crusade specific rule that allows that?
I realize it also might just be s mistake on GWs end but I'm curious if theres a reason aside from that
Do you mean the Damage roll from their weapons? Then yes, you can reroll those.
@@miniwargaming Is that a separate stratagem? From the (admittedly) limited bits I've seen from the book, damage rolls arnt included under CP rerolls. Is it a separate stratagem?
Alex May. Damage rolls are included under the new CP reroll, Matt mentions this.
In the command re-roll stratagem it says you can rereoll a damage roll, would that not also count for the damage done by smite?
No, Damage is an attribute that weapons have. Dealing D6 or D3 mortal wounds is not the same thing.
honestly, we don't know yet. MWG defines the damage roll as bound to a weapons D characteristic, but that's not written anywhere. For me, a damage roll is every roll that deals damage, and that includes the mortal wounds dice.
Craig Fenris it says weapon damage in the description of the Command Reroll strat in the Core Rules.
@@wesyoung9331 MWG have filmed the description of the command reroll strat in the core rules and your citation is not part of it.
Rather the contrary, because it expressly mentions the reroll ability of the strata gem for random shots for weapons, which excludes special abilities and psychic powers. Which is does not for damage roll, which is a general term not defined by anything or that it can only be applied to weapon damage like for random shots.
@@sh4dowcl4w81 Damage is a characteristic on datasheets/weapon profiles as well as in the section on making attacks, so it is defined. Damage is part of an attack. Nothing defines rolling d3 mortal wounds as a damage roll. Effects that cause mortal wounds do not describe that as a damage roll and are not attacks. I can understand why you would think of it that way, but the rules don't support that.
Btw I know you guys pointed out the disembark rule but it's in unit coherence: if models can't be placed they're slain. I don't know if you resolved that one yet. If so ignore me. Lol
Great job presenting these changes, Matthew.
Is there any provision for the maelstrom objective cards in 9th edition? That was my favorite part of 8th edition.
I think the biggest change of 8th to 9th is Matt's new sexy hair-do.
I am confused your storm shield example. With +1 to save characteristic, but with natural 1s being a fail, it basically comes down to AP. So, you roll a natural 2, which is not a natural 1 so is not an auto fail. BUT, your effective save of 1+ minus 4 ap from the melta means you still need a 5. Which means ultimately you should still do the storm shield invuln. How is this not clear?
AP modifies the dice roll, not the save characteristic. If a space marine rolls a 3 armor save vs an ap 1 weapon, the roll is reduced to a 2, a fail. Which in essence is the same thing as saying “he has to roll a 4+” but the distinction is important if the save is 1+. Ap will never modify the roll below 1, therefore ap has no effect whatsoever
I love the new "train-rules" Høh..
Does "Cut them down" apply to single model units, because is does say "Models" in the stratagem.
I appreciate these videos. They are very informative.
Some of the changes seem like they over complicate things, but, maybe I just feel overwhelmed because I only just started learning 8th right as 9th was coming out and have yet to be able to play ANY edition!
I’m on the same boat. Only played some Kill Team and I am gonna try 9th as soon as I can.
Older editions were indeed much more complicated than 9th edition. They drastically simplified the rules going from 7th to 8th to be able to rebalance the game. Now that stuff is quite balanced they are increasing the complexity back, and some rules are new versions of what we had before. Just to give you an idea, in 7th edition you had over 110 pages of "basic" rules :P
This was me with 8th when I first started. Was watching a mix of games from 7th and 8th and was confused as to why I didn't need blast templates,scatter dice and why I couldn't find rules for Arjac's shield brother anywhere in my book. I think the transition from 8th to 9th looks a bit lest complicated, but there is some nuances that are going to take some play testing to pick up on. I would avoid watching anymore 8th personally. download the 9th rules from the website and follow along as you watch some batreps.
Blame that on people trying to argue things like 'a Leman Russ that remained stationary hasn't "moved less than half it's movement"'.
Most significant change? Actions far above all the others. They require you to "lose" a unit for a turn, while also giving you VPs. The difference between using a Platoon Commander with a Squad of Guardsman as chaff (70-75 points) and using, in my case, A Sorcerer and 10 cultists as chaff (150 points) means elite armies will on average have a harder time scoring points, and will have to sacrifice more in points to get those points.
In the psychic phase there is now a rule where you can't cast after falling back from combat.
1: Indomitus storm shields were erratad to give +1 to Sv and 4++, not to all saves
2: Stuff in codices still have their own rules and don't use the rules in Indomitus. To even if point 1 never occurred, your Terminators would still "only" have a 2+ Sv and 3++ invulnerable save, because their storm shields are picked from their codex and not Indomitus.
Seems good to me: unified terrain rules allows for making Competitive/Ranked maps specifically or for keeping the meta fresh.
Great video as always. Keep up the great work. These are really helpful. Thank you. Quick question. What game mat are the models sitting on in the video? Thank you very much.
The new terrain rules are the biggest and best change in 9th
so the changes are mostly related to the rules and not so much the figures? so if I buy the Dark Imperium box rn I could still use those with the 9th gen rules?
Yes exactly.
Feeder tendrils are still ok.
It's only rules or abilities that are used to refund/gain CP when CP is used that's affected. So only if you have an ability that gives you a CP when your opponent uses a strategem or refunds you CP when you use a strategem does the +1 cap apply.
It's changed to specify from any source, including stratagems, so it wouldn't be helpful at all.
@@miniwargaming The section that applies is "There are several rules that give you the chance to gain or refund CPs *when* you or your opponent either use a Stratagem or spend CPs to use a Stratagem."
The "when" part seems to be the main point. The reason the rule is written this way because some abilities allow you gain CP when your opponent uses a Stratagem and others refund you your CP when you use a Stratagem. I'm sure they'll be forced to clarify because there's a fair number of stratagems that would be made useless and have not been updated in the 9th edition FAQ's for the codices.
@@miniwargaming
The first sentence "There are several rules THAT GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO gain or refund CPs when you or your opponent either use a Stratagem or spend CPs to use a Stratagem." clearly describe a precise category of rules. And the second sentence to specify "Each player can only gain or have refunded a total of 1 CP per battle round AS THE RESULT OF SUCH RULES..."
A stratagem whose effect is to gain CPs definitely does not fall into the category described in the first sentence.
@@Sephiroth517 unfortunately a 100% chance is still technically a chance.
For morale, what happens if pulling the first model you pull by failing the test puts you below half? Would the rolls go to 1s and 2s, or remain at 1s because the unit was at half size at the beginning of the phase?
You remove the model that automatically flee before starting to roll attrition, and Half-strength is checked in real-time, so yes, that fleeing model can totally makes the unit fall under half-strength...
Thanks for the vid. Not sure how I feel about the new morale
I was thinking on painting necrons and i thought instead of corax whote can i basecoat the glpw with calliban, sorry of topic
keep in mind calliban green is a faily dark green
warpstone then?
@@themanbehindtheslaughter7633 warpstone would be good to or just do a basegoat calliban and then highlight with warpstone if you are good at it
Thanks alot i will basecoat calliban highlight warpsrone and add some tesseraxt glow
Like very much rules and terrain, but hate alternate deploying and roll-off for first turn after deploy
These have been great, thanks Matt & MWG team!
So, with the coherency rule as written, if you had a unit with 6 models left and due to casualties 3 of which were within 2” of each and the other 3 were within 2” of each other but the 2 groups of 3 models were 6” apart they pass the requirement for being in coherency because every model is within 2” of at least 2 other models from that unit. Is that right?
Lmao 😆 good point. I don't think that's in the spirit though.
Technically you could have a 6 foot gap between the groups of 3 from the same unit!!!!!!!
I think they are primary and secondary coherency rules. 6+ models both apply less than 6 coherency of 2" from one other model applies. You would lose 1 of the groups of 3.
Matthew Stone yeah, in the spirit of the game it’s clear to see what they are going for but it definitely could cause some frantic mid-turn rules checking! 🤣
Now we are talking about the Interesting Phase!
Games workshop address the storm shield question for now the storm shield with the indomitus box keeps that rule however other storms shields like Terminators or wulfen or smash captains keep their normal rules so they still keep the 3++
4:11 "Number 3, a black screen"
Whoops! :)
MWG ...I only got into Warhammer last edition and LOVE it but as much as I think this edition will be alot better .. my army has been made ... Useless... I play and love deamons! But two of the rules I loved about them and were unique are now nothing
1. Moral phase with the banner, on a roll of 1 we automatically passed
And 2. We could deep strike ANY unit.
Now everyone has these rules (except bringing units back after moral roll of 1)
What are your thoughts? Or anytime this reading this would love to know.
I think the new moral test system will help armies/units/abilities that inflict Leadership penalties. Against small units it was practically useless and against big units you were better off just killing them instead. It should make hoards a little more resilient and small units a little more vulnerable.
why couldn't you re-roll the D6 roll ? It is obviously a damage roll, which can be re-rolled ... ?
I'm assuming you're talking about D6 mortal wounds, which is most definitely not a damage roll.
@@miniwargaming Yes I mean the mortal wounds. I'd like to know why don't you consider it a damage roll ? Why do you think should an e.g. battle cannon damage roll (which inflicts wounds) differ from a smite damage roll inflicting mortal wounds ?
@@sh4dowcl4w81 Because Smite doesn't have a Damage characteristic ? because this is a characteristic that is only found on weapon's profiles....
@@Sephiroth517 true, but smite deals damage, mortal wounds are damage, hence the mortal wounds roll (the d6 in this example) can be considered a damage roll. I understand what you mean but I don't think it's clearly explained what a "damage roll" is.
I’m really curious if they will modify Fearsome Aspect; Terror Troops; Fear Made Manifest; Death Mask of Sanguinius; Standart of the Emperor Ascendant; Hallucination; Spirits of Chogoris and/or Headtaker’s Trophies to affect Atrition instead of Moral.
Personally, I think Fear Made Manifest, Standart and Trophies should all change to affect Atrittion INSTEAD of Moral (though Fear Made Manifest pehaps could affect both), non stackable with any other effects that modifies attrtition, except for “bellow half strenght”;
While Fearsome Aspect, Terror Troops and Death Mask of Sanguinius stays affectting only moral and;
Hallucination and Spirits of Chogoris hit both moral and attrition (again, attrition not stacking with anything but bellow-half-strenght).
Anyway, I’m considering a B plan if my moral bomb (-9 moral) gets reduced to removing a single model and then forcing a default attrition test for the rest of the unit, but hopefully I will be looking forward to drop a -5 moral; -1 to attrition bomb with a pair of reivers flanking a phobos lieutenant (Fearsome Aspect + Headhunter’s Trophies + Master of the Vanguard)
Oh, also, 2 stratagems of the white scars became default rules (attacking someone that tries to disengage and “encirclement”, the new reserve forces rules), so there probably will be at least 1 new stratagem for them to replace those. I’m looking forward for something on the lines of: 0CP, use it when an enemy CHARACTER died by an attack made with a MEELE WEAPON of one of your WHITE SCARS (or sucessor) units. Regain 1CP.
A little heads up for people looking into Knights, they have a special rule that gives the CP refund if your Warlord is in a detachment to super-heavy detachments as well. Thought I might mention it in case someone sees this this and goes "Wait does that mean Knights basically start with 6?".
Yes, this was mentioned in the Knight faction focus a few weeks ago too
There I was, sitting and thinking "Matthew talked about those phases but what about other changes? And what about the psychic and morale?" Someone's a mind-reader ;)
Thanks for the vid Matt.
Out of curiosity what gaming mat are you using in the video?
Love the videos! But quick question, were the last 3 or 4 videos made on the same day/session or has Matt been wearing the same shirt for days?
lol, all on the same day.
That's a gorgeous cobblestone gaming mat. Where did it come from Matt?
There really much point in my playing 40k atm, not until new Codexes are released, at least. Thank goodness AoS exists.
The 1+ save with the Storm Shields that is mentioned, I am fairly certain that is how the Bastiladon works now in AoS, right? So maybe not likely to get changed since that hasn't been changed.
It’s already been changed and now adds +1 to the saving throw
Great content as usual Matt! I've got a question vaguely related to terrain - if a unit has a special rule that grants it the benefit of cover even when it's out in the open, such as the Masters of Concealment rule, what benefit does it receive if its not actually on a terrain piece? Is it still +1 armor save, or is it -1 to hit, or what?
The back of the rule book has some FAQs that cover that. If you have a rule that grant you the benefits of cover even if you are out in the open, then you gain the Light Cover benefit (i.e. +1 save). If you have a rule that increases your save when you are in cover (like camo cloaks on Space Marine Scouts), then you get +1 save when in any cover, even cover that doesn’t normally boost your saving throw.
@@miniwargaming Thanks for the quick reply!
The way I understood it ObSec has been changed slightly: basically, with the new rules, 2 ObSec models and 10 non-ObSec models do outcontrol 10 ObSec models. Would’ve been a good type of video to mention it in - if I’m correct that it works like that, of course
So only two things detachments used for, now, is limiting your army composition and managing faction/sub-faction specific rules?
Seems that way, which I'm a big fan of.
Can the necrons cast ctan powers if they fall back in 9th?
So drukhari have if I have 3 patrols I get 4 cp, is this still in or no?
It will be until we get a new codex or index. You get refunded the 2 cp for your warlord's detachment, and gain 4 for your extra patrols. Since the two extra patrols cost 2cp each, you technically get all 3 for free. Pretty nifty
They did verify that the new Storm Shield rule only applies to the Indomitus box models. It is in a FAQ. :) One of my least favorite changes is the change to Heroic Interventions. Allowing them to be attacked nerfs what is usually a fun little ability and part of the Space Wolf Chapter Tactic. :(
Jeremy Blankenship problem is it was used as a “gotcha, FU” ability to prevent characters taking damage when they were in combat. And GW never intended for people to be able to do it
@@anurientalnivarr9408 Fair, but it is less of a 'gotcha' ability than many of the strats as it is part of the Core Rules. The Space Wolf Chapter Tactic merely extended the range.
@@daemonnexusknight and as a result, had thunder hammer wielding characters waiting for a charge, so they could intervene at zero risk and pump massive damage onto whatever they went for, hitting on 2+, whereas other characters, being only 3" away at most, could generally be declared as a charge target.
@@benharrison8855 If someone did this, then they were playing correctly as it is a strategy that you can see coming from a mile away. Just don't charge that other unit, include the character in your charge, or go after something else. You can also end your charge outside the range of the 6". I still don't see the issue with that. It is like saying they need to take away For The Greater Good as it keep people from being able to charge T'au.
@@daemonnexusknight ok champ, I'll avoid a battleline blanketed by a supreme command and dreads that can also intervene 👍
Liking the new rules so far, can't wait to start playing 9th
surely modifications happen at the same time, for instance the storm shield and the bonus to safe happen at the same instant therefore it could drop to 1 as it would ultimately be -3 at that point.
The storm shield modifier is to the save, not the save throw wheres the ap modifiers modifying the roll itself rather than your save itself. I hope that makes sense, it's difficult to word
@@kimreddick7231 yeah thats exactly right, but now it got faq'd so all is fine for now
Doesn't unit coherence not count when you are below half?
The rule of 2" within 2 other models for 6 or more in a unit. If your unit of ten drops to 5 then I guess you just have to be within 2" of 1 other model. I hope this is right otherwise big starting units are screwed when attrition kicks in.
Where can i find that tee shirt
The dice thing confuses me on the plus 1?
You mean with 1+ saves?
For almost everything that modifies saving throws, the modifer applies to the dice roll. A terminator has a 2+ save. If he's in cover, he still has a 2+ save, you just add one to the dice roll. If you shoot him with a melta, he still has a 2+, and you take 4 off the dice roll.
The new storm shields (until they FAQed it) worked differently. They changed the actual save characteristic, so the terminator could now have a 1+ save. You can beat this with a natural 1 (because a natural 1 automatically fails). But because a dice roll can't be modified to less than 1 (and there is no rule that says a _modified_ 1 fails), then no matter how good the AP is, you cant beat the save if you don't roll a natural 1 (effectively giving it a 2++ invulnerable save).
Which is obviously stupid, but that was how the rules as written worked (and why they FAQed it to instead give +1 to the save roll instead).
Iapetus McCool still. Why confused I need to see it happen first I think
In regards to Obscuring terrain the point about not being able to see something beyond it is only for seeing “over the top” of the terrain feature. If you can see something around it like a leg or arm then it can be targeted according to line of sight as it’s any part of the model to any part of the model
Wait, does the building rules include ones you buy for your army (like noctilith crown and so on)?
Yes, the FAQ’s for Imperial Knights, Chaos Marines have stipulations adding terrain features to the Noctilith Crown and the Sacristian Forgeshrine
Great video. Really informative
So can you lose a unit to the unit coherency check, because the definition of unit coherency says it is only relevant with units bigger than 5 models?
Unit coherency is relevant for 2+ models. If you have 6+ then you must have TWO models within coherency instead of just one.
MWG Studios that makes sense, thank you for clarifying that for me.
Your hair is on point man.
Matt,thank you!
Thx for the vid.Keep going on and stay safe.
What if i want to cast smite with a psyker but not cast other of his powers can i do so?
Yes?
Ye, it doesnt say you have to do all his powers or none, just once you start you cant swap from 1 phyker to another
Exactly. You must finish with one before moving to the next. It never says you must manifest the maximum number of powers they are allowed to manifest.
After watching your section on morale and attrition I’m a bit confused as to what role the Leadership stat factors into the game now, or at all?
Brian Cline it’s really only a true/false so you either fail or don’t, so I’d say it matter quite a bit more now than just meaning you lose 5 models instead of 6 because you have 1 more morale, now you can succeed, or fail and lose an amount that increases with the amount of models, but doesn’t scale too much statistically
i feel like im missing something here. Even if you have a 1 up armour save termy, if you are hit by the -4ap that turns into a 5+ armour save instead of a 6+ like it would be without the new rule.......... I fail to see how it becomes a 2+ invun save? Your counting the wrong way no?
AP modifies your save rolls not your save stat. -3 AP on a 2+ does not make it a 5+ save, it makes your 5's count as 2's.
@@SymSne but you still need to roll 5's to make a successful armour save in that situation no?
SO the effect is exactly the same but with a overly complicated way of explaining to mechanic. only in extreme fringe cases does doing it by modifying the armour value and not the roll actually come up and when it does its retarded and makes no sense.
Also this means me and everyone ive ever known and played with [tournaments included] across 2 continents have been doing it wrong for like 20 years lol
@@tylerschofield yeah, in almost all situations, AP and cover modifying the save characteristic would have the same effect as modifying the dice roll.
But it makes a difference:
1) if someone somehow gets an actual 1+ save characteristic: because rolls can't be modified below 1, this works as a 2++ invulnerable save.
2) if someone is in "dangerous cover" that can explode if you roll 7+ on your save: this means that abilities that improve your save roll increase the risk of it exploding, while AP weapons reduce or eliminate it.
Now that the supreme command detachment has changed what can be used as a supreme commander unit?
Be in the new codexs as they come out. It's a new keyword.
Unknown so far. I was a betting man, I'd say named characters like Abaddon, Shadowsun, Ghazkull, maybe Vect, Dante and Swarmlord will be, as soon as their respective codices come out.
I dont like the CP tax for wanting to bring a fluffy list to the table. If I want to play with two detachments, one Guard and a backup force of Marines, I shouldnt be penalized for it. I also shouldnt get bonuses for it. They should have just left it at you start with x CP based on size of battle and detachments give you nothing and cost you nothing
Yes, but for every "fluffy" army that utilizes two detachments, there are fifty "cheesy" armies that abuse the multiple detachments to bring as many bonuses to the table, or to farm CP.
The detachment change in 9th is definitely going to add a lot more good than bad to the game.
I think bringing more than one detachment is a significant advantage whether you can justify it as fluffy or not and should cost CP, although I'd say they costs could be reduced by 1 each and still be okay.
Love your work. Thanks.