One very important thingto watch out for is your Units of Models with multiple Wounds. If a model has lost a Wound already, then make sure that Model doesn't end up as your center. The first time I lost a lot of Orruk Brutes in AoS this way, it definitely felt crappy. That said, I haven't made that mistake again.
Genestealer Cults has a psychic power that can also mess with coherency. Their mental onslaught power targets a model and you then roll off with a d6 adding the leadership of each model to their respective result. If the genestealer player wins the enemy unit takes a mortal wound, and if the selected model is still alive the process is repeated until the model is destroyed or the Genestealer player loses. If the Genestealer player selects a linchpin model this can mean either they remove that model and lose half the unit at the end of their turn, or continue to take mortal wounds. Especially powerful if a Patriarch with Leadership 10 is the one casting the power against a low leadership horde.
I think this is a wonderful addition to 9th. You have to be mindful of placement and casualty removal and placement of key weapons and leader models. Perfect for a TACTICAL war game. I don't think you can move out of coherency intentionally. P206 Paragraph on states " Remember that a unit must finish any type of move in coherency. If this is impossible, then that move cannot be made." I think this is fairly clear and important that you have to pay attention to what your individual models are doing and where they are positioned. Much like setting up charges and optimizing your buffing characters. Too easy.
So what happens if you do any illegal move that brwa ks coherency and your opponent catches it after? You should lose all the units that are out of coherence
@@lordmalal I think that is the rules. In a tactical game, knowing which model is where and how you move them and what casualties you take are important. Just like in the charge phase the order of which units charge in how close you got and trying to tri-point a model all important to the game. You should never make an illegal move in any game. Follow the rules and enjoy the game mate.
Hi, the last FAQ added the following charge move requirement: "Models can only end a charge move within Engagement Range of enemy units that they declared a charge against that phase. "Does this mean that now it is not possible to put large units in 2 rows, due to the fact that the second row will not be in the engagement range. But in one row, if there is not enough space for all the models in the unit, the coherence will be broken How do you charge with large units now?
I honestly don’t know. Maybe you could create a staggered C shaped line and have all models in the unit be touching each other’s bases so are within two inches.
What is it in age of sigmar? Honestly less than 2" cohesion seems like it'd actually be an annoyance to keep your units together even just by moving them around.
This is very easily avoided even with hoards (I play Tyranids). Maintaining coherency is just a good game practice in general. Stringing out a line while tactically useful in 8th was so unrealistic, its a big part of why I am all for aura abilities taking effect on a per model basis rather than a unit basis.
let's say 2 DJs or even 3 DJs attack the same unit, if 2-3 models flee can you pick which 2 to 3 flee based on each individual DJ attacking that unit. So 1 model per DJ
I can't remember in the 9th movement rules are there any take backs allowed ? say you move one unit within it's movement limit and then another also within it's movement limit but under 2 inches horizontally from where it sits and then think "oh I didn't want to do that", can you return both minis to the same spot they were at before ? there are no good ways of marking where your minis were sat before you started moving them, much scope for contention.
If you didn't move the whole squad, then yes. As for remembering where the individual models specifically were, just try your best to remember. If you moved the whole squad and want to take back the move, ask your opponent first. It's ok in casual games, but just make sure to really think ahead of time where you want your squads to be
Hopefully someone can answer this company vets with stormsheilds and meltaguns with long range marksmanship and stealthy as successor traits sallys of course....i digress do u get the +1 to the 3+invulv save with stealthy making it a 2+invulnerable save?
(Haven't played since 5th ed) Dumb question but when you're removing casualties from the Fight Phase can you do so to intentionally leave the enemy unit out of engagement range? ie. no more models within 1"? Can they choose to not pile in?
Warblebeast Yes, you can do this. BUT the fight phase goes like this: a unit does pile in, fight, enemy unit removes losses and then the attacking unit consolidates . So you see, the attacking unit gets a consolidation move after you removed the models, which will very likely be used to make sure that your unit stays in combat.
Warblebeast No, a player doesn’t have to make any pile in or consolidation moves. These moves are a can not a must. BUT when used, the player has to adhere to the rules, i.e. ending closer to the nearest enemy. But he doesn’t have a lot of reasons to let you go, only if the next turn is his turn does it make sense to not stay in the fight.
You can use this to your advantage, if your allowed to break intentionally. You could string out some squads and cause that line to run so the enemy could not charge them or make it harder to do so.
@@ryantownson8530 perhaps, but imho its a flawed solution. My teammates would've skinned me alive if I had the opportunity to enforce this rule and didn't. Whereas I'd hate myself for enforcing it even more than hating myself for letting it happen to me during the pressure of a tourney. Either way it is guaranteed to ruin the mood in a match.
I feel like this is too punishing. Forcing the unit to get back into coherency next turn and making it forego any offensive actions I think would have been enough. Almost like a pile in maneuver but instead at the beginning of the movement phase or command phase.
had a question if i have a trasueranic arquebes and i move a bunch of rangers in a unit but not him i know that i get -1 to hit due to new movement since its if the unit had moved but can i still fire the arquebes cause his datasheet says model?
If any model in the squad moves the squad counts as moving in 9th. You can mitigate this by targeting a unit in cover as the negative to hit from moving and firing wont stack with the -1 to hit for heavy cover.
Caveat: I don't have access to the 'rare rules' section of the 9th rulebook, so it's possible there is something in there addressing this question. That said, I am not seeing anything the basic rules or the FAQ's that would prevent you from firing the TA if the MODEL with it did not move. However, as it is still a heavy weapon, you would suffer a -1 to-hit penalty when firing it if the unit took a move action, even if that specific model didn't move. However, I am willing to bet this is NOT what GW intended, and wouldn't play it that way if it was just a friendly game. If you are able to check the 'rare rules' section of the rulebook, and this isn't addressed, it might be worth an email to the 40k FAQ address. If I remember, I'll put this question up on the warhammer competetive reddit and see what they say.
Arquebus however can't be fired after moving, so if it counts as having moved (as I belive the new rules do) then you wouldn't be able to fire it at all, which kinda sucks
I dont have the rule book yet so im not familiar yet im hoping someone can answer. When removing casualties, do u have to take the closest model or can it be anywhere from the unit?
It is the player who took the casualties choice which model(s) get removed (barring any unusual rule like the Death Jester he mentions in the video.) Also note that with multi-wound models you also get to choose which model to allocate wounds too, but you must continue to allocate any further wounds to that specific model until it is dead. You cannot spread wounds out across a unit of multi-wound models.
@@Tzar-TZ If some of the models in the unit are in cover it will be harder to wound those specific models. They get +1 to their save against ranged weapons. So you may choose them to take any incoming shots, hoping that they will make their saves when the models outside of cover would've failed.
Personally I don’t see the jester doing anything special, the coherency rule is mainly for hordes and I’d say they have fairly good anti leadership rules and the only other squads that have say 10+ models would need to lose a fair few to even fail moral anyway
I was under the impression you could only split a unit before the game starts, using a stratagem no less. Also, above post is right that one can only split a ten man unit up.
So theoretically if I took 6 guard infantry squads with special weapons. I could split them in half, with the special weapon half’s up front and the basic ones on fodder/ screen duty?
@@skewedviews100 The rules say "a unit that has more than one model must be set up and finish any sort of move as a single group", so you can't split the squad up into multiple chunks, even if those chunks fulfil the rest of the coherency rules. Edit: Also, in the morale phase " each player must now remove models....until only a single group of models from the unit remains in play and in unit coherency"
IMO coherency rules like this make the game more immersive or realistic. The game is an imperfect abstraction. The abstraction in this case is individual soldiers being cut off from their unit/allies. In 8th it was basically impossible to simulate this because you could always bring the unit back into coherency. Also in 8th you would end up with squads stretched across half the table with one dude putting his pinky toe on an objective to "secure" it. In 9th if you do this you risk getting your models getting "cut off" because they're essentially in no man's land by themselves.
@@Thergood That's a good argument. I think models disappearing off the table permanently is harder for me to hear but the way you state thing I can see why this was changed. Thanks.
i dislike this Rule. It feals unrealistic and unintuative(which is generally ok since its only a game). Also it complicates the movement without bringing good benefits. The only benefit i can think of is that you get punished for Absurd Formations e.g. to block the whole Plate from shocking. But it comes at great costs and there are easier ways to prevent such formations e.g. You must make the unit coherency check at end of move phase, with 5 or less units each unit must have two other Units in 2" reach and with 6+ models you need three units in 2" reach. Same result but a little more intuative.
This is a rule I’d never want to implement if I was playing. It’s just sorta....dick move really. Also, it’s one of those rules that just makes no realism sense. Like none whatsoever. I think it should be that if the models are not in coherency they lose all faction benefits and unit buffs etc until they reform coherency, basically giving the opponent an entirely basic unit to kill separate from the main one
I generally see it as something you only point out while they are removing models to help them pick the right ones, not something to gotchya them on in morale. Or a "hey you can't conga line can you redo your move on that?"
Well you can't make an illegal move, so you cannot move in a non coherent fashion, I like it, I was fed up with a 30 man squad covering half the table, if you want to take risks and string out your squad then suffer the consequences.
One very important thingto watch out for is your Units of Models with multiple Wounds. If a model has lost a Wound already, then make sure that Model doesn't end up as your center.
The first time I lost a lot of Orruk Brutes in AoS this way, it definitely felt crappy. That said, I haven't made that mistake again.
Good thought! There are a lot of subtleties to look out for with these new slightly punishing rules :P
This is an important rules interaction to be mindful of. It's going to trip a lot of players up.
Genestealer Cults has a psychic power that can also mess with coherency. Their mental onslaught power targets a model and you then roll off with a d6 adding the leadership of each model to their respective result. If the genestealer player wins the enemy unit takes a mortal wound, and if the selected model is still alive the process is repeated until the model is destroyed or the Genestealer player loses.
If the Genestealer player selects a linchpin model this can mean either they remove that model and lose half the unit at the end of their turn, or continue to take mortal wounds. Especially powerful if a Patriarch with Leadership 10 is the one casting the power against a low leadership horde.
Good shout - I knew there were some other examples out there! Best to be forewarned!
Me who just bought a Death Jester before 9th edition dropped:
"Oh, yeah. It's all coming together."
Just as planned.
Imperial/Chaos Knight: *laughs in Unit Coherency*
I really like the new rules. Conga lines and splintered units were ridiculous.
Personally quite like this; it's fringe emergent gameplay. You have to prepare for your opponent not just with your list but with your play.
Death Jester: "Models will continue to be removed until morale improves. "
I think this is a wonderful addition to 9th. You have to be mindful of placement and casualty removal and placement of key weapons and leader models. Perfect for a TACTICAL war game. I don't think you can move out of coherency intentionally. P206 Paragraph on states " Remember that a unit must finish any type of move in coherency. If this is impossible, then that move cannot be made." I think this is fairly clear and important that you have to pay attention to what your individual models are doing and where they are positioned. Much like setting up charges and optimizing your buffing characters. Too easy.
So what happens if you do any illegal move that brwa ks coherency and your opponent catches it after? You should lose all the units that are out of coherence
@@lordmalal I think that is the rules. In a tactical game, knowing which model is where and how you move them and what casualties you take are important. Just like in the charge phase the order of which units charge in how close you got and trying to tri-point a model all important to the game. You should never make an illegal move in any game. Follow the rules and enjoy the game mate.
@@Grithertime I see
A lot of rules around targeting individual models are going to change just because of this. I guarantee it.
And all of a sudden my warmahordes reach key is a warhammer 40k accessory
Hi, the last FAQ added the following charge move requirement: "Models can only end a charge move within
Engagement Range of enemy units that they declared
a charge against that phase. "Does this mean that now it is not possible to put large units in 2 rows, due to the fact that the second row will not be in the engagement range. But in one row, if there is not enough space for all the models in the unit, the coherence will be broken How do you charge with large units now?
I honestly don’t know. Maybe you could create a staggered C shaped line and have all models in the unit be touching each other’s bases so are within two inches.
@@jonathanthiriot1329 yes, thanks for the idea
Having come here from AoS, I consider the new coherency to be a bit more lenient than what I’m used to. 2” is cohesion? That’s insane!
What is it in age of sigmar? Honestly less than 2" cohesion seems like it'd actually be an annoyance to keep your units together even just by moving them around.
Dominus Balial WARHAMMER Age of Sigmar? It’s the fantasy version, you have 1” cohesion lol
This is very easily avoided even with hoards (I play Tyranids). Maintaining coherency is just a good game practice in general. Stringing out a line while tactically useful in 8th was so unrealistic, its a big part of why I am all for aura abilities taking effect on a per model basis rather than a unit basis.
AoS now has a lot of "wholly within x" with the auras to avoid range abusing
Weird boy with 'Ed banger slays the closest model to them which has some uses
let's say 2 DJs or even 3 DJs attack the same unit, if 2-3 models flee can you pick which 2 to 3 flee based on each individual DJ attacking that unit. So 1 model per DJ
so the name of the game is.... GW wants you to no longer be cheezy people with the way you spread out your units.. Got it
1111
Is the widest formation with the most staying power if you remove from the sides first
Same goes for the Red Terror, if I'm not mistaken :)
I can't remember in the 9th movement rules are there any take backs allowed ? say you move one unit within it's movement limit and then another also within it's movement limit but under 2 inches horizontally from where it sits and then think "oh I didn't want to do that", can you return both minis to the same spot they were at before ? there are no good ways of marking where your minis were sat before you started moving them, much scope for contention.
If you didn't move the whole squad, then yes. As for remembering where the individual models specifically were, just try your best to remember. If you moved the whole squad and want to take back the move, ask your opponent first. It's ok in casual games, but just make sure to really think ahead of time where you want your squads to be
I saw this, and was already planning a Harlequins patrol lol.
Hopefully someone can answer this company vets with stormsheilds and meltaguns with long range marksmanship and stealthy as successor traits sallys of course....i digress do u get the +1 to the 3+invulv save with stealthy making it a 2+invulnerable save?
(Haven't played since 5th ed) Dumb question but when you're removing casualties from the Fight Phase can you do so to intentionally leave the enemy unit out of engagement range? ie. no more models within 1"? Can they choose to not pile in?
Warblebeast Yes, you can do this. BUT the fight phase goes like this: a unit does pile in, fight, enemy unit removes losses and then the attacking unit consolidates . So you see, the attacking unit gets a consolidation move after you removed the models, which will very likely be used to make sure that your unit stays in combat.
@@davidgantenbein9362 thanks! Does each unit have to consolidate the full distance if it could conceivably reach engagement range with another unit?
Warblebeast No, a player doesn’t have to make any pile in or consolidation moves. These moves are a can not a must. BUT when used, the player has to adhere to the rules, i.e. ending closer to the nearest enemy. But he doesn’t have a lot of reasons to let you go, only if the next turn is his turn does it make sense to not stay in the fight.
@@davidgantenbein9362 great thanks so much for explaining!
Death Jesters are one of my favorite harlies. I always take three of them. The roles and weapon they can take after PA came out helped them a lot.
I still wish they had the same options they had in the old rule days where why could carry around bright lances and eml.
You can use this to your advantage, if your allowed to break intentionally. You could string out some squads and cause that line to run so the enemy could not charge them or make it harder to do so.
This rule makes me glad my hard-core tourney days are behind me. Talk about feel badsies 😳
This rule was put in place to stop a lot of the 8th edition tournament nonsense.
@@ryantownson8530 perhaps, but imho its a flawed solution. My teammates would've skinned me alive if I had the opportunity to enforce this rule and didn't. Whereas I'd hate myself for enforcing it even more than hating myself for letting it happen to me during the pressure of a tourney. Either way it is guaranteed to ruin the mood in a match.
I feel like this is too punishing. Forcing the unit to get back into coherency next turn and making it forego any offensive actions I think would have been enough. Almost like a pile in maneuver but instead at the beginning of the movement phase or command phase.
Sucks to lose models to this but it's well needed for 9th. Conga lines suck
Would taking out th middle model break over all coherencey though? As long as the remaining models are within 2" of one (of
The rules state they have to be in a single group.
@@PsychoMongoose ah gotcha thanks
cool. good info!
question. What happens when you have a 3 model unit, and one model gets destroyed? do all the models get removed for not having a second model nearby?
I believe the requirement of being next to two models kicks in when units have 6 or more models
@@llesser101 yes
had a question if i have a trasueranic arquebes and i move a bunch of rangers in a unit but not him i know that i get -1 to hit due to new movement since its if the unit had moved but can i still fire the arquebes cause his datasheet says model?
If any model in the squad moves the squad counts as moving in 9th. You can mitigate this by targeting a unit in cover as the negative to hit from moving and firing wont stack with the -1 to hit for heavy cover.
Caveat: I don't have access to the 'rare rules' section of the 9th rulebook, so it's possible there is something in there addressing this question. That said, I am not seeing anything the basic rules or the FAQ's that would prevent you from firing the TA if the MODEL with it did not move. However, as it is still a heavy weapon, you would suffer a -1 to-hit penalty when firing it if the unit took a move action, even if that specific model didn't move.
However, I am willing to bet this is NOT what GW intended, and wouldn't play it that way if it was just a friendly game. If you are able to check the 'rare rules' section of the rulebook, and this isn't addressed, it might be worth an email to the 40k FAQ address. If I remember, I'll put this question up on the warhammer competetive reddit and see what they say.
Arquebus however can't be fired after moving, so if it counts as having moved (as I belive the new rules do) then you wouldn't be able to fire it at all, which kinda sucks
I dont have the rule book yet so im not familiar yet im hoping someone can answer.
When removing casualties, do u have to take the closest model or can it be anywhere from the unit?
It is the player who took the casualties choice which model(s) get removed (barring any unusual rule like the Death Jester he mentions in the video.) Also note that with multi-wound models you also get to choose which model to allocate wounds too, but you must continue to allocate any further wounds to that specific model until it is dead. You cannot spread wounds out across a unit of multi-wound models.
@@Thergood ok. So wat was that about some models in the unit get cover?
@@Tzar-TZ If some of the models in the unit are in cover it will be harder to wound those specific models. They get +1 to their save against ranged weapons. So you may choose them to take any incoming shots, hoping that they will make their saves when the models outside of cover would've failed.
@@Thergood but does that mean u need to roll to save 1 by 1 for those kind of models? Coz bulk rolling sounds weird in that situation
@@Tzar-TZ yes you would have to save 1 at a time, or as many that are in cover at a time until they are dead, then save the rest together
Personally I don’t see the jester doing anything special, the coherency rule is mainly for hordes and I’d say they have fairly good anti leadership rules and the only other squads that have say 10+ models would need to lose a fair few to even fail moral anyway
I thought that coherency check was before morale check so death jester breaking coherency during morale phase doesn't do anything special
Losing a unit in the morale phase also triggers a coherency check.
Stands a little too far away from battle brothers. *dies*
Can you spilt a 10 man unit into 2 groups of 5, as long as the models remain within coherency, is there a rule that says the unit can’t do this?
But space marines can only dplit if the unit contains 10 models so if you lose one you cant then split.
I was under the impression you could only split a unit before the game starts, using a stratagem no less. Also, above post is right that one can only split a ten man unit up.
So theoretically if I took 6 guard infantry squads with special weapons. I could split them in half, with the special weapon half’s up front and the basic ones on fodder/ screen duty?
@@skewedviews100 The rules say "a unit that has more than one model must be set up and finish any sort of move as a single group", so you can't split the squad up into multiple chunks, even if those chunks fulfil the rest of the coherency rules. Edit: Also, in the morale phase " each player must now remove models....until only a single group of models from the unit remains in play and in unit coherency"
Seems similar to AoS to me...
Some characters are so over powered it's ridiculous , others hampered so much they are all most useless .
These coherency rules look like they break immersion. The more I hear about 9th edition rules I like the 8th.
IMO coherency rules like this make the game more immersive or realistic. The game is an imperfect abstraction. The abstraction in this case is individual soldiers being cut off from their unit/allies. In 8th it was basically impossible to simulate this because you could always bring the unit back into coherency. Also in 8th you would end up with squads stretched across half the table with one dude putting his pinky toe on an objective to "secure" it. In 9th if you do this you risk getting your models getting "cut off" because they're essentially in no man's land by themselves.
@@Thergood
That's a good argument. I think models disappearing off the table permanently is harder for me to hear but the way you state thing I can see why this was changed. Thanks.
Hey guys, if this is your local game store, don't be THAT GUY.
i dislike this Rule. It feals unrealistic and unintuative(which is generally ok since its only a game). Also it complicates the movement without bringing good benefits. The only benefit i can think of is that you get punished for Absurd Formations e.g. to block the whole Plate from shocking. But it comes at great costs and there are easier ways to prevent such formations e.g. You must make the unit coherency check at end of move phase, with 5 or less units each unit must have two other Units in 2" reach and with 6+ models you need three units in 2" reach. Same result but a little more intuative.
That death jester is not very funny.... 😂😅
This is a rule I’d never want to implement if I was playing. It’s just sorta....dick move really.
Also, it’s one of those rules that just makes no realism sense. Like none whatsoever. I think it should be that if the models are not in coherency they lose all faction benefits and unit buffs etc until they reform coherency, basically giving the opponent an entirely basic unit to kill separate from the main one
I generally see it as something you only point out while they are removing models to help them pick the right ones, not something to gotchya them on in morale. Or a "hey you can't conga line can you redo your move on that?"
Well you can't make an illegal move, so you cannot move in a non coherent fashion, I like it, I was fed up with a 30 man squad covering half the table, if you want to take risks and string out your squad then suffer the consequences.
7
I'm imagining a death jester nerf in the near future.
i am imagining a good few nerfs quite fast tbh .. custodes probably on the receiving end first lol
First
1st
.. This is dumb.