Warpshadow.com

An unofficial discussion board dedicated to the Tyranids of Warhammer 40,000 (tm Games Workshop)
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:15 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: YATF: Close Combat Bio-weapons
PostPosted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:26 am 
Offline
Harpy
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:17 pm
Posts: 2257
Location: San Diego, California, USA
Army-wide Rule #1 "Living weapon": all models have a CCW built in called "Claws and Teeth" or similar (talons, fangs, hooves, etc), and these count as purchased close combat weapons. Therefore, a hormagaunt with claws and teeth + scytals gets the +1A "additional CCW" bonus.

- Scything Talons
Role: anti-horde
Profile: S+0 AP-, Thresher: a model with at least one set of scything talons and at least three close combat weapons (including the default "claws and teeth") can take the "additional close combat weapon" bonus twice (+2A total).
Justification: this makes scytals something other than a throw-away choice for the second weapon slot (for Raveners and Trygons, for example), typically giving the army designer a "quality vs. quantity vs. diversity" decision (more attacks, better attacks, or a shooting weapon).

- Lashwhip
Role: alpha strike / anti-character / sweeping advance support
Profile: S+0 AP-, Quick Strike: The model has a +3 bonus to Initiative during the Assault Phase while using this weapon.
Justification: although the +3I isn't as intuitive as -I or -A to enemy models, is much simpler in game (not dependent on position of enemy models at all) and it does the right game effects (makes Nids attack first, and makes Sweeping Advance more likely). On the down side, it doesn't allow support of other models in the same CC (like whip guards with non-whip tyrant) which is something I liked on previous iterations of the whip (it allowed the Tyrant to focus on being lethal while the Guard were there to tie up the opposition since they were giving up less offense when they gave up a weapon slot for lashwhips), and it doesn't help with assaulting into terrain (which is partially mitigated by the spinefist "frag" rule, previous). Unless I think of a better way to work this, I plan on keeping as-is.

- Bonesword
Role: anti-monster / anti-MEQ
Profile:
- Bonesword (one CCW): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (6+): rolls To Wound of 'X' cause Instant Death, regardless of Toughness (X as listed in rule description).
- Bonesword and Lashwhip (one CCW): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (6+), Quick Strike
- Pair of Boneswords (one CCW): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (4+), Blade Parry (5+): this model gains an Invulnerable save of X against wounds inflicted in melee (X as listed in rule description).
- Two Pairs of Boneswords (two CCWs): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (2+), Blade Parry (4+)
Justification: I like the current rules, especially since they are no longer dependent on a Ld test (which slowed the game down and made the special rule almost useless). However, I really want to bring dual boneswords back for both warriors and tyrants, both for the look and modeling possibilities and to allow tyrants to make a "Swarmlord" build (which would allow removal of the Swarmlord as a special character). The profiles above use the Swarmlord profile for quad swords and regresses back to what dual swords should look like (mid-point between single sword and quad sword). Intention is for dual swords to be an option for both warriors and tyrants...not sure if the quad swords should be available for warriors or not. Using up the scytals slot deprives them of one potential attack, the extra cost doesn't help them defensively against shooting at all, and ID only affects a small number of potential enemy models (ICs and MCs primarily), but with the upsurge of Wraithknights, Riptides, and Flyrants out there it might be considered too powerful. ID is also effective against FNP, which would be nasty against armies that use it extensively for their defensive power (Nurgle, Nids).

- Crushing claws
Role: anti-heavy-vehicle
Profile: S+1 AP2, Armorbane, Unwieldy
Justification: ok as is. I'm not really fond of them on Tyrant Guard, mainly for aesthetics purposes (the claws seem too big for models that aren't heavy MCs). Rules-wise, they're actually perfect for models in the S5-7 range where the +1S and +2d6 vs. AV really shines, but that's not a good enough answer to put them there. That said, the Unwieldy becomes pointless if they're only available for MCs, so I'll have to think if there are any mid-size bugs that deserve them.

- Rending Claws
Role: anti-Sv2+, anti-vehicle (mainly AV10-12)
Profile:
- Set of Rending Claws (one CCW): S+0 AP5, Rending
- Two sets of Rending Claws (two CCWs): S+0 AP5, Rip and Tear: as Rending, but on To Wound rolls of 5+ instead of only on a 6.
Justification: fine as-is. The double claws is primarily for broodlords (only option to take it?), with rules stolen from last codex's deathleaper. I want to give the broodlord a way to crack armor that isn't just giving him AP2 in close combat; the extra chance to rend, especially in conjunction with possible poison rerolls, gives him about about 50/50 reliability on cracking terminator/riptide armor as well as penetrating rear AV10, which better fits what (I think) he should be capable of in close combat. The compensation for this is losing a potential additional attack with scytals (cheaper and more useful against targets with poor or invul saves).

_________________
"And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all."
- Edgar Allen Poe, The Masque of the Red Death


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: YATF: Close Combat Bio-weapons
PostPosted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:57 am 
Offline
Hatchling
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 36
Location: New England
Alright as this is your most recent post, I figure I'll start here and work my way around to the other threads.

Quote:
Army-wide Rule #1 "Living weapon": all models have a CCW built in called "Claws and Teeth" or similar (talons, fangs, hooves, etc), and these count as purchased close combat weapons. Therefore, a hormagaunt with claws and teeth + scytals gets the +1A "additional CCW" bonus.


As I mentioned in the first thread, I came up with something similar in purpose, but different in execution.

Biologis Tyranicii:
Models with this special rule have the Acute Senses, Move Through Cover and Night Vision special rules, and are immune to the effects of the Blind special rule. Attacks and weapons with the Poisoned special rule are treated as 1 point less effective when rolling To Wound a unit comprised of these models - for example, a Poisoned (4+) hit would be treated as Poisoned (5+) instead, while a Poisoned (6+) hit would be resolved as though it did not have the Poisoned special rule.

Furthermore, a model with this special rule does not receive a bonus Attack for fighting with two Melee weapons - instead, it makes a number of attacks with each weapon's profile equal to its Attacks characteristic. Bonus attacks granted from charging or from other special rules must always be assigned to a single weapon, they do not apply to both. For example, a Hive Tyrant (3 Attacks) that charged into combat this turn, armed with a pair of scything talons and a mated bonesword & lashwhip, would make 3 Attacks using the scything talons profile and 3 Attacks using the bonesword & lashwhip profile, as well as 1 additional Attack from charging using either profile. A model with this special rule which chooses to make a Smash Attack makes one Smash Attack for each Melee weapon it has.


This rule is intended to represent a number of things, all related to Tyranids unique biology. Firstly, the Army-wide Acute Senses, MTC, and Night Vision is representation of all Tyranids being adapted specifically for the environment of any battlefield on which they appear. The immunity to Blind and defense against Poison are modernized shout-outs to the old Second Edition rules they had, which gave Tyranids all kinds of special immunities against similar wargear items. I particularly dislike the fact that Poison is entirely effective against them on the tabletop, while it's said to be damn near useless in the fluff except in specific cases.

The second half of the rule is to represent their way of fighting in close combat, using multiple appendages and natural weapons. It's always bothered me that a Tyranid with Rending Claws and Scything Talons simply got an extra rending attack, even though the talons shouldn't be able to rend. So rather than giving bonus attacks, I simply figured, why wouldn't a Tyranid just make all of its attacks with each weapon separately? This would greatly increase the number of attacks they're making (works towards the overall design goal of making a very melee-oriented army), but is balanced by the fact that you need to take more of the same weapon if you want to stack its special rules. Ergo, one set of Rending Claws on an all-Melee Warrior makes half of its attacks rending, two sets makes all of its attacks rending.

Quote:
- Scything Talons
Role: anti-horde
Profile: S+0 AP-, Thresher: a model with at least one set of scything talons and at least three close combat weapons (including the default "claws and teeth") can take the "additional close combat weapon" bonus twice (+2A total).
Justification: this makes scytals something other than a throw-away choice for the second weapon slot (for Raveners and Trygons, for example), typically giving the army designer a "quality vs. quantity vs. diversity" decision (more attacks, better attacks, or a shooting weapon).


I agree on the intended role of Scything Talons being an anti-horde weapon. My version looks like this:

Scything Talons | S User | AP 6 | Melee, Scything

Scything: For each To Hit roll of 6 made with this weapon, the wielder immediately makes an additional Attack with the same weapon. These attacks do not grant additional attacks on further To Hit rolls of 6.


I feel like this accurately captures the "more attacks" flavor without the illogical issue of those attacks benefitting from other weapon special rules. Furthermore, it's kind of reminiscent of that old "6's To Hit" excitement of 3rd edition Rending Claws, which I enjoy, as well as being mathematically similar to the 5th edition "re-roll 1's" but able to still synergize with Preferred Enemy, which is a very Tyranid-esque special rule that shows up throughout my dex in a whole number of areas.

Quote:
- Lashwhip
Role: alpha strike / anti-character / sweeping advance support
Profile: S+0 AP-, Quick Strike: The model has a +3 bonus to Initiative during the Assault Phase while using this weapon.
Justification: although the +3I isn't as intuitive as -I or -A to enemy models, is much simpler in game (not dependent on position of enemy models at all) and it does the right game effects (makes Nids attack first, and makes Sweeping Advance more likely). On the down side, it doesn't allow support of other models in the same CC (like whip guards with non-whip tyrant) which is something I liked on previous iterations of the whip (it allowed the Tyrant to focus on being lethal while the Guard were there to tie up the opposition since they were giving up less offense when they gave up a weapon slot for lashwhips), and it doesn't help with assaulting into terrain (which is partially mitigated by the spinefist "frag" rule, previous). Unless I think of a better way to work this, I plan on keeping as-is.

Here's what I got:

Lashwhips | S User | AP - | Melee, Symbiotic Grasp

Symbiotic Grasp: Attacks made with this weapon are resolved at the wielder’s Initiative +3. A model which suffers one or more unsaved Wounds inflicted by this weapon is reduced to Initiative 1 until the end of the current turn, and is removed as a casualty if its unit Falls Back or disengages from combat this turn, unless it is an Independent Character.


This solves two of your problems, actually. First it synergizes with other units in the same combat which don't have lashwhips by reducing the enemies Initiative. Secondly, instead of improving the wielder's initiative, it just hits at the higher value, which means that even if charging into cover, you're striking at I 1 (+3) for a total of Initiative 4. Lemme know if you see any issue with this because I think it works quite well.

Quote:
- Bonesword
Role: anti-monster / anti-MEQ
Profile:
- Bonesword (one CCW): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (6+): rolls To Wound of 'X' cause Instant Death, regardless of Toughness (X as listed in rule description).
- Bonesword and Lashwhip (one CCW): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (6+), Quick Strike
- Pair of Boneswords (one CCW): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (4+), Blade Parry (5+): this model gains an Invulnerable save of X against wounds inflicted in melee (X as listed in rule description).
- Two Pairs of Boneswords (two CCWs): S+0 AP3, Psychic Overload (2+), Blade Parry (4+)
Justification: I like the current rules, especially since they are no longer dependent on a Ld test (which slowed the game down and made the special rule almost useless). However, I really want to bring dual boneswords back for both warriors and tyrants, both for the look and modeling possibilities and to allow tyrants to make a "Swarmlord" build (which would allow removal of the Swarmlord as a special character). The profiles above use the Swarmlord profile for quad swords and regresses back to what dual swords should look like (mid-point between single sword and quad sword). Intention is for dual swords to be an option for both warriors and tyrants...not sure if the quad swords should be available for warriors or not. Using up the scytals slot deprives them of one potential attack, the extra cost doesn't help them defensively against shooting at all, and ID only affects a small number of potential enemy models (ICs and MCs primarily), but with the upsurge of Wraithknights, Riptides, and Flyrants out there it might be considered too powerful. ID is also effective against FNP, which would be nasty against armies that use it extensively for their defensive power (Nurgle, Nids).


Well I'll be damned, we both have IDENTICAL blade parry rules. Hold on, lemme post my actual profile here.

Boneswords | S User | AP 4 | Melee, Blade Parry, Force, Psychic Symbiote

Blade Parry: A model armed with this weapon has a 5+ invulnerable save against Wounds inflicted in the Fight sub-phase. If it has more than one weapon with this special rule, this save is increased to 4+.

Psychic Symbiote: A unit that contains one or more models wielding a weapon with this special rule generates one additional Warp Charge dice during each Psychic phase. This dice can only be used to manifest the Force psychic power or to Deny the Witch against powers which target the wielder’s unit.


Reasonings: First the AP. I don't like the fact that Boneswords overshadow Rending Claws a lot of the time due to AP 3, they're practically auto-take on Warriors for that reason. By reducing it to AP 4, it's still decent, but doesn't step on the anti-armour role of RCs. Secondly, instead of needing a different special rule for Instant Death, it's simply a Force weapon. This is possible because all Synapse Creatures in my codex are Psykers. It also has the Psychic Symbiote rule to represent the fact that this "weapon" is in itself a living Tyranid creature, capable of activating on its own and contributing to defense against Psychic attacks.

Quote:
Crushing Claws
Rending Claws

Nothing to see here, mine are likewise identical to the current Codex. But I do have this...

Eviscerating Claws | S User | AP 4 | Melee, Rending (5+)

These are for the Lictors upper pair of claws. Always thought they should have their own rules, as they're not quite scything talons due to being toothy, and they're much deadlier looking than RCs. I didn't put in a special rule for Rending (5+), I think it's self-explanatory enough in that format for any player to immediately understand.

Got one more currently, because I'm fond of moving special rules away from specific units and onto their biomorphs to save space in their profiles.

Ripper Tentacles | S 6 | AP 2 | Melee, Rapacious Feeding

Rapacious Feeding: For each unsaved Wound inflicted by this weapon, the attacker can immediately make one additional attack with the same weapon.


This is of course for the Haruspex, to separate its face-tentacle attacks from its Crushing Claw attacks.


Thoughts? Likes? Dislikes?

_________________
"Perfection - code that changes. Always moving. Can chase. Can not catch." - Abathur


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: YATF: Close Combat Bio-weapons
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:27 am 
Offline
Harpy
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 6:17 pm
Posts: 2257
Location: San Diego, California, USA
@XenoSmiles:

* question about your "attacks per weapon". First, I'm assuming that the number of attacks on each beast's profile is much lower than in the current codex (I would suspect A1 for gaunts, A2 for warriors, A3 for MCs?). Then, it's just a matter of adapting the old "guns that shoot X" rules from 4E. The down side is you're going to be dealing with pretty chunky numbers; it'll be hard to do any fine-tuning of one creature to another, because the difference between A2 and A3 is pretty huge. Another question...what do you do for creatures that don't have any close combat bio-weapons? Do they get any attacks? If so, how are they different from creatures with one bio-weapon?

* I like the idea of making Nids resistant to a bunch of minor irritations. I'm also cautious, though, of giving them too many inherent abilities. Either you have to reflect these bonuses (that will rarely come up) as increased per-model price, which will cause significant disruption at the low end (gaunts) because 1 point up or down really affects their viability. The other option is to give it to them for free, in which case you're just making them better for no compensation and can be accused of cheeze. It's kind of a no-win situation.

* I agree with the concept of "attacks with each weapon" being different. It appears that you would like this to be the norm for all units in the game, in which case you're imposing a limitation on Nids (since you're not also including a rewrite of the main rules). Although it doesn't make sense that holding a knife lets you swing a second time with your power axe, that's how everyone else plays, and I suspect the reason for this is to make it a little easier. I can picture a unit like warriors where each model can have different weapons, and having to roll up to two separate attack routines for each model in the unit...more detailed and intuitively correct, but pretty tedious during a game.

* Lashwhip initiative nerf is interesting...it's a little strange that the nerf may or may not be meaningful depending on whether the enemy model has a higher native initiative than the wielder of the weapon (if they've already gotten in their attacks it matters less whether their I gets nerfed for the remainder of the phase). The "auto-sweep" may be a bit much, since right now units get to use their initiative to escape and are not limited to nerfed individuals (and models that can take a wound from a whip and survive are likely to be characters).

* Swords: I do like AP3, mainly because AP4 is almost worthless (see my most recent comments in the main YATF thread), and there is really no other source of CC AP3 in the whole list; I take solace in the original incarnation of the bonesword, which had an armor save modifier consistent with the current AP3 value. There is some overlap with the AP2 rending claws, although I think there is a trade off; rending is cheaper and riskier, but more of a swiss army knife (special effects on infantry and vehicles, including the ability to destroy them on a penetrating hit). Boneswords are more powerful but also more limited (no better than a combat knife against AV or Sv2+). Overall, I think that AP3 and AP2 are different enough that they can be considered entirely different effects, and not just two points on a sliding scale.

I'll have to agree to disagree on the psychic phase effect and on Synapse creatures being psykers in general; I think it adds too much psychic power to the army (I'm assuming that Warriors are Troops in your dex, and that they can be armed individually...means that each brood of troops with one bonesword on one model could potentially be donating 2 warp charges and one power in the psychic phase). This means a psychic heavy list could have psykers or brotherhoods in every single FOC slot (tyrants, zoanthropes, warriors, shrikes, trygon primes), which infringes on the copyright of Tzeentch (I mean that seriously; if tyranids can out-psychic a dedicated Tzeentch daemon list, I think there is a problem).

* Lictor Claws: they look like they're intended to be like mantis claws; catch and hold vs. kill (and they're perfectly placed to hold a target in front of the feeder tendrils so they can be "tasted". Not sure if they deserve specific rules outside what's already reflected in the feeder tendrils and flesh hooks.

_________________
"And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all."
- Edgar Allen Poe, The Masque of the Red Death


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: YATF: Close Combat Bio-weapons
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 3:45 pm 
Offline
Little One
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:43 am
Posts: 130
...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: YATF: Close Combat Bio-weapons
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 11:13 pm 
Offline
Biomass

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2015 10:10 pm
Posts: 16
It's always bothered me that a Tyranid with Rending Claws and Scything Talons simply got an extra rending attack,
ทำนายเบอร์


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: YATF: Close Combat Bio-weapons
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 6:54 pm 
Offline
Medium One

Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:51 pm
Posts: 314
They should just make it so Scy talons are reroll 1's for one set and reroll to hits for a full set.

That was such a great rule.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Web Design for Warpshadow.com by SMIS Ltd.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group