Goatboy’s 40k Thoughts: Chapter Improved?

Goatboy here again with my take on the biggest thing to hit our little 40k game – Chapter Approved.

Overall I feel a bit underwhelmed as I thought it would have more matched play changes – and while the updates to some index armies is good I still feel like the book is kind of a flash in the pan.  The matched up play updates we pretty much already play with if you lived in the ITC land.  In fact there was really only one new rule that caught my attention more then anything else as it didn’t “fix” the issue and just made the issue “better”.  I am talking about the Character change.

No Big Rules Shakeups

First of all there is no other changes in the book besides Boots on the Ground, Objective Secured for non Soup Detachment troops, Understrength Units in Auxiliary detachments only, can’t use Reroll CP for end of game/beginning of game/etc stuff, and finally a super charging how you get to target characters.

That is all there is.  

There is no Smite update (Currently in a talk there is a smite change coming with an FAQ – in March or something), no removal of problem Detachments (Supreme Beef Taco Command I am looking at you), nor any other answers about some weird gameplay issues.  The only true thing is this complete update on how you get to shoot at characters.  Let’s look at the initial rule and then how they changed it.

The Character Rules Change

Current Rulebook
“A CHARACTER can only be chosen as a target in the Shooting phase if they are the closet visible enemy unit to the model that is shooting.  This does not apply to CHARACTERS with a Wounds characteristic of 10 or more, due to their sheer size”

Basically you can only shoot a character if it is the closest visible unit.  This means you can do some tricks like utilize terrain to block LOS on your models to only see the Character or maybe drive a vehicle or two to block your models view.  This way you could “snipe” characters by utilizing some smart movement tricks.  Of course this was deemed to good and they decided to update the rule in Chapter Approved.

Chapter Approved Rule update
“An enemy CHARACTER with less than 10 wounds can only be targeted if it is both visible to the firer and it is the close enemy model to the firer.  This means that if any other model is closer, whether it is visible or not, then the enemy CHARACTER cannot be targeted.”

This is a huge change and means models can easily be hidden with hidden units.  Do you have some guys hiding being a big LOS blocking terrain?  Well your Captain can strut out in the open and not worry about getting shot.  Do you have some hidden brims who are tiny, short, and a pain in the butt?  That big and bad Daemon Prince is well protected by his “hidden” flaming turds.  I don’t know why they needed to add this as the issue was with multiple character armies – not with how you could snipe out a character or two.  It is a frustrating thing to have to rethink, rebuild, and figure out how your army could get rid of these hidden screens.

This really feels like most competitive armies that don’t rely on massed assaults will need to find some way to get some non LOS targeting options.  Of course as a lot of it isn’t very good – hitting on a starting 4+ which usually means a 5+ for most armies, not having enough shots to be good, or just being way to expensive and normally FW.  This also means I think will have to see some true forms of assault shot up to try and clear these things out.  I was hoping to see a fix to this or some kind of clarification but instead we get a big boost to an otherwise normal unit that didn’t need this.

This also makes sniping options a heck of a lot more powerful.  I have found most snipers to be rather meh most of the time.  Sure they can hit me, but they hit ok, wound kinda bad and normally don’t finish off whatever they are shooting at.  Of course this could change as we saw the return of the Reaper Launcher Auratach who can easily get a mean Warlord trait to help target characters.  A non LOS gun sounds pretty dang awesome and I wonder if will see more character targeting rules.  Thankfully this targeting isn’t hurt by Smites as you hit what you see so maybe there is a way to not be caught “off guard” with tiny blocking units getting in the way.

The Non Codex Factions

Beyond this the book is full of Index book updates.  I really like the add ons to Sisters rules.  They got 2 good stratagems that can put a world of hurt on an army.  I think Space Wolves got some good ones as well – as one of the Stratagems lets them have some crazy movement as they can be across the battlefield if need be.  I am glad Harlies got the Webway Portal rule as it feels very much within their wheelhouse or rules.  Overall the extra rules are kinda ok – as anything more is good.

The Point Updates

The big thing this book does is update some points.

Thankfully the Big Bird and the Taunar both got kicked in the teeth.  Both of those guys were way undercosted and were part of the issue of limiting Power Level to 31 and under in ITC.  With these massive point swings there is no need to limit the Power Level now.  Overall the points are alright as most of my armies were not effected or need to find a way to utilized a few points.  A few things got nerfed pretty hard too which is kind of weird.  Conscripts already got hurt and adding a point is another kick in the junk for them.  I am very excited about trying some Butcher Cannon Contemptors for my Death Guard army as they got very cheap.  It gives them some long range punch for a decent amount of points.  Plus they get access to the Legion rules and can move and fire with those big meat cleaving cannons.  Weirdly the Fire Raptor went down in points.  I find it odd as it is a pretty gnarly vehicle for Chaos as it answers a lot of things for the army.  Seeing it go down is pretty weird but of course I am jaded as I have buddies who play it and murder many things with it.  The Malanthrope got pretty expensive too so the common Nid builds have to adjust with the new book, updated points, and less “protection” then they had before.  The AM books from FW all got updated to match the points in the new AM book.  This is kind of a bummer as they are missing a lot of rules to make them fit within the AM frame so it makes me kind of sad.  Earthshakers got a big change too so a lot of armies lose their LOS ignore damage output.  Overall the point changes feel kind of all over the place so while yes – things got more expensive they didn’t seem to get where they needed to be.

Thumbs Up or Down?

Overall I will be buying the book as I am still heavily invested in the game and most of my stuff wasn’t affected.  I am excited to see the new Daemon book as it will finally allow me to have full options for all my armies.  I would just need some new rules for Magnus to complete all the nonsense I have.  The updates did give me some hope on some Death Guard builds that are not just Pox Walker factors and resemble something that could actually let me win games with.  Here is hoping testing, painting, and thoughts all combine into a cool army for LVO.

~Until next time – keep all my models as bad guys.

  • ILikeToColourRed

    wait so conscripts now cost the same as guardsmen, for less
    wtf

    • Marco Marantz

      Guard are broken, and conscripts needed to be addressed but this move makes no sense.

      • King Renegado

        I feel like conscripts have been addressed though.
        Commissar now only grants a re-roll for ld when he nlams someone, their max size is 30, and they only get orders on a 4+.
        This point increase just seems unnecessary.

        • King Renegado

          Side note, more changes to guard are coming. Point increases to many things… just not the regular infantry squads…lol

          • Karru

            All the other point changes sounded reasonable to be honest. The only one that didn’t make a lick of sense was Conscripts.

          • Watcherzero

            Some of the forgeworld super heavies tripled in points cost!

          • Karru

            Oh yeah, I always forget about that part. I don’t use Forge World myself and really have no issues with them, but from what I gathered most of the changes were completely unreasonable.

          • Dennis J. Pechavar

            The fact that Earthshaker batteries cost more than a Basilisk now is part of what angers me on the price changes. I have been building a second IG army of DKK that “forges the narrative” by using DKK style weapons and not just whatever is best for IG. Artillery is a big thing but now it’s better to buy basilisks? Salt, salt everywhere! It’s feels random what they are changing and while I do agree that some FW models are very OP most of the things I like aren’t but are lumped in with the Tau “suits of death” (TM) and the superheavies.

        • Karru

          The Conscripts got over-nerfed, plain and simple. There is currently no reason to take them, which does make me sad, because I would really like to include them in my Guard Army as I am doing a full Infantry Army, but they now have no role to fill, since Infantry Squads are just straight up better at every role the Conscripts would be used.

          I said this the moment people started screaming “NERF CONSCRIPTS!”, as long as you don’t remove their cheapness, I really don’t mind seeing them being nerfed. To me it seems that people don’t actually realise that Conscripts aren’t exactly cheap per say. While they were 3pts a model, you had to realise you NEEDED a Commissar with them, which adds at least another 31pts to the unit cost. For the price of one minimal Conscript unit, you had to pay 91pts and you only got 1 Troop Slot and 1 Elite Slot out of it.

          Now you just spam Infantry Squads, because they are in every way better and are cheaper to bring because you don’t have to get a Commissar with them. So instead of paying 111pts for 20 Conscripts, for 9pts more, I can take 30 Infantry guys with better stats.

          Reduce their points to 3pts and give them a special rule that you can only bring one for every 2 Infantry Squads you take, that way people can’t spam them without taking regular Infantry. Heck, you could even make them so that they cannot be affected by any Orders. As they stand, they have no place in an Imperial Guard army.

          • Dennis J. Pechavar

            Platoons were what kept IG conscript shenanigans before. I was hoping the nerfs would stop but not really surprised. In my area the main people who were complaining were the Eldar, Tau and Marine players…the same people who told me that they weren’t OP last edition… Ah well now I’ll just do the same as you mentioned, more regular troops that are better than the Conscripts. You showed me I guess?

          • Karru

            Just take the Missile Launcher for each unit and laugh as the opponent has to get rid of 8 guys before he can get to them. All this for 60pts a unit. Then start piling up those Detachments with Company Commanders on top of that.

            Can’t wait to see how fast people start whining that Infantry Squads need to increase in price.

          • Dennis J. Pechavar

            I was told this about mortar squads.

          • Karru

            I enjoy using Missile Launchers more, because people so easily underestimate them. “What can a single Missile Launcher do?” I remind my opponent saying once he realises that I in fact have 12 of them in my army, 1 per Infantry Squad. Meanwhile, I still have 12 more Heavy Weapons in the backfield in my Heavy Weapons Squads.

          • Dennis J. Pechavar

            True. I’ve been dealing with the complaints that IG cost less marines and it’s not fair… After being romper stomped for a few editions IG being strong apparently is a sore spot for people. I have 6 ML but haven’t been using them. Might have to try them but I do love my Lascannons again and the mortar is a winner. I haven’t used them since the first release of the original Cityfight book. So happy.

      • Heinz Fiction

        Maybe they plan to make the commissar playable again. Then the point increase could be justified…

    • zeno666

      Really? LoL!
      GW doing it again, and again, and again 😉

  • Marco Marantz

    Really dont understand the need for targeting character rule change. Its very gamey and against common sense. The article says this makes snipers more powerful but not all factions get sniper units.

    • Lee Ashford

      And snipers are meh as also said…

      Basically they’re trying to make us bring a balanced army. Buy snipers for character popping and artillery to snipe hidden stuff etc…

      • Marco Marantz

        I think you are right about their intent but not all factions have arty that can indirect fire either…heck some dont even have what i consider arty, not unless they take allies or perhaps forgeword….though i dont think chaos even has any arty options from FW as an eg.

        • Navaren

          Well, chaos has DG arty. Those new tanks are indirect fire

          • Marco Marantz

            true but DG are really their own faction, as i see them anyway…

          • Navaren

            Tell that to the Alpha Legion patrol detachments that seem to accompany every DG tourney list. (Note, I agree with you and personally play them as such)

        • orionburn III

          This is my gripe as well. Running Nids we have two decent units that don’t require LOS to shoot (Hive Guard and Biovores) but does us no good for dealing with characters. After decrying rules bloat in 7th for so long I don’t want to see a ton of additional rules creep back into the game, but this is one that needs tweaked. Either a penalty to your BS, only hit on 6s…something. It just seems flat out stupid that weapons that don’t require LOS can’t pick out characters. With Nids it would even fit the fluff if you at least had a synapse creature that could draw line of sight to a character and be within synapse range of a non-LOS shooting unit.

          • Marco Marantz

            Id go with that…they do have a hive mind…and other factions have radios….some of the rules seem to ignore that units can communicate with each other.

          • ZeeLobby

            Honestly the core rules never really bloated that much, outside of the adding of apocalypse stuff. It was always the detachments, formations, etc. That made 7th feel bloated.

          • KingAceNumber1

            To be fair, nids DO have non-standard ways to pick characters. Flying melee tyrants can get in deep and nuke a character in melee and then spend 1CP to full move-advance away as long as you end your assault outside 3″ of enemies. It’s not always applicable but is a neat trick when you pull it.

        • ZeeLobby

          This has always been an issue in GW games, especially since allies became a thing. Some factions have all the tools while others suffer.

        • Frank O’Donnell

          If you that a detachment of R&H chaos has plenty of arty, but sadly the only unit anyone took was the Malefic Lord.

    • Fergie0044

      Apparently people were deliberately putting their units in such a way that they could only see an enemy character thus ‘allowing’ them to shoot it. For example parking a friendly rhino in the way.
      Sadly we must all now suffer strict and slight nonsensical rules due to a handful of ‘those guys’.

      • G Ullrich

        You know, I honestly don’t see anything wrong with what people were doing to get around the prior character rule – it’s a tactical maneuver that you have to really set up.

    • NagaBaboon

      Yeah the rule was already fine, it’s even better at bubble wrapping characters than it was in 7th, especially against CC armies.

    • Guidebot

      I totally agree. The Character Targeting rule is the biggest issue in 8th.

  • Luca Lacchini

    The character targeting rule makes no sense whatsoever.
    Not just badly worded, plain unreasonable.

    This book is steadily strolling into the “Chapter Banned” territory.

    • Karru

      That rule is going to be changed so fast once GW realises just how easy that is to exploit.

      Just stick a single character model(s) behind LoS blocking terrain like corner of a ruin or something and now none of your characters can be shot that stands behind him. Neither can Artillery be used to snipe him, because he is still a character and most likely will have models blocking him.

      • Fergie0044

        Did they not change it so characters can’t shield other characters? Because of the assassin abuse?

        Of course you’re point still stands, would just need a small or single model non-character unit.

        • Watcherzero

          No they made it worse, they removed the visibility requirement so you can have something sat on the other side of a wall and it still counts as the closest enemy and only valid target despite all the other enemy characters standing out in the open.

      • Luca Lacchini

        There was an excellent solution on an older BoLS article regarding the assassin conga train.
        Can’t remember the details (stupid me, next time copypaste the stuff somewhere), but it made pretty much everyone agree it was simple, elegant, reasonable.

        This “won’t touch the core rules” approach won’t work for long, better step up to a 8.5 ruleset with a consistent LoS/cover section – and maybe something for vehicles vs monstrous creatures too.

        • Karru

          I remember seeing it as well, can’t remember the exact details either. It was something along the lines of Characters not being able to block Characters completely, you suffered -1 to hit if you didn’t shoot at the closest character or something.

      • J Mad

        Or it was a miss print on the rule and no one caught it, hoping fora faq on it after CA is released.

    • benn grimm

      Dumbest rule I’ve seen from them in a while, it’s like they heard there was a problem and decided to make it worse.

      • euansmith

        “Criticize our rules, will ya?! You think they’re bad?! We’ll show ya bad!”

        • benn grimm

          It’s certainly an ‘interesting’ approach to game design…)

          • ZeeLobby

            LoL. I see it totally reverting them back to “we make miniatures not games” at some point.

          • benn grimm

            That would be a shame… Thing is, if you add in the word ‘excellent’ or ‘exceptional’before miniatures and games in that statement, it’s pretty much true already. Not sure that would be a great promotional strapline though.

          • ZeeLobby

            lol. yeah. I mean who knows. the biggest news coming from them right now which would lead me to believe this won’t happen is for them to publicly announce that they’ve hired a known game developer from outside to assist in the rules.

          • benn grimm

            They seem to like to keep it all as in-house as possible. Can’t imagine them admitting they could do with outside help, though I guess stranger things have happened.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. I mean I’m hoping with the new management it won’t seem like such a horrible thing anymore. But they definitely like to model themselves as the Apple of miniatures, and admitting your wrong is something Apple never does either, so I doubt we’ll see it.

          • That’s my worry. I think the size of the task is finally sinking in and they may revert back to the old approach before they get the game balanced and fun. The (mostly legitimate) criticism is going to hurt all the more when you are actually making an effort.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, very true.

          • Karru

            I feel like they have already became more “let’s try this, if it fails, we can just fix it!” mentality. All the books so far seemed to have something that didn’t sound right to anyone or was just plainly broken.

          • ZeeLobby

            Which honestly is a model I’d be fine with assuming it heads in the right direction. The issue is that we have to pay for this stuff… I’m not going to buy a book that’s supposed to fix issues if it introduces obvious brand new ones… I mean technically that’s every single edition of 40K, lol, but I’m just tired of it.

          • euansmith

            Maybe the intention is to make players disgusted with Matched Play, so that they turn their backs on it and embrace Narrative; the way the game is meant to be played 😀

          • benn grimm

            Thing is, all ‘competitive’ shenanigans aside, it’s a really bad rule for casual/narrative/whatever; I certainly wouldn’t want to be the gw employee running demo games having to explain why you can’t shoot that guy who is standing out in the open, because his minions hiding behind the building just next to him are closer. It’s just so counter intuitive and makes zero sense from a ‘narrative’ perspective or any other perspective.

      • Muninwing

        …. that’s GW for you.

        so many people keep hyping up the changes that they try to make. but there are so many systemic problems that they have created that have gone unaddressed, that keep churning out bad writing. rules, balance, and fluff.

        if you note the AMA that Andy Chambers did, he subtly mentioned that it was money that made him leave. “they know my hourly rates” speaks volumes. GW has been notorious for underpaying in particular their creative team for years now… and the results are poorly considered changes like these.

        pay people for the work you want out of them, and you get better product and more loyal employees.

        • benn grimm

          Amen to that.

    • SilentPony

      Wait…so what changed? That’s how everyone at my local store has been playing the entire time. Closest model was pretty direct to begin with.

      • Nameless

        it changed in two ways,

        from “unless they are the closest visible unit”, to “unless they are the closest unit”

        and from “wounds characteristic of 10 or less” to “10 or less wounds”

        • SilentPony

          That less than 10 wounds thing seems like a typo on their part tbh.
          but you’re right, it is a big change

          • Nameless

            Almost certainly, but as games workshop can’t be bothered to proof read their Errata…

        • Warboss_Stalin

          Don’t think ‘unless they are closest visible’was anywhere in the rule book. FAQ also said hidden closer stops shooting at characters a month + bac

      • Karru

        The rule says “Closest VISIBLE model”. The change is that the character has to be the CLOSEST model now. So now having a Captain standing out in the open while there is an Apothecary hiding in a corner in front of him out of line of sight, you can’t target either one because the Captain isn’t the closest target nor can you see the Apothecary.

        • SilentPony

          OH! Man, I don’t think anyone at my store knew about the ‘visible’ unit part, because we’ve been hiding scouts in buildings near enemy artillery for months!
          Tyrnanids especially are great at it

  • Rainthezangoose

    I have played one game of 40k 8th and nothing I’ve seen online or my experience in THAT game has made me want to play another….

    • phobosftw

      Please elaborate, my good sir

      • Rainthezangoose

        the system is just sloppily written and frankly more unbalanced as ever. Its not the ‘age-of-simplifaction’ of 40k either because frankly I love AoS. The rules just seem so raw and unrefined. I just didn’t enjoy the game we played. Everything met in the middle and then nothing really happened for 4 turns, then the game ended and I won …. but not really just arbitrarily. I think the chapter approved book being wasted on what is effectively a paid FAQ is just the perfect analogy for whats wrong with 40k at the moment.

        Units are increasing by x2 or x3. You should never be so bad at writing rules that THAT is allowed to happen. No matter how you look at it.

        Also Characters are just tedious now, and there is so many little niggly cheesy tactics that feel more like loop-holes then “tactics”.

        I think the best thing for me at the moment is to wait for 40k to find its feet because this might as well be a fresh system at this point. I really did have high hopes for a balance and streamlined system but 8th is many things but its neither of them.

        In more positive news Necromunda looks great and I cant wait to paint that stuff up. That and Hobbit Battle Strategy Game is still alive in 2018 and frankly that in itself makes me a happy wargamer.

        • I’m giving them a year and some change to get it sorted, but at this point I really doubt that the end result will be something I will choose to play over other options.

    • ZeeLobby

      Having played a couple I’m on hiatus as well. At least til some better terrain rules (and I mean general rules, not rules for terrain) and some more positioning relevance gets added back to the game.

      • Yeah I agree. I’m fortunate to have a small gruop that lets me add those rules back in our campaigns.

        • ZeeLobby

          Yeah. My group is very “why play something ‘broken’ when good alternatives exist”. They love the 40K universe, but just don’t feel like they have time to house rule a bunch of stuff. I mean I can’t really blame them. I’m sure in a year or two once GW swings back the other way (hopefully) they’ll want to pick it back up.

          • Thats just it for me there are no real good alternatives.

            Not in this style anyway. I don’t want skirmish low model count games, nor do I want xwing lol or things like that.

          • Koonitz

            Personally, I find house rules fairly simple to make up and, as long as everyone agrees, they’re easy to implement. I have house rules for buildings I’m running that everyone seems to agree to, and I just went through Forge World’s Zone Mortalis rules and did some tweaks to make it work for 8th, so we can play that in the narrative campaign I’m running.

          • ZeeLobby

            I mean there’s some alternatives out there, or ones that are coming. I think the new SW:Legion game could be good, beyond the gates of antares has solid rules, but low visibility. Mantic’s stuff isn’t bad either. At this point I’d probably try one of these instead of buying back into 40K (at least at the moment).

            All that said, none of them have the models/fluff that 40K has. They have some great models and such, but they’re all behind (as they should be given their age/prices).

          • The models and fluff are (sadly for me) the reason why I play.

            Antares is a solid system. That no one plays because the story and models are to most people flaming hot garbage.

            Legion COULD be good but I’m going to wait to see how its implemented. I’m tired of pay to win, which is what xwing is with having to buy all the models to get cards. FFG loves its pay to win strategy.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I mean I really don’t mind if all cards are available at least in faction. I also imagine in your current narrative group no one would bat an eye at you for simply printing the cards out (I mean they’re pretty easy to get online and FFG has no issue with printing, just playing them at official events). Even at official events I’ve seen people play printed locally.

            In the end if you like the SW fluff, the rules will most likely be solid, so maybe a good alternative is on the way :D.

          • The narrative core of my group doesn’t care but my area as you know is dominated by competitive play and i know in the xwing group they had issues with people printing their own cards out. I say they… I mean a handful of guys that are hyper competitive.

            So I try to avoid it.

            I’m going to wait and see how it goes. A year after launch if there is a playerbase around me i’ll consider it.

          • ZeeLobby

            Makes sense. My 40K purchasing is on hold (still play occasionally) until probably this summer. If SW:L picks up locally, it might be indefinite, hehe.

      • Dennis J. Pechavar

        We’ve played more 30K games than ever, thank you 8th edition!

    • Defenestratus

      I’ve played three 50PL games.

      They all sucked… got my codex two weeks back and haven’t even cracked it open. There’s just no fire for the game that I used to have.

      • aargh00

        The game runs much better at 2000 pts (100+PL) IMO. I found at 1000 pts it was a total wash. I still haven’t had a 1000 pt game get past the third turn, whereas most of my 2000 pt games have been close, or at least not obvious who was going to win before turn three or four.

    • Xodis

      Dont feel bad, I quit playing already too. Its literally been 3 editions since Ive wanted to even play 40K, so Im honestly debating why even keep my models. The odd thing is, I love AoS, which this is very similar too.

      • Koonitz

        Funny thing about AoS is that there are fewer events, fewer tournaments, less coverage, less people talking about it, so people can get by without bothering with the broken metas.

        Sure, they’re there, to a degree, but I just get the feeling that fewer people care, so AoS is rapidly becoming the more casual, beer and pretzels game, with a second General’s Handbook refining the game enough to attract more people.

        At least, that’s my thoughts, whether right or not.

  • Col. Duke Lacrosse

    “First of all there is no other changes in the book besides Boots on the Ground, Objective Secured for non Soup Detachment troops, Understrength Units in Auxiliary detachments only, can’t use Reroll CP for end of game/beginning of game/etc stuff, and finally a super charging how you get to target characters.

    That is all there is. ”

    Well I’m kinda sad to see that GW lied to us about the battlezones, new missions, campaign rules, designing a landraider and all the rest they promised. Because apparently the stuff quoted above “…is all there is,” in the entire book. It appears that if you are not strictly a tournament player (and frankly who wouldn’t be, deviants probably) there’s nothing in the entire Chapter Approved for you.

    But then perhaps I’m being purposely dense here. Surely a well known internet personality commenting on entire publication with content for Open, Narrative, and Matched Play would not treat it as though the book were published solely for Matched Play without even a single reference to those other styles. Surely he would not have done this without at least prefacing the article explaining that it is about about only one portion of the book before calling it a “flash in the pan”.

    This is especially amazing because the tournament community as a whole has never treated itself as the sole component of the 40k community that matters. I can’t think of a single time people have commented on a forum or here on BoLS complaining when GW releases a product for Narrative and Open gaming. We would never act as though 40k exists solely for our style of play. ‘How dare GW make something that isn’t for me’ is a sentiment I have scarcely ever read in the venerable annals of 40k online debate.

    #TheCapsCan’tBeginToExpressTheSARCASM

    • Karru

      Well, I just interpreted that sentence as “That is all there is to it in terms of changes to Matched Play”, which again, is the most played and most important section in the entire book.

      Now, don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that people don’t play Narrative or Open, but the problems with the game aren’t present there as both game types are meant for people that do all the preparation beforehand or play a lot together so they already have every “problem” sorted. Meanwhile, Matched Play is meant for everything from pick-up games to tournaments to just casual quick games with friends. This is where the problems come in and this is where the fixes are needed.

      Basically, the comment you made has a tint of I_Am_Alpharius on it. Unless the article SPECIFICALLY states that everything discussed is aimed towards Matched Play, the article is about everything 40k, including Narrative and Open Play.

      • This is why until the game is fixed I will never touch matched play.

  • cm023

    Kharybdis just went up 75 points for no apparent reason whatsoever while Dreadclaw went down by 70. It’s ridiculous.

    • Lando G

      kharybdis was popular in tournaments and probably a bit too good for what it did and its shooting. The dreadclaw was a way overpriced drop-pod essentially.

  • Oh that character targeting rule. That character targeting rule. Lol.

    • ZeeLobby

      XD. Like how. How does this get through. It’s mind blowing. I always tell people that GW doesn’t actually play their own games, but it’s more of a joke. Now I’m not so sure…

      • Part of me wants to just say they misworded it and meant something else.

        • ZeeLobby

          I mean I’d hope so. I do feel like sometimes they play their rules in their head their own way, like when a basement gaming group goes to their first tournament and finds out everyone was playing a different game, lol.

        • Luca Lacchini

          Really hope so.

  • Arykaas

    That targeting rule ….

    Come to think of it, I don’t have enough Hive Guards, do I ?

  • mrpage

    Who proofed this?

  • majbjörn

    Dont forget to show that Space Marine Point cost list in the next post!

    I just cant get enough of it!

  • Rayna M. McCowan

    By the stars they made the character targeting worse. I am just going to sit here rubbing my temples at the stupidity of it. I mean good on GW clarifying they are stupid as all get out, but that makes no sense that something untargetable makes a character immune to targeting. I mean sure artillery can hit out of LOS stuff, but most things can’t. They just added more verbiage to make it dumber.

  • Ronin

    1) Run an army of characters
    2) Infiltrate a cheap unit up front behind line of sight blocking terrain
    3) Characters cannot be targeted until infiltrators are uprooted.
    4) Profit

    • #tacticalGenius2017

    • Karru

      Just can’t wait to see how fast GW will FAQ this rule. It seriously is the most brain dead “solution” to the problem.

  • Xodis

    Dumbest rule ever. Worse than the “beer and pretzel” rules that came out at the beginning of AoS, but at least those were not meant to be taken seriously.

  • Stonehorse

    The new character targeting rules are already in need of an errata. They missed out a very important word: ‘characteristic’.

    The new rule just says characters with less than. So if a model is reduced to less than 10 wounds it has become eligible for this rule.

    Now this has to be an oversight, but it is annoying that GW continue to make these small mistakes.

    • Rob brown

      Wounds is a static part of a units profile. It doesn’t changing. What you are talking about it sounds remaining which is not relevant to the character targeting rules. No errata required.

    • Apocryphus

      Knock 3 wounds off my flyrant and you can’t target it anymore. 😀 What a mess of a rule.

  • Fraser1191

    With there being only a 5 point difference between a primaris and a tactical, it’s pretty obvious what they want you to bring

  • fenrisful2

    So I will infiltrate my spiritseer in that ruin there behind a wall, now you can’t shoot at my farseer even with your snipers 😛 trololololo 😛

    • Koonitz

      Don’t sniper weapons ignore character target priority to shoot whatever they can see in range? As such, whether the Spiritseer is closer or not, the sniper can still shoot the Farseer?

      • fenrisful2

        You are probably right, it was me missreading the sniper rule.

  • Snord

    “Overall the points are alright as most of my armies were not effected or need to find a way to utilized a few points. A few things got nerfed pretty hard too which is kind of weird. Conscripts already got hurt and adding a point is another kick in the junk for them. I am very excited about trying some Butcher Cannon Contemptors for my Death Guard army as they got very cheap. It gives them some long range punch for a decent amount of points. Plus they get access to the Legion rules and can move and fire with those big meat cleaving cannons. Weirdly the Fire Raptor went down in points. I find it odd as it is a pretty gnarly vehicle for Chaos as it answers a lot of things for the army. Seeing it go down is pretty weird but of course I am jaded as I have buddies who play it and murder many things with it”

    Huh? This is almost incomprehensible stream of consciousness. How at least one read over before posting?

    • memitchell

      My takeaway from this entire article is I think Goatboy’s army(s) are somewhat, but not really adversely affected by the new Chapter Approved. And, he may, or may not actually like that. Oh, and he is looking at ‘Supreme Beef Taco Command,’ whatever the hell that is.

  • Ninety

    Taunar was undercosted? The only thing that made it worth taking was the stupid BATTLESUIT keyword making it eligible for Saviour Protocols because FW can’t write rules.

  • Rob brown

    I really don’t understand the apoplexy arising from making characters harder to target. The idea of 40k is that while characters aren’t part of units any more they are still protected from ranged fire. It should be very hard to shoot characters, they are expensive from a wound to point ratio and their invulnerable saves etc are easily wiped out by massed shooting. The targeting rules are a very reasonable restriction to balance combat units (which characters tend to be) against heavily shooting armies.

    If some players spam cheap characters like assassins, commissars or malefic lords then change them (who’d have thought it.) But protect the other characters that aren’t being abused. This game is no fun if my space wolf captain gets obliterated by a las Cannon turn one. My advice if people ‘game the system’ to gain a cheesy advantage is to stop playing with them. Period.

    • Karru

      There is actually a very simple solution to the Character problem. Make them be part of units once more, done. You could even make it so that you have to assign all your characters to units before the game begins and they can’t leave them afterwards. If the unit dies before the character does, the character is now vulnerable to fire.

      All the shenanigans linked to Characters tanking wounds is now gone from past editions. If a character suffers even a single wound, that character now has to take every single wound from that point on until he either dies or he somehow gets rid of the wounds.

      For people that say “but aura abilities!”, I can easily answer this:

      They are still there, you shouldn’t have to worry about positioning since you still don’t have to worry about stuff like Blasts so you can just have units congaline to him to gain the buff.

  • AkulaK

    So the best armies shifted a little, IG is relegated after Primaris and Chaos… Then comes the Xenos : Eldars and Tyranids which i think are about the same power.

  • BillyBillstone

    The changes they are making through Chapter Approved is like trying to put out a dumpster fire by duct taping it! There are so many substantial rules mechanics that are broken the arbitrary adjustment of points here and there is very poor at best and wont fix core issues.

    Don’t worry there is much work to be done before GW will announce a total lack of progress in fixing things and announce 9th Edition and the “No Now We Are Really The New GW!”