Talk:Fluffhammer 40k

So the heretical codex covenant is a thing, but fluff-reflective rules can't be?

What rules? There aren't any. That's why it's being marked for deletion - WIP pages are okay, but not when there's nothing on them. Get a substantial ruleset down there, or it'll be deleted.--Soundifex (talk) 13:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Project Started. Looking better?--65.92.153.43 21:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

It's... better, I suppose. Of course, it would be best if it was actually something from /tg/; this wiki shouldn't just be a dump for anything that people do because they're "/tg/ related"; the Covenant codex at least started on /tg/, as far as I'm aware.--Soundifex (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to bring it to /tg/ once it's finished, I just don't want to put it here instead of Word so I can sorta see how it will look...sorry if that's kinda next level. I'll almost make it sound less conversational once it's done. For now I'll probably just...leave it here, I guess?--65.92.153.43 00:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Feedback

What's old is new again -- this whole business of AP modifying armor saves reminds me of the rules waaaay back in Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader. Were you (65.92.153.43) inspired by that system?

You might want to think about giving it a different name than AP -- who knows how many people have grown up thinking "lower is better". Unfortunately, I can't think of a better one, so maybe you should give it a different acronym (AP', APf [for "Fluffhammer"], APen...) to set it apart from the "official" AP value. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 20:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, LongPoster! I've decided on Pen for now (vehicles will have a remake too, so there won't be a terminology issue there with penetrating hits being called pen). Rogue trader actually is a partial inspiration, along with FFG games RPGs. Mostly I'm just tweaking it in ways that seem logical though.--65.92.153.43 23:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy to give it. Pen is a great term, and I like the look of the system so far. I'm looking forward to the rest! There was a previous attempt to make a better 40K system called "Waffle Edition 40K", which you might also mine for ideas.

The close-combat part could use some clarification, especially on the "count as having charged in the next round of combat" part. It would probably be best to construct a sample combat that illustrates that rule (and maybe other changes you've made).

Also, regarding weapon types -- what about indirect or barrage weapons? Will those get a separate special rule?

And for movement (I feel like Uncle from Jackie Chan Adventures -- "One mooore thing!"), what about flying Monstrous Creatures, jetbikes, beasts, and cavalry? The latter two probably ought to go into 3I (since jump and jetpack infantry are in that category, and move 12" in regular 40K as well), but the swooping, running, and turbo-boosting mechanics need to be worked out.

(For future reference, my "name" is "Not LongPoster". Someone named LongPoster wrote something that inspired me to write a sequel, and when I put it up on /tg/ I called myself "Not LongPoster" to make it clear that I was, in fact, not LongPoster. I had an account here under that name, and when I forgot the password to it, I made a new one under the name "Not LongPoster Again".) --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 02:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the mistake, Not LongPoster Again. Indirect and barrage weapons are the same as they are now-I am only updating things that need to change in order to better represent the fluff, not completely writing brand new rules for everything, as there would be a lot of overlap. FMCs are unchanged, and I will add those other unit types where appropriate.--70.53.229.254 21:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Addationlly AV is also taken, as it represents vehicle armour. So infantry/non-vehicle armour could be "P" to represent "Protection" while AP could be replaced with "AR" which represents "Armour Reduction." Or people could just use AP and Sv.

• Suggestions

You could change invulnerble saves to lower the penetration value of attacks instead of stacking onto the modles armour.

Like this: say that melta weapons are Pen 8 instead of 6, and a metla gun was fired at a terminator (who could have an invul of 2) which would reduce the the metla guns Pen value to 6.