40K: All Stratagems Should Be One Use Only

[scottshoemaker]

I read this article on BoLS, which I normally read with a stink eye, but I liked the idea of this.  Please read and discuss.

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/05/40k-all-stratagems-should-be-one-use-only.html

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, scottshoemaker said:

I read this article on BoLS, which I normally read with a stink eye, but I liked the idea of this.  Please read and discuss.

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/05/40k-all-stratagems-should-be-one-use-only.html

 

I don't think it would really help. Might make games go faster, but I don't think it would solve anything. The issue, at it's core, is that Codex are not created equal. This fix would nerf armies with only a few useful stratagems and not really hinder armies which have lots of useful stratagems. 

[Lord Hanaur]

I don't agree but it's fun to talk about.

[scottshoemaker]

Would this be a better idea if some armies didn't really require their Strats to function?  It seems some former special rules were moved into being Strats, but it's also clear it varies from codex to codex. 

[Munkie]

11 minutes ago, scottshoemaker said:

Would this be a better idea if some armies didn't really require their Strats to function?  It seems some former special rules were moved into being Strats, but it's also clear it varies from codex to codex. 

Yeah, this is the main problem with trying to implement it now. It would be a fine change in the next edition, but armies should really be designed with this in mind.

[Lord Hanaur]

soooo many ingrained abilities became Stratagems in some ways TO make sure they didn't do them all game long across multiple units (or at least it made it less likely) so in some ways the Strats actually accomplished the underlying mission.

EDIT:  this same mechanism made spamming units a LOT less prevalent.  Some units are still broken enough that you spam them.  but other than troops choices, spamming has largely not been a thing which I like.  Variety is the spice of life and the more units being used, the better.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Lord Hanaur said:

soooo many ingrained abilities became Stratagems in some ways TO make sure they didn't do them all game long across multiple units (or at least it made it less likely) so in some ways the Strats actually accomplished the underlying mission.

EDIT:  this same mechanism made spamming units a LOT less prevalent.  Some units are still broken enough that you spam them.  but other than troops choices, spamming has largely not been a thing which I like.  Variety is the spice of life and the more units being used, the better.

Banning spam seems along the lines of telling a player they can't field a chunk of their army. I'd rather they nerf spam than ban it. For example:

Oh, so that's how you kill it: If the opponent slays more than 3 units of the same name, they gain a +1 to hit and +1 to wound modifer for their entire army against any further units of the same name in your army.

 

[Guest]

Regarding stratagems, the challenge I see is that they basically replaced psychic powers. I mean, we could expand stratagems to include counter-stratagems and more CP and so forth, but basically it's another psychic phase with a different fluff basis. 

May as well have psykers generate CP for use on stratagems, rather than having their own powers. 

[WestRider]

I also noticed that one of the author's complaints is that something like 3/4ths of the Stratagems rarely get used, which is actually due to something I love about them: Stratagems are a great way to include stuff that's extremely situational without making a Player spend Points on it during Army construction. The DeathWatch Stratagems against the various Xenos forces are the most obvious example. If they had to be bought during list construction, they'd almost never make it into lists, because you can't spare Points on something that's dead weight against so many Opponents. But as Stratagems, you can have them available with no pre-game opportunity cost, and just pay the CP for them as needed.

[Lord Hanaur]

21 hours ago, paxmiles said:

Banning spam seems along the lines of telling a player they can't field a chunk of their army. I'd rather they nerf spam than ban it. For example:

Oh, so that's how you kill it: If the opponent slays more than 3 units of the same name, they gain a +1 to hit and +1 to wound modifer for their entire army against any further units of the same name in your army.

 

I think I just said they nerf'd and didnt ban wpamming...

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lord Hanaur said:

I think I just said they nerf'd and didnt ban wpamming...

Maybe I misunderstood.

[andy]

My favorite point in the game is when we both run out of Command Points. It's like taking your shoes off at the end of a long day standing.