New sign&portents&Battlefield:Evolution rules

[Hiromoon]

He's got you there, VT.

Weapon Types:
- Crew
- Infinite
- Internal / Pack
- One-Shot!
- Squad

Weapon Traits:
- AA
- Accurate
- Auto
- Fire Arc: X
- Flame
- Killshot
- LZ(X")
- LZ(X"/LOS)
- LZ (Stream)
- Multihit
- Parry
- Persistent
- Piercing/x
- Ready
- Remote
- Retaliate
- Underslung

Movement modes:
(Some of which never saw the light of day)
- Climb/x"
- Hover/x"
- Jump/x"
- Wheels/x"
- Tunnel/x"
- Tracks/x"
- Air (X)

Unit Traits:
- Independent
- Hits/x
- (Movement)
- No Flinch
- Piercing/X
- Retaliate
- Movement (See Movement)

Range:
- X"
- Dropped
- Launched
- Placed
- Thrown/X"

 

[Proteus454]

Seems to me like they're actually be "mixing and matching" certain traits for weapons anyhow. Some of them, the SAW and MG can be Ready/set-up for more effective fire. They and other weapons cause, in effect, double suppression. Some weapons cause d6 damage out to a certain distance, as opposed to the d10+2 or whatever they do to their primary target, and may have the above abilities as well.

In short, we may be looking at more of a gradient rather than hard-and-fast condensed traits. To be honest, I'm sanguine on the matter - I rather approve.

After rereading, I also rather approve of the ability GLs and LAWs appear to have to pick out a specific target in the fire zone as opposed to the standard allocation. Considering the effective size of said fire zone, I think it's a workable game rule without hobbling the fire team in question too, too badly.

 

[Hiromoon]

Origionally they were going to do that for Accurate weapons.

 

[Voracioustigger]

Another benefit of not having traits is allowing for more varied weapons. If you squint, you can probably see some of the special rules for weapons that can't be represented by ANY traits currently in SST.

 

[Hiromoon]

Oh, That'd arguable...since I have the same set of info you have, VT. Some carefully worded descriptions could easilly cover those new bits.

 

[tneva82]

Another benefit of not having traits is allowing for more varied weapons. If you squint, you can probably see some of the special rules for weapons that can't be represented by ANY traits currently in SST.

Like firestorm missiles can't be represented by just traits? Nothing new there...

 

[Makoto]

Another benefit of not having traits is allowing for more varied weapons. If you squint, you can probably see some of the special rules for weapons that can't be represented by ANY traits currently in SST.

Frankly find that very hard to believe - trait system is very flexible, and You guys did manage to create them the way most imaginable effects won't require more than 4 of the existing traits.
And theres always the possibility to add one or two pieces to the trait list - simplier than coming up with worded description on each card.

 

[MaxSteiner]

Meh, Im really hoping the main rulebook puts traits back in, cause cards might be alright for casual new players but I like to have a book to hide behind when things arent going to well.

I'm not to bothered overall though, so long as Mongoose are 110% certain that what they're sticking on the cards is accurate and correct, I dont wanna go back to the days of arguing what the passage of text squeezed under a picture is MEANT to mean, once was enough

Actually, am I the only one who thinks moving away from traits is quite an old school thing to be doing?
WFB 3rd edition (Cant really speak with authority on the other versions) had a similar thing with its weapons/troops, as did Rogue trader for example, can't imagine it all on a card, but I get the impression the cards are gonna be a bit bigger than Im thinking.

 

[Voracioustigger]

Well, I'd keep up the criticisms...

Maybe you guys can convince them to at least release a S&P update that converts all the rules and weapons into traits for the vets.

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

Much less than writing it into EACH weapon and unit entry.

Given that there's going to be a card anyway, what does it matter? Warmachine and Hordes unit cards have all their special rules printed out in full on all of them, and there's no real problem there except with the really rules-heavy Warcasters - who have two cards anyway.

 

[Poko]

at first i was a bit bothered by the long winded rules on the cards. but then, i realized that i either had a)memorized all the rules b)had to check the wording in case of the more...esoteric equipment anyway.

if i really feel like i need it, i'll write the "traits" on a custom "summary sheet".

also->second what Lorcan said-it's not like you'r exactly saving place on the card if you only put traits there :wink:

 

[tneva82]

Given that there's going to be a card anyway, what does it matter? Warmachine and Hordes unit cards have all their special rules printed out in full on all of them, and there's no real problem there except with the really rules-heavy Warcasters - who have two cards anyway.

But it's lot quicker to just check auto, Armour Piercing(2), accurate for example than try to find out those from full rule text. 3 words vs lot more words. Which is quicker?

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

Anyone who's going to need to refer to the rules in that level of detail is still learning it, and will likely prefer to have the complete rule written on the card so they don't have to go flipping through the rulebook. Once you get more used to it, then meerely glancing at the rules as pritned will be enough to remind you of what they do.

I'm playing devil's advocate to a degree here, and there's certainly a market for cards that list the rules in terms of the old traits (sell them as a deck of cards, or include them in S&P), but I think the cards as they are are a much better choice for the squad boxes - every squad box could be a new player's first purchase.

 

[tneva82]

Anyone who's going to need to refer to the rules in that level of detail is still learning it,

So somebody who starts new army is still learning the game? (well okay he is but why make learning process for new army harder? Main rules, including weapon traits etc, are all learned so why force him to read those things all over AGAIN!).

I found it lot easier to learn skinnie units for example when I could quickly check the weapon traits from the weapon lists rather than having to read out full rules for every single damn weapon.

 

[Galatea]

Of course it is much better to write them on the cards, too. No one has said something against this I think.

But then list the traits at the "traits" section on the card front the traits and on the back say what they do.
That's best for Newbies AND Veterans (or post-Newbies).

I really don't want to take a magnifying glass and search in this novel on the back whether the weapon was piercing/1 or piercing/2.

Also it makes things much more easier if you are writing a weapon reference sheet (and that's a thing EVERY good game has).

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

Anyone who's going to need to refer to the rules in that level of detail is still learning it,

So somebody who starts new army is still learning the game? (well okay he is but why make learning process for new army harder? Main rules, including weapon traits etc, are all learned so why force him to read those things all over AGAIN!).

I found it lot easier to learn skinnie units for example when I could quickly check the weapon traits from the weapon lists rather than having to read out full rules for every single damn weapon.

You're not forcing him to read it again though - just because the rules are printed on each card doesn't mean he has to read them repeatedly.

 

[Galatea]

You're not forcing him to read it again though - just because the rules are printed on each card doesn't mean he has to read them repeatedly.

Hä?
He HAS to read them again and again if he is starting a new race.
If you have played MI a long time and then start playing skinnies, you just look at the weapon description.
Ah, Strenght D6+1, range 20" and... ah well, Pack and Killshot.
Now you know what the weapon exactly does and do not have to encrypt this dang fuzzy print on the back of each unit card.

And another important thing is: Traits ensure coherence.
I HATE this damn Warhammer 40k rules where almost every single unit has a bunch of it's own very special rules that only count for that model type and none other. Especially Eldar and gift-loaded Chaos Armies are a pain to play and play against (I know that, I played Eldar and a mate played Chaos).
Almost every time you forget something or have to read in the rules. That's just silly.

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

You're not forcing him to read it again though - just because the rules are printed on each card doesn't mean he has to read them repeatedly.

Hä?
He HAS to read them again and again if he is starting a new race.
If you have played MI a long time and then start playing skinnies, you just look at the weapon description.
Ah, Strenght D6+1, range 20" and... ah well, Pack and Killshot.
Now you know what the weapon exactly does and do not have to encrypt this dang fuzzy print on the back of each unit card.

Except it's not like there's a huge block of text on the card. It's seperated ino relevant blocks and paragraphs. You look at description for weapon X and it says "cannot fire as reaction; armour saves are -1", and that's little different from saying Pack, Piercing/1, and is easier to interpret for a new player, who now doesn't have to go flipping through the rulebook for the weapons traits page.

 

[Proteus454]

I'm with Lorcan Nagle on this one. I've had no trouble with the size of the paragraphs - in fact, it's comfortably close to the style employed by Warmachine for its units, warjacks, warlocks, etc...

Nah, I think Mongoose has done us right on this one. A conversion to 1st Ed traits might be okay for the vets, but considering they don't quite line up in some places (is there a trait for 2x Suppression? No, of course not, because 1st Ed. SST didn't HAVE Suppression, true.) that could be prickly.

 

[dyssnowman]

I have to say that I think Mongoose is going the right way with this as well. I typed up some cards similar to this for our last games day, and several people commented that they thought it was a great idea.

On a side note, it actually made running the games a little easier as far as splitting up the forces among the players. Just give them a card or two, point out the units and they are good to go. All the information that they might need for their respective units is right there, no digging through a force list to try to find the stat line or details on the unit.

And as for learning the traits and not needing to reference the rulebook, can't you just do the same with the card? After you use it a few times, you are bound to remember what everything does, and if a question comes up just flip over the card and take a look. Seems easy enough to me.

I have to be honest, it seems like people are making a much bigger deal of this than it actually is, especially since it is not like it going to change now just four months out from a worldwide release. Just my 2 cents.