# Rethinking Instant Death and Eternal Warrior



## Sephyr (Jan 18, 2010)

I like the Eternal Warrior rule. It's a good compromise as to how some models can be up front in the thick of fighting for 500+ years and somehow never been hit with a power fist or meltagun. Some people are just touched by the gods of war and get to keep their cool even while the world is exploding around them.

I don't -quite- like how inconsistent it can be, and the loopholes the rules do around it. Cassius and Mephiston are not EW...but really, toughess 6? Putting humanois on par with Tervigons just so they don't get insta-gibbed...you see where this can go.

As a compromise, I think Instant Death itself should be less common. The cannon on the standard _main battle tank_ of the imperium (that is churned out by the hundreds of thousands) should not be enough to gib big shots such as, say, Ahriman or Eldrad. Maybe make it (*double toughness+1*) strength required. Because they way it's being portrayed now is not really fun.

"Making people use their HQs wisely" (the usual excuse) is not what happens when I have to, say, keep Kharn the Betrayer or Cato Sicarius from charging at the enemy's CC specialists (which would be fun and fluffy: what hero wouldn't be best served assualting the enemy vanguard? We see Aragorn battling trolls and captains, not goblins!) because it's a near-certainity that it'll be the end of their careers, instead using them to sucker-punch Devastators and other "safe" weaklings.

It's not really making things more intelligent or complex, just convoluted and harder. "Well, I can't charge any of these ork mobs because the PK nob will crush my HQ after I kill maybe 5 greenskins. Guess I drive this rhino all the way to the back and try to kill his Lootas in turn 4). Eating soup with a knife is harder too, and not smart. unish:


----------



## eyescrossed (Mar 31, 2011)

It gives a way to stop combat characters killing everything they touch. If the Power Fist Sergeant can't instagib a Chaos Lord with a lucky hit then there's no reason not to be careful with characters, and no defence against the uber killy models other than "Run away!"

It also keeps up with the grimdark nature that the "heroes" are still fallible and not invincible killing machines.

EDIT: Also, a Battle Cannon shot would atomize even a Space Marine.


----------



## Routine (Sep 25, 2011)

which is fair, since guardsmen are atomized by pretty much everything! But then, thats why you take so many. IG live by a motto that goes something like "throw bodies/machines at the problem till it quits twitching"

As to the original post, I'm a Grey Knights player, but can you imagine Paladins if Strength 8 or less only caused one wound? They'd be even more disgusting! (ex. they'd take hits from thunderhammers, only to finish the remaining Termies the next combat phase because a tank-killing hammer to the face is just a flesh wound)


----------



## the-ad-man (Jan 22, 2010)

it sounds like the op has just recently been on the reciving end of some instand death


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Yes, i think EW is overused, but i think that any heresy era characters in the chaos codex should have it. Abaddon does, thats fine, but Kharn doesnt? he has been khorne's chosen champion for ten thousand years, yet he can be squished by a scout sergeant with a fist. Ahriman was saved from magnus' wrath by tzeentch, but tzeentch won't save him from a battle cannon shot. Lucius the ETERNAL should sort of give away that he is an eternal warrior, but no.


----------



## the-ad-man (Jan 22, 2010)

mcmuffin said:


> Yes, i think EW is overused, but i think that any heresy era characters in the chaos codex should have it. Abaddon does, thats fine, but Kharn doesnt? he has been khorne's chosen champion for ten thousand years, yet he can be squished by a scout sergeant with a fist. Ahriman was saved from magnus' wrath by tzeentch, but tzeentch won't save him from a battle cannon shot. Lucius the ETERNAL should sort of give away that he is an eternal warrior, but no.


i agree with you any significantly old characters should have it. appart from lucius. he is eternal because whoever kills him, if they relish the kill for even a second, they will turn into lucius. in that way the entity that is called lucius is eternal, but lucius himself, is not. only way to really kill lucius is for it to be an accident and not tell the accidental hero. i.e. orbital lance strike


----------



## jaysen (Jul 7, 2011)

The original poster thinks that Blood Angels shouldn't have Eternal Warrior or toughness 6 either? But, all his chaos champions should have it, naturally.

I think Dante should have it, since he is virtually eternal, per the fluff. 1100 years as chapter master? I mean, c'mon.

I think the game would benefit from a little more realism in leadership. What makes leaders important isn't being the best fighter in a scrap. That's what privates and sergeants are for. Officers bring organization, planning, unified purpose and direction to the fight. The chapter master shouldn't be on the front lines. He should be in the situation room coordinating the fight and creating strategy. He should be something that the army truly values and must protect, more valuable for what they bring to the army than for how many bad guys he can crush with his bare hands.

The only armies that really bring this to the game are IG, Orcs, Tyranids, and Necron.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Hence why I only field DP's in my chaos army.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I play tyranids and necrons. 

I am fine with ID and EW rules as they are. I get by without them. 

And finally:


----------



## Sephyr (Jan 18, 2010)

jaysen said:


> The original poster thinks that Blood Angels shouldn't have Eternal Warrior or toughness 6 either? But, all his chaos champions should have it, naturally.


Emmm, no. Did you even read the post? I suggested raising the ID treshold across the board to make it more rare, and not free EW for all the chaos baddies. I brought up the Toughness 6 some models have because it's -obviously- a way to add in characters that won't go down to a power fist without spamming Eternal Warrior all over the place. 

And I wonder how invincible ICs would become if ID wasn't so easy to tote around  on ever sargeant. A power fist/klaw is still good for 1-2 guaranteed wounds a turn on the prized HQ of yours, so it's not like you can sleep easy. 

And the fact is, I haven't been getting my guys ID'ed that much. But I still don't like feeling penalized for not taking Daemon Princes all the time. It makes the game less rich than it should be: read through tacticas from nearly all factions and you'll see it when describing HQ after HQ something like "Yeah, this guy is nice, but he lacks EW and since he's good at CC, it's not worth it".

That's a good point about GK paladins, however.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Oh my dear Paladins, how i love splatting you with my vindicators after you deep strike.


----------



## Coldshrike (Sep 9, 2011)

I do see what the OP means. Most HQs or even a lot of regular characters are described as having lead for hundreds if not thousands of years. It seems like the might have run into anything you can throw at them before.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

i personally wish that all named HQs should be EW. that way if they go down its a much more memorable moment of the game, kharn dieing with a HUGE pile of dead enemies (and friends) instead of maybe 10, before a PF comes by and wrecks him.

this way it makes ALL named HQs more worthy of taking, instead of a generic libby/DP/etc.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

I agree with the OP. Furthermore, I don't think EW should be reserved for these legendary characters, but simply huge point sink characters. A Tau battle suit commander is a great example of this. He can cost over 250 points, but you can never buy him eternal warrior or extra toughness.

An Ork Rokkit worth 5p shouldn't be able to disintegrate 5 wounds from the most powerful commander an entire codex can field, it's just wrong.

It would be fine if such a commander was optional, but it really isn't, you _have to field one_, and as such you will never get your points worth out of him no matter how cheap you make him.


----------



## Lord Sven Kittyclaw (Mar 23, 2009)

I also agree, I have always felt ID is OTP. Using our age old "He's been alive for 5000 years owning people" if one lucky Devvy with a ML can pop Kharn, than shouldnt there be a rule for every ranged weapon called BOOM HEADSHOT!


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Lord Sven Kittyclaw said:


> I also agree, I have always felt ID is OTP. Using our age old "He's been alive for 5000 years owning people" if one lucky Devvy with a ML can pop Kharn, than shouldnt there be a rule for every ranged weapon called BOOM HEADSHOT!


You also have to take into account that death in WH40K battles don't represent... Well, death. They represent being incapacitated and unable to fight anymore _and_ death.

That's why campaigns/ Necromunda have the injury roll table.


----------



## Machiavellismx (Sep 11, 2011)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> You also have to take into account that death in WH40K battles don't represent... Well, death. They represent being incapacitated and unable to fight anymore _and_ death.
> 
> That's why campaigns/ Necromunda have the injury roll table.


Just my two cents. I understand that, but you don't see warriors like Kharn getting injured, he's just that good.

From his background -

_During the Horus Heresy and culminating in the Siege of the Imperial Palace during the Battle of Terra, Khârn was at the forefront of every assault made by the World Eaters. At the moment of the Horus' defeat, Khârn already lay dead upon a mound of Traitor Marine corpses before the walls of the Inner Palace. His fellow World Eaters carried his corpse away with them as they fought their way back to their landing ships.

Once on board, they discovered that by some dark miracle of the Blood God Khârn still lived. Whether Khorne himself breathed life back into the Berserker's body or whether the relentless clamour of battle revived his blood-lusting spirit remains a mystery, but since the Heresy Khârn has survived the bloodiest battles across ten millennia and has never come so close to death again._

I've personally always felt Kharn is just plain crap on the tabletop, compared to his fluff. He's literally the second most powerful champion of the *BLOOD GOD*, and yet I just don't feel thats represented. He is even called the Avatar of Khorne. For such a badass, total killing machine, he's pretty derp. Shame, cause hes such a cool character.


----------



## DeathKlokk (Jun 9, 2008)

Wait until the next Codex:CSM. He'll be 250+ points and unfucking-stoppable.


----------



## jaysen (Jul 7, 2011)

I don't think EW should work against force weapons. But, force weapons should be reserved for true psykers. GK's should not all have it, but rather be a special ability of a psycher hq.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

jaysen said:


> I don't think EW should work against force weapons. But, force weapons should be reserved for true psykers. GK's should not all have it, but rather be a special ability of a psycher hq.


Yes, they should, since they are all psyskers.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Doelago said:


> Yes, they should, since they are all psyskers.


They are not all Yoda. That's the difference, they are... Henchmen. Filler, if you will. Minor psykers.


----------



## Sephyr (Jan 18, 2010)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> They are not all Yoda. That's the difference, they are... Henchmen. Filler, if you will. Minor psykers.


But even the filler, cannon fodder psykers got lightsabers! Lucas likes all the shiny in the screen. More shiny! More! :biggrin:


----------



## the-ad-man (Jan 22, 2010)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> They are not all Yoda. That's the difference, they are... Henchmen. Filler, if you will. Minor psykers.


i wouldnt call a gk 'filler' haha


----------



## IadUmboros (Aug 9, 2010)

I'm not sure what the alternatives would be? The OP didn't really offer any.

I actually think EW should be more universal than it alreay is, amongst character classes. I don't agree that a powerfist from a sergeant should instakill a craftworld leader, much lesss a chaos lord. More EW to HQ units, paladins and other elite troops can get smulched.


----------



## IadUmboros (Aug 9, 2010)

PS - Either that or boost WS on HQ choices to 8, 9 or 10 across the board. In most codexes and fluff, that seems just about right to me!


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

IadUmboros said:


> I actually think EW should be more universal than it alreay is, amongst character classes. I don't agree that a powerfist from a sergeant should instakill a craftworld leader, much lesss a chaos lord. More EW to HQ units, paladins and other elite troops can get smulched.


This completely defeats the purpose of Instant Death. The whole point of that rule is that sometimes, some weapons just blow you to bits. I have no problem with a character dying in this manner. A Craftworld leader gets gobsmacked to death, fine. A Chaos lord, fine. What exactly is the problem here? If people can't plan around their leaders getting killed or prevent them from dying then those characters deserve to die. 

40k is not and should not become Herohammer. Characters need to be kept in check to make other units worth taking. The easiest way to keep those characters in check is to actually threaten to kill them. 



Fallen said:


> i personally wish that all named HQs should be EW. that way if they go down its a much more memorable moment of the game, kharn dieing with a HUGE pile of dead enemies (and friends) instead of maybe 10, before a PF comes by and wrecks him.
> 
> this way it makes ALL named HQs more worthy of taking, instead of a generic libby/DP/etc.


I agree with this completely. Change the rule to _Legendary Warrior_ and give it to everybody with a name. Why? Because they're legendary. These are people who's names actually matter. 

EW is overused as are special characters. Personally I would rather see several 'generic special' characters for modifing your list/army rules and then only a couple 'legendary special' characters for the actual stombing of face.



jaysen said:


> I think the game would benefit from a little more realism in leadership. What makes leaders important isn't being the best fighter in a scrap. That's what privates and sergeants are for. Officers bring organization, planning, unified purpose and direction to the fight. The chapter master shouldn't be on the front lines. He should be in the situation room coordinating the fight and creating strategy. He should be something that the army truly values and must protect, more valuable for what they bring to the army than for how many bad guys he can crush with his bare hands.


Um, hello... 40k? You want realism, play something else. Daemons, Star-gods and guns that shoot bullets made of imagination and you want realistic leadership? Heros are necessary to any good story and that's what 40k fundamentally is. Sure the battles aren't particularly realistic but personally that's half the fun.


----------



## Machiavellismx (Sep 11, 2011)

MEQinc said:


> 40k is not and should not become Herohammer. Characters need to be kept in check to make other units worth taking. The easiest way to keep those characters in check is to actually threaten to kill them.


:goodpost:

If it all becomes about the HQ units, then it will lessen the effect and choice of the entire codex's models, because the focus will shift from having different troop choices to combat different things to the HQ units.

Plus, they do already have some 'realistic' leadership value - the Necron lord is quite tactical in his gear, and the IG have their command squad. In regards to the Orks and Chaos and Dark Eldar, well the best fighters are going to be in charge as it's such a martial way of life for them. I doubt a Chaos Lord is going to be an amazing tactician but crappy fighter, someone else would want power and take it. Moreover, when you command your forces, I always viewed it as thats the HQ making those 'commands', while he's in the thick of battle or whatever. So really, in my view, it comes down to your own skill for how good/realistic your leader is.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Speaking of HQ's I find that the vast majority of CC oriented MeQ characters are generally useless anyways. I mean for 150pts I can get a Chaos lord with terminator armor and mark + Lighting claws. Now for the same amount of points I could outfit every squad in my army with plasma guns, or buy a defiler. Not to mention the fact that unlike these other options there is a fair chance the lord will never see combat. 

So building on what has already been said I am fine with most HQ's being vulnerable to ID if their pts cost reflects their usefulness. For instance who in their right mind would take a sorc or a regular SM chapter master, when they generally fail to contribute meaningful to a combat. Seriously why pay for 150 pts for one model when the equivalent amount of points of regular infantry or heavy infantry is 2X as effective?

So I think the core problem is not that their is not enough EW, but that a lot of the option are over costed for models that do very little. Hell if their was a 50pt chaos HQ I would take it just so I didn't have to waste points on them. As the more competent players avoid these kinds of models all together and focus on the few HQ's that stand to own CC or contribute something subtle to the army that increases its overall effectiveness.

Also people may be bitching more these days on the issue do to the retarded amount of force weapons and str9 weapons floating around since GK, DE release. Hell its to the point that EW is almost mandatory for HQ's to contribute competitively if its designed for CC, and even then there is a fair amount of abilities these day that even bypass EW. So contrary to what other fear we are now probably the farthest the game has ever been from herohammer. Hell even if they started handing out EW to all the existing HQ's it would make little difference when a lot of the base CC oriented troops these days will just wound the HQ to death (Berzerkers, purifiers, incubi, witches, death company).

In short I feel this thread is subconsciously linked to the fact that as we approach the new edition 75% of all Hq's are becoming a simple hemorrhage point for KP's and nothing more.


----------



## Sephyr (Jan 18, 2010)

I wonder if we're really in so much danger of a Herohammer situation. Pretty much every top-competitive list has generic HQs designed to offer a specific benefit for the least amount of points necessary: Vulkan, Baron Sathonix and BA librarians come to mind. 

My concern is not that famous named HQs are getting killed, but that the current setting is...twisted. I mean, I -should- be far more afraid to toss Kharn or Typhus at freaking Chapter Master Dante than at Tactical Sargeant Blandus Nobodius with a PF. 

Since my idea of 2xT+1 as the IS treshold allows for abuse of builds like nobs and paladins, I imagine maybe something like the rumored 'tiered' EW might be useful.

In this case, Eternal Warrior would become something like '*Insane Bravado +X'*. Basically, it would grant the model a 'bonus' Toughness point for the sole purpose of avoiding ID. So in that case, Comissar Yarrick could get Insane Bravado +2, meaning his toughness, for the purpose of avoiding Instant Death, would be 6. It has the benefit of offering partial levels of protection thjat can still be used tactically. A Kharn with Insane Bravado +1 would just take regular wounds from regular power fists, but would better be mindful of demolisher cannons or Dreadnaught CCWs.


----------

