Liber Panoptica - Horus Heresy 2.0 - Age Of Darkness

[@myrar8708]

I really appreciate Panoptica. Sometimes it changes too much for my taste, but I agree with the idea behind it.

[@blacklight5902]

Awesome interview, really have been enjoying this channel. Would love to see panoptica played on the channel too.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

Glad you enjoyed it mate! Currently on the hunt for opponents so I can get more games in if panoptica!

[@petercarlson8240]

Great, following the alternate Heresy content eagerly.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

Cheers mate! Hopefully will manage to get another panoptica game soon (maybe vs eldar hmmm) and got badab stuff sat on my desk and really digging into the lore/liber badab atm

[@TheSuaveLion_]

Cheers for this! The panoptica updates have meant people actually want to play my Custodes!

[@BearfootMiniatures]

Glad your having a good time with it mate! I’ve not actually looked at what they’ve done to custodes yet (a lot to digest) but I think you’ve just triggered tonight’s reading!

[@myrar8708]

Definitely my go-to rules for home and singleplayer games

[@BearfootMiniatures]

Coulour me intrigued mate! Setting up narrative scenerios is it?!

[@playfulruss4227]

Thank you so much for this! Really lovely to see some in-depth discussion of panoptica and to see Walrus in the real!

[@BearfootMiniatures]

No worries mate, glad you enjoyed it! And hope to get him on again soon!

[@playfulruss4227]

@@BearfootMiniatures fantastic! You are a really good interviewer too - lovely to just hear you guys chat :)

[@lonelysandbar]

We made us of the Centurion format in our slow grow league when HH2.0 dropped. Was great fun. More missions, both these and the goonhammer ones, really add a ton of play variety to HH.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

How’ve you found centurion as a game mode this Ed, we played it loads in first Ed but no one’s massively interested in it around here atm

[@r.j.macready]

I'll definitely be watching this soon. My group was looking at it and I flipped through and saw a bunch of nerfs to my Dark Angels and didn't see anything nerfing fists so we vetoed it for the time. We like the crusade rules though.

[@blacklight5902]

I've been keeping an eye in their feedback channel and they've been pretty open about how much work Fists are going to need to be knocked down. Don't know if you're in there but could always drop some ideas if you want.

[@fungruntjb]

Really? They fairly increased the cost of intredemptors and took the cenobium being all characters away like they did with all all character units. They buffed a few of the DA RoWs to have line too and other issues like allows Storm of War squads with centurions to have apothecaries. Give it another read for sure.

[@r.j.macready]

@@fungruntjb yeah I think most of those are bad changes. Interemptors require a lot of work to get value out if given reactions in the movement and shooting phases and once theyre out, they die like tacticals. Character being a unit wide ability on certain units is both intended and fine and generally included in their cost. They are often targeted by weapons that double them out so the point is usually moot. If people are mad they don't die to mass small arms fire, well that's the point. Similarly the DA rites being so restrictive are also the point. They could use some tweaks but not granting extra line was intended and a reasonable challenge to the player to work around.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

Would you have to play with all or nothing (like how receptive would your group be to some changes and not others?) Could do it without the DA changes and add a fists change as a set campaign for a period of time then evaluate how you liked it?

[@r.j.macready]

@@BearfootMiniatures yeah I really appreciated this video and the fluid nature the guy(sorry terrible with names) suggested this tome was meant to be taken. I think there is a lot of good work here and more than that the spirit of the changes whether I like them or not. My group has been talking about making changes to lascannons, shooting reactions, and the vehicle damage table ourselves. At the very least this has inspired me to maybe codify our changes in a living document. We also definitely can't wait to run a crusade with these rules as we all loved the 9th ed system and like that specifically inspired these rules here. Great video!

[@nukedukem4260]

Awesome, will you be covering Centura in the future with Walrus?

[@BearfootMiniatures]

If he’ll agree to come back on mate! It’s good just talking to people that are passionate about what they’re doing!

[@EAfirstlast]

You guys change the loyalist UM warlord trait since that one is explicitly meant to take a save to confer fearless to the unit?

[@acidnine3692]

using the skitarii from liber ingenium for a league coming up. Suprised by how balanced it seems to be, though there are a few stand outs still like the kill clades.

[@tripp9278]

You'd need to work hard to be less balanced than vanilla HH lol

[@acidnine3692]

@@tripp9278 yea really. I think the worst ingenium unit may be the kataphrons breachers, but even that pales in comparison to lascannon devs

[@knoxminis1211]

Great interview. I'd really like to see vehicles and knights get some attention. The vehicle damage table is just a feelsbad in general. I also think that vehicles and knights need significantly more hull points with so many lascannons, etc out there. Knights also need more attacks in CC. A knight should't have to avoid close combat with Terminators. It's stupid that the Castigator gets only 4 attacks with a giant sword, and it's not even brutal. That absolutely does NOT tell the story of how a Castigator should feel in the lore.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

agreed: I think starting off though a big fix would just be lascannons getting a double nerf (points increase and sunder being taken back off them), maybe Missile launchers to ap2 lascannons to ap3 so theyre just not so overwhelmingly better

[@r.j.macready]

Snap shooting template weapons is intentional to keep template weapons from being invalidated in many of the situations they would practically still be effective. Prevents them from having a minimum range so to speak.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

That’s the way a we’ve been playing it in my group actually, I don’t think any rule set (and that’s fanmade or actual) is ever going to be perfect so with homebrew stuff just would drop the things you don’t like!

[@captainferrite]

If I may offer some well intentioned criticism, I find Panoptica is problematic in terms of presentation and accessibility. HH 2.0 is already a catastrophe of page flipping and Panoptica insists on GW's scattered layout with information regarding a single unit being spread amongst 4 or 5 different sections, while also adding a massive amount of rules in an errata format that reference original rules only by page and paragraph number, making it all but impossible to assimilate the changes in any coherent fashion.

[@BearfootMiniatures]

Hopefully Ollie’s in the comments so gets the feedback, they’ve also got a feedback section in their discord (and I think you’ve got a good point tbh)

[@playfulruss4227]

I love panoptica but really agree with this - i did create a comprehensive rulebook for my group, putting all the things for 2.0 in a good order, and then layered panoptica over as comments - but i need to add in new panoptica over it again. But having it all in a single doc - rules and fan additions - is so helpful!

[@blacklight5902]

@playfulruss4227 originally the team had it in a single document, but got alot of complaints that it was too large and scares people away. Sadly it feels that there is no right way to do it.

[@alexworsfold5357]

​@@playfulruss4227 do you still have this?? I'd love to have it if you'd be happy sending it

[@Sean-nb6sj]

​@@playfulruss4227 I'd love a copy of this

[@gtrk1322]

Panoptica team might be the most toxic part of hh community, suffice to say mournival stopped working with them.

[@nukedukem4260]

What makes them so toxic in your opinion?