The 10 problems of the 2nd Edition Shooting Phase

🪙 Support the channel for great perks on Ko-Fi:
ko-fi.com/oldendemon/tiers
👕 Merch Shop:
oldendemon.myspreadshop.co.uk...
💻 Website:
oldendemon.com/
🖼️ Instagram:
/ chilvers_industries
📨 Email:
[e-mail]

[@positronisomer206]

My friend always included an imperial assassin who could take a piece of wargear that let him take the place of an enemy trooper. He would then pop out and throw a vortex grenade onto my very expensive Avatar or Greater Daemon of Khorne and kill it automatically on a 2+. One game, he forgot to face the assassin properly and the Avatar was out of his arc. I called him out on it and long story short we got into a fist fight and he rammed my head through some dry wall. Ahhhh 1994! To be 14 again!

[@OldenDemon]

I wish I’d written this into the script

[@positronisomer206]

@@OldenDemon you can’t make that stuff up! Good old 2nd Ed.

[@chrispowell2947]

Thank god this was before monster energy drinks were around.

[@Mauricebrogan-uf6qx]

My ork kommandos carried a scanner and vortex grenade for that same tactic. Deploy the other side of cover from character. Turn on scanner throw grenade

[@positronisomer206]

@@Mauricebrogan-uf6qx dirty. Filthy even. Love it.

[@LlamaFIL]

Every one of these videos reminds me just how little we actually followed the rules when playing as 8 year olds.

[@joelarcher2691]

Loool same

[@Cidiuss]

And explains why it was so freaking hard for 14 year old me to understand 2ed rulebooks, especially being non-native english speaker with very rudimentary understanding of english. Brutal.

[@Maggers42]

So much this!

[@JPilestedt]

Haha yeah! We just played the way it made sense. We used the sustained fire dice the way explained: roll die, roll to hit with that many shots. Surprisingly the cover rules never were a problem, we just asked "do you want to hit the guys in soft cover, hard cover or in the open - and applied the penalty as such - if someone chose open and killed all of them, the rest of the shots would be wasted. No one tried sniping with blasts AFAIK. Large target we just used any vehicle large as, or larger than a rhino or on a monster base. Also, we didnt modify the dice roll as described. 0+ to hit and hard cover meant 2+ to hit. It all just made sense back then! 😂 Then again, we were a RPG crowd that just used to play it more similar to an RPG.

[@Skull_Gun]

@@JPilestedt Funny, always assumed you had to use blast markers like flame templates were you had to try and hit as many models as possible and weren't allowed to snipe.

[@danielskurok5433]

"it's short range now, you filthy casual" Made me laugh out loud! Thank you for putting together these videos, they are brilliant.

[@soupalex]

rip in peace franz ferdinand. may noughties indie pop bands sing thee to thy rest.

[@SportyMabamba]

Me when playing Arbites in KillTeam

[@owenthomas5103]

The randomisation of hits in combat was difficult but fun. To this day i pain my Chapter Master with a headwound from the time he was taken out in a 3 way game by a lone grot aiming for the hive tyrant he was fighting.

[@RodneySloan]

GW did sell RPG dice, in a blister set that included a D4, D8, D10, tens D10, D12, and D20. They were all different colours.

[@chuckstaresatthings9605]

Please keep making these. I've only been in Warhammer since 9th, but I love learning about the older versions, and you're really interesting

[@1985slipstream]

2nd really was alot of fun. with barely any good computer games or graphics at the time tanks and crazy tyranid monsters on a really good scenary board just looked epic. You really felt like a general about to make your next decesion.

[@bilko991]

One great thing about GW games of the time was they were a big gaming tool kit. It was expected you would bend and break the rules as you and your group saw fit. No one I knew at the time ever considered sticking to the rules as written, it just wasn't done! You very much could make the game you wanted to play. There was definitely a GW 40k dice blister, I know because I bought one and I still have all the dice!

[@polca4love]

It was a time when most matches were expected to be among friends. Now it seems they target the competitive type.

[@ironbomb6753]

Andy Chambers even wrote that the rules were not to be taken in a "lawyer" fashion...or something like that. But yeah, the original writers intended us to put it to the dice. Then discus later.

[@howardtreesong9165]

I think squinting at the scatter die and determining the precise direction a blast marker scattered caused more arguments than anything else.

[@SCHMALLZZZ]

Precise??? I'd get opponents trying to change the vector by more than 30°and they honestly thought they were right.

[@jackp492]

And how many models the blast token was covering

[@Debbiebabe69]

2nd edition best edition ;) Yes you often had to make compromises in the rules, for example you rolled a load of shots and got one kill, you would be adamant that shot was at the guy with the lascannon, the opponent would say it was the one with the bolter, so we would always presume if the lascannon guy did die another guy almost certainly would take the lascannon so the target always chose who dies - unless of course he does something stupid like put his entire squad in HC but leave the lascannon guy in the open....... We always love it how open the original army lists were in 2nd ed, no shoehorning players into having to use all units with special rules, a space marine was a space marine whether you painted him red, yellow, grey, or blue. And if you were playing as marines or guardsmen, you almost always would use the Imperial Agents allies list to take an assassin with polymorphine and a vortex grenade to insta-pop the enemy commander right off the bat. 2nd Ed had squats. Any 40k game with squats is instantly better. Allies - love em. Allies let you play bigger battles and use armies you dont have enough models for a full army. Plus the guardsman ally list is insane - guardsmen can spend up to half their points on marines, imperial agents (everything from the aforementioned assassins to inquisitors, sisters of battle, various psykers, and the best of them all - Electro Priests!), eldar, squats, and even ORKS! My typical go-to was a marine army with an assassin (of course), couple of units of Electro Priests, and a couple of units of imperial guard penal legionnaires, represented by lego bricks as I could never find and actual models, as allies. Just a shame they never brought the Human Bomb from rogue trader to 2nd ed! Terminators could actually, well, terminate things. You could beam them behind enemy lines, and give them the assault cannon mentioned in this vid.... Pretty much instakill for any character unless they had something fancy like a displacement field.... And with 3+ on 2d6 save, they could even bounce lascannons.... Also DREADnoughts you actually did DREAD as they were very powerful and versatile...... But yea, ballistic skill is kinda redundant. Its either 3 (in which case your regular to hit score is 4+) or 4 (in which case it is 3+). Anything higher (most heroes) is 2+ minus modifiers. But some units had ridiculous ballistic skills with no use for them - Eldar Avatars for example had a ballistic skill of 10 yet could not equip any weapons or wargear (the aforementioned Assassin 'only' has 8 ballistic skill and can use any weapon or wargear apart from heavy weapons), 3 of the 4 chaos greater daemons had 10 ballistic skill as well......

[@jamesbryant8133]

I started when 2nd dropped. These old photos are tearing my heart out. Please continue.

[@SusCalvin]

Champions were a character type in Warhammer Fantasy Battles. They were characters, but regimental captains who were beefed-up versions of a soldier of the regiment they led. They were permanent parts of that regiment. Players could get a champion, a musician and a standard bearer for each regiment. You could also attach other characters to a regiment, so a regiment could have both a regimental champion, a wizard or two, the army general and a priest if you so liked. Champions had meaning when other heroes showed up and called for a duel. Instead of sending your wizard, also a character, into the duel you could let your champion take it on the chin a round. A bit like calling a veteran sergeant in 3rd and up a character.

[@polca4love]

In the spanish 2nd edition of the "Angels of Death" codex, veteran sargeants were called veteran sargeants. In the rulebook were called champions to generalize, i imagine.

[@David_Baxendale]

Ah the joy of 2nd edition. The discussions, the arguments, the tantrums - fond memories.

[@Msatthew]

Came for the Ferdinan, stayed for the shoulder mounted heavy-bolter, which was apparently exactly like a regular bolter, but bigger.

[@cactus_judy3929]

the AI dice on the dog photos are peak 2023

[@owb1979]

The dot configuration is peak AI, look out for the GW "AI dice set" for £50 soon :)

[@jonroads8281]

This video has me crying with laughter. Oh how I loved those days....

[@nicolaso921]

I remember selling my Legos to by this box! Each time we would not be able to resolve something from the book, we would call a "+4 im right, -3 you are right". And we kept going 😂

[@iainawatson]

The core rules of 2e were a clusterfuck, but by far my favourite army and wargear lists to this day. More is more!

[@kristianjensen5877]

This belongs in a museum. *Happy Indiana Jones noises*

[@markg9674]

I played Second Edition, I bought a blister pack of dice (D4, D8, D10s, D12s and a D20) from a GW store at the time. I remember getting them vividly, I still have the yellow D4 and red D20. So they did carry them.

[@domfluff]

"None of these were sold in a gw store to my knowledge" At the time you could buy a blister pack that contained a d4, d8, 2d10, d12 and d20, each in different colours.

[@LordRaa]

I'm reminded of the house rule we instigated for vortex grenades - if you rolled a 1, it exploded on the thrower. Not in any of the rulebooks, but it ws an attempt to balance the game. Especially if someone had the combo of warp jump and a vortex grenade.

[@johnstevenson1709]

God i loved second edition i still get warm when i think of a hughe stack of wargear card and blast templates with different decoration

[@TheRealKoltoroc]

games workshop DID sell dice blisters with the various odd sized dice, including artillery and sustained fire dice. I know because I bought one in 1993

[@SusCalvin]

The funky d6 dice for sustained fire remained in use in Necromunda/Gorkamorka. Orks could have a cheap six-shoota, a sort of horrendous full-auto revolver.

[@Jimbo818]

Capital N for Nostalgia! Part of the point you are eloquently making I feel, but I always felt BS 5+ essentially put you in credit for modifiers - e.g. bs 6 can hit target in soft cover (-1) on 2+

[@OldenDemon]

The table seems to imply it works that way. I suspect a second pass over the rules would have clarified it

[@polca4love]

​@@OldenDemon What Jimbo wrote is what we applied.

[@designjobber]

As a filthy casual myself this video made me chuckle quite a bit!😂 Another great video that really highlights the struggles of the game before we all just made up our own rules on the spot (at least that's what me and my brother did)... They still ended in arguements but we had a lot of fun too.

[@OldenDemon]

Yes I’m pretty sure in 90% of the games rules were considered optional

[@designjobber]

@@OldenDemon 😂👍

[@bigsmiles768]

It could feel as though this era of rules were saying: "Here is a wargaming framework with some novel minigames, here are guidelines for messing about with models, be a good sport and use common sense while enjoying a narrative gaming experience". Maybe this is why we can't have nice things.

[@thefreshwaterpirate]

"Beardy" now thats a word I've not heard in a long time

[@adamfox1669]

Please never stop making these. Please. Thanks so very much. It says a lot about me, but I really look forward to watching these videos.

[@pringlewheel]

This is why my groups games would take approx 3 days to finish. Ah second ed', how I genuinely miss you.

[@nobularlol]

please never stop making these! You had me in stitches the whole time watching your video. Thanks for the great stuff!

[@lesterdarke]

I bought official GW dice set at the time that did include d4's,d8's,d10's,d12's and d20's.... so they did exist. They came in an old blister pack from what I remember.... probably still have some in my big bag of dice.

[@Maggers42]

That's where I got mine too in the 90s

[@kaedesnex]

Can confirm, I still have them to this day. One of each in a blister.

[@Hartmansgrad]

The first GW D10 I am aware of came with the Inquisitor game system though interestingly you can now get them as wound markers that serve no randomisation purpose. There may be earlier examples but this is the limit of my grognardery

[@matthiasoc7141]

What I did was the envy of all my friends: I stole my dad's AD&D dice when he wasn't looking.

[@bilko991]

I'm certain I got a D10 in the GW 40k dice pack when 2nd ed released. It had a D3, D10, D12, D20, and maybe something else, a D8? I've still got them in my dice box so I'm going to have to check or it will drive me up the wall!

[@wolfie54321]

@@bilko991 D4 rather than D3, but yeah, I remember there being a blister pack of special dice in 2nd edition, though I started in the mid 90's rather than at the start of 2nd.

[@bilko991]

@@wolfie54321 indeed it was a D4, I stand corrected.

[@kwest9747]

I like to think the rules as less a definitive document of what is/isn’t permitted in play, more a lengthy description on how the studio played. Thats why odd little bits pop up here and there in the tone of “oh yea, we also sometimes do this!”

[@rendurai]

As someone that started at 8th edition. I really treat this as a history class of the Hobby i love so much. Also helps that i have an absolute hard on for classic models.

[@strategystuff5080]

Very entertaining, it is still hard to drill into the head of some of my friends that the beauty of board/tabletop games, is that you can play it how you want, as long as all players at the table agree.

[@caseycbenn]

Started my wh40k playing in 1995 2nd edition and played a ton until around 2001. My brother and I always took an individual case approach to units in cover. We would apply modifiers depending on a good faith visible situation. Each shot situation was decided based on closest unit not in cover and would work back to IN cover if units were split up die rolls based on how much cover... so a 10 Ork squad that had 3 units not in cover, 2 in half cover, 5 in hard cover were simply targeted and rolled against in that order. The shots favoring the not cover units until they were killed and then the half cover units hit etc etc. Shooting angles we were never that picky about. You could split fire how you saw fit based on the previous rule... distance/cover. Never made that big of a point about mini standing angle. Just that you could have two shots to a squad closer to the left and 3 shots closer to the squad on the right of the units were in those positions. Close range also applied if applicable. We never felt this was very difficult to execute and quite honestly felt more granular and fun. Now when things are generalized you do get more streamlining but then model positions aren't as important as the general squad position and we tend to prefer the granular cases for the narrative vs just raw trying to crank through numbers faster.

[@petersmith6513]

Every time (and I mean every time since 1995) I've played a 2nd edition, it begins with, "Right, which rules do we both agree to ignore?".

[@JimEvansart]

Just found your channel, and oh man...this brings me back to the many arguments at my buddy's house playing this. Look forward to more videos! Great work!

[@219Hexagons]

I'm so happy to have 360 degree firing arcs and controlling players allocating casualties as standard now, though it does seem a little odd to me when my land raider somehow broadsides it's target with a set of guns on it's other side

[@Bluecho4]

It's one of those things you just don't think about too hard, or you'll drive yourself up a wall.

[@kharnifex]

Oh no my entire ork army blew itself up in one round of shooting

[@jamesbryant8133]

'BEARDY!' now I know we are of the same generation/era/epoc

[@OldenDemon]

It dates me

[@wolfie54321]

10:00 I started in the mid-90's and recall my local GW selling a pack of dice that included D8, D10, D12, D20 and I think it had a D4. I remember because as a snot nosed little kid I would sit in the store wondering if I should spend my chore money on finally getting the dice, or just being more models, lol. I dunno how many years before I started they were selling it, but so many weapons required them that I feel like they must have been selling them?

[@OldenDemon]

It’s one of those things that much have happened but I found no blisters or prices for them anywhere. I always make mistakes in these videos.

[@wolfie54321]

@@OldenDemon Hmm, odd, from memory it was a blister pack.

[@phantomdashia4999]

@@wolfie54321 Yeah, I remember this myself, my first set of dice bigger than d6s!. They admittedly then ending up seeing more use for DnD!

[@penpointred]

This video was awesome. Please do more of these for the other phases 🙏🏼oh man 2nd was some crazy times.

[@richtheunstable3359]

The space marine dreadnought rules in codex Ultramarines seems to suggest you can unclear a jam while firing other guns. I like to allocate a crewman/gunner to unclear a jam for other vehicles.

[@RiflemanMoore]

I've only just found your channel, brilliant content I must say. I came to the hobby just as 3rd was taking over and stopped playing just as 4th hoved into view, though maintaining an interest in the miniatures and fluff through to today. I've always been more interested in finding out more about the crunch of Rogue Trader and 2nd, rather than lcatching up with 4th onwards so I'm looking forward to watching the rest of your current videos and your future uploads.

[@warspawnedpainting4380]

You beauty! 😂 The real question though is which elephant for the reference? The African Forest or the Asian? 🤔

[@andersingram]

Just make sure its a laden rather than unladen elephant and you are good?

[@euansmith3699]

Another fun, informative and clearly presented video; thank you!

[@andywardle2988]

Still better than 10th edition 😂 Love these videos!

[@EOTA564]

Might not be RAW, but in my view the most intuitive way to deal with shooting at units in partial cover or LOS is to split up the squad into different targets. The shooting player then chooses how much shooting to allocate against each target. If some models are out of LOS, they can’t be targeted and wounds don’t spill over.

[@MichaRabiej]

To pick random model out of 24 models using dice you need 2 D6 dice. You roll 2 x D6 dice , remember which dice is "first" which is "second", you roll random number from 1 to 36 by (Dice 1 result -1 )* 6 + Dice 2 result. If the number you got is between 1 and 24 - this indicates the model you have picked, if it is between 25 and 36 - roll again.

[@EntropicEcho]

So a D66/D56. :) Better yet: A D3-1 for the tens, and a D6 for the singles.

[@NatureRPh]

Thank you for the nostalgia.

[@Hiddenronin]

6:46 If you can' see them they're not being shot at. The only visible models are in hard cover so a -2.

[@comradealex85]

Thanks for bringing back wonderful memories of 2nd edition wee sausage dog!

[@lnecbaal]

srill planning to play some 2nd edition eventually, but the more i learn about it the less i know

[@Jedi_Scowen]

If you'd asked me anything about 2nd edition back in 95-98 then I could have answered it perfectly. Now watching this I can't believe that I had every rule and weapon stat memorised

[@andrewharper1609]

Games Workshop York actually did have multiple atypical dice on sale when second edition came out. I know because I still own some that I bought at the time.

[@benwooding1311]

Thanks. I needed that kind of humour after the (work) day I've had.

[@BlareWolfgang]

“It’s short ranged now, you filthy casual!”

[@emmaselmeci966]

Hilarious. I can't even decide if you love or hate these rules. Keep up the good work :)

[@ironbomb6753]

I love those old battle report diagrams. They mesmerized me. I'm still hooked on the game, it's the best.

[@mattcat966]

Bit late to the discussion, Rogue Trader defines large target as anything over 3meters high or wide and the intended scale design was 1 tabletop inch = 2 meters. Assuming that’s what they intended for 2e as well!

[@charlesweinert4116]

I just started playing 2nd Ed this month and this video was actually really helpful.

[@OldenDemon]

Thank you, technically these are “how to play videos”. Just done differently

[@beregondibram2985]

​@@OldenDemonMore like how not to play lol

[@CanOfRabbitHoles]

Amazing. Thank you so much for these videos 😂

[@reallyidrathernot.134]

aaaah that thumbnail art. I still want to see tactic discussions in that form.

[@OldenDemon]

Maybe one day

[@louiscarter1320]

Hmm, I can see where your interpretation of the 'roll to hit' rules comes from, but we always played it like this: (sorry if the following seems as patronizing as that 2nd ed range table, I'm just trying to make myself clear :) ) Although a roll of a 1 always misses, this doesn't make the higher BS redundant. Basic roll to hit for BS 10 without modifiers = -3. BUT, a roll of a 1 always misses. Rolling a -4 modifier on the dice means that the dice scores become the following numbers: 1 (-4) = -3 2 (-4) = -2 3 (-4) = -1 4 (-4) = 0 5 (-4) = 1 6 (-4) = 2 As a roll of a 1 always misses, rolling the 1 misses even though it meets the BS requirement. However, a roll of 2 or more means you have *not rolled a 1*. You rolled a 2 or more. The BS modifies the roll produced by the dice, but because you didn't physically roll a 1 the resulting score of -2 or higher still meets the BS requirement. So a roll of a 2 or more would still hit in this situation. The confusion comes from the line "your dice roll to hit is modified". But we took this to mean you miss if you physically roll a 1, but then the modifiers are applied to any number above 1 to see if you gained a roll high enough to meet your BS requirements. It would be simpler if the rules had distinguished between 'roll' and 'score', but as we've already seen from the use of the word 'hero', the writers did tend to use terms in both general and specific ways, even when the two contradicted. Our final point of persuasion is that doing it like this meant the full BS chart was actually used. If the writers hadn't meant the rules to be used like this, why would they have written the BS chart in that way? Again, I can totally see how your interpretation is also valid. Thanks for reading this far. As someone who still plays 2nd ed I'm really enjoying your work.

[@OldenDemon]

Yes, your way does seem to make use of all the appropriate tables and charts. But the rules just needed a second pass by another set of eyes to really clear up most of these points.

[@louiscarter1320]

@@OldenDemon Oh, most certainly. That bloody elephant rule!

[@7isAnOddNumber]

I cannot wait for the video on the Fight phase.

[@robertdalton531]

About turning the models I would say, that turning them away from a very near enemy is a question of the idea of the model. It is a moment of bravery or experience. About the probability's of hitting models in close combat engaged with your models I would say, we just estimate. The game is not chess. Every single step of following the rules is a process of immersion. That is why a periscope is used. I played with the german rulebook and there wasn't a periscope mentioned. But we used it and taking the perspective of my heroes and fighters was one of the best part of the game.

[@djdoug242]

I love how these videos are the nuclear flash to utterly annihilate the rose-tinting

[@theveteransergeant]

2nd Edition was messy, but what really killed 40K was the way 3rd so massively over-weighted the lethality of close combat that it created the phenomenon of the "Close Combat Army." There wasn't such a thing in RT or 2nd. Everyone could shoot, even Tyranids. Because all of a sudden there were "Close Combat Armies," the armies that could shoot became "firing line armies" whose sole tactic was to attempt to stay as far back as possible and hopefully kill enough of the enemy before they made it to close combat. No game designer in their right mind would ever try to balance medieval knights against a WW2 infantry company. That would be insane. And yet, that's exactly what Games Workshop tried to do with 3rd Edition, and they literally never figured out how to balance the game ever again. Somewhere out there is an alternate universe where 3rd Edition 40K streamlined some of the most bonkers elements of 2nd Edition, got rid of the Psychic Phase, etc. And in that one alternate universe, 40K is actually a good game.

[@thecommuterzombie]

I love these oldhammer videos! I can only guess that add i don't remember arguing all these points back in the day we must just have all gone with what felt right and agreed on that feeling.

[@walksinthedarkness]

The frustration of fire arcs meant having people armed with heavy weapons in both 40k and Necromunda could be caught out simply by attacking them from the direction they weren't facing. "Oh, you want to turn to fire your heavy weapon armed dude in overwatch at my charging character - shame - you'll need to move in order to face me and thus remove your ability to fire your gun..." Also, in hindsight, some of the best bits about the game were the randomness of the game and watching blast markers flying around the table!

[@JPilestedt]

The randomness and the unpredictable stories is what I miss most. Current 40k unfortunately plays like an accountants wet dream.

[@impguardwarhamer]

@@JPilestedt 8th/9th honestly isn't worth playing (and I doubt 10th is any better).

[@calebbarnhouse496]

The thing is that is good gameplay, if strategy and tactics cause your enemy to be put into bad positions that's a good thing, though a stipulation for this could be that they can pivot for a small reduction in damage output, player one is rewarded for flanking, player 2 doesn't feel like he's robbed by the flank

[@walksinthedarkness]

I would argue that there is a difference between great tactics and the poor placement of miniatures and by poor placement I mean picking them up and placing them on the board. I would be annoyed if I'd picked up and moved a model and when placing it back on the board I hadn't placed it back the way I wanted it to be facing.

[@SusCalvin]

I thought models could rotate on the spot for free. But going around the back of the bloke with a heavy stubber sounds like a very Necromunda thing to do. Space Hulk was all about facing. Terminators use an action point just to turn 90 degrees. The genestealer player had to come at the marines from a blind angle where the least amount of storm bolter overwatch would hit them. Otherwise your only hope was to throw so many 'stealers down the corridor that their bodies clogged the gun of the terminator and allowed one or two to slip through when he reloaded.

[@OldManRogers]

I remember finding the melee super confusing so for ages we just used WFB style attacks and WS

[@MrConna6]

360 degrees is a circle, a circular shape is a ring, *confirmed* GW is the second coming of Annatar

[@SCHMALLZZZ]

Thats Danyerus bruh

[@nathanglover8938]

At 07:20 you said that a BS 10 shot deducting 4 from the roll would hit on a 6. However I’m pretty sure that they would actually hit on a 2+. That’s because they hit on a -3 basically, so if you apply the modifier it becomes 2+. That interpretation actually also eliminated your previous critique that the part of the “to hit” table that dealt with high BS models was obsolete; its included precisely because of the scenario you outlined (ie a high BS model with several negative modifiers)

[@samgibbs8194]

Also, modifying the dice roll would be extra trick y if hitting on 7+? I that case which roll would be modified?

[@nathanglover8938]

@@samgibbs8194 (as I think you are aware), if a model is hitting on a 7+, they have to roll a 6, follwed by a second roll of 4+, in order to hit. Any additional negative modifiers would apply to the second roll, so a "to hit" roll of 8+ would require the player to roll a 6, followed by a second roll of 5+. Then a 9+ would require a 6 followed by another 6. I'm not sure if the rules ever allowed for a roll as high as 10+, or if that kind of shot was considered functionally impossible.

[@polca4love]

6 + 6 was the highest allowed. Fact is, most of the issues in this video i never faced because we applied common sense. Until 3rd edition when people started to be ultracompetitive.

[@canaryinacoalmine1759]

Honestly, most of these rules are rather clear. Like the to-hit chart is clearly saying that you still keep your normal score but always fail on a roll of 1, so a BS10 means that you can take up to -5 in penalties and still hit on 2.

[@nathanwtc742]

😂😂😂😂😂 this literally had me in stitches! Absolute gold. I still prefer 2nd edition to anything from 9th edition. :D

[@LinkiePup]

If its exactly 8 inches it doesn’t get the short range bonus. Its 8-16 meaning that 8 inches and above there is no modifier. >:( Get Rekt.

[@grlmgor]

Well if it 16" it long range so that means 8" is short range.

[@murphy7801]

They did do a a dice kit in mid 1990s for second edition that had all the unusual dice.

[@MrEggsauce]

I get the feeling that even though the rules were less clear, everyone was having a much more fun time than with rulesets nowadays.

[@BrentWalker999]

It's not the rules. It's us:)

[@impguardwarhamer]

3rd edition (and its variants 4 through 7) are a happy medium in my opinion.

[@GuiltyKit]

Nah, I started back in 2E and while every edition has its pros and cons, the (greater) amount of clarity, universality of terms and definitions, and other things was nothing but good and positive for the hobby. Ambiguity spawned way too much loud arguments (or someone just quietly going along with whatever the louder player said was the right interpretation) that no one enjoyed. Rules need to be clear and consistent. And even if it's not perfect now, the game itself is lightyears more enjoyable to play. Yeah two people only halfway reading half of the rules could still have had a great time, but then why do you even need an overpriced rulebook if it's not going to matter anyway?

[@djdoug242]

nah. I started with 2nd and those 3-4 hours to get through 4 turns due to the just, frankly, terrible rules, are not something I'd ever want to go back to. I much prefer completing the same size game in 90 minutes

[@dstanful]

still play 2nd ed now, and its much more fun, just as long as you make sure not to play against people who take it seriously

[@peterclarke7240]

"OK, so let's agree on some ground rules." "OK." "So, This is 2nd edn, not 10th edn, right?" "Yes." "So we're not going to massively overcomplicate the entire process in a tragic, desperate attempt to prove that our meta-armies of toy soldiers are better than each other, and instead we're just going to have a lovely time playing a sci-fi wargame." "Sounds good." "OK. You go first." "No, you go first." "But I insist." "Well, Ok then. If you're sure." And therein lies the difference between oldhammer and Poohammer.

[@Skull_Gun]

What I've seen from battle reports of the time, while you can ignore the closet target with blast markers to try and hit more units you still need LOS of the target you are aiming at; it looks like some of the Death company brothers here would block shots to the Chaplain 11:50 If the Reapers were on higher ground that'd be a different story. (If I'm wrong about this that's certainly how I would balance it.)

[@OldenDemon]

Excellent avatar and username. Models do block line of sight. Exactly -how- is unclear, but the Death Company could theoretically block the shot.

[@fealix13]

I have absolutely loved this art style of bat rep. I remember reading many of them when I was younger. Can you let me know what program you are using to make them? I suppose I could just make it using Gimp and/or other photo editing software but it looks like it might be a bit easier with your workflow. great stuff man I subbed. I remember getting into 40k when I was so young. My first game was 12 Eldar guardians and a farseer vs Abaddon and a squad of chosen... It was not close lol. but I scared my buddy by taking out everything but abaddon and bloodying him up some too. I look forward to more of your stuff.

[@OldenDemon]

It’s After Effects and Procreate. It’s not easy but it seems to allow the best options for animation

[@murphy7801]

As someone who has rose tinted glasses for 2nd, you've firmly ripped them off. Fair enough

[@iandoddsblah]

I'm fairly sure GW did do a pack of alternative dice sizes? Maybe not when 2nd came out but before 3rd probably?

[@christianjohansson7185]

I better get myself a reference elephant in anticipation for 11th ed. I'm gonna be ahead of the curve this time.

[@seranonable]

Honestly, randomizing hits is a great mechanic that should be brought back. "But it's a hassle!" it's a hobby game, not Angry Birds.

[@Ninjat126]

For a lot of combat situations, I like "defender chooses where damage is allocated" system. The amount of time you save is colossal, really. I especially like it in melee engagements, since it gives you a little bit of extra "footwork" control without adding another phase to movement. Want to be aggressive? Remove casualties from the back of the unit: as models at the front fall, models in the rear surge forward to fill the gaps. Want to fall back? Remove casualties from the front of the unit, and nobody moves up to replace them.

[@EntropicEcho]

Meh, I think it's tedious and doesn't add much to the game.

[@RobotShield]

7:01 I absolutely never read that it was affecting the “Dice Roll” after it was rolled, but the ‘Dice Roll To Hit’ before the dice was rolled and then if it was still 1/-1/-2 etc you had to roll a 2 or more. Let’s laugh and not cry as the arguments start. Ps pretty much here just for the pretty pictures. I love the art so much

[@jarrodbright5231]

The heroes targeting issue (around 4:30) was answered by Andy Chambers in a White Dwarf magazine. Heroes can shoot at whatever they like ignoring the easily circumvented "shoot the closest applicable target" rule. They could not pick out a character standing in a squad if the character was in coherency distance (the character essentially using the squad as cover) as that was a different target selection limitation to the "shoot the closest thing" rule that characters and heroes can circumvent. They didn't have to fire with the rest of the squad. As someone who played back then this wasn't actually all that hard to understand was it? Don't get me started on short vs long range penalty and measuring how much of a unit was obscured for partial vs hard cover... those are headaches I thought I had long since left behind me. It's the whole reason I'd just play Eldar and say "whatever gives you more advantage opponent, you're not winning anyway" Loved the trip down memory lane and I did indeed laugh out loud multiple times remembering

[@hashrat]

And it was still vastly superiour to everything that followed.

[@poireauetsespnjs5668]

I remember buying D4 D8 D12 D20 blister at Games Workshop in the 90's (in France)

[@Dangoku59]

if you were BS10 with a -4 modifier. you'd actually hit on 3+ because when you minus a minus number you add. -4 - -3= -1. Hit on 3+.

[@GI.Jared1984]

The original 40K with made with roleplay gaming in mind the designers just assumed that people were d&d players

[@Thulcandra]

Hi, instant like, watch it later!

[@OllyHux]

I played rogue trader and 2nd for years when I was a kid and literally none of things were an issue

[@gilburtfilburt8779]

All of the sudden, i get why battletech was popular back then

[@user-mb1rp3bq1c]

where can i get that graphic program you were using called "90's batrep sim"?

[@wakcedout]

the current 360 degree firing arc for infantry models makes more sense than you think. the old version you are descrbing reflects a bit of over realism of infantry sitting in one spot and having a limited field of view. the current version takes into account that as much as infantry would have that limited realistic view, they would react based on their sergeants or comrades orders of where the enemy was located and "adjust" based on that and making it so you dont have to move the models facing is just a way to stop padantic rules lawyering like you described about forgetting to "face" your models the right way. ill take the "its assumed" method becuase some people really will be asshats about if your heavy bolter marine is facing the right way to shoot at their valuable unit. especially in the competative level of the game.

[@1sforthemelta913]

Ahhh simpler times

[@TheGreaterGrog]

I just found this channel. I can't wait until you get to the vehicle rules ....

[@1985slipstream]

Think the rules we used were characters can do what they want re shooting. Squads needed to fire at the same thing and also face the same way except for heavy weapons as they would have orders to aim at a tank not a gretchen.