>>96332970
>Why though? I think it adds a nice lever to balance melee units. Genuinely curious.
I think from a game design perspective its about how much return you are getting from the granularity. More crunch slows the game down. You could run GURPS for every single model on the table if you want, but at a certain point it becomes impractical to play and dare I say it not fun. I think the return on the old WS chart being interactive with other characters wasn't high. If anything I think there would be more theming and storytelling from reworking strength/toughness than hit chance. Shrimplified hit chance as it exists in 10th is in a good place in my opinion, it's wounding and saves that's suffering from not having enough granularity.

>In what way? I never thought psykers were complex, we never had anything like WHFB's magic system.
Personally WHFB magic is my favorite, but I think that it overlaps too much with stratagems and I quite like stratagems as a gameplay mechanic and concept. I think 9th had way too many and 10th slightly too few. I think they should dip a toe back into having strats come from both Army/Detachment/Units without the overload of 40 strats we ended up with.

Take knights for example, Rotate Ion Shields should be an army wide Stratagem that's core to how their army plays and has nice interactivity and decision making from both players. But then characters specific units can come with a unique strat again to add more flavor to what they do. I actually wouldn't mind if psychic abilities just became strats tied to psyker units.

Imagine if you took a Librarian and he had a choice of 3 psychic wargear each one giving him access to a different 1CP "spell". So he can activate Bio Lightning for 1CP. It actually gives psykers a purpose without having to commit to the time inflation of adding an entire other phase. We are talking about adding maybe 1 or 2 strats total.

9th was too much, but I think 10th can lean into strats a bit more than it does.