# 7th Edition Rumors, Pics in 1st Post (Update #8 15 May)



## Zion

EDIT: 7th Edition is coming, so speculation about the rulebook going missing is now moot.

EDIT 2:

























EDIT 3:

































EDIT 4: From http://millests.blogspot.pt/2014/05/7th-edition-pictures-confirmation-of-3.html?spref=fb

























EDIT 5: (From Dakka)

























EDIT 6: (From Dakka)

























































EDIT 7:
Some screen caps courtesy of Dakka:

































EDIT 8:
From the Blog for the Blood God Facebook page (rehosted to make life easier when it comes to embedding these pics):


----------



## humakt

It is still available on the UK site. This could just be the fact that they are currently out of stock. This is the process they have been currently following with the new web page.


----------



## Zion

humakt said:


> It is still available on the UK site. This could just be the fact that they are currently out of stock. This is the process they have been currently following with the new web page.


Out of Stock is listed differently though. Which is why I was surprised to see this. It could be a mistake (I've emailed Customer Service about it to find out more) but it could be legit too.


----------



## Drohar

humakt said:


> It is still available on the UK site. This could just be the fact that they are currently out of stock. This is the process they have been currently following with the new web page.


It doesn't state out of stock or no longer available on the UK site, but you can't add it in your cart.
(Though you can add the other language versions)


----------



## Doelago

_No Longer Available_ on the Finnish site as well.


----------



## Stormxlr

Btw did you notice you cant buy formations on the new site anymore? I mean like apocalypse formations, space marine company and chapter formations aswell.

7th ed is imminent =) pistols inclose combat hell yeah.


----------



## Zion

Stormxlr said:


> Btw did you notice you cant buy formations on the new site anymore? I mean like apocalypse formations, space marine company and chapter formations aswell.
> 
> 7th ed is imminent =) pistols inclose combat hell yeah.


I think formations went away with the new site. They were just one click bundles with no savings anyways.


----------



## Kreuger

Welp, 7th edition is starting to sound an awful lot like 2nd edition. 

And for that I'll give a, "Fuck yeah!"

(Though not the cost of another giant book so soon.) Who knows maybe they're finally going digital.


----------



## humakt

Just did a quick check and you can now add the UK version to the shopping cart, so it definitely still available on the UK.


----------



## Badknox

*both* French and English versions on the canadian site are "No longer Available"
40k Apoc and escalation are still available in both languages however


----------



## Serpion5

I've only just now started to play 6e on a regular basis. All my hard memorizing about to me made redundant so son? :laugh: 

Or maybe not, but who knows. I'm cool with either way.


----------



## Zion

Apparently the other language rulebooks are vanishing now too.


----------



## Einherjar667

Very suspicious if the other BRBs are vanishing as well. If this is a glitch with the new website, that would be pretty bad. Not being able to order a $80 item off their website for any amount of time is $$ lost for GW.


----------



## Creon

Strangely enough the Itunes book of rules is still available.


----------



## Bindi Baji

Add to cart has vanished here, if it returns everywhere in the next few days 7th isn't incoming
if it stays like this it looks like they have gambled on an early new rulebook


----------



## Woodzee316

yep also "no longer available" on the Australian website.

that sort of sucks, just finally got my head around all the rules and don't need to look them up as regularly. 

What, has it been about 2 years?


----------



## Varakir

Woodzee316 said:


> yep also "no longer available" on the Australian website.
> 
> that sort of sucks, just finally got my head around all the rules and don't need to look them up as regularly.
> 
> What, has it been about 2 years?


Not even that, think it was September time 2012.

I think it's far too soon for a new ruleset, but i guess we'll have to wait and see. 

If they do bring out 7th i hope they'll have the option to get a smaller rule book from launch. I'm not shelling out £45 for a new BRB and i don't really need another starter set.


----------



## Mossy Toes

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/04/40k-6th-edition-is-being-pulled.html

BOLS confirms and corroborates Nafka's May 24 preorder date.

That's what, a year and a half into 6e? Ridiculous. Most likely a bandaid on some 6th issues and minor tweaks, as I see it.

Ugh. I sure as hell don't want to have to buy another overpriced rulebook on such a short turnaround, nor do I want the rumored Ork/Blood Angel starter kit. GW had better not keep hiking codex and rulebook prices if they want me to buy them...


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Bindi Baji said:


> if it stays like this it looks like they have gambled on an early new rulebook


Very stupid gamble if this is true.


----------



## Zion

Straken's_Fist said:


> Very stupid gamble if this is true.


Depends on the cards they're holding and if this really is a full new edition and not just a revised rulebook.

Also with all the complaints about 6th are we really lamenting it going away without seeing if the new edition (if it is a full edition) is actually better?


----------



## Achaylus72

No longer available in Australia.


----------



## Woodzee316

well if they release a 7th ed so close to the 6th ed then they should really have some sort of trade back of the 6thed maybe bring in your 6th ed book and get a 30%discount off a new book.

As was said before shelling out for another book ($125 here in Australia) is just a load of shit so close to the other edition.

I only just got another friend to start playing 2 months ago and he went out and brought the BRB just over two weeks ago. so now I feel bad for talking him into it.

oh well I guess "electronic" (torrent downloaded versions) will be rampart.


----------



## Zion

Woodzee316 said:


> well if they release a 7th ed so close to the 6th ed then they should really have some sort of trade back of the 6thed maybe bring in your 6th ed book and get a 30%discount off a new book.
> 
> As was said before shelling out for another book ($125 here in Australia) is just a load of shit so close to the other edition.
> 
> I only just got another friend to start playing 2 months ago and he went out and brought the BRB just over two weeks ago. so now I feel bad for talking him into it.
> 
> oh well I guess "electronic" (torrent downloaded versions) will be rampart.


At least it isn't as bad as it used to be where GW was selling the new edition up until the day prior to the new edition. At least he'll get around 6 weeks out of it and if the new edition isn't a large number of changes it'll be easier to transition from the edition to the new one.

I've got a copy of Rogue Trader, a copy of 2nd, 2 copies of 3rd, a copy of 5th and both the collectors edition of 5th and the hardback "the Rules" version of 6th. There is a lot of fun fluff stuff in all of them I enjoy going back to now and then. If he's into the fluff then the book still has some stuff to enjoy now and then too.


----------



## Woodzee316

just spoke to a guy at the Australian headquarters for GW. Yes it is officially removed from the website. he said to me he couldn't say much except to keep an eye on the website and also white dwarf magazines over the next coming weeks. Wouldn't give me much more save the fact that don't get the current rulebook.


----------



## Zion

Woodzee316 said:


> just spoke to a guy at the Australian headquarters for GW. Yes it is officially removed from the website. he said to me he couldn't say much except to keep an eye on the website and also white dwarf magazines over the next coming weeks. Wouldn't give me much more save the fact that don't get the current rulebook.


I got a similiar message from the US Customer Service branch (bold/underlined emphasis mine):


> Hello there,
> 
> Currently the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook is out of stock and I do not have a date as to when they will be back in stock right now. *We will have to keep watching the Games Workshop website and White Dwarf for more information.* You can still get the mini rulebook in the Dark Vengeance core set. Should you need anything else please give us a call at 1-800-394-4263 and we will work to get you helped out.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Games Workshop
> North America Customer Services


I guess that's as forward as they're allowed to be.


----------



## Uveron

I would be willing to make a bet that says this is all linked to the change in army names (IG to AM). And given that planet strike and City's of Death are also No Longer Available. Could be looking at a compendium of some of the older expansions. In the big Book. but not a huge change in the rules (So they don't have to re-do the DV box's)

Edit: and include a Collectors Edition, and they will make a pile of money.


----------



## Zion

DV box was turned in by GW stores about two weeks ago. I don't expect it to stay on the website much longer.


----------



## Nacho libre

Winter is coming.


----------



## Woodzee316

Uveron said:


> I would be willing to make a bet that says this is all linked to the change in army names (IG to AM). And given that planet strike and City's of Death are also No Longer Available. Could be looking at a compendium of some of the older expansions. In the big Book. but not a huge change in the rules (So they don't have to re-do the DV box's)
> 
> Edit: and include a Collectors Edition, and they will make a pile of money.


yes from what I've heard from others is that it will be pretty much the existing rules with all the errata's in and also combining things like escalation and probably as you have noted Uveron those older books which disappeared.


----------



## Nordicus

No longer available in Denmark either.


----------



## bitsandkits

well i can confirm the 40k English rule book has dropped off the indie order sheet, dark vengeance hasnt though....yet. 
I still dont expect a totally new edition, i still think its gonna be a compendium.
from a business point of view however a new starter set would be mint! Dark vengeance is great but i think its run its course and should be retired and two new armies get the treatment, plus a quicker turn around on these starter sets might mean i one day get my dream of seeing the Eldar in a starter set, so far we have had Orks,DE,nids,chaos,orks again and marines, so some starterset love for eldar/tau/or necrons would be nice.


----------



## Stormxlr

Just went to a GW store in Shanghai saw both DV box and a rulebook there. Should have asked em about the rumours but i doubt they really would have mentioned anything we dont already know.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

If true, this is fascinating. I'm not sold on a new edition coming out so soon, doesn't seem like the best idea. However, getting an updated BRB would make sense and a new starter set to keep things fresh for new and existing players makes sense.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

If this is a brand new 7th edition (which i'm highly sceptical about): 
A rulebook not even 2 years after 6th Edition should be free to download online as just the rules (like most other companies do), or you can buy a hard copy with fluff and all trimmings (like most other companies do). Especially if it turns out that they have only released 7th to try and make the game balanced and move away from forging a narrative: The game was advertised as fluff over balance in the 6th ed rulebook, so to change it so quickly and reverse course would be deeply insulting to the fanbase/customers. 
But like I said, this probably wont happen, I see a new rulebook with FAQs. As long as I can still get FAQs online via pdf I think it's entirely fair.


----------



## locustgate

Best case scenario it will be a 6.5 additional book for half the cost worst case scenario I'm going to buy another rule book 10 months before they redo it again.


----------



## Uveron

Woodzee316 said:


> yes from what I've heard from others is that it will be pretty much the existing rules with all the errata's in and also combining things like escalation and probably as you have noted Uveron those older books which disappeared.


Part of me doubts the profitability including escalation, may be a section that references it (like the current one does for city's of death and planet strike, but at the same time putting city's of death and planet strike on another printing run probably would not pay for itself.


----------



## Bindi Baji

Having spoken to someone I know who works for GW (not in a store and not a source) I was 15 minutes ago told a new big book was due in a few weeks, as I understand there was a meeting at GW HQ about it after lunch today


----------



## psactionman

This may be wish listing here, but if we are getting an update to the existing rules and not a new rule set from the ground up maybe they are just going to update the digital versions. I've been meaning to get the digital rulebook but couldn't justify it having two regular ones, but this could be the push I need to get that too.


----------



## Zion

Just for fun I wanted to look at a comparison of how much stuff was released for 6th versus 5th:

6th:
9 Full Codexes
4 "Mini-dexes"
6 Codex Supplements
5 Expansions

5th Edition:
9 Codexes (Counting the Sisters WD Codex)
4 Expansions

So just on a "how much stuff released" perspective you could argue that 6th isn't leaving too soon. And it's interesting that in 2 years we got the same number of codexes in 6th that we got in 4-5 years with 5th. I wonder if GW is basing the launch of a new edition on the amount of stuff they've released and not the amount of time between the editions.

On a timeline though 2 years still really feels short regardless of how much stuff came out, but I don't think this edition has been short changed on content at least.


----------



## Creon

Not ceasing IBook sales makes me think it's a tweaking and consolidation rules set, not a full 7.0 release.


----------



## Zion

Creon said:


> Not ceasing IBook sales makes me think it's a tweaking and consolidation rules set, not a full 7.0 release.


That or they just haven't gotten there yet. It took all day for all the different print versions to get pulled.


----------



## FatBoyFat

Pretty hacked off about this... only bought a new electronic copy last week as I lost my book..


----------



## Zion

Got a bit of info on this passed my way:


> The new rulebook is *not* a 7th edition of the game, but a re-issue of 6th edition which has the FAQs incorporated in it, and some minor tweaks across the board. Some of you may remember when they did something similar during 3rd edition, where they totally overhauled the assault phase, but the edition itself was left alone from that point. Same idea here-- they're folding in the changes in Stronghold Assault into the main rulebook, and quantifying superheavy units and D weapons in the main rules. But that's about it.


----------



## bitsandkits

makes sense ,tweek it a bit, bit more in here a little off there, some new fancy pants photos, re-release it and get some second bites of the cherry with some limited editions and those gamers who cant stand not having the latest book( you know who you are), do a second starter set with a new range of models and next year do warhammer fantasy and do the same again with that.


----------



## d3m01iti0n

Okay, so for those of us who refuse to buy the new book (and never bought Stronghold or Escal because it didnt interest them), I wonder if they will release a FAQ for the "tweaks" and continue to run the 6th BRB. Because straight up I am not plowing into a new edition this early, but if it truly is a tweaked 6th then I will get the FAQ. Im not dumping out $70 on a new rulebook because they screwed the game up and decided to penalize customers in order to adapt this soon after its introduction.


----------



## iamtheeviltwin

That was my prediction all along. This whole episode has mainly been grist in the mill for those who have problems of whatever sort with 6ed and became a chance for extreme wishlisting. 

Hopefully as this information gets spread about it will quell the nerd rage.


----------



## Zion

From Dakka:


Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl said:


> Did not see this posted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “There is no peace” written in French.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “24 may 2014”. If you were unable to figure this one out yourself… well, it was not all that difficult, really, was it ?


EDIT:











> via an anonymous source here at Faeit 212
> My brother just got in from GW and the manager said the rulebooks were just getting errata tweaks put in them and would be re-released alongside something else. So just a 6.5 rather than a 7th edition


----------



## Zion

From Dakka:


krazynadechukr said:


> Just wanted to throw in something my Memphis GW source clued me in on.
> 
> Apparently (as we all know) there is a "new" rulebook coming out, and it is a corrected/updated version of 6th (not being referred to as either 6.5 or 7th, but unofficially as "Revised 6th" at hq in Memphis), with escalation and strong added in the book, amongst other books/supps, d weapons, and some other stuff. 673 pages, $99.99. New cover. There will be new templates and starter box, plus other items. For GW, they want this to be the same big fanfare of a new (40k reawakening) release, new rules, for newcomers, but keep current players (happy?).
> 
> For those who have 6th, and the other books, there's going to be a faq pdf so you can use current books still, apparently. This will be good for another 3 to 4 years.
> 
> So I'm being told... (same guy who told me of website change, scions, and astra name/codex...).


----------



## DeathGlam

Im dissapointed, i love 6th, it's my favourite edition since i have been playing but hoped for a few new things to be added.


----------



## Moonschwine




----------



## Zion

From BoLS comments section:


> My sister in law works in the printing department and has seen parts of the new rule book. She has limited gameplay experience but does know the rules from watching countless games. One thing she did notice is that "Prescience" is no longer the Primaris Power in Divination. It has move to number five and now cost two warp charges to cast.


All the salt on that one.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief

Stormxlr said:


> Just went to a GW store in Shanghai saw both DV box and a rulebook there.


The manager is probably still waiting for the government to finish reading and approve his e-mail from HQ 

(Just kidding)


----------



## Zion

From BoLS:


> *First up - Percentage FOC limits (like in Warhammer Fantasy):*
> 
> 40%+ Troops
> 
> 10%-30% HQ (single character HQ Warlords can break this limit)
> 
> <20% Elite
> 
> <25% Fast
> 
> <25% Heavy
> 
> <25% Lords of War
> 
> <20% Fortifications...can take multiple fortifications
> <25% Allies, Secondary Detachments, or Allied Army Formations
> 
> <50% Primary Army Formations
> 
> *+++We consider this set average reliability+++*


----------



## Jacobite

Poster in WD? Or only instore? (Because for once that is actually a poster that I like).


----------



## Zion

Jacobite said:


> Poster in WD? Or only instore? (Because for once that is actually a poster that I like).


From what I've heard: in the WD.


----------



## humakt

I'd quite like percentage organisation instead of the current number limit. It will force more balanced armies.


----------



## Nordicus

God I hope that new organisation is true - It will solve alot of the headaches I have with my playing in general.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

I don't play fantasy and therefore have no experience with a percentage FOC. How does it work? Is this going to cause a revision of existing 'dexes for points cost? 

I'm confused, so, enlightenment would be appreciated.


----------



## Nordicus

Jace of Ultramar said:


> I'm confused, so, enlightenment would be appreciated.


In essence, it would mean that instead of a max of 3 heavies, for example, you can use a max of 25% of your total points on heavy support choices. It would have a great effect on alot of armies, and essentially be the death of armies like:

- Eldar bringing Wraithknights to small games (You would need at least 1200 points to bring just one, if you want the 5+ invul)
- Flying Circus for Daemons (You would need roughly 2000 points to bring 2 Daemon princes as heavy choices with armor, wings and psyker levels)
- Chaos Space Marines bringing 3 Heldrakes in smaller games.
- etc. etc.

_(My math may be off, but you get the gist of it)_

Essentially, it makes the lists more narrow in what you can bring and usually it escalates the battles more. It also prevents people from spamming a certain unit (unless it's a troop that is) and forces them to prioritize their choices more.

Overall, I'm a massive fan of this approach. It brings the game back to troops and smaller models more, than just a minimum of troops and then spamming your toptier model.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Ok, thanks Nordicus, that helps me a great deal.

So, I guess this means my 30 Sternguard list is only usable in 2K+ games, huh?


----------



## Nordicus

Jace of Ultramar said:


> So, I guess this means my 30 Sternguard list is only usable in 2K+ games, huh?


I'm afraid so 

In my opinion it would solve a lot of the imbalances of the game currently. Not all of them, but it would be a huge step forward.


----------



## Einherjar667

I was able to just rework my army (tau, 2 commanders, 1 riptide, 1 stealth team, 2 fw, 2 crisis troops, 1 pathfinder team, 2 broadsides 1 hammerhead) without changing my line, using the percentages approach. Seems easy enough, i like how fantasy does it


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Nordicus said:


> I'm afraid so
> 
> In my opinion it would solve a lot of the imbalances of the game currently. Not all of them, but it would be a huge step forward.


Well, its a good thing I hadn't painted all of them yet, I suppose. But, I do like the percentag idea. 

One question I have about a percentage FOC is concerning unused points in a category. Do those points just burn up in that category or can they be allocated elsewhere?


----------



## Einherjar667

Jace of Ultramar said:


> Well, its a good thing I hadn't painted all of them yet, I suppose. But, I do like the percentag idea.
> 
> One question I have about a percentage FOC is concerning unused points in a category. Do those points just burn up in that category or can they be allocated elsewhere?


I think so, as long as you don't breach the percentage limit.


----------



## Nordicus

Jace of Ultramar said:


> can they be allocated elsewhere?


They can be used on troops. Troops (if the rumor is correct) needs to be *at least* 40% of your total points and there's no upper limit. You could make a valid list with a warlord and the rest of the points on troops choices if you wished.

Troops would then be the only choice that does not have a upper limit.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Interesting. So, a swell of troops is acceptable? Hmm... I've used large amounts of troops in recent tourneys, I wonder if this will change anything too much or not?


----------



## Einherjar667

Jace of Ultramar said:


> Interesting. So, a swell of troops is acceptable? Hmm... I've used large amounts of troops in recent tourneys, I wonder if this will change anything too much or not?


Also note that it makes Supplements with special troop choices that much more significant.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Einherjar667 said:


> Also note that it makes Supplements with special troop choices that much more significant.


True, I can see the advantage of this in relation to Deathwing and Ravenwing. Hmm...


----------



## Zion

Jace of Ultramar said:


> So, I guess this means my 30 Sternguard list is only usable in 2K+ games, huh?


And it's this thought here that makes me think GW won't do it. Too many fluffy armies require odd things to fit into that organization. Plus how many Orks exactly would you need to run a list exactly?


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Zion said:


> And it's this thought here that makes me think GW won't do it. Too many fluffy armies require odd things to fit into that organization. Plus how many Orks exactly would you need to run a list exactly?


Well, they're technically not telling players they can't do what they want with homebrew games. But, for tournament purposes, I could see this type of FOC seeing use, I guess.


----------



## Zion

Jace of Ultramar said:


> Well, they're technically not telling players they can't do what they want with homebrew games. But, for tournament purposes, I could see this type of FOC seeing use, I guess.


The way some people consider the rulebook to be carved in stone (regardless of the fact the rulebook says it's not) I don't see it being good for the game.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Zion said:


> The way some people consider the rulebook to be carved in stone (regardless of the fact the rulebook says it's not) I don't see it being good for the game.


True. But,I usually like quoting Hector Barbossa at times like this, "its more actual guidelines than rules."


----------



## Zion

From the BoLS comments section:


BigRed said:


> As with all of rumors, the overall trends are more important than the details. I would be surprised if the exact percentages were exactly matching in the final rulebook. More important is simply the overall switchover to a WFB style percentage system, which would be a big deal for the game.


To quote the internet: "lol, wut."

Who posts rumors and then posts that the major details of the rumor are probably wrong, but then basically say that those same details "don't matter"?

Also I love how they posted earlier in the day that no big changes were coming then posted the percent thing.


----------



## humakt

Zion said:


> And it's this thought here that makes me think GW won't do it. Too many fluffy armies require odd things to fit into that organization. Plus how many Orks exactly would you need to run a list exactly?


Off the top of my head you would need a mere 90 boys to fullfill the troop choice requirments for a 1750 army list. (3 squads of 30 including 3 nobs with PK's and 2 rockets per squad). Thats a lot of boys.


----------



## Zion

That's an unreasonable amount of Orks for people to get into the game with. I don't see it happening just because of that.

In other news, from Natfka:


> via a must remain anonymous source on Faeit 212
> FoC removed, percentages added.
> 
> Players have a "sideboard" of up to X number of selections (2-5, bracketed on points, so 1k or less games you have 2 sideboards, at 3k+ you have 5).
> 
> Sideboards can't be more than 25% of the total, or can be none at all.
> 
> They are referred to as "Secondary Detachments."
> 
> They are used for anything from allies to just additional things from your own codex.
> 
> If they are allies, then they require an HQ and a troop, and are still bound by the 25% of total.
> 
> Both players are expected to have sideboards.
> 
> Sideboarding is now a part of the game, done before deployment but in order of turn priority. So the person going first, picks their sideboard first after learning what race their opponent is playing, and seeing 75% of their army (and the available sideboards).
> 
> The person going second then picks their sideboard, after their opponent has selected, but before either side deploys.
> ----------------------------
> Other tweeks include assaulting as a form of sweeping advance/consolidation.
> 
> The option to flee, in response to being charged (after overwatching) but there is the potential to be swept and the unit charging can (if they have the movement and sweep you) just hit a different unit provided it's in the same rough direction as the unit they swept.
> 
> The main thing I wanted to touch on is sideboards, % based army building, battle brothers being removed and units being able to lock themselves into combat to combat, but simultaneously enemy generals having another tool to avoid combat to counter act this.


----------



## Creon

Well, that limit would reduce the use of Knight Allies to 1. Only use for more than one is a full army. Which would now be illegal. So, shaker of salt.


----------



## Bindi Baji

FoC removed, percentages added

This has been a rumour for more years then I remember,
it was definitely going to be in the last two rule books at least


----------



## humakt

This sideboard rumour seems to require an unhealthy large amount of salt to even make it to the 'No fucking way' rumour bucket.


----------



## venomlust

Zion said:


> The way some people consider the rulebook to be carved in stone (regardless of the fact the rulebook says it's not) I don't see it being good for the game.


Honestly, as a new player I didn't really even consider playing the game in a way that differed from the rules until having a discussion with @MidnightSun. Since my friends are all veteran players that never did any homebrew stuff, I figured they'd tell me to pound sand. Instead, I was proven half-wrong. Half of them are cool with homebrewing, others are strictly RAW guys. I sort of like the chance to play both ways.

'Zerkers on juggernauts comin' for ya!


*edit*

I really like the idea of the sidebar stuff. Even if it isn't true, I would very much like to incorporate it into games.


----------



## MidnightSun

Sideboards?

This isn't MTG. I can't just casually pack an extra 2500pts into my case alongside my 2000pt army.

And bringing five different codexes in one army?

I think someone in the rumour mill has a boner for five-colour decks and a raging chubby for GW being put under Wizards of the Coast.


----------



## Zion

Imperial Armies can already roll 4 armies deep thanks to LotD, =I= and Knights allying to everything.

EDIT: Allies and Allied formations. We can actually hit SIX armies in a legal list right now.


----------



## MidnightSun

Zion said:


> Imperial Armies can already roll 4 armies deep thanks to LotD, =I= and Knights allying to everything.


Legion of the Damned are in the Marines book anyway, =I= is a one-model Dataslate, Knights are hard to put into most lists. You can't make any really sickening, dumb combos with them.

If you can bring 5 Allies, that's a *gigantic* fuck you to Tyranids, which makes me smile.


----------



## Zion

MidnightSun said:


> Legion of the Damned are in the Marines book anyway, =I= is a one-model Dataslate, Knights are hard to put into most lists. You can't make any really sickening, dumb combos with them.
> 
> If you can bring 5 Allies, that's a *gigantic* fuck you to Tyranids, which makes me smile.


You already can thanks to the Allied Formations actually. Tau Firebase, Coteaz, Eldar, a Knight, a Marine formation, and sprinkle in LotD into an IG list.


----------



## MidnightSun

Zion said:


> You already can thanks to the Allied Formations actually. Tau Firebase, Coteaz, Eldar, a Knight, a Marine formation, and sprinkle in LotD into an IG list.


I don't think you can get that many points below Apocalypse and still have a vaguely reasonable army.

You're not wrong, but the supposed new system is open to far more abuse than the current one, in my opinion.


----------



## Spankinginred

Bindi Baji said:


> Having spoken to someone I know who works for GW (not in a store and not a source) I was 15 minutes ago told a new big book was due in a few weeks, as I understand there was a meeting at GW HQ about it after lunch today


A non GW playing friend of mine, told me a similar tale today (1st May). There was allegedly a big training day on Tuesday 29th April in GW's HQ in Lenton. What was being trained, wasn't mentioned, but it fits in with these rumours and removal of the 6th edition rules from sale. 
If there is a new version of the rules about to come out, then I for one cannot afford it. Likewise what effects will this have on all of the new codex's recently released?
However, if its just an update (WH40k 6.1) to include Escalation, Imperial Knights & Stronghold and a few minor changes to clarify problems thrown up here & there, then we won't all need to purchase a new copy.
Question is, do we the customers need a 7th edition?
Well, time to sift through all the other 'salt encrusted' rumours about this elsewhere.


----------



## Spankinginred

The site Pins of War, has a poster up allegedly from GW's Liverpool stores facebook page that gives release date of 24th May for 7th Edition


----------



## Zion

Spankinginred said:


> The site Pins of War, has a poster up allegedly from GW's Liverpool stores facebook page that gives release date of 24th May for 7th Edition


Already posted that. 
EDIT:


Zion said:


>


In other news more from Lords of War on Facebook:


Lords of War said:


> A new Realm of Battle board will be released with 7th edition. This board will have a "40k/City" theme and will be 6' x 4' with a travel bag like the current Realm of Battle Board.





Lords of War said:


> Is calling BS on the whole "percentages" for your forces in 40K.


----------



## MidnightSun

Being able to flee from charges is dumb - if you're six inches away and choose to flee, statistically you'll make it impossible for the enemy to charge you. If you're Necrons or Tau and have a shit Initiative, then that's not as great a problem, but making it impossible to charge Eldar sounds like a really terrible idea.


----------



## Zion

40k Radio breaks radio silence:


40k Radio said:


> Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
> 
> We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
> 
> So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
> 
> These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.


----------



## Kreuger

Huh. I played a ton during 2nd ed where in all allocations were % based. I think it was a fair system. It didn't have the same sorts of min/max that are the results of the force org chat.

And 40k might be better off returning to a % system.


----------



## Tawa

Kreuger said:


> And 40k might be better off returning to a % system.


Whilst the Org chart is a nice idea and I see the reason behind it, I concur that % lists should make some kind of a return


----------



## Zion

Anon from /tg/. Might just be echoing things though but this was from this morning:


> There isn't a general so I guess I'll throw this here.
> Believe me or don't, you'll know in 3 weeks either way:
> 24th May is a new 40k rulebook.
> It is not a new edition, its more inline with eh gamer edition from last year.
> It isn't filled with drastic changes, the rules mechanics from escalation and stronghold are in, as are some interesting tweeks.
> Percentages are not in.


----------



## Spankinginred

Jace of Ultramar said:


> I don't play fantasy and therefore have no experience with a percentage FOC. How does it work? Is this going to cause a revision of existing 'dexes for points cost?
> 
> I'm confused, so, enlightenment would be appreciated.


I've used percentage points with non-GW systems, but I don't like it for small games*. Although I don't tend to use named 'big characters' myself, others who I game with do. 
Likewise, in small games it could stop Tau from building established XV8 type command squads. No doubt the same will apply to many more armies.
Still, in the end I will have to wait until the new rules appear. 
*Small games - 1000 points or under


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Well, I'm curious to see what this looks like and think @Tawa should do a book review


----------



## Zion

Had a conversation with some voices in the walls and here's what I've learned:
-No known changes to psychic powers
-Assault changes where on the table at one point to try and make it more on par with shooting but it's unclear if they made it in or not right now
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
-Just one book, not three.
-New Starter isn't Marines and Orks .


----------



## MidnightSun

My local GW has had a change of opening hours - they're opening later every day, but open until late on a Friday as that is when pre-orders will now be announced. This new set-up starts next week.

Pre-orders will go up at around 7PM on the 16th.


----------



## Zion

From /tg/, take as much salt as you feel it needs:


> I was bitching to my GW store manager today about the staticness of the Eldar bikers and he told me to wait for the 24th...
> 
> Anyone else anything about New Eldar models?


----------



## The Irish Commissar

NEW JETBIKES! :biggrin:


----------



## Badknox

do you think they'll ever put official word in the rulebooks regarding Forgeworld rules?

also new jetbikes? maybe we'll finally see these.


----------



## afnolte

About frickin' time we got new jetbike models. I remember when the DE reavers came out it said in the design notes that the sculptors were instructed to make a "generic" template that could serve as a starting point for both elder armies.


----------



## Adramalech

If the BRB is going out of stock in more than just a few countries in the span of several days, we either have one hell of a coincidence, or GW is up to something.

Could be 7th is coming. Could be that GW are going to charge $85 for the 40k rulebook now.

The only thing we can do is wait and see.


----------



## Zion




----------



## Zion

From Dakka (apparently from the next WD):


> 2 new Force Organizations. ("Battle-Forged" or foc And "Unbound" take whatever) battle forge gives bonuses. New Missions using tactics cards in addition to our current Eternal War Missions, a new "Psychic Phase" of the game, and the full article next week.





> New psychic discipline available to everyone but nids(lol). Psychic phase sounds a lot like fantasy.


----------



## Zion

The rumors don't seem to be stopping (and by rumors I mean WD leaks sans the pictures):
From Natfka


> via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
> The FoC chart is still in the new 40k edition and if you follow it you have what is known as a "Battle Forged" army. It awards (unlisted) bonuses for using the FoC.You can also take a unbound army, these allow you to take whatever you want from your collection and toss out the FoC (while still adhering to unit size and heeding the relationships described in the new Allies Matrix.
> 
> Another thing is objective cards, so the objectives of the game can change each turn. The deck will be 36 cards.
> 
> There is also a physic phase confirmed now. A pool of warp charge dice is created at the start of the psychic phase, equal to 1d6 + mastery lvl of psychers. You can use as many dice as you like, but increase risk of perils of the warp (which is now a table you roll on.) Enemy psychers can draw on warp charge pool to Deny the Witch and nulify powers.
> 
> Also Eternal warrior missions still exist but in addition there are 6 new Maelstrom of War Missions.
> 
> via another anonymous source on Faeit 212
> Additional information that a Battle Forged list can take as many detachments as they wish, and still get bonus's.. The Unbound lists, is very much whatever you want to throw in to do a battle, and you get to choose which you want to play, and your opponent can do the same.


----------



## Zion




----------



## Nordicus

That.... is beyond stupid. Enabling players to totally disregard the FoC? Yeah, that's not going to be exploited at all.

Jesus christ - I was hoping they would scale back and try to balance it a bit more. Now it seems 40k and Apocalypse is the same thing.

Very VERY disappointed if that is true.


----------



## DeathGlam

Ok im just gonna say it, im excited for 7th. 

My local group is planning a tale of x gamers in time for the new rules, good times here.:grin:


----------



## nevynxxx

Nordicus said:


> That.... is beyond stupid. Enabling players to totally disregard the FoC? Yeah, that's not going to be exploited at all.


"Do you want a game?" "Sure, no unbound tho ok?" "Yeah, sure"/"Ah, no I'll find someone else". 

That wasn't so hard was it?


----------



## Nordicus

nevynxxx said:


> "Do you want a game?" "Sure, no unbound tho ok?" "Yeah, sure"/"Ah, no I'll find someone else".
> 
> That wasn't so hard was it?


I prefer to have a ruleset, where I don't have to have a checklist of things to ask for when wanting a random game with a stranger. But I do agree, that it can be done the way you ask.


----------



## maximus2467

So does this mean now you don't have to take troops that everything counts as scoring?


----------



## Varakir

I've always wanted to fight a 6 hell drake army. Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy...........:suicide:


I was convinced they weren't going to roll over to 7th but these pics look pretty legit. Crazy times are upon us.


----------



## Zion

Nordicus said:


> I prefer to have a ruleset, where I don't have to have a checklist of things to ask for when wanting a random game with a stranger. But I do agree, that it can be done the way you ask.


We don't have the full rules about how the rules actually work so I don't see a point in getting upset about anything just yet.


----------



## elmir

I don't mind the battle forged vs unbound stuff. 

I'm really liking the sound of the changed to psychic stuff. Some of the insane deathstars we are seeing now, are also due to the over-reliability of psyckers now.

I also hope a few tweaks to battle brothers are made... It's a bit too much right now. 

As long as troops are still the predominant scoring units, I'll be happy still. Unbound should be too hard to deal with if people forsake troops too much. Hell, double FoC pretty much allowed you to ignore most of it anyway, or ally with your own codex shenanigans...


----------



## iamtheeviltwin

Looks like bigger changes than I thought. 

Unbound sounds interesting, it will make armies like my Harlequins viable again as what they were designed to be (although probably not the strongest of armies)...that change alone has me interested. I can easily see tournaments forcing hard FoC limits via "Battle Hardened" and such, but 40k was being forced to move to more comp anyway (much like WFB has been doing for years)

An actual psychic phase will be interesting as well. Just wondering what "fully compatible with current codexes" mean for the psychic powers charts.

---or this is one of the most elaborate troll jobs yet.


----------



## Old Man78

so glad I decided not to buy sixth ed yet, I'd put if off till I got my dabbler force repainted and upgraded to tabletop force


----------



## Old Man78

maximus2467 said:


> So does this mean now you don't have to take troops that everything counts as scoring?


I'd imagine that will be the downside to an unbound army you may make it real difficult for yourself by going elite or heavy support mad, if you take no scoring unit you may have to wipe every single enemy model off the table to win


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Saw this on DikkaDikka. If true, you could play a battle forged army, lose everything, and still win depending on your opponents list. It has the feel of wish listing to me though.



> Battle-forged - you obey all FOC rules and stick to one Codex.
> 
> If you bring a battle-forged list and play against an unbound list you immediately receive the following VP bonuses.
> 
> You receive Victory Points determined by what your OPPONENT brings.
> 
> For every Codex/Dataslate/Formation after the first one that your opponent brings, you receive two VPs.
> 
> For every duplicate of a unit your opponent brings (other than troops and their transports) you receive one VP.
> 
> For every superheavy your opponent brings you receive five VPs.
> 
> For every flyer (including FMC) after the first one your opponent brings, you receive two VPs.
> 
> For every MC your opponent brings after the first one, you receive two VPs.
> 
> For every D strength weapon your opponent brings, you receive three VPs.
> 
> For every 2++ rerollable your opponent rolls during the game you immediately receive seven VPs.
> 
> Victory Point conditions stack and are cumulative. Ergo, the second FMC in your opponents list will yield you five VPs (+2 flyer, +2 MC, +1 duplicate unit).
> 
> In all instances in which a dispute arises the maximum number of VPs must be conveyed to the battle-forged list player.


----------



## Zion

Khorne's Fist said:


> Saw this on DikkaDikka. If true, you could play a battle forged army, lose everything, and still win depending on your opponents list. It has the feel of wish listing to me though.


It was fake and conjecture.


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Zion said:


> It was fake and conjecture.


Thought it might be.


----------



## venomlust

Sweet, looking forward to seeing the rules that go along with these leaks.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Still, the new Mission Objectives hinted on in the WD leaks sounds like it could be similar to Schemes in Malifaux: That would be very welcome if it pans out like that, because it adds a whole new dimension to the game. I have seen games where a player had lost all of his models yet still won because he was smart with his schemes (infact campaigns usually award additional points for such a feat). It's certainly better than "let's pile on the objectives"... 
The Psychic Phase sounds interesting...Want to hear more about that.

As for the "Unbounded Armies" that completely ignore FOC: Well, the game is so unbalanced anyway, so why bother playing it pretending it is anything else? Is the game even possible to balance anymore, due to the choice and diversity in the game now? I don't think so. So why bother continuing to pretend it is with things like FOCs? 
You always have the option of playing "Forged in Battle" armies anyway. Just decide with your opponent before hand which to use, and it's all good. 

As for all the people who actually thought they would be moving towards a more balanced system...Why on earth would you think that? They are clearly devoted to the forge the narrative game system (basically make it all up as you go along, don't like a rule then houserule it away, make up your own scenarios, homebrew the shit into everything, write your own Squats fandex etc.). If you don't like TauDar or ScreamerStar lists then don't play people who play them, and find another game system all together for tournaments... 

Only thing that would piss me off is if my 19 month old 6th edition rulebook became obsolete: Hopefully the new rules will just be a plug-in (they do mention in the WD leak that all the codices and supplements will not become obsolete, so that could actually be saying a lot about what 6.5/7th edition will actually be). Either way, I will wait and see how this pans out before succumbing to nerd rage.


----------



## Stephen_Newman

Yay! I finally get to take the Nidzilla list I always wanted (without including little guys for troops. Although I can throw a couple Tervigons purpose.

Now I need to face an all Knight/Riptide/Wraithknight/all mech army to have that Pacific Rim fight.


----------



## ntaw

Straken's_Fist said:


> Only thing that would piss me off is if my 19 month old 6th edition rulebook became obsolete


Only thing I'm dismayed about. I was in a store today (..wait, what?), about to buy either a BA or Necron Battleforce (...must be feeling sick) and I didn't because there's a new friggin' rule book coming out. Instead of growing my model collection I have to take into consideration buying a new BRB first so I can take in the changes and how they may effect my table-top armies. They couldn't have just released a new starter set with different missions or a campaign and models with the same edition book...

6th edition I was in opening day to buy, not so sure I'll be paying up as quick this time around.


----------



## SilverTabby

So, a return to a 2nd Ed style Psychic Phase... Let's hope it doesn't lead to the problem 2nd Ed had - where if you didn't have a Psyker and your opponent did, you lost...

'Nids don't get Daemonology? There's a surprise. I'm hoping they get *something* to balance that, as their 'dex was being made as this edition was being finalized...


----------



## The Sturk

maximus2467 said:


> So does this mean now you don't have to take troops that everything counts as scoring?


Let's face it: anyone who brings 6 riptides or their equivalent is playing a kill-list. 

Objectives won't matter once you kill the opponent.


----------



## Moonschwine

Oldman78 said:


> I'd imagine that will be the downside to an unbound army you may make it real difficult for yourself by going elite or heavy support mad, if you take no scoring unit you may have to wipe every single enemy model off the table to win


I'm thinking that in all honesty Unbound armies will quickly grow tedious with a "Play for a Draw" mentality. Especially in situations where objectives are captured by a wider-spread of FOC choices. I really hope that objective cards are elaborate and game changing rather than "Kill an opponents X."

The only concern I have is that now forces are going to be so cluster-fugged that 40k will become a game of paper-work to just flip through all the source books, slates etc etc.

Also Unbound speculation is producing insane lists already in the 1800-2000pts range. I know I should be patient and "wait and see what happens" but already I'm a little concerned.

It sounds "Hey this awesome in concept." But a big issue is that if everything is green-lit then the game itself devolves into a parody of what it's meant to be. 40k is meant to be a wargame enjoyed with friends I get that - it's Grim Dark tones are supposedly contrasting to the light-hearted nature of it's spirit, but when you have stuff like this:

Nothing but 450 lurking Gaunts.

Corteaz and his 429 Henchmen.

Corteaz and his 42 Rhinos.

421 (Blaze It) Gun Drones.

666 Cadets.

10 Flyrant Circus.

Nothing but Kannons

And so on....

The game becomes a stupid mess where you'd be better off throwing dice at one another or just not playing. Armies will quickly become "Game Points / Unit Cost = My Force" which is sad considering the effort gone into sculpting and fluffing everything - It seems sort of insulting. I know I'm ranting about the unknown right now but the more I think about this the more concern I get. The option of "Just filter out what you want" doesn't hold true for individuals with an already limited player-base. I don't see how "play anything" is supposed to attract new customers for more than a month or two before they get upset no one wants to play them because the solution for everyone is "Go elsewhere".



Straken's_Fist said:


> As for the "Unbounded Armies" that completely ignore FOC: Well, the game is so unbalanced anyway, so why bother playing it pretending it is anything else? Is the game even possible to balance anymore, due to the choice and diversity in the game now? I don't think so. So why bother continuing to pretend it is with things like FOCs?
> You always have the option of playing "Forged in Battle" armies anyway. Just decide with your opponent before hand which to use, and it's all good.


Except it's not "All good" as dismissing the problem is not a solution in any shape or form to the problems that plague the game. The community has also never pretended that FOC were a balancing factor, infact it's been GW that's buried its head in the sand when anyone has stepped up to say "Oh by the way this doesn't seem right" regarding units/armies/rules etc yet people are supposed to accept it. 

I agree whole heartedly with you that diversity has gone a long way to damaging balance; but its not entirely lost. The HH series is doing quite well to hold a form of see-saw balance in its system. 

Also, people have harked for years that attempts to balance the system would be welcome as long as the community at least felt they were able to put in some kind of input - either through WD or through Tournament feedback and actual Beta-Testing of rules/armies, at the very least people have wanted GW to release tweaks to try address glaring issues that exist within the rule-set. However unbound appears to be GW basically giving themselves a get-out-of-jail clause for any cock-up with stuff they make in the future by letting them wave away any problems with "well don't play it" as the return answer. 

It's not a solution and people who think it is can't see why it's a dangerous mentality to run. If you want to play you have to play a certain style that is agreeable fore your opponent, but the "rules" basically say "play how you want to" If you raise a query about this or anything else you are then told to shut up and accept it. Then if you dislike not being able to play the way you want (even though you are being told "Play the way you want") you are told to p-off. If people really think this is how anything should be played put simply you are wrong. 



Straken's_Fist said:


> As for all the people who actually thought they would be moving towards a more balanced system...Why on earth would you think that? They are clearly devoted to the forge the narrative game system (basically make it all up as you go along, don't like a rule then houserule it away, make up your own scenarios, homebrew the shit into everything, write your own Squats fandex etc.). If you don't like TauDar or ScreamerStar lists then don't play people who play them, and find another game system all together for tournaments...


Balancing the system would never take away from the narrative aspects since narrative aspects are just that - added effects to the game. What is a disappointment is that alot of people probably thought that GW was actually attempting to manage the rules for once with the rapid release of codecies in order to drag everyone into the "relevance of the present of 6th edition" as it was these past years. 

Also, I don't know where you game, but it sounds wonderful that every opponent you meet is more than willing to forge some kind of narrative campaign system out your pick-up matches and throw around house rules and homebrews. I may just be unlucky, but the walk-ins and pick-up games form a massive part of my actual playing side of the hobby both at clubs and in-stores and trying to get them to even agree upon wording of certain rules in the BRB is a pain in groin. Having a rule-set in place to give consistent and fair as possible contest where ever you go doesn't seem like some kind of unreasonable request seeing as at the moment you need corporate-contracts just to decide how the game is actually going to be played.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

I'm curious to see how this plays out for someone like myself who wants to run entire Sternguard/Vanguard armies with Kantor.


----------



## Achaylus72

maximus2467 said:


> So does this mean now you don't have to take troops that everything counts as scoring?


Why not, i reckon that there should be a universal rule that any unit should be scoring and to capture objectives (as a collector only and not a gamer per se, i think that may be the same.)

Actually i'm excited.


----------



## Mossy Toes

Nothing but Shokk Attack Guns, as far as the eye can see.


----------



## Nordicus

Beyond the supposed FoC change, I do very much like the changes. The Strategic cards sounds like a absolute blast and the psychic phase sounds very interesting.

Also, being a Daemon player, I'm quite anxious to see the new psyker discipline!


----------



## humakt

Until I read the rules I'm not too upset about the proposed changes. I did think an army consisting of megnobs and ork flyers would look awesome but its probably not something I would ever make.

A change to the pychic phase is overdue and the auto cast looks to be over (a majority of pyskers have ld 10). 

I am surprised that they are having a new release so soon, but hey ho and away we go for the roller coaster of 7th.


----------



## Gret79

I'm really looking forward to this. Now I'll actually be able to run an all aspect army without having to double foc my elites - so I can bring a less than 2k version of it. And I'll get complained at less - no more 'cheese' double foc complaints 
I used to love the 2nd ed psychic phase.
I also really hate having money, so this is going to really going to tick all the boxes :grin:


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Just based off this preliminary info, my new favourite 2K list will probably be Kantor, Cypher, 30 Sternguard w/Combis, 20 Sternguard no Combis, 5 Drop Pods. Can't handle AA, but, it would be fun.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Moonschwine said:


> Words


Think you misunderstood: I agree with you that you can have balanced and a narrative, other games are evidence of that. What I meant was that there is no point in complaining about it on forums, or even writing to GW about it, because as long as GW keep posting millions in profits, GW couldn't give a crap. As long as everyone keeps buying there models, nothing will change. 

So you can basically accept it, waste time moaning about it online, or find another game to play. Or vote with your wallet: But we all know that most the people that moan online about it will end up continuing to buy the models anyway, so that won't really happen. 

That's just the way it is. Excluding the occasional moan about things, I have accepted it. If I want my fix of balanced games or tournaments i'll play other games. If not, I just stick to 40k, and mainly play against friends or the same circle in gaming clubs. I think this is how it is for most people offline - the online community is very different.


----------



## The Sturk

As a whole, Unbounded has potential to be fun for casual games.

I'm just not looking forward to the people who will inevitably abuse Unbounded with all Riptide/WraithKnight/DreadKnight/Greater Daemon/etc spam.


----------



## Grins1878

I think it's a pretty cool idea. I've been playing games like this against r kid for years, FoC? If it works with the battle we want, sound, if not, disregard.

New rules allowing you to play any force you want should just make it more fun, just don't play against bellends and you'll be fine. :grin:


----------



## ntaw

The Sturk said:


> I'm just not looking forward to the people who will inevitably abuse Unbounded


No one at this point has any idea what buff might befall Battle-Forged armies: maybe taking whatever you want really puts you at a serious disadvantage when playing against someone who has a more coherently organized army. Sure, this opens up the potential for abuse...but are there not 'deathstar' units out there anyway? If my opponent only wants to bring one type of model to the table in multiples that's great. I may still have enough variety that he simply can't stop all the different things I may have going on with his 4 Titans or whatever may be the case. Everything has a counter.

I'll be giving this book a hard read before my gaming group decides to move on from 6th. None of us noticed anything 'broken' really, so it's not like we were chomping at the bit to get anything changed. Now that I've gotten over my now useless $90 book, I'm mostly just concerned with a potential new precedent for new rulebooks coming out. I liked the idea that 6th would be around for ~4 years but now it's being replaced after less than 2. My next hard question for my own hobby is: 

Do I give enough fucks to keep learning new rule sets when I don't even play in-store? 

Fuck, maybe this will actually be what gets me in to play. People at that store just take it so....seriously...though. I can't even bring up that I play BA without getting groans. I don't even go into the non-GW shop. There it's bad enough that I play 40k, but marines? Fuck. Basically, just fuck. Not much do do with the thread, this paragraph.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Its always possible, that this edition will get several people back into the tournament scene. There's even the possibility that it may breathe new life into the tournament scene.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

ntaw said:


> No one at this point has any idea what buff might befall Battle-Forged armies: maybe taking whatever you want really puts you at a serious disadvantage when playing against someone who has a more coherently organized army. Sure, this opens up the potential for abuse...but are there not 'deathstar' units out there anyway? If my opponent only wants to bring one type of model to the table in multiples that's great. I may still have enough variety that he simply can't stop all the different things I may have going on with his 4 Titans or whatever may be the case. Everything has a counter.
> 
> I'll be giving this book a hard read before my gaming group decides to move on from 6th. None of us noticed anything 'broken' really, so it's not like we were chomping at the bit to get anything changed. Now that I've gotten over my now useless $90 book, I'm mostly just concerned with a potential new precedent for new rulebooks coming out. I liked the idea that 6th would be around for ~4 years but now it's being replaced after less than 2. My next hard question for my own hobby is:
> 
> Do I give enough fucks to keep learning new rule sets when I don't even play in-store?
> 
> Fuck, maybe this will actually be what gets me in to play. People at that store just take it so....seriously...though. I can't even bring up that I play BA without getting groans. I don't even go into the non-GW shop. There it's bad enough that I play 40k, but marines? Fuck. Basically, just fuck. Not much do do with the thread, this paragraph.


My local GWs stopped having games last year: Now they just offer painting tutorials and not much else. Now the actual gaming is left to club. This is fine by me as it means I can use non-GW conversions and no one give a fuck. I can also have a beer while playing. I never liked the GW atmosphere: No swearing (and I swear quite a lot), no alcohol, no food, no conversions, no homebrewed armies, no talking about other gaming companies...The gaming clubs can do the gaming side so much better because they don't have these restrictions, and this is why I wish GW would just drop their brick and mortar stores and go online-only. They would free up so many resources for other things. 

I am with you on your feelings on the rulebook: 60 quid for 2 years of rules is a bit of rip off. I mean, yeah the fluff and artwork is cool, but couldn't they at least offer a "just the rules" book on the cheap if they are going to have a new edition every 2 years? And if this continues I have a feeling that people may start turning to pirate copies more and more.


----------



## DeathGlam

Things are generally positive about the 3 new elements we know some about at my local gaming club but then we don't have any WAAC types, looking to leap on every advantage possible, im especially keen to find out more info on the Objective Cards, as they sound the most like something that could make the game more dynamic.

Im also loving a Psychic Phase similar to magic in Fantasy, assuming they give some buff for defence to armies that have no psychic powers.

Either way as much as i like 6th, im eager for 7th even if i do have sympathy for anyone who has purchased the big hard back rulebook of 6th in the last year.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Yeah see that's the thing about most gaming clubs I have encountered: They often self-regulate themselves against douchebaggery as no one likes or wants to play the dick who brings a netlist or 5000 riptides and will argue over every single rule bogging the game down with a WAAC attitude. They quickly find no one wants to play them and either stop coming or move to another club.


----------



## DeathGlam

I was lucky enough to move to a new area just as a new club started, so got to be a part of the creation of the 40k scene, so we really have been able to spread that we are a just for a laugh enviroment.

I actually have a couple of gaming clubs closer to where i live but it's worth the extra travel to really enjoy my hobby with like minded players.


----------



## MidnightSun

I want to see an Unbound army consisting of all the Phoenix Lords.

I think the psychic phase sounds pretty ok, all things considered.


----------



## ntaw

MidnightSun said:


> I think the psychic phase sounds pretty ok, all things considered.


No more forgetting to cast certain powers at the beginning of specific phases at least.


----------



## MidnightSun

ntaw said:


> No more forgetting to cast certain powers at the beginning of specific phases at least.


And a nice little fuck you to Necrons and Tau, who have no hope in hell of dispelling stuff against Eldar or Daemons.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

ntaw said:


> No more forgetting to cast certain powers at the beginning of specific phases at least.





MidnightSun said:


> And a nice little fuck you to Necrons and Tau, who have no hope in hell of dispelling stuff against Eldar or Daemons.


Yay.


----------



## Zion

MidnightSun said:


> And a nice little fuck you to Necrons and Tau, who have no hope in hell of dispelling stuff against Eldar or Daemons.


I assume there will be changes to make things more balanced. I wouldn't be surprised if Acts of Faith got treated like Psychic Powers for activation for instance.


----------



## MidnightSun

Jace of Ultramar said:


> Yay.





Zion said:


> I assume there will be changes to make things more balanced. I wouldn't be surprised if Acts of Faith got treated like Psychic Powers for activation for instance.


Soo...

I'm the only one who thinks that giving Tau and Necrons the disadvantage of struggling to stop psychic powers is a good thing? Because I seem to remember that Tau were all the rage and the best thing ever and anyone who didn't play them was a useless being who didn't deserve to lick the missiles off a Broadside a little while ago, and Necrons are hardly underpowered and do at least get a psychic defence in the Codex.

Bringing a new, powerful element into the game that Tau don't get to be a part of seems like a pretty good way to balance the game, actually.


----------



## Zion

MidnightSun said:


> Soo...
> 
> I'm the only one who thinks that giving Tau and Necrons the disadvantage of struggling to stop psychic powers is a good thing? Because I seem to remember that Tau were all the rage and the best thing ever and anyone who didn't play them was a useless being who didn't deserve to lick the missiles off a Broadside a little while ago, and Necrons are hardly underpowered and do at least get a psychic defence in the Codex.
> 
> Bringing a new, powerful element into the game that Tau don't get to be a part of seems like a pretty good way to balance the game, actually.


I assume Necrons will be 40k's Dwarves: they'll not cast but shut down powers, that or the powers the Crypteks have will change over to being spells and have to be "cast" to function (as they goad the universe to do things THROUGH SCIENCE!).

If 'Crons don't become the Dwarves of 40k in terms of the powers, Tau definitely will. Though being able to Deny the Witch their Ethereal powers would be kind of nice....


----------



## MidnightSun

Zion said:


> I assume Necrons will be 40k's Dwarves: they'll not cast but shut down powers, that or the powers the Crypteks have will change over to being spells and have to be "cast" to function (as they goad the universe to do things THROUGH SCIENCE!).
> 
> If 'Crons don't become the Dwarves of 40k in terms of the powers, Tau definitely will. Though being able to Deny the Witch their Ethereal powers would be kind of nice....


I think that'd be a huge cop-out. I believe that Tau and Necrons should be more powerful than any other race in terms of their guns and wargear, but be completely helpless in the Psychic phase. It gives more diversity in army dynamics - you can be well-rounded, like Marines, having good guns and gear and psychics, or be Necrons or Tau with great guns and gear but no psychics, or Chaos or Eldar, with sub-par guns and gear but great psychics. Obviously there'd be more to it than that, but having races that obviously dominate or are much weaker in the psychic phase allows armies to be more different (Space Mariens vs Chaos would have Space Marines having better wargear and weaponry, while Chaos would get a more powerful psychic presence in that phase, rather than just being ATSKNF vs Cheap Dudes).


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

MidnightSun said:


> Soo...
> 
> I'm the only one who thinks that giving Tau and Necrons the disadvantage of struggling to stop psychic powers is a good thing? Because I seem to remember that Tau were all the rage and the best thing ever and anyone who didn't play them was a useless being who didn't deserve to lick the missiles off a Broadside a little while ago, and Necrons are hardly underpowered and do at least get a psychic defence in the Codex.
> 
> Bringing a new, powerful element into the game that Tau don't get to be a part of seems like a pretty good way to balance the game, actually.


Sorry, sorry. I forgot the Orange text in my post.


----------



## Zion

Necrons in the fluff are pretty much the ultimate anti-psykers (outside of Nids who don't shutdown powers as much as they just overload your brain with the entire Hive Fleet talking at the same time) The pillars on Cadia that are helping hold the Eye of Terror in check? Originally placed as part of a fence to try and hem the Eldar in by the Necrons.

Necrons shouldn't be "helpless" during the Psychic Phase, they should be good at stopping the powers. And as I mentioned, their "Technosorcery" could be treated -like- Psychic Powers (with Psykers basically using the Powers of the Warp to shut down such SCIENCE!) without actually being Psychic Powers.

Tau is kind of hit or miss on if they should or shouldn't but they're kind of all over the place in how well they interact with Chaos because of their apparently tiny souls (as far as the Daemons are concerned at least). Sure they have no innate psykers (at this point int time) but they're not exactly in a position to be made helpless. 

Honestly I don't think anyone should be "helpless" in *any* phase because that just screams poor balance to me. I feel that instead of them being helpless that other things need to addressed and fixed instead (buffing Assault so it's either on par with shooting or punchy units are MUCH cheaper for instance to balance out the punchy vs shooty imbalance we currently have).


----------



## Straken's_Fist

ntaw said:


> No more forgetting to cast certain powers at the beginning of specific phases at least.


God yeah I always did that when playing my Tzeencth-1ksons lists. Was far too much for my drug frazzled brain to remember...


----------



## King Gary

MidnightSun said:


> ... or Chaos or* Eldar, with sub-par guns and gear *but great psychics.


Don't let the Aurtach's hear you say that...


----------



## Woodzee316

so i'm looking forward to see what they're going to do with the Black Templars in the physic phase or will it still just be a 5+ deny on everything. it would be hard to give them a buff (without some sort of errata) when they say the new rules are still going to work with the current codex. they won't be able to generate more than max 6 dice so that would hamstring them against something like my thousand son which would generate 11 dice minimum.

anyway i'm not going to complain about new rules until I've read them and then it's not like i'll be able to do anything about them anyway. my only gripe is the edition was to close to the other especially the price of a new BRB. in Australia the cost is $126.00 for the 6th ed and codexes started at $75.00 so that is my major gripe just the cost all the time.

my friends and I have said we'll continue to play in 6th ed until we all are ready to get into 7th. so we'll wait and once it comes out go and have a look at it and then decide.


----------



## ntaw

Woodzee316 said:


> so i'm looking forward to see what they're going to do with the Black Templars in the physic phase or will it still just be a 5+ deny on everything.


I heard that there's going to be something akin to a mana pool for each side that is drawn upon to cast/refute psychic powers.


----------



## Stormxlr

ntaw said:


> I heard that there's going to be something akin to a mana pool for each side that is drawn upon to cast/refute psychic powers.


 Mana pool?　How would that work when you have to expand your warp charges on force weapons or the helm for eldar?


----------



## Spankinginred

I can see both sides of the argument. Unbounded will give games that are a 'Titan-fest' of big names and/or big toys such as the like we all read in the fluff.
On the downside, we can ask, Whats the point of a Codex?
As an historical gamer (mostly) I like to field realistic or as realistic considering an alien future forces as I can. So having a base list of HQ + 2 Troops minimum works towards that end.
In the end, as so many have said, it's who you game with and how the game is played
Maybe GW are trying to go back to Rogue Trader??


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Spankinginred said:


> In the end, as so many have said, it's who you game with and how the game is played
> Maybe GW are trying to go back to Rogue Trader??


I wasn't around for Rogue Trader, so, I don't exactly get this comment. Would you mind explaining it just a bit?


----------



## Zion

From Dakka:








Sounds like how CSM used to summon Greater Daemons actually.


----------



## DeathGlam

That sounds like it has the potential to be awesome, im really looking forward to knowing more details now.


----------



## Shadow's Fury

"Sir, what the hell just happened?"
"Err...he...errr...got angry, that's all"
"But he turned into a Daemon! Is he corrup..."
"HERESY! We have a member of the fallen!!!" 

Dark angels, you didn't see anything...or else


----------



## Zion

I have a strong feeling (until GW proves me wrong) that it was just play testing or a fun "let's give this a go" sort of thing instead of how it'll work normally.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Wow, that's jacked up.


----------



## ntaw

Stormxlr said:


> Mana pool?　How would that work when you have to expand your warp charges on force weapons or the helm for eldar?


er...warp charge pool. I forget sometimes people can't. 

It will likely work exactly the way the new book describes....though if I had to guess, each side generates a specific number of Warp Charge points (or whatever you want to call magic points) based on the number of psykers or anti-psykers they have and whoever is using or refuting a power draws on that pool of points to do so. 

Think Command Points from Space Hulk. If I had to guess.


----------



## Zion

Warp Charge dice (kind of like dice in the magic phase for WFB) were said to be D6+Mastery Level (of all the Psykers in your army) in the WD. So basically a collected pool like now, only you get up to D6 extra ones to try and help put some oomph into getting powers off.

Looks like Wyrdvanes will be handy to IG just to spawn extra dice now.


----------



## humakt

Jace of Ultramar said:


> I wasn't around for Rogue Trader, so, I don't exactly get this comment. Would you mind explaining it just a bit?


If my memory allows, you could take pretty much anything you wanted in RT. Mind you this was before the time of codexes so army lists were articles in WD etc. 

Those were the days of much more fluidity in the game, with players making up their own rules and less adherence to what was in the rule book if it didn't suit you. Not like today's rules lawyers who take every nuance of a rule to mean something it probably does not.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

humakt said:


> If my memory allows, you could take pretty much anything you wanted in RT. Mind you this was before the time of codexes so army lists were articles in WD etc.
> 
> Those were the days of much more fluidity in the game, with players making up their own rules and less adherence to what was in the rule book if it didn't suit you. Not like today's rules lawyers who take every nuance of a rule to mean something it probably does not.


Ah, ok. I may actually like that more.


----------



## psactionman

Spankinginred said:


> I can see both sides of the argument. Unbounded will give games that are a 'Titan-fest' of big names and/or big toys such as the like we all read in the fluff.
> On the downside, we can ask, Whats the point of a Codex?
> As an historical gamer (mostly) I like to field realistic or as realistic considering an alien future forces as I can. So having a base list of HQ + 2 Troops minimum works towards that end.
> In the end, as so many have said, it's who you game with and how the game is played
> Maybe GW are trying to go back to Rogue Trader??


I love Terminators and bikes, but Sammael and Belial are very expensive. With the unbound rule I can bring a Termie/bike list without HAVING to spend so many points on an expensive HQ and bring an interrogator Chaplain instead. This is actually a realistic force for Dark Angels to bring. There are a lot of fluffy lists that simply don't fit within the standard FoC.


----------



## ntaw

psactionman said:


> but Sammael and Belial are very expensive


Azrael is pretty inexpensive when you consider he can join a blob of 30+ Guardsmen and give them 4++ saves. Not to mention you get both DW and RW as Troops.

I am interested to see how this Unbound army list stuff works with the Objective cards; I still feel like scoring options will be necessary and for DW that means Belial or Azrael. I don't see DW with the ability to table anyone being as outnumbered as they usually are.

EDIT: _Completely_ thought this was another thread, but hey. It still seems like it applies.


----------



## ntaw

Double post for hilarity:

Talking to a buddy about the new 40k edition, specifically about the Unbound army option. His response to the change:

"I guess now they just don't give a FoC"

:rofl:


----------



## Zion

ntaw said:


> Double post for hilarity:
> 
> Talking to a buddy about the new 40k edition, specifically about the Unbound army option. His response to the change:
> 
> "I guess now they just don't give a FoC"
> :rofl:


That's a pretty good one! :good:


----------



## Einherjar667

Jace of Ultramar said:


> Ah, ok. I may actually like that more.



i concur as I love terminators, Id love a terminator/vehicle force.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

humakt said:


> If my memory allows, you could take pretty much anything you wanted in RT. Mind you this was before the time of codexes so army lists were articles in WD etc.
> 
> Those were the days of much more fluidity in the game, with players making up their own rules and less adherence to what was in the rule book if it didn't suit you. Not like today's rules lawyers who take every nuance of a rule to mean something it probably does not.


You've always bee able to do that though. If I remember correctly there was specifically a section in the rulebook that says something along the lines of: "Play the game how you feel is best, if you wanna take a bunch of stuff from every codex, just do it." 

The way I see it is; ideal, well written, balanced rules allow for more options and styles of play, better clarity and less time bickering over rules. If you wanna play an ultra-competitive tournament style game, you can; if you wanna play an extended narrative campaign, you can; if you wanna damn the rules and take a whole terminator force, you can. Well designed game mechanics provide the basis for your games, no matter what form they take.

I'm going to reserve my judgement of 7th edition till after it comes out. This pre-release angst and guestimating is worse than a coalition budget.


----------



## Zion

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> You've always bee able to do that though. If I remember correctly there was specifically a section in the rulebook that says something along the lines of: "Play the game how you feel is best, if you wanna take a bunch of stuff from every codex, just do it."


The only problem is that some people just don't allow people do stray from the rulebook and because of that people just can't play against other people. So putting the options into the rulebook is actually pretty good for that.


----------



## King Gary

Zion said:


> The only problem is that some people just don't allow people do stray from the rulebook and because of that people just can't play against other people. So putting the options into the rulebook is actually pretty good for that.


I guess the point is that for those players who would play without codex restrictions, having to have it written down somewhere is, well kinda sad. Possibly?

Who knows, maybe it'll lead to more creative gameplay for the majority of players which is a good thing.


----------



## Varakir

King Gary said:


> I guess the point is that for those players who would play without codex restrictions, having to have it written down somewhere is, well kinda sad. Possibly?
> 
> Who knows, maybe it'll lead to more creative gameplay for the majority of players which is a good thing.


Personally i like to have it written down because it saves time. I appreciate the game isn't balanced, but homebrew rules can be ridiculously unbalanced and it takes ages for everyone to concur on whether a home brew list is ok to play. More time gaming and less time rulesing sounds good to me.


----------



## venomlust

Varakir said:


> More time gaming and less time rulesing sounds good to me.


Hear, hear!


----------



## ntaw

Varakir said:


> Personally i like to have it written down because it saves time. I appreciate the game isn't balanced, but homebrew rules can be ridiculously unbalanced and it takes ages for everyone to concur on whether a home brew list is ok to play. More time gaming and less time rulesing sounds good to me.


Most applicable comment. Well said!


----------



## Zion

Oh look, a new poster:


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Zion said:


> Oh look, a new poster:


Oh, wow! There's a Titan in the starter!


End of over-reaction. :crazy:


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

Zion said:


> The only problem is that some people just don't allow people do stray from the rulebook and because of that people just can't play against other people. So putting the options into the rulebook is actually pretty good for that.


As I said, the option was already there, right at the beginning of the book "break rules if you want to" so nothing has really changed. You and your opponent still need to reach an agreement, even an unspoken one. (s)he may not like the new unbound play style, and only wants to play against balanced 'proper' armies. 

The same thing applies right now in 6th edition, you can play the game however you want, as long as you and your opponent can come to an agreement about it. I can see a lot of people just deciding they're not gonna play against unbound armies, which is their right.

Like I said before, the thing I'm most curious about is whether GW is gonna make clear, balance, well designed game mechanics; because as I've discovered in recent years the quality of the games rules are directly correlated with how enjoyable I find the game. I am sceptical that GW can pull it off given their track record, but I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised. If they cock it up.... We'll FF are making a 40k themed LCG, so I can always get my 40k fix there.


----------



## Chaplain-Grimaldus

So.... Ezekiel summoned a blood thirster........

What the actual?!?


----------



## Vaz

I read - we done fucked up with 6th. Lets make a half heated "fix" which fucks things up even more, so that 8th edition actually sells a shed load because we'll fix everything then.

It's about time GW start just saying "make up your own rules, we don't know what the fuck we're doing, we're a toy shop which sells models, and you fucking idiots just keep buying our rules".


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Vaz said:


> I read - we done fucked up with 6th. Lets make a half heated "fix" which fucks things up even more, so that 8th edition actually sells a shed load because we'll fix everything then.
> 
> It's about time GW start just saying "make up your own rules, we don't know what the fuck we're doing, we're a toy shop which sells models, and you fucking idiots just keep buying our rules".


Eloquent, to the point, I like it. Would you like to be the new GW rep for PR?


----------



## Tawa

Vaz said:


> It's about time GW start just saying "make up your own rules, we don't know what the fuck we're doing, we're a toy shop which sells models, and you fucking idiots just keep buying our rules".


Never change Vaz. I love your blunt honesty. :good:



Jace of Ultramar said:


> Eloquent, to the point, I like it. Would you like to be the new GW rep for PR?


To be fair, something along the lines of Vaz's comment would probably be better received than the standard avoid-your-question-but-look-at-the-new-toys-aren't-they-cool response that is given out when you do get a response.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

Tawa said:


> To be fair, something along the lines of Vaz's comment would probably be better received than the standard avoid-your-question-but-look-at-the-new-toys-aren't-they-cool response that is given out when you do get a response.


Oh, I completely agree. I think they could take a hint from that one post and apply it as a new automated response for their email system.


----------



## Zion

From tetrisphreak on Dakka:


----------



## humakt

Oh look a riptide lost in close combat against a monstrous creature.

Damn I'm eager to find out about these strategic objective stuff. I'm sort of hoping we have secret objectives as this will make the game much more interesting.


----------



## MidnightSun

Vaz said:


> I read - we done fucked up with 6th. Lets make a half heated "fix" which fucks things up even more, so that 8th edition actually sells a shed load because we'll fix everything then.


Fix for competitive play? That thing GW doesn't think exists? Yeah, 6th is bad for that, but tournament players aren't the target audience of 6th either.



Vaz said:


> It's about time GW start just saying "make up your own rules, we don't know what the fuck we're doing, we're a toy shop which sells models, and you fucking idiots just keep buying our rules".


Which everyone knows already, but doesn't want to admit that they know without a completely explicit verdict from GW.


----------



## Zion

humakt said:


> Oh look a riptide lost in close combat against a monstrous creature.
> 
> Damn I'm eager to find out about these strategic objective stuff. I'm sort of hoping we have secret objectives as this will make the game much more interesting.


4 VP for that Hive Tyrant and talks about the Marines and Tau "exchanging shifty glances" suggests changes to VPs and Tau not allying with Marines as BB anymore.


----------



## humakt

Zion said:


> 4 VP for that Hive Tyrant and talks about the Marines and Tau "exchanging shifty glances" suggests changes to VPs and Tau not allying with Marines as BB anymore.


Yes it all looks very interesting.


----------



## psactionman

ntaw said:


> Azrael is pretty inexpensive when you consider he can join a blob of 30+ Guardsmen and give them 4++ saves. Not to mention you get both DW and RW as Troops.


That is true. But then I am nt taking a full DW/RW list. And that is one of my favorite things to do.


----------



## Spankinginred

Jace of Ultramar said:


> I wasn't around for Rogue Trader, so, I don't exactly get this comment. Would you mind explaining it just a bit?


I'll get back to you on this when I have some more time. Don't let me forget


----------



## Jacobite

Zion said:


> talks about the Marines and Tau "exchanging shifty glances" suggests changes to VPs and Tau not allying with Marines as BB anymore.


I think you are reading into it a bit much, it sounds like the usual embellishments that they put into WD that don't actually happen in the game play.


----------



## Zion

Jacobite said:


> I think you are reading into it a bit much, it sounds like the usual embellishments that they put into WD that don't actually happen in the game play.


Completely possible, but with the article talking about the upcoming changes mentioning that there will be some to the allies matrix maybe not.

EDIT:









Last one is rumored to be a CSM and the tagline "There is only war".


----------



## Stephen_Newman

I'm also interested in that part where Nids actually got to ally with something. Even if it is just other Nids it gives the army an option that was denied to it before. Hopefully a better allies matrix will be in this edition.


----------



## Zion

Stephen_Newman said:


> I'm also interested in that part where Nids actually got to ally with something. Even if it is just other Nids it gives the army an option that was denied to it before. Hopefully a better allies matrix will be in this edition.


Didn't catch that previously. Also didn't notice previously the part about the Tau and Marines being "teamed up in a desperate alliance". I think we can safely say Tau and Marines aren't the best of friends anymore.


----------



## venomlust

Hmm maybe I'll actually buy the next one if the CSM poster looks cool. Would like to jazz up my hobby space.

7th coming so soon! Can't wait.


----------



## Zion

venomlust said:


> Hmm maybe I'll actually buy the next one if the CSM poster looks cool. Would like to jazz up my hobby space.
> 
> 7th coming so soon! Can't wait.


CSM one should be the last one released the week of the launch.


----------



## King Gary

I just hope there are typos. It isn't a GW rulebook without the occasional and completely random spelling mistake / gramatical error. The 6th ed BBB was far too polished for my tastes.


----------



## Einherjar667

King Gary said:


> I just hope there are typos. It isn't a GW rulebook without the occasional and completely random spelling mistake / gramatical error. The 6th ed BBB was far too polished for my tastes.



BRB, typo!


----------



## Zion

If government manuals and $200+ textbooks can have typos, I wouldn't count 40k out.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief

If GW's goal with this rush edition is to pad their financial report, they're in for a rude awakening if they actually nerf the allies chart just 1 year and 8 months after encouraging people to buy armies with allies in mind. I think that actually could send so many tempers flaring, and investments ruined, that GW kills itself once and for all.

I don't care personally though, I play house rules locally. But I think after this release, there's either going to be a massive collaborative community development of non-GW rules, or a surge of second-hand market minis unlike anything we've ever seen before - followed by a deep crisis at GW.


----------



## scscofield

Should be interesting. I know most of the local gamers here are not excited about this at all.


----------



## King Gary

Just had this off my local GW shop's facebook feed (accompanied by a pic of the two posters). Seems to be implying that these rumours are part of a big summer campaign rather than a whole new rule-set.



> Why not pop in today and make your painting pledge towards the army you want to use in the Warhammer 40,000 campaign that starts on the 5th of June. Any completed pledges give you an awesome bonus that you can use in game. Come into store today and find out what those bonus' are!


I can see it as a pretty clever way of introducing new rules on an experimental basis with no long term commitment for themselves. That OR the local manager/GW's policy is to throw this in as a red herring.


----------



## Zion

Found on Dakka, take with salt:


> So, last night someone from The Overlords Podcast group on Facebook posted these tidbits. Hopefully they don't mind if they're posted elsewhere. There's some interesting things to chew on here.
> 
> -- So Guys I heard from a pretty reliable source that got to sit down with the book for a few minutes here is what I can remember from what was said.
> 
> 1. 4ed consolidate in to combat is in
> 2. If you fail to cast a power you can't cast it the rest of the game
> 3. Every unit including vehicles will now score
> 4. Unbound armies may not contest objectives
> 5. Lords of war are in
> 6. Escalation and stronghold remaine as they are now
> 7. Vehicles will be harder to kill the chart changes once more.
> 8. The book will come out in 3 options Art like warhammer visions, Fluff book, and one that only contains rules and that one is about as think as the current SM book.
> 9.difficult terrain is just -2 inches
> 10. Wound allocation has changed a bit.not super clear as to how.
> 11. D-weapons toned down but he was unclear as what that meant so from the sounds of it they will still be super ugly. --


----------



## MidnightSun

Zion said:


> 1. 4ed consolidate in to combat is in
> 2. If you fail to cast a power you can't cast it the rest of the game
> 3. Every unit including vehicles will now score
> 4. Unbound armies may not contest objectives
> 5. Lords of war are in
> 6. Escalation and stronghold remaine as they are now
> 7. Vehicles will be harder to kill the chart changes once more.
> 8. The book will come out in 3 options Art like warhammer visions, Fluff book, and one that only contains rules and that one is about as think as the current SM book.
> 9.difficult terrain is just -2 inches
> 10. Wound allocation has changed a bit.not super clear as to how.
> 11. D-weapons toned down but he was unclear as what that meant so from the sounds of it they will still be super ugly. --












Calling bullshit on everything except vehicles getting tougher and D-weapons being toned down if they're even in the main rules at all.


----------



## Einherjar667

Wonder how the person sat down with "the book", if it's going to be released as "three books".


----------



## maximus2467

I don't know, these latest "rumours" seem pretty reasonable, I especially like the unbound armies cannot contest objectives, will stop WAAC players in tournies being nobs. The inability to cast a psychic power for the rest of the game seems harsh but not broken and I think it right that vehicles should be harder to kill, I'm sorry but 4 glances on a land raider should not mean it's destruction


----------



## maximus2467

Einharjer, all the rules will be the same regardless of which book they are in so to say he sat down with the book when there are 3 variants coming out isn't something I would read anything into


----------



## MidnightSun

maximus2467 said:


> I don't know, these latest "rumours" seem pretty reasonable, I especially like the unbound armies cannot contest objectives, will stop WAAC players in tournies being nobs.


Honestly, how many times is contesting Objectives that relevant? I rarely see a contested objective - either nobody has the objective, or it's been taken by one side or the other. Not often that there are two people on an objective come game's end.

Being able to Tank Shock onto objectives to contest/score them could make a comeback though. Necrons will be an absolute nightmare, with AV13 4HP scoring units.


----------



## maximus2467

Contesting has been the difference between a win and a draw at tournie many a time

For me at least lol

Also think about it, if unbound armies can't contest then all you've got to do to win is get within 3" of your opponents objectives if they're unbound to claim them as your own


----------



## MidnightSun

maximus2467 said:


> Also think about it, if unbound armies can't contest then all you've got to do to win is get within 3" of your opponents objectives if they're unbound to claim them as your own


Easier said than done if I bring 3 Land Raider Achilles and park them on objectives. If you want to make it difficult for people to get within 3" of an objective, it's very definitely do-able, especially when you can bring anything disregarding the FOC.


----------



## Zion

More from Dakka:


> Minor rumor. Take this with a grain of salt, the source is an independent stockist.
> 
> Source tells me the cost of the new book is right around $100. There's some special edition stuff that will be available to FLGS retailers - dice, cards, templates, etc. Limited edition variants of the book are web-only.
> 
> He has a large inventory of existing 6th edition books. He was told the new book will make up for his losses. It sells for more than 6th edition and claims players will need new copies, the existing books are obsolete.


I am going to be dissapoint if the book is $100. I only got a budget of that much for the new release and I it's intended for the book AND the cards.


----------



## maximus2467

Hmmmm, true. But that is about half your points allocation on 3 units and if I were to simply move up to the side of your land raider that would be within 3" of the objective underneath, it's not as if they're 7.5" wide


----------



## SonofVulkan

Don't think i'll bother with the big rules book this time around. I'll probably wait for the box set to come out (if it does). Anybody remember how long Dark Vengeance took to come out after the last BRB release? (Seems like yesterday!)


----------



## Zion

SonofVulkan said:


> Don't think i'll bother with the big rules book this time around. I'll probably wait for the box set to come out (if it does). Anybody remember how long Dark Vengeance took to come out after the last BRB release? (Seems like yesterday!)


Rumor for that release is August.


----------



## MidnightSun

maximus2467 said:


> Hmmmm, true. But that is about half your points allocation on 3 units and if I were to simply move up to the side of your land raider that would be within 3" of the objective underneath, it's not as if they're 7.5" wide


If you can move right up to the Land Raiders parked on objectives, something's gone wrong, but this isn't the place to discuss the finer points of tactics, so back to the rumours:

£60 for the rulebook is insanely pricy but is hardly far-fetched. I'll wait for the starter set, I think; although if the rulebook is £60, I dread to think how much the starter set will be.


----------



## Einherjar667

MidnightSun said:


> If you can move right up to the Land Raiders parked on objectives, something's gone wrong, but this isn't the place to discuss the finer points of tactics, so back to the rumours:
> 
> £60 for the rulebook is insanely pricy but is hardly far-fetched. I'll wait for the starter set, I think; although if the rulebook is £60, I dread to think how much the starter set will be.


In GW's defense, the new BRB is rumored to have 670ish pages while the 6th ed has 440.


----------



## venomlust

So, what exactly were 4th edition's "consolidate into combat" rules?


----------



## Deus Mortis

IIRC, after you won an assault, you consolidated as you do now (i.e. 1D6). If you could make it into assault range of another unit, you could launch another assault.

And that was how you could wipe out an entire, closely packed army with nothing but a unit of genestealers...


----------



## ntaw

Deus Mortis said:


> And that was how you could wipe out an entire, closely packed army with nothing but a unit of genestealers...


Sign me up! Those guys always seemed way more badass in the fluff than the game, even if this seems just a little bit overpowered.


----------



## MidnightSun

Einherjar667 said:


> In GW's defense, the new BRB is rumored to have 670ish pages while the 6th ed has 440.


Well that won't be insanely impractical at all.


----------



## Deus Mortis

ntaw said:


> Sign me up! Those guys always seemed way more badass in the fluff than the game, even if this seems just a little bit overpowered.


Oh trust me it was. I mean, they were/are initiative 6 with 4/5 attacks (I forget exactly) with rending (which in 4ed was an instant, ignore armour wound on a 6 *to hit*) Almost nothing struck before them, and they would tear through terminators like they were guardsmen.

My cousin's templars experienced a few bitter losses to my mobs of genestealers :laugh:


----------



## elmir

I don't, for one second, believe the rules from that podcast. 

Everything being scoring (including vehicles) would be terrible design and would be a pretty hard revamp of the game. 

Consolidation into a new charge could be a thing... But I think this is just based off wild guesswork.


----------



## Woodzee316

well great, if the book is slated for 60 pounds in the UK then us in Australia will no doubt be slugged up near 200 bucks.


----------



## Zion

Woodzee316 said:


> well great, if the book is slated for 60 pounds in the UK then us in Australia will no doubt be slugged up near 200 bucks.


I heard it's going to be 300 Dingo anuses and Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw's hat for a copy.


----------



## Nero

GW video regarding bound/unbound and detachments - nothing new really, just found it nice to watch after reading WD, and getting that final confirmation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7JnMByJVUow


----------



## Woodzee316

Zion said:


> I heard it's going to be 300 Dingo anuses and Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw's hat for a copy.


you left out the part about the first born child


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Whatever about the rules, I'm interested in seeing how they move the fluff on. In the 6th Ed book, the Golden pottie was failing, hive fleets were encroaching from all directions, and tomb worlds were waking up all over the place. Basically the Imperium was fucked. Are they actually going to advance that a bit further, or just leave it hanging on the brink of a new millennium?


----------



## Spankinginred

Woodzee316 said:


> well great, if the book is slated for 60 pounds in the UK then us in Australia will no doubt be slugged up near 200 bucks.


£60!! Fek off!! Maybe we tha kistomars shud writcht eir ein rules noo or use some-eine else's. E'm nae happie if that's tha price. Nae happie at-tal. (Local Scottish dialect due to anger)

Translation;
Sixty Great British Pounds, Gosh!. Perhaps us, the customers, should collude to pen our own version of their rules system or use a less expensive set of rules from another supplier. I for one am displeased with the rumoured dramatic rise in price of this product.
Angry of Aberdeenshire


----------



## Spankinginred

Khorne's Fist said:


> Whatever about the rules, I'm interested in seeing how they move the fluff on. In the 6th Ed book, the Golden pottie was failing, hive fleets were encroaching from all directions, and tomb worlds were waking up all over the place. Basically the Imperium was fucked. Are they actually going to advance that a bit further, or just leave it hanging on the brink of a new millennium?


Should stay the same really, it's only been about two years.... Nothing compared to space. Even the Tau are unlikely to have had time to finish test driving the Riptide yet


----------



## Worthy

Just spotted this http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/blog/blog.jsp (see Jervis Johnson unbound at the top).

I'm suprised none of the rumour sites (Natfka, BOLS, etc...) have mentioned about that *official GW video* which has revealed more suprises (ie: Battle Forged armies get to reroll the Warlotd trait result).

EDIT: after all the trouble i've had trying to link to it on here (the video is private) I can see why most haven't spotted it yet.


----------



## Zion

7JnMByJVUow



> *via an anonymous source on Faeit 212*
> _These are in Australian prices_
> _Standard edition 140_
> _Collectors Edition 360 _
> _Physhic Cards 16 _
> _Objective Tokens 12_


Anyone care to translate that to prices for the rest of the work?

Screencaps from http://xvilegion.com/2014/05/12/reglas-de-la-nueva-edicion-new-40k-edition-rules/#more-464


> _It seems that GW wants to publicise their new 40k edition, so they have uploaded a promotional video with Jervis Johnson, part of GW’s Rule Development Team. I have taken some screenshots of all the rules for a better reading, click to enlarge._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _More or less this confirms the rumours we have beer hearing these days, I am still afraid of the impact of including Lords of War in regular 40k, let’s see how this goes._


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

Those prices are a joke right? Or Faeit 212 having a bit of a troll.

Do these new rulebooks give out free blowjobs or something?

$140 is a lot of money just for the rules to play the game.


----------



## The Irish Commissar

I really dont like the sound of these unbound armies. I can already see people taking advantage of it. I know its not out yet but still dont like the sound of it.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

The Irish Commissar said:


> I really dont like the sound of these unbound armies. I can already see people taking advantage of it. I know its not out yet but still dont like the sound of it.


To be fair, a lot of miniature games place little to no restrictions on what you can take and still work well. As long as things are well balanced it should be ok.


----------



## Zion

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> To be fair, a lot of miniature games place little to no restrictions on what you can take and still work well. As long as things are well balanced it should be ok.


I was just thinking about that this morning actually. There is no FOC in Warmachine for instance.


----------



## ntaw

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> $140 is a lot of money just for the rules to play the game.


Yeah....yeah. If that's the case I will definitely not be buying a book to carry around.

I wonder if this new inclusion of Formations will see some showing up in new Codices? I'm sure there will always be ones in Supplements or Dataslates, but it would be nice if they could throw one or two into new codex releases as well if they are going to be in the core rulebook.


----------



## MidnightSun

The Unbound bit doesn't say you have to choose all your models from the same Faction...


----------



## Zion

ntaw said:


> Yeah....yeah. If that's the case I will definitely not be buying a book to carry around.
> 
> I wonder if this new inclusion of Formations will see some showing up in new Codices? I'm sure there will always be ones in Supplements or Dataslates, but it would be nice if they could throw one or two into new codex releases as well if they are going to be in the core rulebook.


That's $140 AU, not CA.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

Zion said:


> I was just thinking about that this morning actually. There is no FOC in Warmachine for instance.


Smaller skirmish games tend to use this model though. Typically, but not always, you just need some kind of leader, then you spend the rest of your points/soul stones/bananas/mugufins on whatever you want. It works for skirmish games, but I don't know if it will transfer over to 40k, where you're playing with army-sized forces.


----------



## Zion

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> Smaller skirmish games tend to use this model though. Typically, but not always, you just need some kind of leader, then you spend the rest of your points/soul stones/bananas/mugufins on whatever you want. It works for skirmish games, but I don't know if it will transfer over to 40k, where you're playing with army-sized forces.


While true, you can play skirmish games at fairly large scales. I've seen Warmachine games that look like some 40k games.


----------



## ntaw

Zion said:


> That's $140 AU, not CA.


I was hoping you were commenting on the second half of my post...ah well. I saw that it's AU, just sympathizing. 6th was around $90 CAD, which is still pretty ridiculous for my tastes, I imagine 7th will be more expensive since they take such pretty pictures and use only the finest paper when making the book. I mean, it _is_ a really nicely done book at least.


----------



## Zion

ntaw said:


> I was hoping you were commenting on the second half of my post...ah well. I saw that it's AU, just sympathizing. 6th was around $90 CAD, which is still pretty ridiculous for my tastes, I imagine 7th will be more expensive since they take such pretty pictures and use only the finest paper when making the book. I mean, it _is_ a really nicely done book at least.


Sorry, I'll post more when I know more but until then I can only comment on what we know.


----------



## elmir

I'm still wondering if anything and everything is scoring... 

The benefit from battleforged armies still mentions scoring units... so hopefully, there will still be some sort of differentiation between say troops and elites...


----------



## ntaw

elmir said:


> I'm still wondering if anything and everything is scoring...


Back a page there was a video posted by GW that had a rule for certain units along the lines of 'objective secured': meant that they could hold objectives despite enemy units being close enough to contest it. If everything's scoring, why make a point of saying 'enemy scoring unit'?


----------



## Drohar

ntaw said:


> Back a page there was a video posted by GW that had a rule for certain units along the lines of 'objective secured': meant that they could hold objectives despite enemy units being close enough to contest it. If everything's scoring, why make a point of saying 'enemy scoring unit'?


I don't know this, but I'd guess that it means, that if troops from a Battleforged army and units from an Unbound army claim for the same object - the Battleforge army troops get it even though Unbound army unit are in the area, since there are several mentions that Battleforged armies get advantages over an Unbound army.

And I think in an Unbound army only troops are scoring, unless the mission states otherwise. (Additional units being scoring e.g. fast attack)


----------



## The Irish Commissar

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> To be fair, a lot of miniature games place little to no restrictions on what you can take and still work well. As long as things are well balanced it should be ok.


But see if there is one thing I have learned from my short life so far on this planet is that if there is a way to take advantage of something, people will take advantage of it. Id give it a month before we see even more ridiculous armies and deathstars then we have now. Im hoping that it will be better edition but Im just being realistic.


----------



## MidnightSun

The Irish Commissar said:


> But see if there is one thing I have learned from my short life so far on this planet is that if there is a way to take advantage of something, people will take advantage of it. Id give it a month before we see even more ridiculous armies and deathstars then we have now. Im hoping that it will be better edition but Im just being realistic.


I think you ought to find yourself a different gaming scene. Sounds like tournaments aren't really your thing...

I really don't mind a fun ruleset that has potential for broken shit. Potential is easy to deal with for me by playing against people looking for the same experience as me from the hobby. A ruleset that is inherently broken, and cannot be easily houseruled (easy to houserule roughly encompassing ignoring rules, but minor modifications if necessary), is more of a problem.


----------



## elmir

ntaw said:


> Back a page there was a video posted by GW that had a rule for certain units along the lines of 'objective secured': meant that they could hold objectives despite enemy units being close enough to contest it. If everything's scoring, why make a point of saying 'enemy scoring unit'?


That's why it's giving me hopes that, despite taking an unbound army, you'd still need troops to claim your objective. Given the "objective secured" bonus, battle forged might still be the way to go. Not taking any allies also gives a bonus, but I find that one very minuscule. 

BTW, you really didn't need unbound to make a dick-ish list before. FoC wasn't really a very effective way to keep cheese in check. So in conclusion: if you still need troops to capture stuff, unbound isn't going to be that bad. The sky isn't falling just yet.


----------



## Zion

From the Daemons 40k blog:


> I spoke with my FLGS guy who talked to the GW rep this morning. Not all of my questions were answered, but here is what I heard that is not something already all over the internet. This assumes the GW rep had his facts straight, and the FLGS guy relayed them correctly via the game of telephone.
> 
> 
> Battle Brothers
> 
> Eldar/DE
> Chaos/Daemons
> All Imperium
> 
> All others were convenience, desperate or apocalypse.
> 
> No answer as to whether you can join units of battle brothers.
> 
> Psychic Phase
> 
> Roll a D6 and add the total mastery levels of all your psykers. You get that many power dice and your opponent gets that many DTW dice.
> 
> To cast a power, you need to roll a 4+ for every warp charge of the power you're using. So warp charge 2 = two 4+, meaning you'd need 4 power dice to have an average shot.
> 
> Your opponent dispels the power with a roll of a 6 on their dice. So the more dice they have, the more shots they get at rolling that 6 to cancel out that critical power. I was told that the mastery level of the psyker dispelling the power lowers the roll needed to dispel it. So a ML2 psyker dispels on a 5+, ML3 on a 4+. etc...
> 
> That is what I was told.
> 
> That seems wrong to me because Fateweaver, Eldrad and Ahriman could dispel anything on a 3+. More likely, I would think you compare mastery levels between the casting psyker and the dispelling psyker, and apply a bonus that way. This is conjecture. What I wrote above is what I was told.
> 
> What I also don't know is if there is a dice limit a psyker can use to cast or dispel a power based on their mastery level. I also don't know if you need two 6's to dispel a ML2 power. I assume you do.
> 
> You would figure Adamantium Will would give you +1 to DTW for powers cast at a unit with that rule.
> 
> Jink Save
> 
> Jink is a 4+, however it is no longer always on. You must declare a jink to claim it, and if you do so, it's snapshots only in the next phase.
> 
> Sweeping Advance
> 
> Unchanged. You do not consolidate into a new combat.
> 
> And that's all I got that's new! So you can go runtelldat.


And posted on /tg/:


----------



## venomlust

Pretty cool, I could mostly take it or leave it. Some of those powers do sound like a lot of fun.

Now let's see the (hopefully) revised tables for all the other BRB disciplines.

*edit*

Could be extra fun if I actually play my Daemons army in any pure sense, though.


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Those malefic powers certainly look like they'd be fun to play. Can't see my rune priests being down for a bit of casual summoning though.


----------



## Zion

From Bell of Lost Sense:


> Warhammer 7th Edition: Price: roughly $80
> 
> Edition is presented in a new format, 3 hardcover books in a slipcover. Pagecount of all three is about 450 pages in total:
> 
> The Rulebook: @200 pages, only rules
> 
> The Grimdark: @128 pages - Fluff and history of the Warhammer universe
> 
> The Hobby: @114 pages - Full miniatures and hobby book. All splash pics, and intro to the hobby stuff.


----------



## elmir

I'm a little worried about the DTW dice also being D6+Mastery. 

I hope the psychic phase doesn't devolve into a fantasy-eque "bring a lvl 4 or go home" type game. Also, I wonder how they will FAQ my GK's the aegis ability... 

Just imagine a MSU GK army. With all those lvl 1 psykers, you'd be lucky to get a single cast off... :s


----------



## Zion

More regarding the stuff posted earlier from the Daemons blog:


> A small correction on the Psychic Powers. The defending player must roll a number of sucesses equal to the sucesses rolled by the casting player. So if I cast a level 1 power with three sucesses my opponet needs three sucesses to cancel it.
> Also this has not been posted but I think it might make a few people happy. Strength D has changed.
> D weapons:
> 1 nothing
> 2-5 D3 hull points/wounds
> 6 crazy
> However Strength D no longer ignores cover/ Invuls


----------



## venomlust

Hmm, interesting if true. You'd need the blessing of all the gods to survive a strike from a Knight titan's chainsword.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Zion said:


> From the Daemons 40k blog:
> 
> 
> And posted on /tg/:



Yeah I just saw this ^^

My immediate thoughts went straight to my Mono-Tzeentch lists: x2 lvl 3 sorcs, thousand sons squads, pink horrors and a lord of change...That's like 15 warp charge points per turn. That's A LOT of summoning of extra Daemons, and I will be sacrificing the 1ksons Sorcerers to summon additional Lords of Change whenever possible lol Psykers are powerful beings and this is hopefully a rules change that will reflect that better. Should be fun times ahead! 
Suddenly I am feeling quite excited for 7th edition. Not just the psychic power changes, but I think 'Unbounded' armies are going to give us the ability to play fluffy themed armies: 100% Jump Pack Raven Guard armies? Go ahead. An armoured fist IG regiment with no guardsmen? Sure, why not. An army of Inquisitor warbands or Sternguard? You get the picture...
I think this is very much the kind of game GW want us to play, they have just made it crystal clear now for all the people who didn't get it with the 6th ed rulebook: It's a casual game. Of course, we could've played it this way all along (and probably should have, since GW make it clear they encourage you to play it how you want to play it), but now GW have "sanctioned" it for the masses...


----------



## Straken's_Fist

elmir said:


> I'm a little worried about the DTW dice also being D6+Mastery.
> 
> I hope the psychic phase doesn't devolve into a fantasy-eque "bring a lvl 4 or go home" type game. Also, I wonder how they will FAQ my GK's the aegis ability...
> 
> Just imagine a MSU GK army. With all those lvl 1 psykers, you'd be lucky to get a single cast off... :s


Yeah not sure where this leaves Tau and Black Templars, with no access to psykers...Any ideas?


----------



## DeathGlam

I totally can't wait, im another who is very excited to play 7th the more i hear/read about it, i understand why some people don't like it, especially if you play in an enviroment dominated by tournament or WAAC type players but for a group like mine, who are all just for a laugh casual narrative players, this is really looking set to boost our gaming sessions, which even if it seems selfish, is what i care about.

Good times ahead for me.


----------



## Zion

So some thoughts on things that MIGHT be in the core rules that would balance this out:
- No duplicate powers for Psykers
- Each Power could be limited to one casting per phase
- Perils could be as brutal as WFB with you suffering it for double 6s

And if the rumor about needing a 4+ per mastery level to get a power off a ML3 power has a 27/216 chance of going off on 3 dice, or a 3/24 shot. I see a LOT of dice being throw to get these powers off, and if the system works like Fantasy were double-6s mean perils (or perhaps double 1s instead) then you'd be more likely to wreck yourself using it.


----------



## Creon

We'll see, I'm seeing good things with this, and it looks like 'nids might have something POSITIVE in the new system.


----------



## Adramalech

nurgle bike sorcs, anyone?

Actually, that was a terrible idea... tzeentch would probably be better what with the invul increase and all.

or maybe unmarked.... yes, definitely unmarked.


----------



## venomlust

Adramalech said:


> nurgle bike sorcs, anyone?
> 
> Actually, that was a terrible idea... tzeentch would probably be better what with the invul increase and all.
> 
> or maybe unmarked.... yes, definitely unmarked.


Are you sure? Maybe Khorne instead :grin:.


----------



## Adramalech

venomlust said:


> Are you sure? Maybe Khorne instead :grin:.


 I like the way you think.


----------



## Einherjar667

Nurgle doesn't deal with wheels and iron.


----------



## Zion

Einherjar667 said:


> Nurgle doesn't deal with wheels and iron.


Oh really? Then what are these:
























Because I see iron and I see wheels (well 2/3 have wheels).


----------



## Einherjar667

*7th Edition Rumors, Pics in 1st Post (Updated 12 May)*

It's a quote from Lord of the Rings

And I can not verify which metal that equipment is made out of.

And you should have included that Skaven model that is basically just a wheel


----------



## Zion

Einherjar667 said:


> It's a quote from Lord of the Rings
> 
> And I can not verify which metal that equipment is made out of.
> 
> And you should have included that Skaven model that is basically just a wheel


Iron based metals rust reddish brown.


----------



## Einherjar667

Ppssshhh Nurgle can rust ANYTHING!


----------



## Zion

Einherjar667 said:


> Ppssshhh Nurgle can rust ANYTHING!


Yes he can, but only iron based metals rust that way. For example here's gold and then copper, both rusted up:

















As you can see the first only rust brown with no red, and the other rusts green. 

These are things that come in handy to know if you want to weather your models properly.


----------



## Fallen

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> To be fair, a lot of miniature games place little to no restrictions on what you can take and still work well. *As long as things are well balanced it should be ok.*


But we are talking about GW, and I completely doubt that it will be balanced.

honestly, not looking forward towards the new edition.

I will probably wait until some people in my gaming group buy it / hear about it on the webs, to see if I will buy it.

Hopefully it does everything excellent, and is the greatest edition that I will have played under (5th so far is the best)


----------



## Einherjar667

Zion said:


> Yes he can, but only iron based metals rust that way. For example here's gold and then copper, both rusted up:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see the first only rust brown with no red, and the other rusts green.
> 
> These are things that come in handy to know if you want to weather your models properly.



I included no rust when I did my Death Guard last summer, where were you last summer?!


----------



## Zion

Either on the board or under the hood of my broken ass car trying to make it not-broken.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

Zion said:


> While true, you can play skirmish games at fairly large scales. I've seen Warmachine games that look like some 40k games.


Yes that is indeed true, but skirmish games aren't designed for those larger battles. I can play a 1000 point game of X-wing if I want to, but the game will lose most of it's strategy and balance, which is fine on occasion.



The Irish Commissar said:


> But see if there is one thing I have learned from my short life so far on this planet is that if there is a way to take advantage of something, people will take advantage of it. Id give it a month before we see even more ridiculous armies and deathstars then we have now. Im hoping that it will be better edition but Im just being realistic.


In an ideal game there is nothing to "take advantage of" because everything is balanced. 100% balance is never going to occur in any wargame, let alone 40k. Having said that, if GW aims to get as close as possible to it, 7th edition could be very good. If they take this fuck balance attitude they've been increasingly taking, I can see this new addition losing more players to other systems.



Fallen said:


> But we are talking about GW, and I completely doubt that it will be balanced.
> 
> honestly, not looking forward towards the new edition.
> 
> I will probably wait until some people in my gaming group buy it / hear about it on the webs, to see if I will buy it.
> 
> Hopefully it does everything excellent, and is the greatest edition that I will have played under (5th so far is the best)


Yeah I'm skeptical too, but I want to be pleasantly surprised. Well designed and balanced mechanics could help GW turn the tables and steal some players back from other game systems.


----------



## Spankinginred

Straken's_Fist said:


> Yeah not sure where this leaves Tau and Black Templars, with no access to psykers...Any ideas?


Blatting their enemies with firepower - I hope!
Either that or they can take Eldar Allies


----------



## Nordicus

As far as I understand it, any army gets D6 warp charges per turn, plus the combined amount of psyker levels. The charges can be used to either use psychic disciplines or boost your deny the witch.

In essence, Tau and Black Templar would then be able to use all their warp charges to deny psychic disciplines instead. So they shouldn't be without power in the psyker department.


----------



## Spankinginred

The Irish Commissar said:


> But see if there is one thing I have learned from my short life so far on this planet is that if there is a way to take advantage of something, people will take advantage of it. Id give it a month before we see even more ridiculous armies and deathstars then we have now. Im hoping that it will be better edition but Im just being realistic.


That'll be evolution in action


----------



## MidnightSun

The more I see of the psychic phase, the more I like it. It makes Mastery 1 Sorcerors kind of worthless, especially if you want any more than Warp Charge 1, but that's good (needing an average of 18 Warp Charge to cast Possession on a level 1, amd your opponent needing 6 Warp Charge to dispel if he's a Mastery 3). Makes the powerful psykers more influential but stops low-level psykers from being able to spam stuff like Prescience.

A definite thumbs up from me on the Psychic Phase.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

MidnightSun said:


> The more I see of the psychic phase, the more I like it. It makes Mastery 1 Sorcerors kind of worthless, especially if you want any more than Warp Charge 1, but that's good (needing an average of 18 Warp Charge to cast Possession on a level 1, amd your opponent needing 6 Warp Charge to dispel if he's a Mastery 3). Makes the powerful psykers more influential but stops low-level psykers from being able to spam stuff like Prescience.
> 
> A definite thumbs up from me on the Psychic Phase.


Yeah it's sounding well thought out, which is always a good indication.


----------



## Zion

From Natfka:


> via Luis Ed(Agramar) El Descanso Del Escriba
> http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.com/2014/05/varys-diceprecios-en-euros-de-los-pre.html
> 
> W40k Rules come in a hard cardboard box and includes 3 separate books.
> The first is called Galaxy War and is a starter guide with 114pages with lots of photos of painted miniatures.
> The second is called Dark Millennium and is 128 pages with extensive background section and new portraits and illustrations.
> The third is the rules, and is 208 pages including among it the new psychic powers.
> 
> Pricing is 65 euros and will be sold in English and Spanish.
> 
> Next we have Tactical Objectives that are 36 cards. Cost 6.50 Euros
> Finally a box with 50 cards for Psychic powers and has 6 known psychic disciplines of Daemonology for 12 Euros


EDIT: From http://millests.blogspot.pt/2014/05/7th-edition-pictures-confirmation-of-3.html?spref=fb


----------



## SonofVulkan

So, just read that little red box on the above post. Dark Vengeance is getting an updated rule book. Wonder if a new box set is still coming out? Hope so.


----------



## Deus Mortis

Zion said:


> via Luis Ed(Agramar) El Descanso Del Escriba
> http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.c...e-los-pre.html
> 
> W40k Rules come in a hard cardboard box and includes 3 separate books.
> The first is called Galaxy War and is a starter guide with 114pages with lots of photos of painted miniatures.
> The second is called Dark Millennium and is 128 pages with extensive background section and new portraits and illustrations.
> The third is the rules, and is 208 pages including among it the new psychic powers.
> 
> Pricing is 65 euros and will be sold in English and Spanish.
> 
> Next we have Tactical Objectives that are 36 cards. Cost 6.50 Euros
> Finally a box with 50 cards for Psychic powers and has 6 known psychic disciplines of Daemonology for 12 Euros


Please don't tell me our only option is to buy all 3 to the tune of £65...:angry:

What if I don't want your arty books, huh GW? What if I just want to play the bloody game and not pay for a bunch of art which, whilst I'm sure is very nice, I don't want. I just want the rules to play the game with.

It's like the Xbox One forcing you to have Kinect. I never asked for it, stop forcing my to buy it you arse-hats! :ireful2:


----------



## Zion

It's three books inside of a slipcase. Sure they could sell you one MASSIVE book but they broke it down so you can take, say just the rules, with you to play with.

Which is probably a good thing since that book is 208 pages long.

EDIT: A summary for those who don't want to read tiny pictures:
3 Books in a slip case:
A Galaxy At War, 144 pages, Model Gallery (basically), also talks about collecting 40k minis and covers the hobby (presumably modeling and painting stuff to some level will be covered)
Dark Millennium, 128 pages, Focuses on the background/setting/lore of 40k
The Rules, 208 pages, Contains the rules

Dark Vengence is getting a rules update.


----------



## Deus Mortis

But the point is, if you only want to have the rules, you get to eat shit?


----------



## Zion

Deus Mortis said:


> But the point is, if you only want to have the rules, you get to eat shit?


How is it different from *every other release up to this point?* Seriously, GW has ALWAYS released a massive combined book at the start of the edition all the way back to 2nd which required THREE rulebooks to play. Complaining that they're doing it is like bitching that the ocean has waves: completely pointless.

You're not being told to "eat shit", you're just bitching because they bundled extra stuff with the rules that you've decided you don't personally need.

GW is putting updated rules in the DV box in the next couple of months which means it'll be on ebay soon enough. And if they do what they did in 6th there will be a Rules Only release in due time as well. If you REALLY need just the rules and can't handle having two extra books wait for one of those options then. No one is forcing you to buy this set of books.


----------



## Deus Mortis

Perhaps that was too much of a knee jerk comment. What I mean more articulately is, if you are already splitting the book up into 3 books, why not sell them separately?

I never minded the rulebooks been all of those things rolled into one before because it was only ever £30-£40, which I was happy to pay. The fluff and whatnot was nice, but I really only wanted the rules and (for some hitherto unknown reason) never bothered to wait until someone online was selling the slimmer rulebook from the starter set.

For £30-£40, getting a load of fluff that, while it was nice, wasn't necessary to me was a price I was willing to pay. But £60-£65 is not (especially so soon after 6th ed), and I would rather not have to wait for however long it takes for the slim DV rulebook to become available before I can play this edition.

Hence why I don't understand why we either have to buy all the book or none of them when they have _already_ been split into separate books? I am certain I'm not the only one of this opinion, so surely it would be better from a financial point of view for GW to sell them separately *and* as a bundle, then they still get money from people like myself who don't want to pay £60-£65.

It seems daft to me why they would say "We split them into 3 books, but you still have to buy them all" when doing so means that people like myself will either buy the slim version of rulebook from someone online (which GW get less money from than if we had bought it directly from them) or download the rules (in which case they get nothing).

As I said, my comment before was probably too reactionary, because I don't welcome the thought of spending £60-£65 only 2 years after I bought this edition's rulebook and when 2/3rds of it I don't need. The essence of what I think is that is seems silly of GW to not allow you to buy them separately, especially when it means they could lose money?


----------



## Zion

If they sell them separately they lose money on the other two books right out of the gate.


----------



## bitsandkits

Zion said:


> If they sell them separately they lose money on the other two books right out of the gate.


I think everyone who has a copy of 6th edition should be able to go into the nearest gw and get a free leatherbound limited edition of 7th with all the rules in and all the fluff and pictures and hobby bits included or left out for free and hand job from Mila Kunis and GW should foot the bill.


----------



## Deus Mortis

Yeah, except companies like Forge World sold the Collector's edition of the Isstvan Trilogy when you could buy all of those separately, which suggests to me that any loss in value is negligible.

I would have thought that those who wanted all three would buy all three, those who only want two would buy two and those who only wanted one would buy one. Then instead of only giving one option and hoping everyone buys it, you cater to everyone and avoid losing money from those who don't, which (based on nothing other than pure, wild speculation) might well mean that the loss from people not buying all three would be covered and, indeed, exceeded by those buying only that which they want.

Plus, you could still make it advantageous to buy all three. If you sold the individual ones at £25-£35 and the set at £65-£75, people would be more inclined to buy all three since it's cheaper than buying them all individually.

But, to my knowledge, neither of us have power over how GW do and do not sell things. If just grates me because I'd happily invest £25-£35 directly into GW for just the rules, but I'm not prepared to invest £60-£65. It's not worth that much to me, especially when I'm paying for things I don't need, or want that much. Instead I, and I imagine others like myself, will go through 3rd parties, which cuts into GW profits, which leads to more mark up on things, etc. 

I guess it just seems silly to me and means I have to wait an extra arbitrary time length and fight other people for copies of the slimmer rulebook, just so I can play a game I enjoy.


----------



## Creon

I for one am HAPPY that the art and fluff will be able to sit on my shelf and NOT be taken to games. And likely I won't buy another base set for the minirules, so I don't get shoulder cramps from the weight.


----------



## maximus2467

I'm not fussed either way, I'm buying this book on day one, £60 is not a lot of money (I appreciate that it is a lot for some) but I'm only buying it for the rules, the artwork and fluff books are going straight in the bin


----------



## Zion

I just saw a person on Dakka saying their store is selling it for £50 (it'll cost them £40 with an online discount), this would put the book at around $85USD.


----------



## DeathGlam

Assuming it is true about the 3 books in one, then for me they have just secured me buying the full sized book rather then trying to get a rules only starter set version.

As im happy to have all the fluff and hobby material but now im a regular gamer, i don't like having to use a massive 400 page book when at my club.


----------



## Creon

I'm told US$ 80 from my FLGS.


----------



## Zion

Creon said:


> I'm told US$ 80 from my FLGS.


Sounds good to me. That'd give me enough money to buy the book and the mission cards (and MAYBE the Psychic Powers Cards).


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Zion said:


> How is it different from *every other release up to this point?*


Yet a bunch of other companies give you the option of buying just the rules or give 'just the rules' away for free online. GW could afford to do this is they weren't so stubborn about keeping failing brick and mortar stores open...Bah.


----------



## Zion

RE4H93c7U5Y
EDIT (From Dakka):


----------



## neferhet

well, this i like. altough could also make troops not so longer useful for winning games. we'll see. thanks Zion.


----------



## Zion

neferhet said:


> well, this i like. altough could also make troops not so longer useful for winning games. we'll see. thanks Zion.


It's what I do!

Also makes Battle Forged armies important because they'll earn more VP in a game than an Unbound army will.


----------



## venomlust

Obviously there's more to it than what we see in the pictures, but can you see a difference between the "Capture & Control" vs. "Take and Hold"? They're even synonymous.


----------



## Zion

Confirmations on prices from Dakka (source being his FLGS):


> Rulebook was confirmed at 85, psychic cards are 15, and objective cards at 8


Also apparently vehicles only explode on a "7" now when rolling for damage, requiring AP 1 or 2 to do it.


----------



## neferhet

Zion said:


> Confirmations on prices from Dakka (source being his FLGS):
> 
> 
> Also apparently vehicles only explode on a "7" now when rolling for damage, requiring AP 1 or 2 to do it.


praise the lord. that wasn't so hard to understand, game designers!:grin:


----------



## Zion

neferhet said:


> praise the lord. that wasn't so hard to understand, game designers!:grin:


Mind you that it's rumors (by two different people claiming they got it from GW reps (one through his FLGS) so take it with salt.


----------



## neferhet

as always. but i can see the "vehicle issue" simply solved with this. damn gw, i am going to waste my money on 3 f*ing books.


----------



## Creon

Just think of it this way. The mini-rulebook was 45-50 bucks in this edition, it'll probably be 55-60 in the next, you're really only losing "wasting" 30 bucks.


----------



## Zion

From Dakka:


> Had a chance to talk to my FLGS and good friend regarding the edition. He has some similar info as to what's been posted but some stuff I haven't seen posted 9got tired of reading about xbox and MtG).
> 
> Sounds like the reps were only getting a day with the new book so I doubt we are gonna get clear and concise info but for what its worth. Here's what I can remember
> 
> 1. When asked if vehicles were more durable the response was they now explode on a 7+. Conjecture on our part is 6 maybe has maybe d3 hull point strip like for super heavies in 6ed.
> 2. No assault from reserve. Friend knew I'd want to know this.
> 3. Its been said but to reiterate no sweep into new combats.
> 4. Charge range is same ole 2d6 but he did say it sounded like move through cover works for charging now.
> 5. Apparently denying powers doesn't require a psycher, so necrons and tau will get to as well.
> 6. There's some changes to USRs and specifically how they are conferred to units from ICs. Another one he knew I'd want to know about (I bitched about it this weekend )
> 7. So he mentioned there's an advantage to focusing on a set of psychic powers or something. Not really sure how it works or what. We are assuming if you roll all on one discipline you get a bonus but it seemed kinda vague.
> 8. Battle brothers can ride in each others transports now. I forsee much shenanigans here.
> 9. Everything scores. Did throw in a 'unless stated otherwise' so who knows what will have caveats (swarms I imagine but what else?)
> 10. Sounded like shooting psychic powers were resolved in the psychic phase, not shooting phase. Wonder how that will work for ICs and targeting.


EDIT:


> Looking at my copy of WDW and this is epic:
> 
> Units now shoot based on the weapon they're holding. E.g., the flamer shoots and resolves all wounds, then the bolters in the unit shoot and resolve all wounds. So on and so forth until all eligible weapons have been fired.
> 
> No more 'my bolter has 24" range so my flamer wounds can apply to models up to 24" away." This is huge.


This was offered as proof of the second one: 









EDIT: Enjoy.


----------



## venomlust

Dang, too bad about the no sweeping into new combats (if this is accurate).

Not sure I understand how currently a flamer wound could apply to something 24" away, either.


----------



## Zion

venomlust said:


> Dang, too bad about the no sweeping into new combats (if this is accurate).
> 
> Not sure I understand how currently a flamer wound could apply to something 24" away, either.


Wounds used to get allocated out to the range of the longest rage weapon so a flamer could end up allocating wounds to a model 24" away.


----------



## DeathGlam

Im confused by that weapons rule too, is that not how it currently is played?

I have never met anyone who tries to claim a flamer can wound 24 inches because it is in the same unit as mostly boltguns.

Edit: missed the above post.

Second Edit: Love the sound of Challenges now, that has taken away the main reason i hate them in 6th. :good:


----------



## venomlust

Zion said:


> Wounds used to get allocated out to the range of the longest rage weapon so a flamer could end up allocating wounds to a model 24" away.


Ah, ok.

I'm loving the sound of everything the more I read it. 

NO MORE is Kharn, Black Mace Prince, or my Juggerlord wasted in a challenge if the excess wounds transfer to the rest of the squad. There are always excess wounds. That is an awesome and a very welcome buff!

And only 1 grounding test? Be'lakor is rejoicing!

I can definitely see myself running Daemonology lists of every sort available to me (Daemons, CSM, AM). My enthusiasm has grown.


----------



## Zion

EDIT: From same source:


> Difficult terrain is -2" to charge range.
> 
> 7+ to explode a vehicle.
> 
> New wound allocation - weapon by weapon.





> Rulebook - $85
> Munitorum edition - $340, 2,000 copies, online only, limited
> Psychic deck - $15
> Tactical objectives - $8
> 
> No dice, objectives, or templates. Those will probably drop next week.


----------



## The Irish Commissar

I like most of these rules except the only one grounding check. Question, if the grounding check happens at the end the phase does that mean if I shoot it I can only assault it after because i made it take the check in the shooting phase. If so ouch for shooting armies.


----------



## scscofield

The change to excess challenge rules is going to make CSM players very happy.


----------



## Fallen

Nordicus said:


> As far as I understand it, any army gets D6 warp charges per turn, plus the combined amount of psyker levels. The charges can be used to either use psychic disciplines or boost your deny the witch.


so... Fantasy's magic system then...


----------



## Zion

> Melee to-hit chart is the same.
> 
> S vs T to-wound chart is the same.
> 
> BS6+ not listed in the shooting to hit table.
> 
> Vehicle damage table has effects for 1-3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. (Cannot read text)
> 
> Perils chart is a d6 table.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief

So apparently the Dark Vengeance garbage set will stay, guess my enthusiasm for whatever 7th may bring went from 0.1 to 0 on a scale from 1 to 10.

At least the cultists are nice. Still couldn't find a player within 2000km to share a DV purchase to pawn the cruddy Dark Angels off on. Unbuyable piece of loathing, that thing.


----------



## Nacho libre

scscofield said:


> The change to excess challenge rules is going to make CSM players very happy.


Fuck yeaahhhhhhh.:laugh:


----------



## Nacho libre

MetalHandkerchief said:


> So apparently the Dark Vengeance garbage set will stay, guess my enthusiasm for whatever 7th may bring went from 0.1 to 0 on a scale from 1 to 10.
> 
> At least the cultists are nice. Still couldn't find a player within 2000km to share a DV purchase to pawn the cruddy Dark Angels off on. Unbuyable piece of loathing, that thing.


Me and my mate went halfs on it and i got the csm.


----------



## raven_jim

Saw this, not sure if its been mentioned, I've not seen it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RE4H93c7U5Y#t=17


----------



## Spankinginred

Deus Mortis said:


> Please don't tell me our only option is to buy all 3 to the tune of £65...:angry:
> 
> What if I don't want your arty books, huh GW? What if I just want to play the bloody game and not pay for a bunch of art which, whilst I'm sure is very nice, I don't want. I just want the rules to play the game with.
> 
> It's like the Xbox One forcing you to have Kinect. I never asked for it, stop forcing my to buy it you arse-hats! :ireful2:


In my guise of 'Angry if Aberdeenshire'. I couldn't agree with you more. And as a full time carer for my terminally ill wife, I begrudge giving GW my entire weekly payment the government allows me to live on so I can play with my toys! AARRRGGGHHH!!!!


----------



## Zion

From /tg/ (via Dakka):


> >Word on the D Weapons is 1: miss, 2-5: wound with no armor save but cover/invuln still allowed, 6: destroyed.
> 
> >The specifics for contesting is that all units now score, but troops in forged armies now have the uncontestable rule (like for the gargs in the formation), unless the other unit also has that rule. So it isn't just a big deal for forged v unbound, but makes troops a big deal in standard foc games.
> 
> >The rulebook also specifically states requiring player permission for unbound games. Oh, and as a bonus, forged armies get to reroll their warlord trait if desired.
> 
> >Unsure of the rest of the damage chart changes, but explodes only happens on a 7+ now.
> 
> >You can ally with "come the apoc" now. Penalties include not being allowed within 12 in and not being able to deploy together
> 
> >Jink saves are better, but universally force snap shots next turn.
> 
> >FMC now only have to make one grounding test a shooting phase, and only if wounded. No more laser pointer crashes. Big buff for flying circus.
> 
> >Oh, and apparently snap fire has been changed to a -2BS modifier instead of the flat BS1


From Dakka:









Prices confirmed.


----------



## Nordicus

Zion said:


> FMC now only have to make one grounding test a shooting phase, and only if wounded. No more laser pointer crashes. Big buff for flying circus.


I can hear my Bloodthirster crying of joy in the next room.


----------



## humakt

Nordicus said:


> I can hear my Bloodthirster crying of joy in the next room.


Well yes and no. Snap fire only being a -2 means marines hitting on a 5+ without skyfire. Those heavy weapons will hit and cause actual wounds instead of just forcing a grounding test. But bloodthirsters will devastate units in turn one due to the changed challenge rules so swings and roundabouts.

I liek the sound of Ed 7. It seems quite well thought through and adds to the already good Ed 6 rules.


----------



## Zion

Changes to snap fire haven't been confirmed yet.


----------



## neferhet

Zion said:


> Changes to snap fire haven't been confirmed yet.


exactly. lots of salt. (and hopes, by my side. I hate flyiers  )


----------



## raven_jim

-2BS on snap fire, if that's true it makes over watch so much more devastating


----------



## humakt

Zion said:


> Changes to snap fire haven't been confirmed yet.


Of course, I was just thinking of why they would have done this. FMC are pretty powerful currently except for the grounding rule.


----------



## Creon

I am salting the -2bs rule, cause that would make charging even less effective. But, I can live with it. 7th ed seems good. Now, I do admit my inquisition allies started throwing 1 10 point psyker in it's battle squads for the dice only.


----------



## Zion

Creon said:


> I am salting the -2bs rule, cause that would make charging even less effective. But, I can live with it. 7th ed seems good. Now, I do admit my inquisition allies started throwing 1 10 point psyker in it's battle squads for the dice only.


It'd only make charging less effective against BS4+. Lots of BS3 or less out there.


----------



## DeathGlam

I hope that -2bs is true.

As an aside cheers to Zion for collecting all of this, for people like myself who are not up on checking all the various sites, it is very useful.

Especially as this site does not seem to have the constant stream of sky is falling negativity to read through as other well known forums tend to be focussed on, really restores my faith in the internet.


----------



## Vaz

You musn't have met Stella.


----------



## projectda

I'm with glam. Zion is always on top.of having rumors posted and sorted for us to read over. Great work to zion and any others.


----------



## SonofVulkan

So this new Daemonology power that possesses your psyker with a Greater Daemon. Wonder if that means new Greater Daemon models are on the horizon? Here's hoping.


----------



## MidnightSun

Zion said:


> It'd only make charging less effective against BS4+. Lots of BS3 or less out there.


I think that making charging harder against Space Marines of all varieties, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Necrons, and CSM is broad enough to have a big impact. It also makes the Vindicare hilarious for shooting down people charging him and planes.

I like the sound of pretty much everything that's been confirmed, and most of the things I saw that were rumoured have been wrong, which is great.


----------



## The Irish Commissar

So my jink save is now a 4+ on my jetbikes but only if a take snap shots. Also if i go flat out does that mean +1 to the jink.


----------



## Spankinginred

Vaz said:


> You musn't have met Stella.


You may wish to buy a copy or five of the new rules, take them there and sell them!
Good luck with the move, shame about the beer there. My youngest cousin says get a job in the gold mines for loads of money - her fella has

Stella who? My wife had an auntie Stella and two cousins of the same name (common name here)

All this sounds like all the current new codices are now out of date. Will they be giving the likes of Imperial Knights a re-write after only about 3 months??



MidnightSun said:


> I think that making charging harder against Space Marines of all varieties, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Necrons, and CSM is broad enough to have a big impact. It also makes the Vindicare hilarious for shooting down people charging him and planes.
> 
> I like the sound of pretty much everything that's been confirmed, and most of the things I saw that were rumoured have been wrong, which is great.


One can feel a small force of unbound Tau Shas'Os in the making. That's around ten including shooty drones for around 2000 points. 
The force rules were put in place to stop things like this happening (HQ, Troops, Troops etc).


----------



## Creon

Well, if unbound requires approval of opponent, you're probably just not going to see approval of opponent.


----------



## Zion

Creon said:


> Well, if unbound requires approval of opponent, you're probably just not going to see approval of opponent.


Approval of your opponent is required to play the game in general. Checkmate. 



Spankinginred said:


> All this sounds like all the current new codices are now out of date. Will they be giving the likes of Imperial Knights a re-write after only about 3 months??


FAQ is more likely.


----------



## MidnightSun

Creon said:


> Well, if unbound requires approval of opponent, you're probably just not going to see approval of opponent.


40k requires opponent's permission. EDIT: Damn, Zion got me.

Really don't see the big fuss about Unbound armies. Yeah, you can just bring Shas'Os or Riptides or something, but I can't think of any army that's _really really stupidly good_ and you lose the ability to contest objectives if your opponent's Battle-Forged. 

I always like seeing how quickly the 40k community dismisses something when the new "This has ruined my hobby, I'm selling all my models and starting Warmachine because Privateer Press offer a free blowjob with every big stupid steampunk robot they sell" 40k release comes out. I thought Jetbikes were all the rage because they could do last-turn contests and take objectives? I thought that Flyer transports were really good because you could drop dudes on objectives on the last turn? But suddenly, you can break the FOC, so all of that stuff becomes useless and bad and unplayable because "holy mother of shit you can bring a gorillion Riptides and that must be OP as hell, right?" If I only bring a load of copies of the same one unit, that can't possibly lose, right?!"


----------



## Creon

I don't think changing the way D weapons work is much of a "re-write".


----------



## Vaz

The benefit of 6th edition is that most rules are referenced within the rulebook. Instead of something being say "always wound on a 4+", it's now "Poison (4+)", meaning that when a character is "immune to poison", "always wound on a 4+" attacks won't be at an unintended advantage.

There will be some "code rot" as nomenclature gets updated, but for the most part, the rules are a bit plug and play. Obviously, they won't be balanced against the new rules, which is where your FAQ "hotfixes" come in.


----------



## SilverTabby

Don't forget - anything released in the last year is 7th compatible. The rulebook was finished 6-8months ago. Preproduction and painting took the next 3 months. Then WD was written 3 months in advance...

For all those who complained about the 'Nid Codex, here's where it will likely come into its own.


----------



## Einherjar667

Can i say that I am very excited and optimistic and Yah!


----------



## Creon

I'm quite looking forward, barring the surgical extraction of 85 bucks from my wallet.


----------



## Old Man78

I'm totally brain fucked, is this 7th or 6th redux, I did not get 6th yet, so will this be a solid release usable for the next 4-5 years or will it be upgraded in 2 again


----------



## Creon

No one can say. If GW was working on it's old Schedule, this should be the Fantasy 9th release, not 40k 7th.


----------



## Nacho libre

Creon said:


> I'm quite looking forward, barring the surgical extraction of 85 bucks from my wallet.


If you ever played the PC game surgeon simulator, you will realise how hard this task will be.


----------



## Deus Mortis

Interestingly, had a chat with one of the guys working in my FLGS who seemed to think the rulebook wouldn't been the £60-£70 version, but that might be some sort of limited edition thing further down the line. Interesting (and less painful) if true...


----------



## Zion

Oldman78 said:


> I'm totally brain fucked, is this 7th or 6th redux, I did not get 6th yet, so will this be a solid release usable for the next 4-5 years or will it be upgraded in 2 again


This is 7th. GW is even calling it a "new edition".


----------



## Old Man78

Zion said:


> This is 7th. GW is even calling it a "new edition".


Cheers mate, well with a soon playable painted force, I can grab 7th and not have felt the bump in the road that was 6th, smooth


----------



## Nacho libre

Oldman78 said:


> Cheers mate, well with a soon playable painted force, I can grab 7th and not have felt the bump in the road that was 6th, smooth


I'm with you there mate. I cannot wait until the new ed.


----------



## Bindi Baji

Einherjar667 said:


> Can i say that I am very excited and optimistic and Yah!


no, optimism is frowned on :biggrin:


----------



## Einherjar667

Bindi Baji said:


> no, optimism is frowned on :biggrin:


NO SMILING!

Though, I'm excited to finish up my Imperial Fists and get playing this new Ed.


----------



## Loki1416

The more I think about it, the more I like the "Unbound Army" idea. Not because it could be seriously abused (and some will do so) but because I have some lists in mind that I want to play for fun that just doesn't fit into the FOC. Now, I'm not talking about 9 tfc's or anything like that. Just some things I would like to take with others that the FOC just frowned upon. So I, for one, am looking forward to 7th edition. TBH, I played a handful of 6th edition and kinda just fell out of it because I really wasn't feeling it so just went to modeling (which has always been my favorite part). Played a lot in 5th, so hopefully 7th will bring me the joy I'm looking for.


----------



## revilo44

Creon said:


> No one can say. If GW was working on it's old Schedule, this should be the Fantasy 9th release, not 40k 7th.


I Completely agree @Creon. But ever since the first 7th rumours the Rumor mill has come off its hinges and start rolling down to the town of madness.


----------



## Zion

The Psychic Phase:
RDDcX8a-9uA

Some screen caps courtesy of Dakka:

































From Bols:


----------



## MidnightSun

Zion said:


>


----------



## venomlust

And I thought I loved psykers in 6th ed!

Actually killing people with witchfires does sound a bit iffy, though, no? Maybe only slightly? I'm really holding my breath to find out the fate of the existing BRB disciplines. Left as-is? Shuffled new powers into primaris position? New powers completely? AAAAARG MUST KNOW!


----------



## MidnightSun

venomlust said:


> I'm really holding my breath to find out the fate of the existing BRB disciplines. Left as-is? Shuffled new powers into primaris position? New powers completely? AAAAARG MUST KNOW!


I'm guessing that Prescience will leave the Primaris slot and will be replaced with something like Scryer's Gaze or whatever the Overwatch one is. I'd quite like to have a look at the other side of Daemomancy, but all will be clear soon! First GW thing I've ever actually been interesting in pre-ordering.


----------



## elmir

I'm actually slightly worried at the same time that both attacking and defending player get the same warpcharge treatment (D6 + mastery). 

I'm also worried that DTW rolls can be made relatively easily. If this is the case, my lvl3 GK librarian with hood is going to seriously screw some people up. Just imagine all my brotherhood units generating 1 DTW dice extra and then me having a character that can DTW on 3+ on anything lvl 2 or lower... 

Sounds like we'll be back to people loathing to play grey knights again... Just 2 years after 5th when people already groaned at the thought of facing them. :s


----------



## Bodo1260

And our Sisters... no Psykers at all... 
maybe they will be immune again *looks for the flying pigs*


----------



## venomlust

elmir said:


> I'm also worried that DTW rolls can be made relatively easily.


Yeah, this is a much better way of encapsulating what I was getting at. 2 armies with psykers seem like they'd just keep nullifying each others' powers the whole game. Not crying about it, still waiting for more details of course.


----------



## Zion

From Natfka:


> *via an anonymous source on Faeit 212*
> Some of this is old news. Other parts not.
> 
> 
> Vehicle chart has shifted one spot. Now tanks only explode on a 7+
> Jink got punched in the neck. Now you have to choose wether or not to Jink after you are hit. If you choose to Jink you get your Jink save (which is now 4+) but you only snap shoot next turn. This is the rule in all cases. (Flyers,Bikes,skimmers, etc....)
> All units except for Zooming flyers now score.
> Interceptor + Skyfire no longer allows firing at normal BS at ground targets. You always snap fire at ground targets now if you have skyfire.
> If you take a Battleforged list your troop units gain an ability where they cant be contested while holding and objective except by another unit with the same ability.
> Psychic phase works as follows.....Roll a D6. Both players get this many dice. Then both players add up all their mastery levels and each player adds dice to his or her base pool one a 1 for 1 basis. (so If a 5 is rolled both players get 5. Player A has 4 Mastery levels so he ends up with 9 dice. Player B has 3 Mastery Levels so he has 8 dice.) Warp charges are now the powers difficulty. In order to cast a power you need a number of successes on D6s equal to its warp charges. A success is a 4+ on a D6. (If player A wanted to cast a 2 Warp Charge power he picks any number of dice and rolls them. 2 of them need to be 4+ for him to succeed.) If you fail in casting a power bad things happen to you. To Deny the Witch you choose howerver many dice you want a roll them. You need to score an equal or greater number of successes than the caster to cancel the power. A success on a Deny roll is a 6+. You get a bonus of +1 to each of the dice you roll for being a psyker, being higher mastery level or having Adimantium Will.
> D weapons got toned down a bit. chart now goes....1 = nothing2-5 = D3+1 wounds but you get to take Invul and Cover 6 = 6 + D6 wounds no cover or Invul.
> Battle Bothers can now get into each others transports.
> You can now ally with Come the Apoc units. They get the same drawbacks as distrusted plus they cant be deployed within 12 inches of each other.
> All armies are now Battle Brothers with their selves.
> Vector strike is now AP 2 and you only score 1 hit per Vector Strike unless you are a Montrous creature then its still 1 plus a D3
> Montrous creatures only take grounding checks if they are wounded not if they are just hit.
> If you shoot a unit of mixed weapons you resolve each weapon type one at a time. Example...... If you shoot a Tac squad with 8 Bolters, a Melta and a Missile Launcher you roll to Hit and Wound with your bolters (or which ever of the 3 weapon types you choose to do first) then your opponent makes saves then you move on to the next weapon. Repeat until yuo fire the entire unit.Wounds are still taken from the front.
> Vehicle Squadrons got better. You now keep resolving damage to the closest vehicle until it dies then move on to the next closest. No more having to spread all the Pens and Glances around then resolving.


----------



## elmir

> To Deny the Witch you choose howerver many dice you want a roll them. You need to score an equal or greater number of successes than the caster to cancel the power.


*sigh of relief*

Good... Guess a single high level psyker can't just lock everything down singlehandedly.


----------



## Nacho libre

Zion said:


> From Natfka:


Aw fuck, I guess I'm taking flicker fields on my raiders now.


----------



## venomlust

elmir said:


> *sigh of relief*
> 
> Good... Guess a single high level psyker can't just lock everything down singlehandedly.


+1 to relief. My army of daemon psykers will still wreck stuff.


----------



## elmir

No no, you'll still be purged... 

I do wonder how they will rework "the aegis" and reïnforced Aegis for Grey knights though. 

Anyway, this does leave me excited for 7th! Now just some confirmation that ignore cover is nerfed a bit and snap shots are buffed a bit, and we should be good!


----------



## ntaw

Zion said:


> Vector strike is now AP 2 and you only score 1 hit per Vector Strike unless you are a Montrous creature then its still 1 plus a D3


I could have done with these being based on LoS in some way, and cover saves being allowed. Making these AP2 and MC's still able to do D3+1...well, lets say there's no sighs of relief here just yet. I'm thinking about rubbing salt in my eyelids at this point until the rulebook comes out.


----------



## Jacobite

-All armies are now Battle Brothers with their selves.-

Ouch. That isn't going to cause some problems in Non-Unbound lists.


----------



## ntaw

Jacobite said:


> Ouch. That isn't going to cause some problems in Non-Unbound lists.


GW: ok, so here's the option of playing without a FoC...like it?...oh, and if you feel like still playing from the FoC and getting those benefits, here's the option of expanding your FoC to include the allied detachment as well.


----------



## Zion

From the Blog for the Blood God Facebook page (rehosted to make life easier when it comes to embedding these pics):


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Interesting to see contemptors in the pics above. I wonder will they have anything about using 40k approved FW units in an Unbound list without having to have the permission of your opponent.


----------



## Cougar

50 quid for all three isn't so bad as long as you like the fluff  advance order tomorrow, I guess the only question is do I order at full price or wait for a reseller to get a discount ? Lol


----------



## venomlust

Friggin' wait! Spend less money :ireful2: :laugh:.


----------



## venomlust

ntaw said:


> GW: ok, so here's the option of playing without a FoC...like it?...oh, and if you feel like still playing from the FoC and getting those benefits, here's the option of expanding your FoC to include the allied detachment as well.


Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but I suppose I ultimately don't care one way or the other.


----------



## ntaw

venomlust said:


> but I suppose I ultimately don't care one way or the other


So long as 40k is still a thing I'm good. When it stops being a thing I will be muchly disappointed.


----------



## venomlust

May the game survive at least until we see the corpse god ripped out of his chair.


----------



## Nacho libre

venomlust said:


> May the game survive at least until we see the corpse god ripped out of his chair.


 Yeah and I can shoot monkeys out of my ass. If we all know gw, teh corpse is staying on the golden shitter.


----------



## Zion

Nacho libre said:


> Yeah and I can shoot monkeys out of my ass. If we all know gw, teh corpse is staying on the golden shitter.


I think the real trick is getting the monkeys IN your ass because it's clear that they won't -stay- there once they're in.

On a different note I decided to write up my thoughts on everything based solely on screenshots and WD pictures:

Unbound Armies: Interesting idea, hampered by the problems of the game balance (or lack there of). Taking FOC is not a bad idea, by itself. The real issue is that we have things that run too high in points and this rarely, if ever see lists (ex. Terminators) or are just automatic takes into a list (ex. Wraithknights). I assume more people who want to use this for fun ideas or cool thematic armies will likely get lumped into the crowd of "WAAC jerkasses" by most people just because of the way the game isn't balanced. That said....

Battle-Forged Armies: I do like that GW at least has made some attempt (though to what effect we don't know exactly) to balance the new against the old by giving the limited lists some kind of buff for playing with restraints on. I just hope this goes beyond the "super scoring" and re-rolling Warlord traits because the first can still be beaten by tabling and the latter doesn't matter if you use most named characters.

Psychic Phase: Frankly I like this. It gives psykers a nice spotlight while not letting them run too rampant. With how powers work (4+ per Warp Charge required for the power) and Perils works (rolling Double 6s) it really brings a nice risk/reward mechanic system to the game. One that I hope is paired with powers that really make you want to use the new phase. The free Primaris is a nice buff to level one psykers and rewards specialists, but really the dispel mechanic will be the major make or break for most people on this I think.

Daemonology: No, I didn't forget it, I just wanted to cover this one on its own. Frankly the idea is fine in my book. I even like the idea of Dark Angels being radical enough in how they'd hunt the Fallen to resort to summoning Daemons to do their will as it fits my head canon of how far the chapter will go in their hunt. The full restrictions and methodology used for this would be the real make or break for me if it wasn't for the whole "all doubles perils" (unless your Daemons) thing that really cuts a lot of the crud out of it. Also who really wants to summon something in their army that can trigger the whole "stand around and do nothing" part of distrusted allies if they're within 6" (which they likely will be after being summoned). I just don't see this being the new "big thing" to be abused in 7th, but I can always be wrong.

Maelstrom of War Missions/Tactical Objective Mission Cards: Love the concept, love the idea, love the fact that you don't even need to buy the cards to use them. This is frankly one of the BEST things I've seen in this release so far. It's a dynamic way to change how the game is played from turn to turn and I feel does a lot to break up the ol' "grab objectives at the last minute" method of playing the game we've been doing for two editions now. This one gets a thumbs up just for shaking that monkey off our backs. Of course, if you like the monkey (his name is Bobo), you can still play the old missions or one of the MANY alternate ones in the Altar of War or Supplement books. So nothing was invalidated, just expanded on. I like it!

Price/Three Book Combo: Frankly I'm not excited about the price. Yes, I know the rulebooks have been getting progressively thicker over the years but I don't like the price creep that has come with them. And while I'm happy this was NOT $100 USD as guessed I still wish it'd stayed $75 or gotten cheaper. That aside, making the books a three pack is genius. It gives players a smaller rulesbook to carry around and reference, and that makes most of us pretty happy. They just need to hurry up and release it by itself for less than $40 before summer is over to earn real brownie points.

Oh and the special edition is just way too damned much.

FMCs: A single grounding test if they sustain wounds is a nice buff for them because before it was all to easy to drop them (and for a while, dribble them like a basketball). It might annoy armies that relied on grounding FMCs to make things work but if anything related to the rumors regarding snapfire are true I don't see it being too big of a deal if they're slightly harder to drop.

Challenges: I like the overflow aspect. It's a good buff towards armies that want to use challenges effectly, or are required to (CSM). I just hope other things were tweaked to make up for the fact that using a cheap character to "speed bump" a nastier one was changed.

D-Weapons: I'm glad to see that we're seeing it balance back out again so models with invulnerable saves get protection against the attacks more often. Especially when those Invulnerable Saves are usually factored into their points costs. I'm sure Daemon players are more likely to bring their armies to Apoc games now too.

Lords of War on the FOC: We knew it was coming, here's to hoping there is something like a percentage cap like the Heresy books did.

6" Verticle Unit Coherency: I never had issues with the 3" version, but I can't complain about this. Seems fine to me. Makes scratchbuilt terrain less of a pain too I'd suspect.

Split Fire: No Leadership tests? That solves the Astra Militarum quandry right there at least. I'm sure Space Wolves are happy too.

Wound Allocation Rules: I'm not sure how I feel about this. I mean it basically is just like the AP method like 6th edition, only more precise I suppose with how you'll need to approach shooting an enemy unit. I assume most of us will just roll things like we already do, and just resolve them in groups based on weapons instead of AP values just to speed things up.

7+ Explodes: Doesn't fix how easy it is to glance things to death, but at least it no longer means losing your Land Raider on a 4+ to a Melta. I hope Hull Points got buffed or vehicles got armour saves or something to make up for all this.

-2" Charge Distance into Difficult Terrain: MUCH better than before and easier to plan around. Though it does mean you could charge 0" if you roll snake-eyes which is kind of funny.

Everything Scores (for the most part): I have no idea how to feel about this, but with super scoring in the game it does make Troops a LOT more useful than before when it comes to properly holding objectives. I just wonder what they mean by "the most part". Is there something in the core rules that keeps things from scoring we should know about or is it the same old stuff as before? Guess I'll just need to wait for the rulebook on that one.


----------



## kickboxerdog

hey all so if im reading the new wd correct the new rule book comes as 3 books for £50, which look really good.

has there been any talk on a new starter set sa in the wd there a little added section saying dark vengeance will be updated with the new rules in the near future, so does that mean no new starter set??


----------



## Spankinginred

kickboxerdog said:


> hey all so if im reading the new wd correct the new rule book comes as 3 books for £50, which look really good.
> 
> has there been any talk on a new starter set sa in the wd there a little added section saying dark vengeance will be updated with the new rules in the near future, so does that mean no new starter set??


Hmm, £50 I could live with, but the prices I've encountered on other forums £60, £65 and even £75 NO! I hope you are correct.

Well done Zion for your big article above!


----------



## DaisyDuke

I'm confused, will you be able to take formations in a battle forged list?


----------



## Creon

We'll have all details next week.


----------



## humakt

£50 seems a way better price. I'm happy to pay that and will likely pre-order it so I can get reading ASAP. Although I do have a 6th edition tournament to go to in June so may hold of playing the new rules till after then.


----------



## Adramalech

venomlust said:


> May the game survive at least until we see the corpse god ripped out of his chair.


Don't worry. You can write a fanfic about that if it doesn't happen in official 40k lore.

I'll also write a fanfic, but mine will have gratuitous amounts of gay sex and gore described in great detail, for the pleasure of the voyeuristic sadists that the 40k fandom no doubt harbors. It'll be like true blood in the 41st milennium.


----------



## bitsandkits

Adramalech said:


> Don't worry. You can write a fanfic about that if it doesn't happen in official 40k lore.
> 
> I'll also write a fanfic, but mine will have gratuitous amounts of gay sex and gore described in great detail, for the pleasure of the voyeuristic sadists that the 40k fandom no doubt harbors. It'll be like true blood in the 41st milennium.


you should call it 50 shades of dawnstone


----------



## humakt

Adramalech said:


> Don't worry. You can write a fanfic about that if it doesn't happen in official 40k lore.
> 
> I'll also write a fanfic, but mine will have gratuitous amounts of gay sex and gore described in great detail, for the pleasure of the voyeuristic sadists that the 40k fandom no doubt harbors. It'll be like true blood in the 41st milennium.


Its sounds grim and dark :shok:


----------



## kickboxerdog

Spankinginred said:


> Hmm, £50 I could live with, but the prices I've encountered on other forums £60, £65 and even £75 NO! I hope you are correct.


ha ha its def £50 in uk I get my weekly wd on Thursdays.


----------



## Zion

Price confirmations:


----------



## revilo44

im not excited for 7th to be honest, i just got to know the rules for 6th and i thought it would last a bit longer than 2 years .



Adramalech said:


> Don't worry. You can write a fanfic about that if it doesn't happen in official 40k lore.
> 
> I'll also write a fanfic, but mine will have gratuitous amounts of gay sex and gore described in great detail, for the pleasure of the voyeuristic sadists that the 40k fandom no doubt harbors. It'll be like true blood in the 41st milennium.


so your going to a sci fi gay game of thrones then.


----------



## Tawa

So an "Unbound" army is basically pay the points for whatever the fug you want in your army, and play.

Well played GW. You have a thumbs-up from me :good:


----------



## venomlust

Adramalech said:


> Don't worry. You can write a fanfic about that if it doesn't happen in official 40k lore.
> 
> I'll also write a fanfic, but mine will have gratuitous amounts of gay sex and gore described in great detail, for the pleasure of the voyeuristic sadists that the 40k fandom no doubt harbors. It'll be like true blood in the 41st milennium.


You could have just said "I'll also write a fanfic" and I would have known what you'd include :laugh:.


----------



## Adramalech

venomlust said:


> You could have just said "I'll also write a fanfic" and I would have known what you'd include :laugh:.




Also: I'm totally calling it 50 shades of dawnstone, as per bitsandkits's suggestion.

Though I anticipate I'll get about half-way through the third chapter of 50 shades of dawnstone before I get distracted by something shiny... or maybe someone beefy. not sure which one it'll be, but it'll be one of the two.


----------



## Kreuger

Wow. 7th edition sounds *even more* like 2nd edition than ever before.

Psychics phase - check
Army percentages - check
No FOC - check
Pistols in CC - check
Mission cards/tactics cards - check
Core set coming with 3 books dividing up rules, lore, & game - check

I haven't read through the whole thread for all the details, but this seems like a striking about-face for GW. Most of these additions adds things they _intentionally_ threw out when redesigning the game for 3rd edition. (3rd was pretty awful by comparison to 2nd edition and 5th/6th.)

I can't really say I'm sorry though. The points values and FOC have never worked right in editions 3-6. 

Hopefully GW gets these changes right.


----------



## neferhet

Kreuger said:


> Wow. 7th edition sounds *even more* like 2nd edition than ever before.
> 
> Psychics phase - check
> Army percentages - check
> No FOC - check
> Pistols in CC - check
> Mission cards/tactics cards - check
> Core set coming with 3 books dividing up rules, lore, & game - check
> 
> I haven't read through the whole thread for all the details, but this seems like a striking about-face for GW. Most of these additions adds things they _intentionally_ threw out when redesigning the game for 3rd edition. (3rd was pretty awful by comparison to 2nd edition and 5th/6th.)
> 
> I can't really say I'm sorry though. The points values and FOC have never worked right in editions 3-6.
> 
> Hopefully GW gets these changes right.


my same thought. hopefully it won't be as ugly (imo) as 2nd. i hope the good things of 5-6th ed will stay. and i guess it will be so.


----------



## Kreuger

What do you mean by ugly? Art, models, rules?


----------



## Zion

Percentages haven't been confirmed actually.


----------



## Stormxlr

Kreuger said:


> What do you mean by ugly? Art, models, rules?


I think he means the gameplay itself was clunky for whatever reason be it rules, wording or a hodge podge of things.


----------



## NoHeresyOnlyTruth

hahaha suckers making fun of fantasy for getting f-ed over and almost the same crap we got you get now . Prepare for a purple sun crap and needing to buy 10000 models to have a chance with huge cool monsters that are crap .

Should of seen it coming with apoc formations everywhere and larger models poping up


----------



## Zion

NoHeresyOnlyTruth said:


> hahaha suckers making fun of fantasy for getting f-ed over and almost the same crap we got you get now . Prepare for a purple sun crap and needing to buy 10000 models to have a chance with huge cool monsters that are crap .
> 
> Should of seen it coming with apoc formations everywhere and larger models poping up


Apoc formations have been around and since 4th. And I doubt we're going to see the Purple Sun in 40k.


----------



## NoHeresyOnlyTruth

Zion said:


> Apoc formations have been around and since 4th. And I doubt we're going to see the Purple Sun in 40k.


True "I ment on the site that huge battle force you can buy for ultrasmurfs and others like it"

Probly be eyeball of horus and ball of the emperor, instead of purple sun tho. just sayin:angel:


----------



## Varakir

Pre-orders up on the UK site:


http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB...ct.repositoryId&qty=12&sorting=phl&view=table


Fingers crossed they offer a hardback A5 rulebook on it's own soon......


----------



## Zion

NoHeresyOnlyTruth said:


> True "I ment on the site that huge battle force you can buy for ultrasmurfs and others like it"
> 
> Probly be eyeball of horus and ball of the emperor, instead of purple sun tho. just sayin:angel:


Yeah, I don't know if that's going to happen in 7th, but I don't really expect it.

And the giant "one click deals" are hardly a sign that 7th was coming. All of those deals fit inside FOC limits.

Well minus the whole UM Chapter thing, but a single Battle Company fits just fine.


----------



## DeathGlam

Did pistols in combat get confirmed?


----------



## falcoso

Yeah I was going to get the limited edition since I thought it would be around the same price as the alst one, or the gamers edition if there was one (which sadly there isn't) finally had money for it..... then its £200..... nope.....


----------



## locustgate

Sooo is it 7th ed, they got rid of the 6th ed book, but there is no mention of what edition the book, also I just noticed that the book isn't black so then doesn't that mean it's the Big White and Red Book soooo BWaRB, also it looks like they lost 200 pages 432 pages to 208.

EDIT: Guy says "New edition of warhammer 40,000"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0-GErXKpks#t=11


----------



## mrknify

7th edition is available on the Canadian website. As well as new psychic cards andobjective cards.

Best prt you can get the special edition for 400$ Canadian. That's about 200£ 300€ and 350$ us.


----------



## Spankinginred

Adramalech said:


> Don't worry. You can write a fanfic about that if it doesn't happen in official 40k lore.
> 
> I'll also write a fanfic, but mine will have gratuitous amounts of gay sex and gore described in great detail, for the pleasure of the voyeuristic sadists that the 40k fandom no doubt harbors. It'll be like true blood in the 41st milennium.


I'll let my daughter know about your fanfic, I'm sure you'll get her as a fan -she collects Dark Eldar... Nuff said!


----------



## locustgate

mrknify said:


> 7th edition is available on the Canadian website. As well as new psychic cards andobjective cards.
> 
> Best prt you can get the special edition for 400$ Canadian. That's about 200£ 300€ and 350$ us.


*Spits orange soda out*, why would you willingly pay $400 for a book, It's selling for $340 in us (so they are only jacking your price by $10), if it came with a life size bolt pistol and a scantly clad SoB initiate that would be understandable.


----------



## Adramalech

locustgate said:


> *Spits orange soda out*, why would you willingly pay $400 for a book, It's selling for $340 in us (so they are only jacking your price by $10), if it came with a life size bolt pistol and a scantly clad SoB initiate that would be understandable.


^this


----------



## Woodzee316

$140 au here in australia for regular edition of the game rules or if you have an e-reader you can just buy the rules for $80. Or $360 au for the limited edition.
that sucks arse you can buy the rules separately electronically but not physically when it is in a separate book that is just shit. $140 a year after i shell out $126 that is just bullshit. i was prepared for $126 but now they can go jump. we get so screwed here in australia. well i'll be waiting to get it and buying it from overseas and getting it posted here and be cheaper even including the cards.

/end rant


----------



## mrknify

Woodzee316 said:


> $140 au here in australia for regular edition of the game rules or if you have an e-reader you can just buy the rules for $80. Or $360 au for the limited edition.
> that sucks arse you can buy the rules separately electronically but not physically when it is in a separate book that is just shit. $140 a year after i shell out $126 that is just bullshit. i was prepared for $126 but now they can go jump. we get so screwed here in australia. well i'll be waiting to get it and buying it from overseas and getting it posted here and be cheaper even including the cards.
> 
> /end rant


I know how you feel I order my stuff from the states.


----------



## Zion

I don't recall seeing these before (I apologize for the slight fuzziness, I had to resize them because my phone thinks that resizing things down to 1/4 their original size to transfer them to my computer is okay):


----------



## locustgate

So 1 major question, will I have to buy another book in a year? If so then screw it I'm torrenting the book.


----------



## Zion

locustgate said:


> So 1 major question, will I have to buy another book in a year? If so then screw it I'm torrenting the book.


Do you mean core rulebook? Probably not. I don't see anyone supporting that action by GW. If you mean codex, maybe?


----------



## locustgate

Zion said:


> Do you mean core rulebook? Probably not. I don't see anyone supporting that action by GW. If you mean codex, maybe?


Core book, *pessimism* if they keep their release trend they probably will, years in between edition have been going down, 6,5,6,4,4,2 (more 1.change) if it follows that trend then eventually it will be a month in between editions and then a week, and then a day, and then minutes, and then seconds, although that really don't affect me because I'm dropping 40k if they release another one in a year.


----------



## Loki1416

263 Nids at 1500?! That is a LOT of bugs. Hopefully if I ever see that, I've taken a list with a lot of pie plates!


----------



## venomlust

Those Howling Griffons look pretty sweet.


----------



## locustgate

Loki1416 said:


> 263 Nids at 1500?! That is a LOT of bugs. Hopefully if I ever see that, I've taken a list with a lot of pie plates!


I don't have a nid book handy right now but wouldn't it be if you take out the zoanthronpes then they have absolutely NOTHING that can damage a vehicle? It seems the only way that list would work is if your facing an army with only infantry.


----------



## ntaw

locustgate said:


> It seems the only way that list would work is if your facing an army with only infantry.


My buddy plays ~94 footslogging marines at 2k. His bolters would rejoice!


----------



## locustgate

ntaw said:


> My buddy plays ~94 footslogging marines at 2k. His bolters would rejoice!


And my battle suits and armored infantry would have wet dreams for weeks, god emperor I love running over nids and berserkers with devil fish...es?.
It seems like a list that would be fun to face but not really that much chance of winning.


----------



## ntaw

locustgate said:


> It seems like a list that would be fun to face but not really that much chance of winning.


I said the same thing the first time that I faced his list, and he wiped the floor with the bolt-ridden carcasses of my army. There's something to say about having so many models you just can't deal with them all, though I have only faced 'nids a time or two when I first got back into the hobby in the twilight of 5th so know basically nothing about them tactically now.


----------



## Woodzee316

For anyone in Australia, looking to get the new rulebook, Bunker Games have it on pre order for $105 free shipping in victoria also $12 for psychic card set and $9 for the objective cards. Not sure how much postage is through out the rest of Oz. just letting you know guys.


----------



## Sethis

I love the "Unravelling the Immaterium" paragraph where he says that Psykers "weren't being used enough" and "lost out to Captains and Chaplains".

You're... you're not even joking, are you? You have no actual concept of how the hell to play the game.


----------



## Nordicus

Sethis said:


> You're... you're not even joking, are you? You have no actual concept of how the hell to play the game.


Or possibly the players don't. I know plenty of players who would never take a psyker previously, as they didn't think they were good enough.

Yeah, I'm not kidding.


----------



## ntaw

I normally don't take psykers because their typical lack of a base Invulnerable save makes them uselessly squishy in CC for the way my games seem to go. I really only just started using a Librarian and Inquisitor more often, but even then pretty much just for Prescience/Unleash Rage.


----------



## bitsandkits

locustgate said:


> I don't have a nid book handy right now but wouldn't it be if you take out the zoanthronpes then they have absolutely NOTHING that can damage a vehicle? It seems the only way that list would work is if your facing an army with only infantry.


Nothing that can hurt vehicles in 6th edition, this is a different edition, massed ranks of infantry may gain something in this edition ? I dont know for sure just pointing out this is a different rule set so who knows.


----------



## bitsandkits

locustgate said:


> Sooo is it 7th ed, they got rid of the 6th ed book, but there is no mention of what edition the book, also I just noticed that the book isn't black so then doesn't that mean it's the Big White and Red Book soooo BWaRB, also it looks like they lost 200 pages 432 pages to 208.
> 208 is just the rules, the other two volumes actually add an extra 50ish pages of fluff and hobby stuff. But the rules and addional gumph isnt all in one huge brick tome its divided up so you can just carry the rule book.
> EDIT: Guy says "New edition of warhammer 40,000"
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0-GErXKpks#t=11


----------



## locustgate

bitsandkits said:


> Nothing that can hurt vehicles in 6th edition, this is a different edition, massed ranks of infantry may gain something in this edition ? I dont know for sure just pointing out this is a different rule set so who knows.


It would make playing a plague zombie scenario more fun, as my group would be able to field vehicles now.


----------



## Zion

locustgate said:


> Sooo is it 7th ed, they got rid of the 6th ed book, but there is no mention of what edition the book, also I just noticed that the book isn't black so then doesn't that mean it's the Big White and Red Book soooo BWaRB, also it looks like they lost 200 pages 432 pages to 208.
> 
> EDIT: Guy says "New edition of warhammer 40,000"
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0-GErXKpks#t=11


Actually it's thicker than the old rules section. Just "the rules" for 6th totaled 156 pages. The rest of the page count was hobby and fluff materials. The three books combined (and yes they're being sold in a single slip cover) totals 480 pages, clearing the old one by 48 pages.


----------



## mrknify

Zion said:


> Actually it's thicker than the old rules section. Just "the rules" for 6th totaled 156 pages. The rest of the page count was hobby and fluff materials. The three books combined (and yes they're being sold in a single slip cover) totals 480 pages, clearing the old one by 48 pages.


I skipped the last book, I'm actually thinking about buying the new one. Will have to see if anyone puts it on ebay for cheaper than the Canadian price.


----------



## ntaw

mrknify said:


> Will have to see if anyone puts it on ebay for cheaper than the Canadian price.


More like "will have to see if anyone puts just the rulebook up on eBay for basically anything less than $100 CAD" for this Heretic :laugh:


----------



## psactionman

locustgate said:


> *Spits orange soda out*, why would you willingly pay $400 for a book, It's selling for $340 in us (so they are only jacking your price by $10), if it came with a life size bolt pistol and a scantly clad SoB initiate that would be understandable.


I am not suggesting it is worth the price, but it is more than a book. It has two other books normally sold separately, the psychic power cards, objectives, mission cards, and some other useless stuff. Still over priced, but I don't think it is as bad as you are saying it is.


----------



## Woodzee316

some friends and i were discussing the new psychic phase and a question came up "how will force weapons work now?" and that was puzzling as that is done in the combat phase normally, so do you need to attempt to activate the weapon in the psychic phase (rhetorical question)? i wonder if you have to roll a dice to see if it turns on or if it still is automatic and uses up a warp dice? hmm i guess we'll just have to wait for next week to discover how it works.


----------



## locustgate

psactionman said:


> I am not suggesting it is worth the price, but it is more than a book. It has two other books normally sold separately, the psychic power cards, objectives, mission cards, and some other useless stuff. Still over priced, but I don't think it is as bad as you are saying it is.


If you are talking about the Rules, Galaxy of War, and Dark Melinium books those are all sold in the $85 one, cards are $23 total (15+8) so overall that is $292 pissed away, and I still say it needs a life sized SoB initiate, Which I always pictured as the stereotypical catholic school girl.


----------



## venomlust

Hmm. I can't do maths. Nevermind. 

Ninja edit x3!


----------



## MidnightSun

Woodzee316 said:


> some friends and i were discussing the new psychic phase and a question came up "how will force weapons work now?" and that was puzzling as that is done in the combat phase normally, so do you need to attempt to activate the weapon in the psychic phase (rhetorical question)? i wonder if you have to roll a dice to see if it turns on or if it still is automatic and uses up a warp dice? hmm i guess we'll just have to wait for next week to discover how it works.


That's a good question, but I think that activating in the Psychic Phase would make it a lot easier so there's no weirdness with the interaction between Unsaved Wounds and Force Weapons for the purposes of Feel No Pain or any other effect. If you pass in the psychic test, it's an Instant Death weapon that assault phase. If it's countered, it doesn't inflict Instant Death.

Being able to counter Force Weapons would be really nice.


----------



## neferhet

Also, i wonder how Deamons of tzeentch will get their bonus. +3 power dice, maybe?


----------



## Creon

My curiosity is how Shadow in the Warp will be working in this new Phase.


----------



## Zion

New 40k video:


----------



## experiment 626

Dakka has some screen caps on the new Daemonology with the following tidbits available:

1. Grey Knights cannot take Malefic powers.
Non-Daemons suffer Perils on any double. Daemons only suffer Perils on double 6 like normal.

This actually makes the 'Prophet of the Voices' relic from the Crimson Slaughter supplement a decent buy for any CSM army wanting to go crazy summoning Daemons, as it gives the bearer the Daemon rule!

2. Daemons cannot take Sanctic powers.
Non-Grey Knights suffer Perils on any double. Grey Knights only suffer Perils on double 6 like normal.

And psychic vehicles get to cast powers in the new Psychic phase just like a regular psyker does. No idea how Perils will work for them though...
Heck, it would be nice to actually see the new Perils chart and see if it's going to be a real deterant to 6-dicing 'uber spells, or if it'll just be like the Fantasy Miscast table which most players don't fret much over due to the rewards massively out-weighing the supposed risks.


----------



## revilo44

Sounds kinda cool, but what do you lot think is going to happen with dark eldar and tau in the psychic phase?


----------



## Nordicus

revilo44 said:


> what do you lot think is going to happen with dark eldar and tau in the psychic phase


I think they are going to cling to thhose D6 and use them all to deny powers - I'm currently uncertain is you can deny without any of those D6 or if they can only be used to boost your deny.

Regardless, I actually think that they have a higher chance to deny certain important powers.


----------



## raven_jim

All this emphasis on making psychic powers a key part of the game just makes my eldar list better and better, thank you GW  

Looking forward to Saturday now.

This is the first time I've played when a new edition has come out, I can imagine it can cause some heated debates at gaming clubs as I'd imagine some players will still be using the 6th edition rule book?


----------



## Straken's_Fist

raven_jim said:


> All this emphasis on making psychic powers a key part of the game just makes my eldar list better and better, thank you GW


Yeah, and hopefully it's time Tzeentch and my Thousand Sons will rise to finally get some time in the sun! You can bet I will be trying to turn my rubric sorcerers and Horrors into Lords of Change from turn 1 lol Maybe Ahriman will actually be the demi-god sorcerer he is portrayed as in the fluff? We can only hope.


----------



## Ravner298

Straken's_Fist said:


> Yeah, and hopefully it's time Tzeentch and my Thousand Sons will rise to finally get some time in the sun! You can bet I will be trying to turn my rubric sorcerers and Horrors into Lords of Change from turn 1 lol Maybe Ahriman will actually be the demi-god sorcerer he is portrayed as in the fluff? We can only hope.



Summoning is mastery level 3, and only models with the daemonic rule can use malefic daemonology. Meaning the only non daemon psycher that can summon things a ml3 crimson slaughter sorcerer with voice of the prophet.

Edit; unless the 'leaked' picture regarding such things is hogwash.


----------



## Creon

I think anyone can use malefic Demonology except Grey Knights. However, they miscast on ALL doubles, not just double 6.


----------



## mrknify

Creon said:


> I think anyone can use malefic Demonology except Grey Knights. However, they miscast on ALL doubles, not just double 6.


Yes, and daemons cannot use sanctific.


----------



## Creon

Makes me wonder if Santific will be able to Summon Legion of the Damned.


----------



## Sethis

raven_jim said:


> All this emphasis on making psychic powers a key part of the game just makes my eldar list better and better, thank you GW


Especially since Farseers can expend a Charge (a dice from the pool now?) to ignore any and all miscasts. Eldrad is going to be a bit of a beast depending on the new disciplines.


----------



## Straken's_Fist

What? I am pretty sure a Dark Angels psyker summoned a Daemon in the White Dwarf... The way I read it was that being a Daemon you only suffer perils if you roll a double 6, whereas everyone else on any double, with GK's not being able to use it at all. 

So can you cast the summon a Daemon on another model other yourself? If no, then i'll probably be taking more Pink Horrors for my summoning purposes (less risky, as if one horror suffers perils it's no real loss), and my Sorcs i'd only do it with 1 wound remaining in a pinch situation (more risky on a single expensive model). So could you just plant a 20 Horrors in cover and just keep summoning Lords of Change each turn?


----------



## psactionman

locustgate said:


> If you are talking about the Rules, Galaxy of War, and Dark Melinium books those are all sold in the $85 one, cards are $23 total (15+8) so overall that is $292 pissed away, and I still say it needs a life sized SoB initiate, Which I always pictured as the stereotypical catholic school girl.


Don't get me wrong, a life sized SoB would make me buy one. The two extra books are The Dominion of the Imperium and Visions of the Dark Millenium, the latter being $90 on its own.


----------



## Sethis

Straken's_Fist said:


> So can you cast the summon a Daemon on another model other yourself? If no, then i'll probably be taking more Pink Horrors for my summoning purposes (less risky, as if one horror suffers perils it's no real loss), and my Sorcs i'd only do it with 1 wound remaining in a pinch situation (more risky on a single expensive model). So could you just plant a 20 Horrors in cover and just keep summoning Lords of Change each turn?


You can summon a unit of Daemons (basic infantry) without removing a model of any kind, but is WC3. You can summon a Herald by sacrificing a single model from a nearby unit, and summon a Greater Daemon by replacing the model/unit you are casting with - so a unit of 20 Horrors that summons a Lord of Change is removed from play entirely. So if you're going for numbers on the table, it's better to summon Horrors and Heralds than it is to summon Greater Daemons, unless you're on your last wound or whatever.


----------



## experiment 626

Sethis said:


> You can summon a unit of Daemons (basic infantry) without removing a model of any kind, but is WC3. You can summon a Herald by sacrificing a single model from a nearby unit, and summon a Greater Daemon by replacing the model/unit you are casting with - so a unit of 20 Horrors that summons a Lord of Change is removed from play entirely. So if you're going for numbers on the table, it's better to summon Horrors and Heralds than it is to summon Greater Daemons, unless you're on your last wound or whatever.


 Note too that Sacrificed Greaters don't get any upgrades at all, unlike summoned Herald who can take 30pts of upgrades.

Naked Greaters in 40k are about as useful as non-E.Blade toting Kippers in Fantasy... (ie: they're entirely 'meh' for what they cost!)
Casting Sacrifice to turn a Herald or 10 Pinkies into a LoC may sound like a sweet plan, but then you end up realising that what truly makes the LoC so damn scary is the fact he normally buys a pair of Greater Rewards + the Boomstick for S8/ap2 attacks in combat.
The Bloodthirster would honestly be the only Greater I'd ever consider for Sacrifice - he at least comes kitted out with a 3+ save, a 12" ap2 shooting attack, and the 40k version of Killing Blow thanks to his Axe of Khorne.
The rest of the Greaters are just giant bullet magnets by comparison...

What I'm more interested in with these Malefic summoning powers however, is if this means we'll see the new plastic Greater Daemon models that Harry & Hastings mentioned over a year ago!
The current ones are just old & tired and look like complete garbage compared to the rest of DoC range now.
Not to mention that the plastic Daemon Prince stands taller than any Greater Daemon now!:taunt:


----------



## Adramalech

experiment 626 said:


> Note too that Sacrificed Greaters don't get any upgrades at all, unlike summoned Herald who can take 30pts of upgrades.
> 
> Naked Greaters in 40k are about as useful as non-E.Blade toting Kippers in Fantasy... (ie: they're entirely 'meh' for what they cost!)
> Casting Sacrifice to turn a Herald or 10 Pinkies into a LoC may sound like a sweet plan, but then you end up realising that what truly makes the LoC so damn scary is the fact he normally buys a pair of Greater Rewards + the Boomstick for S8/ap2 attacks in combat.
> The Bloodthirster would honestly be the only Greater I'd ever consider for Sacrifice - he at least comes kitted out with a 3+ save, a 12" ap2 shooting attack, and the 40k version of Killing Blow thanks to his Axe of Khorne.
> The rest of the Greaters are just giant bullet magnets by comparison...
> 
> What I'm more interested in with these Malefic summoning powers however, is if this means we'll see the new plastic Greater Daemon models that Harry & Hastings mentioned over a year ago!
> The current ones are just old & tired and look like complete garbage compared to the rest of DoC range now.
> Not to mention that the plastic Daemon Prince stands taller than any Greater Daemon now!:taunt:


I also wish to know the implications malefic powers hold for the plastic greater daemon rumour.


----------



## Zion

The new Allies Chart:









And from Tetrisphreak on Dakka:


> All armies can ally. Come the APOC is desperate allies, plus cannot deploy within 12" at start of game. I think it also hints at taking come the apocalypse allies is only for unbound forces.


----------



## scscofield

Heh GK now are battle buddies with the imperium


----------



## Zion

scscofield said:


> Heh GK now are battle buddies with the imperium


So are Sisters. 

And nids are allies with themselves now.


----------



## Tawa

Zion said:


> And nids are allies with themselves now.


Ooh, Friend! :laugh:


----------



## mrknify

Zion said:


> So are Sisters.
> 
> And nids are allies with themselves now.


And imperial can ally with chaos space marines and knights.....
but knights can't Ally with CSM..... then there is unbound. Knight, heldrake lists inbound.... (my fluff is heresy fluff) time in the warp means nothing!






Tawa said:


> Ooh, Friend! :laugh:


----------



## Straken's_Fist

experiment 626 said:


> Note too that Sacrificed Greaters don't get any upgrades at all, unlike summoned Herald who can take 30pts of upgrades.
> 
> Naked Greaters in 40k are about as useful as non-E.Blade toting Kippers in Fantasy... (ie: they're entirely 'meh' for what they cost!)
> Casting Sacrifice to turn a Herald or 10 Pinkies into a LoC may sound like a sweet plan, but then you end up realising that what truly makes the LoC so damn scary is the fact he normally buys a pair of Greater Rewards + the Boomstick for S8/ap2 attacks in combat.
> The Bloodthirster would honestly be the only Greater I'd ever consider for Sacrifice - he at least comes kitted out with a 3+ save, a 12" ap2 shooting attack, and the 40k version of Killing Blow thanks to his Axe of Khorne.


I don't think you can call a Lord of Change "meh". Even a naked one hits at I6 with AP2 attacks (thanks to smash). Nothing to sneer at. Yes, a crap save like all greater daemons without upgrades, but if he can swoop straight from being summoned that helps with that. I wouldn't dismiss him entirely.


----------



## Zion

From /tg/ (no proof given that they have the book so enjoy the salt):


> -Sanctic:
> Primaris – Banishment -> anti-demon (-1 invuln)
> Gate of Infinity
> Hammerhand
> Str D Vortex.
> Sanctuary, iirc makes demon within 12″ all move through difficult terrain.
> Cleansing Flame (some nova)
> One more spell, you target an opponent, both roll dice and add to ld, if you’re higher than him, he auto losses a W, no saves.
> 
> -Precision shot is a USR now, so guards need 6s to do precision after that Order.
> 
> -Str D now only ignores all saves on a six. If not a six, the Str D weapon profile’s AP is followed. Str D is also assumed to be S10, so T6+ will be safe from ID.
> 
> -Deny the Witch for passive spells, like blessings are denied on a six. However offensive/directed/maledictions spells that target you, is a different matter, your DTW rolls can be improved by brother ofpsyker +1, psyker mastery level being higher than the offensive caster+1 and adamantium will +1. So you could technically go up to a 3+ dtw against offensive powers.
> 
> -Smash, only one attack. rest of it same.
> 
> -Vector Strike. 1A only unless against a flier -then D3, AP2 Ignore Cover.
> 
> -Ignore Cover – No change.
> 
> -ICs cannot be in the same unit as a MC anymore.
> 
> -Telepathy Powers Invisisbilty – makes others snapfire at you. Shrouding – gives you shrouded only.
> 
> Prescience is still a Primaris
> 
> - mc's cant be joined by ICs, flying MCs cannot charge the turn they change flight mode
> 
> -Jump infantry now can use the jumpack both in movement and assault phases. Also it has jink.​
> >Snapshots are at BS1
> 
> >Psyker's level, Adamantium Will... only affect dispelling attempt when you are targeted by the power, dispelling Blessing requires natural rolls of 6
> 
> >Chariots now gives Relentless to the passenger, their rules were totally reworked so that they are more of a single entity with their passenger.
> 
> >Perils table, only a third is a real issue and a decent leadership severely diminish its impact. worse, one effect turns your psyker into superman for a turn. Another drains psychic dice for both players.
> 
> >Most Perils are a leadership test, with different results for success and failure, most of the better successes are lose a wound or hull point, best one gives you 3++ and possibly Smash, Armorbane, and Fleshbane until the start of the next Psychic Phase
> 
> >Imperial forces are all Battle Brothers with each other, non-Imperial seems to have made out relatively worse
> 
> >Battle Brothers share basically everything, Powers, abilities, transports, Warlord traits, Reserve altering effects.
> 
> >Sisters are acknowledged as an Imperial faction in the book (Including for whiners)
> 
> >Immobilized Flyers now have a chance to Crash and Burn
> 
> >Old Aquila Lander crash scenery has rules
> 
> >Gate of Infinity is now a Sanctic power, another is a strength D Vortex, most of the Grey Knight powers might be included as well
> 
> >Now when you activate a Force Weapon, you active all of them in a unit
> 
> >Chariot rider may not be able to disembark
> 
> >Missile Lock apparently effects more than just Blasts now
> 
> >To Deny the Witch you must match your opponent's number of successes, number you have to roll is a 6, having a higher Mastery Level Psyker in the unit dispelling, Adamantium Will, or being within range of a Psychic Hood each give you +1 to your roll, again except for dispelling Blessings
> 
> >Defending player apparently gets to choose how hits are allocated between passenger and Chariot


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Sethis said:


> You can summon a unit of Daemons (basic infantry) without removing a model of any kind, but is WC3. You can summon a Herald by sacrificing a single model from a nearby unit, and summon a Greater Daemon by replacing the model/unit you are casting with - so a unit of 20 Horrors that summons a Lord of Change is removed from play entirely. So if you're going for numbers on the table, it's better to summon Horrors and Heralds than it is to summon Greater Daemons, unless you're on your last wound or whatever.


Gotcha. Well then, Horrors summoning more Horrors and Heralds seems like the way forward. Then summoning a Lord of Change reserved for the sorcerers who are down to 1 wound.


----------



## ntaw

Zion said:


> Vector Strike. 1A only unless against a flier -then D3, AP2 Ignore Cover.


Fucking PLEASE. Only against a Flier 'ignores cover' is fine by me, I'll just use both my Stormravens more often than one so it doesn't get openly ran by Heldrakes...oh...wait....that already happens. Just winning if this is true!!


----------



## Woodzee316

all the imperium battle brothers? my Templar can ally with psykers now? time to get some GK to allies, a whole new world for my BT being able to have blessings cast on them.:good:


----------



## venomlust

> flying MCs cannot charge the turn they change flight mode


Bah, not that one...:angry:


----------



## tyraniddude

agreed


----------



## MetalHandkerchief

Tyranids and Necrons should be allowed to ally. "Allies of mutual disinterest" - aka. if they ran onto a battlefield, they'd make any other army a priority kill.

Also annoyed at the lack of options for Dark Eldar. Chaos should be an option for convenience. But we all know it's just a "streamlined" GW way of saying "yeah we're too lazy to isolate the Chaos factions by god, we're not allowing Chaos + DE because _it might be_ Slaanesh."

Grimdark: the dumbening.


----------



## Akhara'Keth

Here is the full scan from the WD page:

http://tausend-tore.blogspot.de/2014/05/neue-alliierten-matrix.html


----------



## humakt

I like the new look of this new allies list. It seems to get rid of a lot of problems (depending on the actual allies rules).


----------



## Akhara'Keth

humakt said:


> I like the new look of this new allies list. It seems to get rid of a lot of problems (depending on the actual allies rules).


But it is a PitA to read....


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Oh I missed the bit that says: "Any faction can ally with any other" and come the apocalypse doesn't mean you cannot ally anymore...

So guard and DE can still ally with Chaos but with"some serious downsides". I want to know what these downsides are exactly with Come the Apocalypse alliances..


----------



## Straken's_Fist

MetalHandkerchief said:


> Tyranids and Necrons should be allowed to ally..


Seems like you will be able to if you read the article above..


----------



## Akhara'Keth

Straken's_Fist said:


> Oh I missed the bit that says: "Any faction can ally with any other" and come the apocalypse doesn't mean you cannot ally anymore...
> 
> So guard and DE can still ally with Chaos but with"some serious downsides". I want to know what these downsides are exactly with Come the Apocalypse alliances..


There was a rumour somewhere back at Natfka saying it's -2 Ld for units within 12" and they have to take a morale check or else fall back. Even fearless units. But take it with a chunk of salt.


----------



## MidnightSun

Guys, if you want to make a ten-army fustercluck _that badly_, the FOC doesn't affect you. Just play Unbound and stop complaining that the Allies chart has been improved - yeah, ok, now GK get Battle-Brothers with stuff and Wolves/DA or whatever is allowed, but Taudar and Fishmarines are dead and gone and honestly, what were the *really powerful* Allied combinations that didn't involve Tau or Eldar? Beaststar is still around for the few months until they re-write Dark Eldar, but now Fortune can be countered through throwing all of your Warp Charge at it, so it becomes far less reliable (it's hardly unheard of for players to not even roll up Fortune and forfeit then and there, so adding an extra level of defence against it has a pretty strong impact).


----------



## raven_jim

I don't get why imperial space marines and chaos cant ally, they are both marines so I thought they would get along?

3,2,1...


----------



## venomlust

raven_jim said:


> I don't get why imperial space marines and chaos cant ally, they are both marines so I thought they would get along?
> 
> 3,2,1...


----------



## raven_jim

it's the thought that counts


----------



## venomlust

Shit, you've now shifted me to being sympathetic instead of a jerk. I... what are these feelings?! @raven_jim can we become buddies and work on a shrimp boat?


----------



## Zion

From what I understand CtA sounds like it works like Desperate Allies with the added condition that they can't deploy within 12" of each other.


----------



## venomlust

Damn. Sort of puts an axe into the traitor guard army I started. I don't expect them to be battle brothers with my CSM, but that one eye open rule sounds like a total B. Not totally unplayable, of course, but dang.


----------



## Zion

From the comments section of Frontline Games:


> Just got a quick glance in the new rulebook and can confirm a few things:
> - New table for Perils, on a roll of 1 psyker takes a Ld, fail the Ld and the psyker dies instantly and any unit he/she is in takes d6 S6 AP1 hits. Roll a 2 and you loose the power and takes a wound. On the other hand, roll a 6 and you get 3+ invul and Fleshbane.
> - New table for vehicle damage, indeed explodes is 7+ (6 is Immobilised)
> - Santic powers looks alot lite Grey Knights old powers, spotted at least Hammerhand.
> - FMC’s, one ground per phase and only on inflicted wounds. So worst case one test in psychic and one in shooting.
> - Prescience is now 2 warpcharges.
> - Battlebrothers, same as before BUT you can embark on your bro’s transport.


----------



## Zion

From Twitter (via Dakka):


----------



## ntaw

Zion said:


> Battlebrothers, same as before BUT you can embark on your bro’s transport


pleasepleaseplease...

Wonder what that 'Force' column is all about. Maybe Force Weapons? Only Daemons don't have access it seems.


----------



## Zion

ntaw said:


> pleasepleaseplease...
> 
> Wonder what that 'Force' column is all about. Maybe Force Weapons? Only Daemons don't have access it seems.


Well Tau, Necrons and Sisters too since they're not even ON the list. 

And it's probably Force Weapons, which are (in the fluff) anti-daemon weapons.


----------



## The Sturk

And all of the sudden, the Balestar Relic from the Crimson Slaughter supplement becomes near-useless.
@Zion, Tyranids aren't there either.

I assume Orks will also be getting their own Psychic Powers list when they are updated, since they can't take much else at the moment.


----------



## mrknify

You would think eldar would get biomancy

And what do they mean orks dont get pyromancy? There guns dont work for anyone else.....


----------



## venomlust

The Sturk said:


> And all of the sudden, the Balestar Relic from the Crimson Slaughter supplement becomes near-useless.


Yeah, I thought the same thing on reading it. Maybe we only have Divination checked because of the possibility of using the Balestar of Mannon. That would be a little stupid, though. Hmm. I wonder if there will be a sea of errata released as a flood when the new BRB drops.


----------



## Zion

From the 40k Daemons Blog:


----------



## Nordicus

Noooo Puppetmaster is gone  Poor Be'Lakor. 

On the other hand, Ironarm is now a straight +3 instead of +D3.


----------



## Spankinginred

raven_jim said:


> I don't get why imperial space marines and chaos cant ally, they are both marines so I thought they would get along?
> 
> 3,2,1...


What if they are heretic (codex) Marines who are just turning to chaos? Then surely they could be allied to each other? Did the first Astartes that turned to the chaos gods decide to dump all those nice toys (LR Crusader & Speeders etc) in favour of spikey armour?
Imagine the conversation when it happened
"Horus Sire, what shall we do with these Land Raider Crusaders, paint them with your marksl?"
"No cut 'em up and make spikey things with them, then adorn our armour in the most awkward fashion with your works Master of Armours!"


----------



## Zion

Let's go ahead and just drop the discussions on if Marines should or should not ally with CSM before it turns into an angry shouting match. Thank you.

Back on topic, from /tg/ so enjoy that salty fresh taste:


> warlord traits are:
> 
> Skilled fighter:
> 1. the warlord has the counter attack special rule.
> 2. the warlord has the furious charge special rule.
> 3. the warlord hase the outflank special rule.
> 4. the warlord gains 1 victory point for each charactermodell he kills in a challenge.
> 5. the warlord has the feel no pain special rule.
> 6.the warlord has the fearless and it will not die special rule.
> 
> Skilled Leader:
> 1. all allied units within 12" can use the warlords LD.
> 2. all enemys within 12" of the warlord have to use the lowest LD.
> 3.the warlord and all friendly units within 12" of the warlord have the move through cover special rule.
> 4. the warlord and all friendly units within 12" add +1" on run and assault moves.
> 5. the warlord and all friendly units within 12" reroll failed to hit rolls of 1 in the shooting phase.
> 6. the warlord and all friendly units within 12" reroll failed to hit rolls of 1 in the assault phase.
> 
> Skilled Tactican:
> 1.as long as your warlord is alive you can discard 2 mission objectives per turn instead of 1.
> 2. one use only: declare at the end of one of your turns. if you declare the warlord trait your enemy has to discard one random mission objective of his.
> 3.obtain a additional mission objective at the start of your first turn.
> 4. when declaring mission objectives in your first turn you can select to discard up to all your mission objectives and draw new ones.
> 5.as long as your warlord is alive you can reroll the victory point result that you get for each mission objective archived.
> 6. for all tactical secured tactical mission objectives x (x is 1-6) you archive you gain a additional victory point.


----------



## Zion

From Natfka:


> Perils of the Warp
> 1. Dragged into the Warp: Psyker takes a leadership test, if passed suffers 1 wound or glancing hit no saves.if failed he is removed as a casualty and his unit takes d6 S6 AP1 hits. The hits come from the psyker for allocation
> 2. Mental Purge: Psyker suffers 1 wound/glancing hit no saves. randomly select one power from the psyker. its lost for the rest of the game.
> 3. Power Drain: Psyker suffers 1 wound/glancing hit no saves. if its the psychic phase, both players lose d3 warp charge points
> 4. Psychic Backlash: Psyker suffers 1 wound/glancing hit no saves.
> 5. Empyric Feedback: Psyker takes a leadership test. if failed Psyker suffers 1 wound/glancing hit no saves. If passed no effect.
> 6. Warp Surge Psyker takes a leadership test. if failed Psyker suffers 1 wound/glancing hit no saves. If passed psyker gains a 3+ invul, fleshbane, armour bane, and smash until the next friendly psychic phase.


----------



## elmir

Sanctic feels extremely meh... Especially that primaris!  

What the hell is that, why is that warp charge 3??? Hammerhand as primaris would have been so much better and would have made a lot more sense... -.-

Also, 2 warp charge for prescience now stings.


----------



## Creon

I think enfeeble and Hemorrhage would be, well, nasty


----------



## Sethis

I think they've done a good job of fixing the most broken powers and adding in some nice new ones, although Levitation and Sanctuary both make me cringe at the possible abuses...

I want to now see the new BA codex to see if we can get 2+/2++ FnP Hammernators that reroll saves, because frankly that'd be hilarious.

I'm not sold on the changes to how powers are resolved and denied, but the powers themselves seem reasonable (time will tell on the Summoning ones, I think).


----------



## ntaw

It just occurred to me that I'm the only person in my group that uses psykers. Hopefully some of these goodies help to spur my compatriots into building up their armies, otherwise hey! New phase for me.

Oh, and Prescience being Warp Charge 2 now makes me like Unleash Rage from the Blood Angel codex even more.


----------



## Cougar

Eldar casting the malefic deck and summoning slaanesh daemons will be awkward.... with ancient doom n all. Altho cursed earth would boost the avatar's ++ save nicely


----------



## Kroothawk

CSM can cast Sanctic, SM and Eldar can summon Slaanesh Daemons, but Tyranids can't biomorph but still can get perils of the warp? 

And Tau would rather fight alongside Necrons than Imperial Guard?

This edition is not only end of days for the rules system, but also for the 40k fluff.


----------



## Zion

Kroothawk said:


> CSM can cast Sanctic, SM and Eldar can summon Slaanesh Daemons, but Tyranids can't biomorph but still can get perils of the warp?


If you read the Tyranid codex they explain why they "Perils". Just replace "sucked into the warp" with "head asplode" and it's right on point.



Kroothawk said:


> And Tau would rather fight alongside Necrons than Imperial Guard?


OR the Imperium would rather not fight along side Tau (as a generic whole) and that's why they ally with them worse than Tau and Crons.

Though Guard really should have been their own allies section just to let them whore themselves out as they will.



Kroothawk said:


> This edition is not only end of days for the rules system, but also for the 40k fluff.


So new edition, same old complaints? :laugh:


----------



## Zion

From Dakka:


> So got the book. Will jot down the things I notice
> There is now a start of turn which is specfically before movement
> Mastery level governs how many spells you can attempt to cast per psyhic phase as well as how many spells you generate. Psykers that take all their spells from one table know the sig spell. So lvl 1';s will know the sig and another random spell but you can only cast 1.
> Psykers can know the same spells (which is a big difference form fantasy)
> Perils table is pretty much take a wound with no saves of any kind, plus another feature, the rumours are true for these (on 1 you do a ld test, pass you take a wound, fail removed from play).
> Something chew just asked, it is indeed correct IC's cannot join units that contain MCs or vehicles....
> snap shots are bs1 still
> Overwatch is still as it is now, no test to do it, no penatly for doing it
> Charging through terrain is -2 to distance rolled and still int1
> Multi assault. Still the same up to this point
> A charging model is not permitted to move into base contact with a model in a secondary target, unless it cannot move into base contat with a unegaged model in primary target (think thats different?)
> The wording for jet pack thrust move is still the same, in that it describes the jet pack unit. Cannot find anything to explain what a jet pack unit is....
> FMC's cannot charge is they have changed flight mode that turn.
> swooping is 12 to 24 still, 90degree turn before it moves, still run 2d6, grounding is still on a 1 or 2 and suffering a wound has to test end of phase but if grounded can charge.
> Flyers now, if immobilsed crash and burn on a 1 or 2,
> Ignoring the rest of the vehicle section for now (yes super heavies are in)
> Excess wounds are indeed transferred to the unit from challenges
> Ignoring terrain for now
> Deployements are still the same
> 'Night fighting is just everyone has stealth
> FMCS, zooming flyers or units in them are not scoring, claimed buildings are SCORING LOL
> With reserves, I am struggling to find how much you can reserve, it doesnt actually say!
> force weapons are now acitvated in the psyhic phase, one test for the unit
> Dedicated transports can now infiltrate
> IC's cannot infiltate with a unit unless he has infiltrate as well
> Jink is 4+ but can only fire snap shots until end of their next turn
> You need a 6 to hit for precision shot,
> ignores cover is no cover saves against wounds pens or glances
> power weapons are the same
> Psyhic powers
> Iron arm doesnt give EW anymore,
> enfeeble is minus 1 str and toughness treats all terrain as difficult
> Endurance is warp charge 2, targets friendly unit, they gain EW, FNP 4+ and relentless wow
> rest are pretty much the same, the numbers have changed though (i.e endurance is now 5)
> Prescience is wc2 now, 12inch range gives re roll to hit still
> Foreboding is the same
> Forewarning is the same
> perfect timing is the same
> Pre cog is the same
> Misfortune, is different, all attacks that target that unit have the rending special rule... wow
> Scriers gaze is you can now re roll the reserves roll outflank and mysterious objective
> Daemonology we all know from leaks
> santic no 6 is vortex of doom, str d small blast
> pyro is still crap
> Telekinesis, no gate....
> replaced with levitation
> targets the psyker he may move 12inches... they then cannot charge
> psyhic malestrom is no 6, wc3, str 10 ap1 large blast barrage
> Telepathy
> Dominate the same
> mental fort, the same
> terrify, -1 ld, treats all units as having fear, and must take moral check end of phase, no longer removes fearless
> Shourding, new power, gives pskyer and all units within 6 shrouded
> Invis, all units targetting the unit with it cast on can only snap shot at it
> Hallicunation, the same?





> Something chew just asked, it is indeed correct IC's cannot join units that contain MCs or vehicles....





> Ok then d weapons.
> 
> 1 nothing happens
> 
> 2 -5, vehicles suffer penerating hit which causes d3 HP's
> Models suffer auto wound and d3 wounds
> 
> 6 vehicles, pen hit, d6+6 HP's
> Models, auto wound d6+6 wounds, no saves of any kind





> To deny the witch, you need to nullify all fo the warp charge points that were successfully harnessed by the pysker when he passed his test
> 
> So if I cast a power and roll 5 4+ you need to deny 5 times.
> 
> 
> To make a deny the witch, select one of your units that was the target of the enemys psyhic power. You will then need to expand a number of warp charges, declare how many you will spend and remove them from your pool and roll them, apply any of the following
> 
> 
> Additions are
> The target unit contains pysker (inc piliot brotherhood etc)
> 
> ML greater then the pysker manifesting the power
> 
> Adamanitum will
> 
> To deny the witch on a blessing, or something which doesnt target one of your units, it is a stright 6 needed, no modifers


RE: Changes to Jump Infantry:


> No its one or the other (move or assault), no jink





> no unit can attempt to manifest the same power more then once per phase. So no having say screamer council or seer council spam the same power to draw your DTW dice out.
> 
> Nothing capping re rollable saves.
> 
> Checked again and the powers you have access to are in the dex's, no mention in the book of who has access to what bar the malefic and santic tables,
> 
> 
> Automatically Appended Next Post:
> Vector strikes and smash as per the rumours, one vector only on ground targets, ap2 no cover at str. Smash is always ap2 but if you smash dbl str and re roll armour pen





> Ally rules are pretty much the same,come the apoc cannot deploy with 12 but then treated as DA's after.one eye open rule still in there
> 
> [RE: # of dice you can use to manifest a psychic power]: No limit on how many dice.





> Do glances still cause automatic HP loss?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> You now deduct all HP's lost then roll on the damage table, this sounds like you can glance a vehicle to death before you roll on the table.
Click to expand...




> Soul blaze is awesome in 6th, killing off those last few kroot or pinging more wounds on guard is worth it., it is still the same for 7th





> Only scout cannot charge game turn 1, inflitrate cannot charge their first turn, couldnt see any other restrictions.





> Any ability to charge out of a stationary transport vehicle?
> 
> 
> 
> Only if it is assault vehicle
Click to expand...




> I answered that, only one vector strike on ground targets, otherwise d3














> Yes you can peril and die and power still works (unless it targets psyker) you can peril and fail to cast the power.


----------



## Zion

More from MarkyMark on Dakka:



> Ok, so the banshees in raider, if its a DT you cannot deploy in there, the restriction that only units that bought the DT can deploy in there is still there. But yes BB's can embark on allied transports.
> 
> Hollismason. No if you peril you resolve the perils stright away, the sequence is this.
> Select psyker and power
> Delcare target
> Take pyshic test (this is where you can peril)
> Deny the witch
> Resolve power.
> 
> So if you peril and die you wont get the chance to resolve the power.
> 
> 
> Here is the quote from page 24 for the pyshic powers
> 
> No unit can attempt to manifest the same psyhic power more then once per phase
> &
> Under pysker and psychic power (in the sequence table)
> ..... select a psyhic power known to the selected unit that the unit has not already attempted to manifest in this psychic phase.
> 
> Also, conjured units are scoring unless otherwise noted.
> 
> Skilled rider and hit and run are the same. (skilled rider still adds +1 to jink save only).
> 
> Ok, think this will cover the conjured units and allies: The allies matrix shows the levels of alliance between units that have different factions in the same army.
> 
> No cannot assault from outflank and can only assault if its a assault vehicle (already answered).
> 
> 
> Reading it again, it does look like you can reserve as much as you like. There is now a distincation between rolling for reserves and moving them on. You roll for reserves start of turn then you must move your reserves on first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did any of the special rules change?
> 
> 
> 
> Too many to go through dude. Yes some have changed (the rumoured ones vector jink etc).
> 
> DT can infilitrate I think i said, but only if the unit inside has infiltrate.
> 
> Yes jink is 4+.
> 
> It looks like he can start in reserve in a non DT
> 
> Fnp is 5+
> detachments have been answered, can take as many as look as you meet the miniumum requirements (1 hq 2 troops)
> 
> Smash has been answered, 1 attack dbl str re roll to pen.
> 
> DT's in troop selection has been answered
> 
> Shrouded is +2 to cover save still
> 
> The mastery (getting sig for free) is for every psyker
> 
> Yes you can still default to primiars
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you able to use a Consolidation move to move into base contact with an enemy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A glance takes off a HP, does a Pen take off 2 HP?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1HP
> 
> NF [Night Fight] gives everyone stealth, no mention of ranges so thats a big change.
> 
> Barrage is the same except all wounds from mutliple barrage comes from the first shot only.
> 
> Wound allocation from shooting has changed as per the rumours
> 
> Jink, you have to declare before rolls to hit are made, you can still assault after but can only snap shot
Click to expand...

From Natfka:


> via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
> No more Double Force Org at 2k points.
> When making a Battle Froged army, you can have as many force orgs as you want. So at 1k points, if you want 3 ICs, you'd just need 6 troops (divided evenly) to still count as "bound" in order to maintain your Objective Secured rule, etc.
> 
> Being able to ally with yourself is just an extension of this, because it lets you alternatively take a 3rd HQ, needing only 1 troop for his allied detachment.
> 
> This is relevant, why?
> 
> Many new things will specify "This model's detachment" in the near future. Unbound armies do not have detachments, even though they are one entity. So some wargear, or special rules won't work in unbound, rewarding use of the forge organization chart as a bonus, more so than a punishment to unbound (I'm sure some people will just see this as a negative, and not the positive as is the nature of the internet).
> 
> Most Warlord traits won't specify detachment, and will still apply globally to the army (or based on range, etc as it is now).
> 
> This is also a subtle way to affect formations, which count as their own detachment outside of the Force Organization chart. While an army may remain "bound" despite exceeding certain limits via an additional Formation, the Formation represents and operates as a self contained entity.
> 
> This will also limit ally shenanigans somewhat as allies are their own detachment.
> 
> Essentially: A bound army can have any number of detachments now, one must be listed as primary (from which your Warlord is drawn, so no taking multiple detachments and picking a Warlord based on scenario or opponent). Detachments must still follow the Force Organization chart, be they a normal army or allied detachment, or must be formations.
> 
> Unbound armies throw this out, and you just have all your models in one big mishmash, don't count as a detachment for rules that specify "this detachment" and just pick a warlord out of all the possible HQs. This freedom comes at the cost of objective secured and the rerolled warlord trait, and potentially other things down the line specific to codexes.
> 
> A hint as to what that very last line means? Imagine your HQ getting bonuses if the compulsory troops chosen for his detachment are a specific unit, or elites allowed to be taken as compulsory troops only in their detachment.


Also from Natfka:


> *via an anonymous source on Faeit 212*
> This was unexpected, take a look at these.
> 
> Shrine of Aquila
> Terrain Type: Ruins
> the ruins are difficult terrain and all models inside receive a 4+ cover save regardless if they are 25% obscured.
> 
> Rules: Armies of the Imperium can re-roll failed morale checks if any models in their unit are inside the ruin. Any others get Hatred (armies of the imperium)
> 
> Manufactorum
> Terrain Type: Ruins
> the ruins are difficult terrain and all models inside receive a 4+ cover save regardless if they are 25% obscured.
> 
> Rules: Models in the Manufactorum that are firing weapons that have the "gets hot" rule, can re-roll failed saves from wounds inflicted with the Gets Hot rule.


From Warseer:


> Terrain has seen some tweaking. There is no Area Terrain, for instance. Each kind of purchasable terrain kit that GW sells has its own unique rules. Moonscape craters, for instance, provide only a 6+ cover, and are -not- difficult ground! In general, -moving- through difficult terrain is entirely unchanged. Assaulting through it takes 2 off your highest roll, but is otherwise the same. The generic Mysterious Terrain table is a thing of the past, but future Terrain kits may be released that have the Mysterious Terrain rule attached them... in such instances, they will have their own unique tables. The Crashed Aquila Lander kit, for instance, has a table unique to it.
> 
> Cover, by and large, is unchanged. Focus Fire, as a rule, is no more; and cover saves are granted on a model by model basis. Is it in cover (25% obscured?) from the shooters POV? If so, then yes, you get a cover save. If not, then no. The exceptions to this are clearly defined. Ruins, always grant cover if you are -inside- them, regardless if you're physically obscured or not. Same for Twisted Copses (citadel wood) and Craters.
> 
> +1 cover save for vehicles if you can see a part of the vehicle, (therefore allowing you to shoot it) but you can't see the facing of the vehicle that you lay in arc of is still in, just as it was before. The rumor that vehicles could not claim cover from Infantry was a falsehood; however Vehicles are the exception to the above "if you're -in it- you get cover" rule associated with Ruins, woods, and craters. They must still be 25% obscured to claim cover.


----------



## Zion

More from Warseer:


> Vehicle Wreckage (0 hull points) is, you leave the vehicle in place. It is now Difficult Terrain. Unless otherwise noted, a model taking cover behind Difficult Terrain gets a 5+ cover save. Explodes results, on the other hand, to not instruct you to place a crater. You simply explode, and remove the model (after resolving the explosion effects)
> 
> Ruins, and the overall -absence- of "Area Terrain" do not provide you with a +2 cover for going to ground within them. They are difficult, they provide 4+ cover for those inside, regardless if they are 25% obscured. Nothing more. Now...the specific Ruins...Basilica Administratum, Sanctum Imperialis, Shrine of the Aquila....they are the exact same...but each have their own unique special rule. You and your opponent may choose to ignore these rules.
> 
> The datasheet rules in Stronghold Assault for each piece of terrain is used for those pieces. Defense Lines and Barricades, in general, provide a 4+ cover. Defense Lines (aegis and wall of martyrs) provide +2 to cover if you go to ground behind them/within them...so there is still plenty of 2+ cover. Walls, barricades, and defense lines you are behind (in contact of) count you as being in contact with an enemy who charges them. (i.e. that enemy need not charge all the way to your models, just the barricade they are hiding behind)
> 
> I can find no reference to a limit on how many units may be held in Reserves.
> Nightfighting has been simplified to be an option that either player can invoke in a mission where that rule is used. If neither does so, there is no Night Fighting. If one does, it is rolled for only on game turn 1. On a 4+ -everything- has Stealth. Simple...no?
> Each piece of purchasable Citadel Terrain has its own unique rules. Sanctum Imperialis, for instance, or Moonscape, or "Twisted Copse" as they call the Woods. Shrine of the Aquila...all have unique rules.
> Also, there are no longer any guidelines on restrictions or maximums for amount of terrain on a battlefield, or how to deploy it. It is left up to player preference and agreement. (which I vastly prefer)
> 
> Factions is a term that refers to what most players are accustomed to calling "Race" or sometimes more vaguely, "Army"; but is perhaps better interpreted as "Codex". Imperials is -not- a Faction. Adepta Sororitas, Astra Militarum, Imperial Knights, and each type of loyal Space Marine are all individual Factions; for instance.
> 
> The only time this is of particular import is when you are building a Battleforged Army; as your "Combined Arms Detachment" (what we recognize as the standard FOC) must consist of units only from a single Faction (codex)... or, alternatively, -no- Faction. (an option that I suspect will become available somewhere down the line) Savvy?
> 
> Furthermore, your "Allied Detachment" (which is identical to what we know already) must include units only from a single Faction, and that this Faction must be a different one from your "Primary Detachment".
> 
> All in all, it looks as though Combined Arms Detachment, and Allied Detachment are the -only- detachments so far...but that there will be others...and they will have their own, unique, FOCs. They will also have their own requirements and Command Benefits. Some Detachments, for instance, may have the requirement of needing to consist of units taken solely from the Orks Faction...
> 
> Formations, consequently, are also Detachments, but of a very special kind. Formations, consequently, are the -only- kind of Detachment that an Unbound army may take.
> 
> Lastly, with regards to Factions, is that each Codex Supplement is specifically the -same- Faction as the Codex that it is a Supplement for. Codex: Clan Raukan -is- the same Faction as the Space Marines Faction. Codex: Iyanden is the same Faction as the Eldar Faction. So yeah, you can't have an Allied Detachment of Crimson Slaughter to your Primary Detachment of Chaos Space Marines...but you really don't need to...you can take a Crimson Slaughter Combined Arms Detachment instead.
> 
> [USRs]Some have been altered for simplicity. Split Fire and Counter Attack, for instance, no longer require the Ld test they did before. Most are identical, but some have been tweaked. Rampage, for instance, no longer grants any benefit in the case of a Disordered Charge. The best change is that most of the rules are very clearly written, with regards to how they interact with one another, obscure rules, and special situations. Most of the USRs are entirely self-contained, and do not require that you reference other sections of the book to decipher them. Precisions Shots is now a USR, rather than an addendum attached to the Character section. Vector Strike is 1 hit, or d3 against things high in the air. All in all, nothing ground breakingly different.
> 
> Soulblaze is unchanged.
> 
> Deepstriking vehicles count as moving Combat Speed, rather than Cruising.
> 
> Walkers have Hammer of Wrath, and neither they, nor Monstrous Creatures, nor anyone else have a forbiddance on climbing up levels of ruins...at least not that I have found.


----------



## Zion

From a comments thread on 3++ (link):


> Most Important Rule still exists.
> 
> Turn is start of your turn, movement, psychic, shooting, assault, end of turn.
> 
> Turn still refers to player turn.
> 
> True Line of Sight still exists.
> 
> Unit coherency is 2" as per normal; 6" vertically.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> has MC and multitrackers change for the purpose of shooting at shooting phase or overwatch
> 
> 
> 
> The wording is the same "in shooting phase"
> 
> Psykers can know more than their mastery level of powers ONLY if stated otherwise. Otherwise number is as per mastery level.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the basic rules for casting psychic powers? (Is it 4+ per die and need "successes" equal to the spell's WC, as rumored?) Is there any limit on power dice or dispel dice per turn?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 4+ per die; need X successes where X is WC level
> 
> D6+masterys for power; D6 for dispel (each D6 is =)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do Snap Shots function?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can units consolidate into new combats? If so, how exactly does it work?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No
> 
> Psychic focus – generate all powers from one discipline (even one power); gain primars. If you gain another power from another discipline, lose psychic focus. Powers not part of a discipline do not count against this.
> 
> Chaos psychic focus – mark of chaos or being a daemon of a particular chaos god = auto primaris of that god in addition to others.
> 
> Powers generated beofre game and done openly. YOu choose the order generated.
> 
> Same as before – choose a discipline, roll a D6.
> 
> Generating warp charges – player turn rolls a D6; each player gains D6 warp charges. Player turn adds all mastery levels of psychic units (this includes!!!!!!! psychic pilot and brotherhood of psykers).
> 
> Attempt to manifest psychic powers until warp charge pool is 0. Cannot ATTEMPT to manifest same power twice.
> 
> Delcare a target and make a psy test followed by a deny the witch.
> 
> two or more 6s = perils.
> 
> Cannot psy power target a unit in a transport.
> 
> Taking psy test – declare how many warp charges you are spending and then remove from pool. Roll a number of D6 equal to points expended and for each 4+, you get one Warp charge point. If total is greater than or equal to the cost for the power, the psy test is successful.
> 
> Deny the witch is essentially the same (6+, +1 for being a psyker, +1 for higher mastery level, 1+ Adamtin will) but must equal or exceed the number of successful warp charges.
> 
> You can nullify blessings and conjurations; same process but without bonuses.
> 
> Psy hoods allow the wearer if within 12" to attempt to nullify the power as normal. Can only be used inside a vehicle if against vehicle.
> 
> All armies can generate from Daemonolgy except Tyranids. [Zion's Note: And non-psyker armies obviously]
> 
> GK can generate Santic as normal but none from Malefic. Other psy on Santic = perils on any doubles.
> 
> Daemon rule psykers can manifest Malefic as any other but not from Santic. Other psy = perils on any doubles.
> 
> Perils – roll D6; randomly applied for units with brotherhood.
> 
> 1) ld test; pass = 1 wound/ glance with no saves of any kind; failed – removed from play and unit suffers D6 S6 AP1 hits (wound allocation from psyker
> 2) 1 wound / glance no save; randomly select one power and power is lost
> 3) 1 wound / glance no save; if currently psy phase roll D3 – number of warp charges lost from both players pool
> 4) 1 wound / glance no save
> 5) Ld test; suffers 1 wound / glance if failed; if passed – no ill effects
> 6) ld test; fail = 1 wound / glance; pass = 3+ invul, fleshbane, armourbane, smash until next friendly psy phase
> 
> weapons are fired individually within unit
> 
> BS6+ still works as before
> 
> Snap shot BS can be modified but only if rule states can modify snap shot BS
> 
> WOund allocation is the same – closest to closest.
> 
> 25% is still cover percentage needed [Zion's Translation: Models need to be at least 25% obscured to claim cover?]
> 
> no changes to weapon types that i can see
> 
> Cannot declare charges against unreachable units or units it cannot see.
> 
> Overwatch is the same.
> 
> 2D6 still for charge distance.
> 
> -2" for charging through terrain
> 
> You CANNOT consolidate into combat. Same as before.
> 
> Morale appears the same.
> 
> Unit types the same
> 
> FMCs:
> -Deployment same. CANNOT charge the turn you change flight modes.
> -If suffered one or more unsaved wounds during a phase; must take grounding test. 3+ all good, 1-2 as normal.
> -You can be grounded and then charge the next turn.
> 
> All garg creatures have stomp and unstoppable.
> 
> Vehicle movement is the same as is combat speed and cruising speed. Stationary = all weapons. Combat = one plus snap shots; Crusising = all snap
> 
> Ordnance firing from vehicle = all others snap shots.
> 
> Flat out is the same.
> 
> Hull points are the same.
> 
> VD cha(r)t
> 1-3 shaken
> 4 stunned
> 5 weapon destroyed
> 6 immobilised
> 7 explodes (S4 within D6")
> 
> AP2 + 1 to damage chart; AP1 + 2
> 
> Vehicles are WS1
> 
> Rear armor in assault
> 
> Glancing counts as 1 wound and pen as 2 wounds for combat results
> 
> Emarking / disembarking is the same.
> 
> Transports bought for units count as their respective FoC
> 
> CHANGE – damage results of shaken/stunned/imob/weapon destroyed = Ld test for embarked passengers, if failed can only snap shot
> 
> Jink – declare before to hit rolls are made, all models gain a 4+ cover save but can only snap shot (during next shooting phase)
> 
> Cannot charge from stationary vehicles
> 
> Dozer blades +1 to AV WHEN RAMMING
> 
> Wounds from challenge carry over but the challenge remains ongoing until end of combat phase.
> 
> USRs:
> 
> 
> Acute senses – same
> AWill – same
> ATSKNF – no more extra 3" on regroug
> Assault vehicle – can assult from vehicle unless it arrived from reserve that turn
> Armourbane – roll additional D6 for armor pen
> Blasts – same with apoc crap thrown in
> Blind – failed I; WS/BS1 until end of their next turn
> Brotherhood – covered
> Bulky / Very / Extremely – 2/3/5 for transport capacity
> Barrage – same
> Deep Strike – same
> Concussive – I1 if hit by this until end of next assault phase
> Counter-attack – same
> Crusader – 2 dice for run, pick one; +D3 for sweeping advance
> Daemon – 5+ invul and fear
> D-weapon – 1 = nothing; 2-5 = pen hit with D3 HP; D3 wounds; 6 = pen hit D6+6 HP or wounds – no saves only from 6
> EW – immune to instant death
> Fear – Ld test; if failed WS1 for remainder of fight sub-phase
> Fearless – same
> FNP – 5+ same
> Fleet – same
> Fleshbane – Same
> Gets Hot – same
> Force – psy power as discussed
> Furious Charge – +1S; no if disorderd charge
> Graviation – same as SM book
> Hammer of Wrath – models strength
> Hatred – same
> Haywire – same
> H&R – same
> Ignores cover – Same
> Instant death – same
> Independent Characters – WAIT FOR IT - cannot join infiltrate units if it does not have it. thanks for answering half the question. dicks however this to me identifies that an IC can confer it to a unit since they restricted only ICs joining if they do not have it; cannot join MCs
> Infiltrate – same (as is outflank)
> Interceptor – same but nothing to help shooting at ground targets
> IWND – same
> Jink – discussed already
> Lance – vehicle armour values count as max of 12
> Master-crafted – same
> Mighty Bulwark – same
> Melta – says against vehicle but otherwise same (im noting this as armourbane says armor values; not vehicle armour values)
> Missile Lock – reroll to hit rolls when one use only weapons; D6" scatter instead of 2D6" for one use only
> Monster Hunter – same
> Move trhough Cover – not slowed by charging through difficult terrain; Tyranids REJOICE; auto pass dangerous
> Night Vision – ignore Night Fight
> Pinning – one or more from a weapon once firing unit has finished (one per unit)
> Poisoned – same
> PotMS – cannot be used if flat out or smoke lauchers used
> Precision Shot – same
> Preferred Enemy – same
> Psy Pilot – discussed
> Psyker – discussed
> Rage – +2 on charge
> Rampage – +D3 in fight subphase if outnumbered in combat; cannot gain if disorderd charge
> Relentless – same
> Rending – same
> Repel the enemy – charge on turn disembarked from building
> Sentry Defense System – can auot fire with weapons even if unoocupied
> Shred – re-roll failed to wounds
> SHrouded – +2 cover
> Skilled Rider – +1 cover to Jink, ignore dangerous
> SKyfire – normal BS against air; snap against ground
> S&P – same
> Smash – all attacks AP2 and can choose to replace with 1 Smash attack at double strength and can re-roll armor pen
> Sniper – same
> Scout – same looks like
> Soul Blaze – same
> Specialist Weapon – same
> Split Fire – no ld check required
> Stealth – +1 cover
> Strafing run – same
> Strikedown – same
> Stubborn – Same
> Superosnic – same
> Swarms – same
> Tank Hunters – against vehicles
> Templates – looks same
> Torrent – same
> Twinlined- same
> Twohanded – no +1A
> Unwiedly – I1 unless MC/Walker
> Vector Dance – second pivot
> Vector Strike – 1 hit unless FMC or Flyer. AP2 at strength and random allocation. Ignores cover. counts as shooting a weapon but not against a target (i.e. can shoot another waepon at a different target)
> Vortex – looks same
> Zealout – looks same.
Click to expand...


----------



## Straken's_Fist

http://daemons40k.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/a-few-more-confirmed-pieces-of-info.html

_Smash is indeed 1 attack only now. Ostensibly a Daemon Weapon would still boost that.

You must change flight modes from swoop to glide and wait a turn before charging._

Wow, if true, Straken is basically useless now. And Lord of Change (and MCs in general) nerfed big time.


----------



## Akhara'Keth

Straken's_Fist said:


> http://daemons40k.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/a-few-more-confirmed-pieces-of-info.html
> 
> _Smash is indeed 1 attack only now. Ostensibly a Daemon Weapon would still boost that.
> 
> You must change flight modes from swoop to glide and wait a turn before charging._
> 
> Wow, if true, Straken is basically useless now. And Lord of Change (and MCs in general) nerfed big time.


FMCs got boosted by all the other changes like only one Grounding Test


----------



## Zion

More from 3++ (yes, he has the book, image of it is on that page):


> Any change to 2+ rerolls.
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the psychic section do conjured units have a rule saying they don’t score?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do MC still get cover for a foot in terrain?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No – area terrain no longer exists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is fearless the same in close combat or did it revert to 5th?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same as 6th
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you enlighten us on desperate allies and scoring. Are DA scoring ? Are tropps from DA super-scoring ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No restrictions on scoring for any allies. yes they get objective secured.
> 
> Allies:
> Battle Bros – benefit from warlord trait; ICs can join; "friendly units" for psy powers, abilities, etc.; can use special abilities to repair vehicles; can use modifiers and re-rolls on reserve rolls; can embark on each other's transports
> 
> Allies of Con – treated as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, attacked or targeted; cannot move within 1" of each other; no warlord, no IC joining, and basically none of the above stuff but are impacted by that effect enemy models.
> 
> Desperate – same as AOC plus if within 6" roll a D6, on a 1 they do nothing
> 
> Come the Apoc – same as Desperate but cannot deploy within 12" of each other.
> 
> No restrictions on scoring for any allies. yes they get objective secured.
> 
> Warlord Traits:
> Warlord traits –
> Tactical; 1) while alive, can discard up to 2 active tactical objectives (TO) instead of 1
> 2) one use only, end of your turn, opponent randomly selects TO and discards
> 3) generate one additional TO first turn
> 4) redraw all TO on first turn if you want
> 5) while alive, re-roll VP awarded for TO
> 6) +1 VP for objective secured TO by Warlord
> 
> Command –
> 1) 12" use of warlord Ld
> 2) 12" use of lowest Ld for enemies
> 3) 12" move through cover
> 4) +1" for run and charge within 12"
> 5) 12" bubble of shooting re-roll 1s to hit (suck it tau – this is permanent)
> 6) same as above but for assault
> 
> Personal –
> 1) Counter attack
> 2) Furious charge
> 3) outflank
> 4) 1VP for characters slain in combat
> 5) FNP
> 6) Fearless and IWND
> 
> Strategic –
> 1) stealth ruins + move through cover
> 2) choose for night attack and all models in your army have night vision
> 3) warlord + 3 units (non-vehicle) have infiltrate
> 4) +1 to seize and re-roll reserves if warlord alive
> 5) -1 to opponents reserves
> 6) first enemy turn, 3 enemy units take a pinning check
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Under psychic powers conjuration is there anything that says conjured units can’t score?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Under psychic powers does it say a unit can only attemp a psychic power once per phase? ie multiple IC can’t atttempt to cast the same power if they are in a unit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes-UNIT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Under vehicles is there anything saying vehicles can’t score?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
> 
> Objectives deployed before table halves decided.
> 
> Who deploys first chooses who goes first or second after deployment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about close combat weapons? Power axes, mauls etc…
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you still move and fire rapid fire at full range?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have sweeping advances changed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does fearless have the old no retreat rule again?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has ATSKNF changed much?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No
> 
> Maelstrom of war missions are missions based upon Tactical Objectives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also can the "defending" player use his mastery levels to generate "dispel dice"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No
> 
> Normal missions do NOT uses Tactical objectives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When do you get your cards for Maelstorm missions? Before or after table sides/Deployment?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Beginning of turns.
> 
> Roll a D66 – consult table; can never roll the same one twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what does glancing hit actually do now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Take a HP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was the declaring jink for flyers or all skimmer and bikes. If so then serpent and bikes have lost some shine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anything with the Jink rule – so skimers, bikse, flyers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can fliers still choose to shoot ground targets at regular BS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes – choose skyfire or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What about Mixed Wounds and Fast Dice, does it still allow you to roll saves one at a time because there is different saves and/or a character?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same as before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the strength of the explosion of an open-topped vehicles for the passenger? (Was 3 in 5th ed gone to 4 in 6th ed)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 4
> 
> Craters = 6+ no matter what; 4+ if GtG in craters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do weapons that have the Get Hot USR still cause a loss of HPs on vehicles on a 4+?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Loses HP on a 1,2,3
> 
> STOP – Misread something; EACH player adds their Mastery Levels each psy phase; so you get D6+ML for dispel as well. Apologies this was wrong before when I said you only got D6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any changes to walkers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> None that i saw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is moving through difficult terrain in the movement phase 2d6 pick highest (as before) or -2" (as with charging)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 2d6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does an Open-Topped Vehicle still add +1 to the Vehicle Penetration table? (Hadn't seen it on the VP table part. Asking just in case).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes.
> 
> "In some Army List Entries, a Psyker will have one or more specific psychic powers listed – where this is the case, it will be clearly stated. These Psykers always start the game with those psychic powers. Otherwise, a Pysker generates random psychic powers from amongst the psychic disciplines known to him."
> 
> Brotherhood and Pilot can manifest unless they have a specific power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How D weapons work now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 6 only ignores invul/cover
Click to expand...


----------



## ntaw

Not to mention they can't be tied up as efficiently with Challenges.


----------



## venomlust

Damn. Some of my enthusiasm has definitely waned a bit. Some of the changes are great, others not so great, and a few things that should have been fixed haven't been. Oh well, as I've said to the whiners other than myself: It's just a game. It'll still be fun. I'll still rape face with my Heldrakes, Be'lakor, and Juggerlord. 

Cannot WAIT to fuck around with Daemonology.

One particularly annoying thing I noticed:



> Psychic focus – generate all powers from one discipline (even one power); gain primars. If you gain another power from another discipline, lose psychic focus. Powers not part of a discipline do not count against this.
> 
> Chaos psychic focus – mark of chaos or being a daemon of a particular chaos god = auto primaris of that god in addition to others.


So, if I'm running an unmarked Chaos Sorcerer at ML1, I don't get a primaris power along with the one I roll for? That would be pretty lame...

Also, fuck the Space Marines. I would never have used Telekinesis, but it would have been nice to have the option :laugh:.


----------



## Kroothawk

Zion said:


> So new edition, same old complaints? :laugh:


No this edition is something new: Even Dan of the WD team calls it officially the end of days edition (to justify the allies matrix, but anyway :wink

Force Chart? Aww, do what you want.
Allies? Aww, do what you want.
Point costs? Aww, do what you want.
Summon Daemons? Aww, do what you want.
Apocalypse units and formations? Aww, do what you want.
Chapterhouse shoulder pads? Heaven no, that would break the game! :wink:

I won't pay 65€ for GW's total surrender.

BTW I just read an official BL story where Tau can't massacre innocent civilians fast enough so they incinerate 7 billion of them with a beam and slaughter half of the rest in a few days. ANd that story was by Phil Kelly who should know better.


----------



## Zion

Kroothawk said:


> No this edition is something new: Even Dan of the WD team calls it officially the end of days edition (to justify the allies matrix, but anyway :wink
> *snip*


I meant more along the lines of "new edition, same complaints" meaning things like "ruined fluff" and the like are still the primary complaint.


----------



## maximus2467

What do you mean points cost-do what you want? Surely you have to agree on a points cost with your opponent before game starts or that would be wholly unfair

I'm interested to see what they do with TOS at ww, I've a horrible feeling they will increase the points level to 2k to entice people to buy low models, I sincerely hope this is not the case as all I do now are tournies at ww (live too far from my mates now to play regularly)


----------



## Straken's_Fist

Akhara'Keth said:


> FMCs got boosted by all the other changes like only one Grounding Test


And what else?


----------



## venomlust

Straken's_Fist said:


> And what else?


Yeah, not sure what other buffs aside from the grounding test change. 

Vector Striking ground targets isn't as good unless you manage to get a pen on a vehicle or you're striking terminators.

Smash is only 1 attack instead of half.

What other relevant changes were there?


----------



## humakt

venomlust said:


> Smash is only 1 attack instead of half.


This is a good change in my opinion.

Invariable a MC would get say 5 attacks. You would half that, rounding up, which made 3. Add one for charging and its 4 attacks instead of 6. Not much of a hindrance for using smash.

Knock it down to 1 attack and MC must now make a choice about when they use smash or normal attacks.


----------



## Kroothawk

maximus2467 said:


> What do you mean points cost-do what you want? Surely you have to agree on a points cost with your opponent before game starts or that would be wholly unfair


This refers to a WD 16 quote (page 22), where the editor talks about the unlimited possibilities of the new edition:
"You can compose your armies in two ways now. After deciding on the point limit (if you want to use points at all), ..."


----------



## Straken's_Fist

venomlust said:


> Damn. Some of my enthusiasm has definitely waned a bit. Some of the changes are great, others not so great, and a few things that should have been fixed haven't been.


Yeah I am definitely feeling less optimistic about it. 

The leaked White Dwarf articles constantly referred to addressing "game balance" on numerous occasions, so I thought for a moment that GW were going to turn from the "Forge a Narrative"/Make it up as you go along path and really focus on making the game more balanced. While it is important to highlight that it's early days yet and these are all still rumours, it doesn't look like that it's been addressed all that much. So I am not sure what kind of game 7th Edition will be: If you say you want to make a balanced game, you kind of need to do that. I always defended GW on the premise that they made it clear in the 6th Ed rulebook that the game isn't designed for balance and encouraged home brewing and houseruling to fix balance issues. That was how they were advertising it, so people shouldn't complain if they want a highly balanced game...But now that might not hold true anymore: If they advertise it as a balanced and it's not, well they are just plain bullshitting their customers, or literately just cannot balance it no matter how hard they try... 

Still, time will tell. There's a lot I like about it, and a lot I think has potential to create balance, such as the new objectives.


----------



## venomlust

I think the sum total of changes could go either way in terms of making the game better or worse, but I feel the game will be better for them. Still holding on to that optimism.

As for the smash change, I'm not too concerned about it. I rarely smashed instead of using the Black Mace anyway. All I meant was that it was a nerf and not a buff.


----------



## Ravner298

Fmc got hit by the nerf bat hard. 1 vector strike hit isn't ground shattering, but not being able to charge the turn you change flight modes is gigantic. That ensures your opponent will get a full turn firing at close range on their full ballistic skill before you make it into combat. 

I lost some enthusiasm when consolidating into combat and ignore cover only being -2 were faux. Those changes were great. However the change to jink knocks serpents down a peg so it's not all bad. Also night fight bein board wide stealth is a welcome change. I'm tired of fighting guardsman with 2++ saves. 

I thought smash meant you replace once of your regular attacks with a double strength one? Vs all of your attacks? 

Balance wise, time will tell. 2++ rerollable is still possible ( and with cursed earth in daemonology more widely available). Shooting is still the end all be all. Vehicles are more resilient and there's a tad more emphasis on high str low ap weapons again vs an asston of mid str guns. 

I can already see daemon players tossing invisibility/grimiore on a zarakynel or something and just giggling like a school girl. (And life leech can give the gained wound to a model in 6' for more hilarity). I'm still excited all things considered, they could of done more though.


----------



## humakt

venomlust said:


> I think the sum total of changes could go either way in terms of making the game better or worse, but I feel the game will be better for them. Still holding on to that optimism.
> 
> As for the smash change, I'm not too concerned about it. I rarely smashed instead of using the Black Mace anyway. All I meant was that it was a nerf and not a buff.


Probably agree with this, and yes most MC have access to better weapons than smash if you spend the extra points.


----------



## Zion

From Seandrake on Dakka:


> Psykers embarked on a transport cannot manifest any other kind of power than witchfire
> 
> So the burning chariot is fixed. Riders always count as stationary when firing weapons.
> 
> Riders CANNOT disembark from the chariot.
> 
> IF either rider or chariot is killed both are removed from play.
> 
> When shooting at chariots keep the number of successful hits that have been caused, keep the dice in different wound pools based on str and ap basically.
> 
> The player controlling the chariot then allocates each hit pool to the rider OR the chariot of the cloest model in the unit, if more then one pool the attacking player decides what pool to resolve first,
> 
> Chariots can be locked in combat, Chariots fight like infantry models, and can sweeping advance, pile in console etc (unless stunned)
> 
> In CC against a chariot decide if attacking chariot or rider, model by model basis, always by the riders WS though. You use the chariots FA though
> 
> Hammer of wrath from chariot is d6 str 6 ap- can re roll charge distance as well!, rider has fearless and relentless and can fire overwatch but not with a weapon on the chariot.
> 
> Difficult terrain gives 5+ [MarkyMark Adds: "Only if 25% cover by it."]




From MarkyMark:


> IF using allies, they CANNOT have the same faction as those in your primary detachment, so no ally with yourself by the looks.
> 
> models in ruins are 4+ if you can see them fully or not, still 4+
> area terrain is basically diffcult terrain still, but you have to be 25% obsurced to get a 5+ cover save
> 
> 
> then you get to use the rules for it from battlefield terrain section, you get a 5+ for standing in it LOL
> but it does say composition, Citadel wood....
> 
> There is no area terrain so no bonus for going to ground in what was once area terrain
> 
> basically GTG is flat +1 always.
> 
> You will have to agree with your opponent if the base counts as the ruin or not.. If you are in a ruin say 2nd floor but not 25% cover you still get the ruin cover save.


----------



## venomlust

Man, I really wish my preorder wasn't arriving late. All these summaries from people with rulebooks aren't doing it for me.


----------



## The Irish Commissar

I know it's still early days but I'm not sure if I like the new way of casting psychic powers. If I'm reading correctly for my farseer if I roll a 6 that means i have 9 points. That means if i want cast prescience i have to roll 5 dices to have better then 50/50 odds or less of casting the power, which if i roll a double 6 using 5 dice I perils. That sounds pretty shitty to me. ( that's if I'm reading it correctly)


----------



## Spankinginred

Strikes me that vehicles will be too hard to kill. I look at this from an historical perspective. A WWII Panzerfaust/Bazooka could and did destroy tanks with a single hit for example.
Now for example, two Leman Russ Tanks banging away at each other, even side on will not be able to get a kill during the space of a normal game.
.....Got to go otherwise I'd write more


----------



## scscofield

If by kill you mean explode then yes it is slightly harder to kill them. Thing is that it is till quite easy to strip HP off of them with glances. What I foresee happening is there being a lot more terrain being added to boards during the course of a game from wrecks. Honestly it makes me consider loading up on rhinos again just to use as cheap place-able terrain.


----------



## humakt

Spankinginred said:


> Strikes me that vehicles will be too hard to kill. I look at this from an historical perspective. A WWII Panzerfaust/Bazooka could and did destroy tanks with a single hit for example.
> Now for example, two Leman Russ Tanks banging away at each other, even side on will not be able to get a kill during the space of a normal game.
> .....Got to go otherwise I'd write more


The Russ's main gun is primarily an anti infantry gun not anti tank. Armour bane, melta and lance weapons are anti tank. And its not too difficult to hull point a tank to death.


----------



## Zion

humakt said:


> The Russ's main gun is primarily an anti infantry gun not anti tank. Armour bane, melta and lance weapons are anti tank. And its not too difficult to hull point a tank to death.


Pretty much this. All thr new chart does is make anti-tank weapons better at their job versus other weapons. You can still "disable" a vehicle by stripping it of its Hull Points as you could do before, all it does it make the explodes result on a pen limited to key weapons designed to crack tanks is all.


----------



## Sethis

Finally, Marines don't move faster after rallying than they ever could just by advancing normally. That bullshit has been going on for 3 editions now.

There are some small changes that I would like to see corroboration for, because they massively, massively impact the way certain important units work. Not being able to bless a unit inside a vehicle? No cover for MCs just by being in area terrain? Being able to embark on a BB transport? By the looks of it then due to FMC changes Flying Circus is going to be right out of the window as an archetype (thank god) which will leave Eldar/Daemons as the masters of the Psychic Phase, easily being able to generate 14+ dice per turn. Despite that, I think Deny is still too weak - it should have been a 5+ to Deny, flat, with bonuses only from Adamantium Will and having your own Psyker.

The terrain changes (ignoring DT on the charge with MTC is a MASSIVE change) are also very significant.


----------



## Zion

More from Seandrake:


> Models firing out of a vehicle that moved at combat speed count as having moved that turn, models firing out of a vehicle that moved at cruising speed can only fire snap shots that turn. They cannot fire if the vehicle moves flat out or uses smoke launchers, nor can the vehicle move at flat out or use smoke if the embarked unit fired.
> 
> No Escape
> If a template hits a buildings fire point or an open topped vehicle and there's a unit embarked inside, then in addition to any other effects that unit takes D6 hits at weapons str and ap.
> 
> Vector Strike:
> When swooping or zooming, this model may savage its prey. At the end of the movement phase nominate one enemy unit not locked in combat that the model has moved over that turn. That unit takes 1 hit (if the unit is an enemy flyer in zoom mode, or and enemy swooping flying MC, it instead takes d3 hits). Unless stated otherwise vector strikes are resolved at the models unmodifed str and ap2 using random allocation. These hits have the ignores cover (it then goes on the say VS doesnt benefit from other special ryles and that it counts as firing a weapon).
> 
> There is nothing in the BRB to say what powers you get, it states this is found in your codex. The card thing is pretty crap, for example Space mairnes have divination ticked, but only tiggy can access divination from the SM codex.
> 
> For daemons, tzeentch heralds and GD can access divination, nurgle biomancy, slaanesh telepathy, princes bio telekinese and telepathy, Fatey all of them. So while the ticks may be correct OVERALL they do not replace what is found in your codex. (unless you have old codex in which case hope for a faq).


tag88:


> "For a Deny the Witch Test to be Successful, you need to nullify all of the warp charges that were successfully harnessed by the psycher when he passed his psychic test"


----------



## venomlust

Whaaat that's super lame! Only Fateweaver gets Daemonology? That can't be right.


----------



## Zion

venomlust said:


> Whaaat that's super lame! Only Fateweaver gets Daemonology? That can't be right.


That's not what it says. He was talking about the card and how it doesn't accurately reflect which psykers in an army can take which powers on it is all.


----------



## venomlust

I guess I'm missing something. How do we know what powers an army can use, if we compare those tick marks to the powers they get in the codex, which wasn't written with 7th in mind?


----------



## Creon

No news on what Shadow in the Warp does now?


----------



## Zion

Creon said:


> No news on what Shadow in the Warp does now?


No, that's a FAQ issue, not a rulebook one.



venomlust said:


> I guess I'm missing something. How do we know what powers an army can use, if we compare those tick marks to the powers they get in the codex, which wasn't written with 7th in mind?


I believe the word you're looking for is "FAQ" when it comes to Daemonology stuff.

Other than that, the powers are as per codex.


----------



## Woodzee316

the thing i'm spewing about slow and purposeful still can't overwatch. it doesn't make sense if you are moving slowly and purposefully if anything you would be expecting an attack. so my thousand sons who are only really a shooting army still get screwed. I guess we will just have to leave our house rule in place then.

Nothing worse than some one being 11 inches away and hearing "I might as well have a go at charging it's not like you can overwatch me" fucking bullshit /end rant


----------



## Zion

From GoonBandito on Dakka:


> 1) There is a "Locked in Combat" section in the Assault Phase section. It clearly says "If a unit has one or more models in base contact with an enemy model (for any reason), then it is locked in combat". It then goes on to say that you cannot fire overwatch if charged if you are locked in combat.
> 
> 2) The section for Independent Chars quite clearly says that special rules are not conferred from the Independent Char to the Unit or vice versa unless specified in the rule itself (it gives the example of the stubborn rule). It also specifically says that Independant Chars without the Infiltrate rule cannot join a unit that does have Infiltrate. However the Infiltrate rule itself says "Units that contain at least one model with this rule...". Short answer - Independent Char with Infiltrate can join a non-Infiltrate unit and make the Unit (and any Ded. Transports) deploy as Infiltrators.
> 
> 3) All Super Heavy Vehicles have the Move Through Cover special rule (3D6, pick highest). Super Walkers can walk 12" in the movement phase, but otherwise follow all the movement rules for Normal Walkers. Super Heavy Walkers also cannot Overwatch
> 
> Conjured units arrive via Deep Strike within the power's range. This means they are subject to scatter, mishaps and no charging the turn they arrive as per the normal Deep Strike rules.
> 
> Conjured Psykers generate their powers as soon as they are conjured (also applies to any other random powers/abilities). Conjured Psykers cannot cast conjuration powers on the turn they are conjured.
> 
> Conjured Units are scoring, unless otherwise noted.
> 
> If the conjured unit is from Codex: Chaos Demons, and that unit has the option of Character, Icon of Chaos or Instrument of Chaos upgrades, it may take any of those upgrades for free, providing you have the model.


And the biggest reason S&P can't overwatch @Woodzee316, is an artificial limitation to keep it from being too like Relentless.


----------



## Nordicus

Zion said:


> "For a Deny the Witch Test to be Successful, you need to nullify all of the warp charges that were successfully harnessed by the psycher when he passed his psychic test"


I wonder how this works with thingiebobbies like the Tau items in Farside, that gives them a 5+ deny the witch.


----------



## Woodzee316

Zion said:


> From GoonBandito on Dakka:
> 
> 
> And the biggest reason S&P can't overwatch @Woodzee316, is an artificial limitation to keep it from being too like Relentless.


yeah but it doesn't make sense as there is no bonus for the thousand sons it's not like we can take heavy weapons. anyway this is probably for a different thread so i'll leave it at that. and stay on thread.

No Escape, it is gonna hurt my trukk orks list (that's funny that it came up as we were actually planning a house ruling that because we figured if you dropped a grenade into the back of a truck then the occupants would cop it). oh well at least I have my foot sloggers


----------



## Bindi Baji

Creon said:


> No news on what Shadow in the Warp does now?


all models in 2d6 have to squint, or buy a torch


----------



## Bodo1260

I come back to my question about sisters, if we have no psykers than our Deny pool is seriously depleted, we only get +1 from adamantium will. I thougt the sisters where supposed to be extra-immune to psykers.. not less


----------



## tirnaog

So what the consensus, this thing worth $69 if you already have 6th edition?


----------



## humakt

tirnaog said:


> So what the consensus, this thing worth $69 if you already have 6th edition?


Depends on what you want from the rule book. If you just want the rules you may have to wait for the boxed set version to be available. If you want all the other things, like pretty pcitures, you should get the $69 version (or £50 version in the UK).

Personally I'm going for the big book, as I always have.


----------



## Spankinginred

tirnaog said:


> So what the consensus, this thing worth $69 if you already have 6th edition?


At this moment in time GW have in the short term priced me out of the hobby. However (not knowing how income is in the USA) I think it is quite possibly worth it in the end considering how many GW toys I own.
Should GW introduce a two year life span into their games rules, then assuming you purchase on or near release, thats £25/$34.50 per year or about £0.49/$0.67 per week
I still wish 6th edition had another year to go though


----------



## Zion

From xttz on Dakka:


----------



## projectda

I'm just going to sit it out till the boxset rule book goes on ebay. Don't see me getting a game in for awhile anyways. Last fall a few friends started getting to know the rules for 6th.


----------



## venomlust

I like those cover rules. Makes me want to build some of each to have some diversity on our table. Cardboard boxes are getting old :wink:.


----------



## Zion

From Blog for the Blood God:


----------



## Zion

From Spoletta on Dakka:


> GtG does no longer allow overwatch.
> 
> Pinning still counts as GtG, so yes broodlords are happy and i feel less idiot for playing 2 stranglewebs.


----------



## Sethis

A previous post implies that you can now be locked in combat with non-walker vehicles. Is this correct? A massive potential boon to combat armies if true.


----------



## Zion

Sethis said:


> A previous post implies that you can now be locked in combat with non-walker vehicles. Is this correct? A massive potential boon to combat armies if true.


I highly doubt it. I've seen nothing saying that, and the glance/pen=wounds thing seems to be there solely for determining results vs Walkers.


----------



## Sethis

I mention it simply because of a mention that you are locked in combat if you are base to base with another model, with no exclusion for vehicles mentioned in the same sentence.


----------



## renren

does anyone know which the codex faq are going to be updated for 7th


----------



## scscofield

At the very soonest, tomorrow since 7th doesn't hit till then. I figure sometime next week or the week after.


----------



## The Sturk

Sethis said:


> A previous post implies that you can now be locked in combat with non-walker vehicles. Is this correct? A massive potential boon to combat armies if true.


Might just be chariots, which makes sense really.


----------



## Zion

The review is live. 

I even included pictures this time!


----------



## elmir

You mention jetbikes didn't change in your review... So no changes to their turboboost/jink save? 

My mate has his panties in a twist about his DE reavers doing fly by attacks and his jink saves...


----------



## Zion

elmir said:


> You mention jetbikes didn't change in your review... So no changes to their turboboost/jink save?
> 
> My mate has his panties in a twist about his DE reavers doing fly by attacks and his jink saves...


Jink changed as a rule, but the bikes themselves are still the same.


----------



## elmir

Oh ok, so they need to declare a jink in order to claim them then? And then only snapfire in the turn afterwards?

Is there still a bonus for going flat out to your jink save? Because technically (according to previous rumours), he was already dreaming about flat out moving super scoring raiders/venoms with flickerfields giving him a 2+ jink save. 

If that can happen, it sure as hell would put MSU DE venoms back on the map...


----------



## Sethis

Standouts:

Beasts no longer ignore cover when charging. This is significant for DE/Eldar Beast-stars and Daemons.

Wound overflow works both ways in challenges now - so excess wounds on either the character OR the unit carry over into the other.

You cannot purchase or use Fortifications unless you're using the Stronghold book. No more "everyone and his dog has an Aegis".

Sniper Rifles lost Pinning. What the hell? Were they overpowered or something?

Apart from that, it looks like a solid book, not the end of the world.


----------



## Zion

elmir said:


> Oh ok, so they need to declare a jink in order to claim them then? And then only snapfire in the turn afterwards?
> 
> Is there still a bonus for going flat out to your jink save? Because technically (according to previous rumours), he was already dreaming about flat out moving super scoring raiders/venoms with flickerfields giving him a 2+ jink save.
> 
> If that can happen, it sure as hell would put MSU DE venoms back on the map...


Jink is a flat 4+ period. Doesn't matter how fast you move. Skilled Rider improves that to a 3+.

@Sethis: Pinning became awesome is what happened. Pinned models are forced to Go to Ground. A model that has Gone to Ground cannot Overwatch.

Now go look at how dirt cheap most snipers are and you'll see the issue with leaving it on Snipers.


----------



## Jacobite

Sethis said:


> You cannot purchase or use Fortifications unless you're using the Stronghold book. No more "everyone and his dog has an Aegis". Well that doesn't come across as a cash grab at all.
> 
> Sniper Rifles lost Pinning. What the hell? Were they overpowered or something? That makes fuck all sense, if I'm wandering along a street thinking I'm safe and then there is a crack from the distance and then Trev hits the deck with half his face missing I'm going to hit the deck faster than a donut down a fatties throat. Do Mortars still pin?


----------



## Kroothawk

Two questions:
1.) Is the use of dice now optional?
2.) Does the digital edition include a file with piupiu sounds


----------



## venomlust

Zion,

Question about choosing psychic powers for Chaos: If you have a marked sorcerer, you say he gets the god-specific primaris for free. Does this use up one of his rolls for powers as it used to, or can he roll all of his dice on another table? Sounds like the latter but I need things out spelled out as if to a child.


----------



## Cougar

Sethis said:


> Standouts:
> 
> You cannot purchase or use Fortifications unless you're using the Stronghold book. No more "everyone and his dog has an Aegis".


Where does it state that ?
i must be blind, i can't see it anywhere


----------



## Zion

Kroothawk said:


> Two questions:
> 1.) Is the use of dice now optional?
> 2.) Does the digital edition include a file with piupiu sounds


1. No
2. I have the hard copy so I don't know. 

But I doubt it.



venomlust said:


> Zion,
> 
> Question about choosing psychic powers for Chaos: If you have a marked sorcerer, you say he gets the god-specific primaris for free. Does this use up one of his rolls for powers as it used to, or can he roll all of his dice on another table? Sounds like the latter but I need things out spelled out as if to a child.


It's just vague enough that I don't know and it's a thing that needs to be FAQ'd honestly.



Cougar said:


> Where does it state that ?
> i must be blind, i can't see it anywhere


Rules and points costs for Fortifications are gone from the book so you now need Stronghold Assault to use them.


----------



## venomlust

Bleh ok, thanks! Damn you GW! I really hope they remove the rule where CSM can't put all their dice into 1 specific god's discipline. If they do, then Slaanesh sorcs are gonna be the hotness.

Also, awesome review Zion.


----------



## Cougar

Zion said:


> Rules and points costs for Fortifications are gone from the book so you now need Stronghold Assault to use them.


Definitely blind. didn't notice that either !
i have that book but it kinda shows that thinning down the BRB means carrying more separate smaller add-on books  

i see that the mysterious forests and rivers seem to have been dropped :cray:

i just finished a load of river ..... lol


----------



## venomlust

Another question, this time regarding Precision Shots/Strikes:

You mention in your review that these are now rules and not just the result of being a character. I imagine, though, that now having the quality "character" automatically bestows the precision rules to the model?


----------



## Zion

venomlust said:


> Another question, this time regarding Precision Shots/Strikes:
> 
> You mention in your review that these are now rules and not just the result of being a character. I imagine, though, that now having the quality "character" automatically bestows the precision rules to the model?


I've looked and re-looked and no.

Suddenly makes that IG Commisar Pistol more useful.


----------



## venomlust

Damn! Yeah it does. So much for my charging Berzerker champ allocating those power fist hits on 6s :laugh:. Oh well, not a huge deal. I rarely remembered to roll separate dice in 6th.


----------



## mayegelt

But at least that berserker champ (or lord) wont be stuck their mashing the face of 1 bog standard Impy Guard Serg / Space Marine Serg / Tau Shas'ui / OR more importantly Terminator Sergeant with W1 no special gear, while the rest of his squad clap at how well you did mushing him up into paste with your 4-5 attacks on charge.


----------



## Kroothawk

So what is the verdict?
Do people think that this "edition" is playable and/or fun at all?
Because I still don't see how all this mess (army composition, psionic phase, demonology, Apocalypse units, no area terrain) can be fixed with less than 30 pages of house rules.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

So everyone has precision shots and strikes now?


I played a game today with it, only 1k it was my marines vs dark eldar and I only had like 30 minutes so didn't know all the changes. He did a lot of jinking and I think I may of forgot that if you jink you can now only snap fire since I think he was jinking and also firing normally. I won in the end 3 to 1, me holding two objectives and first blood whilst he had one. The fact my bikes still only charge 2d6 is annoying, they are bikes for gods sake. Rending is more useful for finishing off a tank, really helps having that +1 damage for being ap 2 on rending to get it up to that 7.

I still think the game heavily favors shooting, nothing has changed there, squads in rhinos still take like 3 turns to get into combat across the board, move 12, move 6 and get out, charge on third turn. Between that you have two turns of shooting at you (three depending on who goes first) AND an overwatch if you survive it all.


----------



## Zion

Kroothawk said:


> So what is the verdict?
> Do people think that this "edition" is playable and/or fun at all?
> Because I still don't see how all this mess (army composition, psionic phase, demonology, Apocalypse units, no area terrain) can be fixed with less than 30 pages of house rules.


Frankly I think it's not THAT bad. "No Lords of War, Single Combined Arms Detachment and one Allies Detachment" will likely be the way going forward from here on out competitively. I don't see a need for "30 pages of house rules" to say that.

Heck, by stripping fortifications out of the book you can even go "no Stronghold Assault" and not have to deal with those either!

Even outside of that, the core rules are fine. Their tighter and better explained than 6th's in a lot of places (though some places still need touching up) and it'll really be the codexes that make or break things.



Words_of_Truth said:


> So everyone has precision shots and strikes now?


Nope! They're USRs that you can get, but no one innately has them anymore.

As for Jinks, you have to declare you'll jink when someone says they're shooting at a unit that Jinks and in the next shooting phase that unit has to Snapfire.


----------



## mayegelt

oh another question I guess...

How does cover now work for both units and Vehicles? Still just the X saving throw?

Also with Grav Guns if cover for Vehicles is still a saving throw, is there clarification on if they get the same or not considering they technically don't penetrating hit, they just immobilise...


----------



## Zion

mayegelt said:


> oh another question I guess...
> 
> How does cover now work for both units and Vehicles? Still just the X saving throw?
> 
> Also with Grav Guns if cover for Vehicles is still a saving throw, is there clarification on if they get the same or not considering they technically don't penetrating hit, they just immobilise...


Cover mechanics are still the same. 

Vehicle cover rules specifically allow them against Graviton weapons.


----------



## Kroothawk

Zion said:


> Frankly I think it's not THAT bad. "No Lords of War, Single Combined Arms Detachment and one Allies Detachment" will likely be the way going forward from here on out competitively. I don't see a need for "30 pages of house rules" to say that.
> (...)
> Even outside of that, the core rules are fine. Their tighter and better explained than 6th's in a lot of places (though some places still need touching up) and it'll really be the codexes that make or break things.


So you are fine with Inquisition, Dark Angels and Eldar summoning Daemons, Imperial Armies getting DLC buff after buff, and non-psychic factions just watching the summon-daemons-cascades, and Godzillas stomping through standard troops? 
I think, the only thing GW has forgotten is to make dice optional as well ("if you want to roll dice").


----------



## mayegelt

Presume Daemonic Save also works vs Grav Guns or has that been overlooked?


----------



## Words_of_Truth

Zion said:


> Cover mechanics are still the same.
> 
> Vehicle cover rules specifically allow them against Graviton weapons.


I thought gravitons ignore all types of saves but invulnerable saves when it comes to vehicles.


----------



## Zion

Words_of_Truth said:


> I thought gravitons ignore all types of saves but invulnerable saves when it comes to vehicles.


Go read page will 77. :grin:


----------



## Words_of_Truth

Oh well that sucks, no matter I only have three on my bike squad, still waiting to face an army that has high armour saves, seem to only be facing eldar.


----------



## Zion

Kroothawk said:


> So you are fine with Inquisition, Dark Angels and Eldar summoning Daemons, Imperial Armies getting DLC buff after buff, and non-psychic factions just watching the summon-daemons-cascades, and Godzillas stomping through standard troops?
> I think, the only thing GW has forgotten is to make dice optional as well ("if you want to roll dice").



After seeing the math on how hard it it to manifest powers they don't bother me so much. Especially Daemonoly which can perils at the drop of a hat.

And not all of the dataslates (aka DLC as you called them) are Imperial. Or have you forgotten the Tau ones and Tyranids ones already? Even CSM got some love there too.

I think you're overreacting a touch personally.


----------



## Kroothawk

As someone loving and knowing the 40k background, Daemon summoning Dark Angels and Eldar bother me indeed. Adding rules for this shows a gross disrespect for the 40k world on a C.S.Goto-level.

And the Tau supplement basically adding names to bog standard crisis suits is not on the same level as all Imperials getting a 50 point insurance against reserves (Inquisition DLC).


----------



## falcoso

Kroothawk said:


> So you are fine with Inquisition, Dark Angels and Eldar summoning Daemons, Imperial Armies getting DLC buff after buff, and non-psychic factions just watching the summon-daemons-cascades, and Godzillas stomping through standard troops?
> I think, the only thing GW has forgotten is to make dice optional as well ("if you want to roll dice").


I played 3 games of the new edition today with necrons against Orks, with CSM allies so I could try out malific. Quite simply it didn't give that much of a bonus and the ridiculous amount of perils. I mean yeah I got one unit of bloodletters, but then they were swamped by Orks anyway. Denials I find are just as easy even in the game I just took necrons I mean I denied one power a turn which is nice compared to what I used to do. And then Gloom prisms is still a nullify powers on a 4+ as its a 5th ed wargear so that is still nice.

Overall 7th seems much more balanced, psychic powers aren't that big a change if I am honest, or certainly not from what I have seen. -2" to charge through terrain seems to have had a bigger effect as has the new jink. 

I guess it will take more games to properly decide if crons and tau are at a disadvantage or not, I mean yeah there will be that one game where your opponent gets really lucky and just happens to have loads of casts and no perils but hey its dice what can you expect.



Kroothawk said:


> As someone loving and knowing the 40k background, Daemon summoning Dark Angels and Eldar bother me indeed. Adding rules for this shows a gross disrespect for the 40k world on a C.S.Goto-level.
> 
> And the Tau supplement basically adding names to bog standard crisis suits is not on the same level as all Imperials getting a 50 point insurance against reserves (Inquisition DLC).


Ok granted under competitive condititions you can't really do this but it does say how through forging a narrative you should decide if you really should be using malific with imperials. I guess they had to put it in to balance them out much more but in the end you don't HAVE to take them, and you are more likely to kill yourself rather than do anything that meaningful.

Then there is also the fact the Deamons would still trigger one eye open so in summoning those deamons and nearly killing your libraian you may also stop your own models and the deamons doing stuff.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I was told that all units can now capture objectives. Played a game going off what someone who had read it for 30 more minutes told me lol.


----------



## falcoso

They can and if you follow the FoC your troops capture objectives and the cannot be contested except other troops from bound armies. From look at unbound armies they are really not worth it. Objective secured is just too good IMO and re-roll warlord traits are nice. Unbound armies are still affected by the alliance rating e.g. one eye open, only blessing battle brothers etc. Yeah there may be some fun things you can do, like lots of sorcerers but in the end it can be easy to counter as most FoC armies try and mitigate their downsides with other units quite nicely.


----------



## Sethis

@Zion Pinning isn't awesome. It got a slight buff. You still need:

1. To hit on 3/4+ (most of the time)
2. Wound on a 4+ (even against T3)
3. Them to fail any relevant save.
4. Them to fail a Ld8/9/10 check, assuming no Fearless.
5. This results in them not being able to use an ability that only functions when they're assaulted, requires 6s to hit, and then needs to wound and penetrate armour.

It's just not that likely to happen, and even if it does, it isn't exactly a huge loss. I've never seen Overwatch kill more than two models except when someone charged with a single unit into a Tau Firebase (which was bloody stupid, of course). The improvement certainly isn't worth nerfing Snipers to hell and gone, who were already merely mediocre-to-poor in every single book. If anything, Barrage weapons should have lost it since they already have the significant advantage of pie plates, ignoring cover, and generally having a very high Str value.


----------



## Kroothawk

How about invisible Imperial Knights and Seer Councils? Will they affect game balance?


----------



## scscofield

Dude Kroothawk calm down and untwist your panties. You are ranting, if you don't like shit so be it. Make a new thread to b itch about it.





Personally most of these changes aren't all that bad/good. A lot of them seem to just be focused on changing things that had issues in 6th. Psychic phase just made it harder to actually cast shit effectively I feel.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

Is a kroot army viable now?


----------



## MidnightSun

If Daemomancy bothers you, don't use it.

Psychic powers have become easier if you dominate the phase, but makes it harder to cast when you have (for example) Eldar vs Tyranids or another matchup with a lot of Warp Charge being generated. You can now essentially guarantee your super-power goes off by throwing all of your Warp Charge into it, but you have to manage effectively if you want to cast a whole bunch of powers.

I really like the changes to the Psychic Phase. In a game I played today, both my Tyranid opponent and I benefitted - he had Dominion on every Synapse Creature to burn off any leftover Warp Charge, and I Denied the power Catalyst a couple of times which made things a lot easier for me.


----------



## Sethis

The thing that I like though is there there IS no "super power". At least not to the tune of Mindrazor/Pit of Shades/Dwellers.


----------



## elmir

Kroothawk said:


> How about invisible Imperial Knights and Seer Councils? Will they affect game balance?


Were they balanced to begin with? 

I think you are just trying to look for things to support your "the sky is falling" attitude. People who try to break the game will break the game. They've been doing so since as long as the game has been in existence. 

Just the fact that you now have to reach an agreement on what to use before the game even starts, means that GW is quite aware that there's different ways to approach this game (and an indicator that you need to be on the same page when it comes to playing this game). 

Also, as for your previous rant on daemonology... I think that the huge risk associated with any psyker using that (except daemons) already reflects the background that it's only to be used in desperate situations. As far as the fluff goes, it's just another reason to justify all that imperium vs imperium warfare that's going on... 

None psychic races don't fare THAT much worse than psychic races for stopping conjuring/blessings. Just a few less dice to try to get 6s... It's not going to happen a lot anyway. 

Does this edition fix all the weird crap we've been seeing in 6th. No... Does it bring a few more interesting things to the table (like maelstrom of war missions) and a slightly more entertaining magic phase than just rolling Ld tests. Yes!

So it's not perfect, but when was the last time a GW ruleset was? I think the game would get a lot more enjoyable if people stopped taking it so seriously and started seeing it for what it really is: "grown up men acting like kids again and playing with toy soldiers"


----------



## Words_of_Truth

D weapons have been changed, you now roll on a chart, 1 does nothing, 2-5 does a lot of wounds and 6 is the typical all out destruction.


----------



## The Irish Commissar

Words_of_Truth said:


> D weapons have been changed, you now roll on a chart, 1 does nothing, 2-5 does a lot of wounds and 6 is the typical all out destruction.


No matter what happens to the rules during the change of editons, you can always rely on a role of a 6 to blow shit up. :biggrin:


----------



## Zion

Kroothawk said:


> How about invisible Imperial Knights and Seer Councils? Will they affect game balance?


You mean the same exact power you could use in 6th edition? Seriously, it didn't change any, so why is it suddenly so much more "OP" now? Even casting on Battle Brothers didn't change. If Guard wanted an Invisible Knight they could do it then and they can still do it now, only it's harder to cast, can be denied and perils can remove that psyker from play, wound them to death or make them lose that power.

On a different note, someone on Dakka posted the results of some local playtesting:


> Just got back from my flgs and spent some time talking with madmen who'd been up since last night playing back-to-back-to-back games of 7th.
> 
> There was a good mixture of armies overall, but I thought I'd share some of the stuff I was told that jumped out at me.
> 
> - The battle-forged vs. unbound stuff didn't break the game for these players, even with guys who intentionally made the most "game breaking" lists possible.
> 
> - Universally the idea of scoring drop pods was dumb. That needs to be pushed out in an faq. Essentially any army running mass pods won objective games.
> 
> - People thought the maelstrom of war missions were fun, but too random to play regularly. They felt like too often they were stuck with a card they couldn't use and/or whoever got the "slay the opponent's warlord" card would win by default.
> 
> - FMCs took a hit according to demon players, but it was made up for with chariots. They seem to be the go-to unit in 7th if you have them.
> 
> - Walkers and tanks performed really well, land raiders didn't earn their points back. My local meta will favor mass razorbacks and predators over big expensive heavy vehicles.
> 
> - Wounds spilling over from challenges had major implications in games they played. This could be a change in mindset needing to occur, but throwing a cheap sergeant into a challenge is a bad idea.
> 
> - Demonology was far too unreliable, even for demons or GK. Across the board lvl2 and 3 powers were too risky to get off without perils. One player built a list around the idea of summoning in mass demons and was tabled quickly by tyranids.
> 
> - Marines are really strong this edition (gasp) and their few weaknesses are no longer weaknesses. Universally they felt like the hardest hit army was Tau and Necrons gained the most across the board.
> 
> - Assault became slightly more effective, but not enough to reliably run an assault army with success.
> 
> - Largely the result was positive. Most players said that while wound allocation and shooting takes longer there's a lot less ambiguity in the book. Anecdotally the game moved faster, even though there was more to do.


----------



## locustgate

The Irish Commissar said:


> you can always rely on a role of a 6 to blow shit up. :biggrin:


Huh......I never really bothered to look but.....basically yeah, well vaporize or imploded or explode.


----------



## scscofield

Scoring drop pods? Can immobile objects score?


----------



## Zion

scscofield said:


> Scoring drop pods? Can immobile objects score?


Buildings with units inside can score, so yes. Almost everything scores (zooming flyers, swooping FMCs and models who have rules that say they can't score don't, everything else does). The big deal with Drop Pods is that DT count as being whatever slot the unit that bought them for is from, so Troop DT in Battle Forged armies get Objective Secured.

And then pair that with Drop Pods and you can see the potential issue.


----------



## scscofield

lawl looks like i should bring my dp heavy sw list back


----------



## Zion

scscofield said:


> lawl looks like i should bring my dp heavy sw list back


Since you can Split Fire and Counter-Attack without needing to test it's not a bad idea! :laugh:


----------



## scscofield

Always could Splitfire without the check, LF didn't have the Splitfire USR. They have Fire Control that acts like Splitfire without a LDR check. 

The change to Counter Attack is nice though.


----------



## Woodzee316

noticed they removed pinning from the barrage USR as my friend made a point of letting me know so my ork lobba's are not as great anymore. oh well you get that.


----------



## Kroothawk

Warhammer World said:


> Well met Warhammer 40,000 warriors.
> 
> A brand new edition of the rules has arrived and many of you may be wondering what this means for the events you are planning to attend.
> 
> The Events Team have been hard at work deciding what to do (it’s a tough old life…) and so we have made the following decisions for each of our Warhammer 40,000 events for 2014.
> 
> Please note: We are confident that any army you could take before is still usable at our events. If you are worried that something we have written here or in the new rulebook contradicts this please contact us and we will discuss it with you. We want any army you could use before to be available after this update – so don’t worry – you will still be able to use it!
> 
> *WHW throne of skulls *
> 
> The points values for armies shall remain the same (1,500).
> We will be using the ‘Battle Forged’ rules to select armies, from page 117 of the rulebook.
> You can only take the “Combined Arms” Detachment on page 122 once at a Throne of Skulls event.
> There will be no other changes to the standard Battle-Forged rules.
> We will be using the Eternal War missions as stated in the Events Pack.


Didn't know GW still has an event team :wink:
http://warhammerworld.games-worksho...-and-our-events-in-2014/#sthash.mALOGweI.dpuf
So no unbound, no infinite FOC (no Allies?), no mission cards even for GW events.
And they still use points :grin:

Also:
7th edition Video Battle report (60 daemonettes summoned by the end of turn 1):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ryMAAP6HWfw


----------



## Zion

Yeah, one battle report where Daemonology paid off, but I've been seeing a lot of people saying it wasn't as reliable or as effective as the internet is concerned about. 

I mean sure, dice get hot sometimes and do great things, but as it stands it's, when you really sit down and do the math the odds of even summoning one unit without perils isn't good (more so if you're not a Daemon), and with perils isn't good for your psyker.

Torrent of Fire has your math covered by the way: http://www.torrentoffire.com/4776/the-math-of-the-new-psychic-phase


----------



## falcoso

Words_of_Truth said:


> D weapons have been changed, you now roll on a chart, 1 does nothing, 2-5 does a lot of wounds and 6 is the typical all out destruction.


Its also nice that the apocolyptic mega-blast is now 10" 7" 5" rather than 15" blast, and the old barrage template is used too


----------



## iamtheeviltwin

Kroothawk said:


> Also:
> 7th edition Video Battle report (60 daemonettes summoned by the end of turn 1):
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ryMAAP6HWfw


If it's a Front Line Gaming Batrep you can pretty much dismiss the results as useful. They have a long history of posting batreps to push whatever point of view they have about the rules. (see their early Tyranid and Escalation batreps).


----------



## Zion

iamtheeviltwin said:


> If it's a Front Line Gaming Batrep you can pretty much dismiss the results as useful. They have a long history of posting batreps to push whatever point of view they have about the rules. (see their early Tyranid and Escalation batreps).


It's Team0Comp, whoever that is.

Summoning a whole crapload of daemons IS possible, it's just REALLY not that likely. Pretty much anyone who is banking on it working well for them all the time is going to have a bad time in general.


----------



## Spankinginred

We had a wee go through the rules at our club today. And here are a few things that seemed to have cropped up. I'll add, I don't own a copy yet, so if anyone can correct anything that I've written below, please do.
AAA weapons are now not much use, unless you have a Hydra battery - ie You can no longer practically shoot down an aircraft with a Flakk missile - Kind of defeats the purpose of such a weapon. (Flakk missile used as an example)
Grey Knights will be the best force to take - Thousands of Psy points etc plus they can use everything in the book (not Daemons of course) and cast it on every one....
The guy that came up with that is a Grey Knight player & frother
Medium anti tank weapons suffer from being effectively unable to kill tanks in game time any more. Missile weapons S8 AP3 Cannons S7 AP4 etc. Yes glance a tank to death, give it some annoyance, but a 50/50 chance of doing bugger all once you get through the armour!
Rending, Snipers not longer get it?? Plus it not longer adds D3 to armour penetration 
D weapon rules - changed so soon whilst Apocalypse is still in print!
These are just a few things that we've found to be questionable so far..... Not sure I'll buy a copy yet, just in case there has to be a 40k VIII by Christmas 
Have fun picking holes in the rules and remember, in the UK we have a law on purchases that are not fit for purpose, just in case you want your money back!
Nice cover art though


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I agree spankinginred, assault cannons are actually a lot better now due to rending and making them ap2 which means you can destroy a tank if you roll a 6 on the damage chart and it can get through all but the toughest tanks now, but you need a lot of 6s but it can at least do it.


----------



## Zion

Assault-backs are my favorite Razorback. I just wish that part was in the kit. As it stands you pay $25+ on most bits sites for an Assault Cannon.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I converted mine from the assault cannon from the land raider crusader sprue http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Space-Marine-Land-Raider-Crusader-Pack also gives you the option to convert your own heavy flamer turret to.

Forgeworld are also bringing out their own assault cannon turret for razorbacks to a long with a lascannon and twin plasma gun turret.


----------



## ntaw

Words_of_Truth said:


> I agree spankinginred, assault cannons are actually a lot better now due to rending and making them ap2 which means you can destroy a tank if you roll a 6 on the damage chart and it can get through all but the toughest tanks now, but you need a lot of 6s but it can at least do it.


Now, granted I don't have the new BRB in hand, but in 6th Rending's AP2 did not apply to Amour Penetration rolls, it just got +D3 Strength added. What's the wording of the rule in the new book, is it always just AP2 on a 6 for anything?



Zion said:


> Assault-backs are my favorite Razorback. I just wish that part was in the kit.


WoT has it right, you can get them from that package. I ordered a few pairs of just the guns online and used the LCs and HBs from the kits for other things (like making sponsons for my Valkyrie/Vendetta). Alternately, you can use the back half of the HBs to mount home made AC barrels made out of thin plastic tubes/drilled out pipes and plasticard for the bindings. You could also source the ACs off of the Stormraven/Stormtalon kits I'm sure for less than the full turret if you have the core parts.

As a BA player primarily, if Rending changes to being AP2 for Armour Penetration rolls I will likely try to dust off all of my TLAC turrets and put them back to use.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I just read it, I think it's now changed, the ap is no longer changed to ap2 when hitting vehicles instead the weapons ap is still used. Either it's changed or I've always been playing it wrong.

The rule now states "In either case, against vehicles, armour penetration roll of 6 allows a further D3 to be rolled, with the result added to the total. These hits are not resolved at AP2, but are instead resolved using the model/weapon's AP value."


----------



## ntaw

That sounds the same as it always has been. Against infantry, to-wound rolls of 6 = AP2 and when determining damage against vehicles, 6's = +D3 to Strength.

From pg.6 of the FAQ for the old book:

Q: If an attack with the Rending special rule rolls a 6 for their
Armour Penetration roll against a vehicle and subsequently scores a
Penetrating Hit, does that hit count as being AP2 as it would if the
attack rolled a 6 To Wound? (p41)
A: No.

Alas, my TLACs will remain where they are for the time being. Now my Drop Pods, on the other hand.....


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I just read the old rule book, in it the second sentence is not there. 

"These hits are not resolved at AP2, but are instead resolved using the model/weapon's AP value."

That sentence absent from the old rules.


----------



## ntaw

Words_of_Truth said:


> That sentence absent from the old rules.


And dealt with in a FAQ. Sorry, I must have edited my comment while you were typing yours.


----------



## Worthy

Zion said:


> It's Team0Comp, whoever that is.
> 
> Summoning a whole crapload of daemons IS possible, it's just REALLY not that likely. Pretty much anyone who is banking on it working well for them all the time is going to have a bad time in general.


Team0Comp is Frontline Gamings Youtube account.


As for summoning stupid ammount of daemons - he drew the game and nearly lost, which just goes to show how pointless these attempts at breaking the game are when every army can lose thanks to them mission cards.


----------



## Spankinginred

Zion said:


> Assault-backs are my favorite Razorback. I just wish that part was in the kit. As it stands you pay $25+ on most bits sites for an Assault Cannon.


There is a company that used to be called 'Old Crow' that used to make Gatling gun barrels you could add onto other models
http://www.oldcrowmodels.co.uk/


----------



## Spankinginred

Woodzee316 said:


> noticed they removed pinning from the barrage USR as my friend made a point of letting me know so my ork lobba's are not as great anymore. oh well you get that.


Hmm the point of a barrage weapon is that it causes pinning, now that makes me wonder if its gone through the effects of poor proof reading.
If so, return your copies to GW for a refund.


----------



## Nordicus

Spankinginred said:


> Hmm the point of a barrage weapon is that it causes pinning, now that makes me wonder if its gone through the effects of poor proof reading.
> If so, return your copies to GW for a refund.


And here I thought the point of barrage is that it could shoot at enemies that it didn't have a line of sight to. 

For all we know it could be intentional that they removed it. So before we claim poor proof reading and demand refunds, how about we take a step back and see the rule for all its advantages and not just the ones we use?


----------



## ntaw

Nordicus said:


> And here I thought the point of barrage is that it could shoot at enemies that it didn't have a line of sight to.


Seconded. After millennium of war you'd think people would be used to shelling from above by now.


----------



## Sworn Radical

While it still feels a bit uneasy to get bombarbed with a _'new' _or rather altered version / edition in just *under* two years (yeah, you go make some more money GW baby), I think I'll like most of the changes / additions that've been made to 7th ed. 
At least I hope so.

Which brings me to my question, actualy. 
Maybe it's an oversight on my part, but I couldn't find for the hell of it any notation on the limits of one's Reserves like there was in the previous rulebook. It seems like the entire army could potentialy start in Reserves now, save for one unit to fulfill the criteria listed under _'Sudden Death Victory' _?


----------



## Zion

Yes, there is no restriction. 

Deathwing Armies are now less bad.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

Yes it can start in reserve but if there's none of your models on the board at the end of your enemies first turn then you automatically lose.


----------



## ntaw

Zion said:


> Yes, there is no restriction.
> 
> Deathwing Armies are now less bad.


:yahoo: Blood Angel Drop Pods combined with Deathwing Assault here I come!!


----------



## scscofield

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Warhammer-40k-Dark-Vengeance

So DV is back?


----------



## unxpekted22

This is weird. It seems like edition 6.2, not a full '7th' as usual. Its completely compatible with 6th edition codex books and supplements, so I wonder how many armies they will actually bother updating for this version. I mean, they are all 'up to date' now, every army will have been renewed within a two year span or so, I think. but I guess if they made a new rulebook in this short a time why not do it with the army books too and try to make more money.

Doesn't matter much to me though haha. For all intents and purposes I'm out of the hobby, literally can't afford to buy any of GWs new stuff now.


A question though after reading your review Zion. You can still buy things like battlefield terrain and walls but there are no fortification rules? Can you still use defense lines in your army but just not the big buildings?


----------



## Zion

Fortification rules are in Stronghold Assault, so if you want them in your army you need that book.


----------



## revilo44

unxpekted22 said:


> I mean, they are all 'up to date' now, every army will have been renewed within a two year span or so,



Um they not all up to date as there's 6 codexs do to Orks,blood angels dark eldar, space wolves,necrons and of course SoB which have all been done in 5th edition. And I know why there they putting out 7th @Zion because they trying not to update sisters to rage there players.


----------



## falcoso

Yeah summoning deamons does very little in every game I have done it in, I have made my chaos lord a deamon from the crimson slughter so he doesn't perils and quite simply whenever I summon deamons they are wiped out before they get to do anything. I summon a herald that lasted a turn but my other sorcerer had died so it didn't do that much either.

Also from looking at all these lists that spam 'psyker batteries' to get lots of power dice they seem to be a massive points sink to me. Whereas if you take one ML 3 your get to have a go at casting his 3 power dice with 3 + D6 whereas if you take a bajillion warlocks, or heralds etc. then you get there baillion mastery levels to try and cast their bajillion spells +D6, and with 4 dice on average needed to consistently cast a lot of psykers will sit there doing nothing.

The tactical objectives area also really nice, it makes armies move around as you have to get to objectives that are on the other side of the map and slow armies simply won't be able to do this. It lead to us haveing incredibly close games where we had very few models left on the board. Whether they are any good yet I think it is too soon to tell but I personally like how it stops static armies


----------



## Kroothawk

Here a review by the blog "Conclave of Har":
*Warhammer 40k: Revenge of the Sixth or Seventh Heaven?*


Part 1 on "Book I: A Galaxy of War", the hobby book:
http://conclaveofhar.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/warhammer-40k-revenge-of-sixth-or.html

Part 2 on "Book 2: Dark Millennium", the background book:
http://conclaveofhar.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/warhammer-40k-revenge-of-sixth-or_26.html

Part 3 on the actual rulebook forthcoming.


----------



## Varakir

I had a chance to look at the new rulebook yesterday, have quite a few of the psychic powers changed? I noticed that gate of infinity has been changed & nerfed and the pyromancy table looks a little different.


----------



## Nordicus

Varakir said:


> have quite a few of the psychic powers changed?


Indeed they have. For example, taking Biomancy, the following have changed:

- Ironarm now gives a flat +3 to strength and toughness, but no longer grants eternal warrior.
- Endurance now gives FnP 4+, eternal warrior and relentless, but is a warpcharge 2 spell.
- Warpspeed, similarly to Ironarm, now gives a flat +3 to intiative and attack, in addition to fleet.

Considering the amount of changes, I would heavily recommend giving your usual power a glance before they are cast.


----------



## unxpekted22

revilo44 said:


> Um they not all up to date as there's 6 codexs do to Orks,blood angels dark eldar, space wolves,necrons and of course SoB which have all been done in 5th edition. And I know why there they putting out 7th @Zion because they trying not to update sisters to rage there players.


I thought they said there would be a 6th edition codex for each army. Didn't realize they hadn't actually done that. I'm so out of the loop, my fault.


----------



## Sworn Radical

Well, obviously characters as well as independent characters no longer get the Precision Shots USR.
Makes you wonder how the _'Marksman' _Exarch Power is supposed to work now ...


----------



## falcoso

Sworn Radical said:


> Well, obviously characters as well as independent characters no longer get the Precision Shots USR.
> Makes you wonder how the _'Marksman' _Exarch Power is supposed to work now ...


I had not realised that had been dropped.... interesting. Makes sense though I mean how com characters can single people out


----------



## Sworn Radical

Awesome, they FAq'd it like 3 hrs after I asked myself that question regarding _Marksman_ ! :victory:

Warp Spider Exarchs are now officialy awesome ! :good:


----------



## mrknify

Dark vengeance is back !


----------

