H.B.M.C. wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Yes and it was a lot of redundant rules that were unnecessary.

And you think that this new system won't create lots of redundancies and repeated rules?

It doesn't have to, but this is GW we're talking about so....

Voss wrote:

Oh, right. Synapse. How the frig are they going to fit that?

Not sure if serious. Current synapse rules are weird but its super easy to go back to "Synapse: unit gains fearless if within X" of synapse creature" Or in this particular edition, 'skip morale checks if in synapse range.'

it can very easily revert to being a 1 sentence rule.

Apologies - I was thinking of synaptic link ( but also how they handle repetition of rules ).

Sure would suck to lose synaptic link because of "simple, not simplistic".

Oooh, remember when synapse range also gave eternal warrior? Meant Nid warriors could stand up to str 8 way better than other factions elites.

Gunna be interesting to see what they keep and what they chop.

There's still a butt-load we don't know, and the trickle of information is going to come in real slow from GW to keep us guessing until the entire rules are in our hands and we can cut past all the hype and advertisement and get to the real meat and potatoes of whether this game is going to be better or not.

And then we start the timer.

The timer being how long it takes for GW to put out a codex that throws all their promises in the trash.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sure would suck to lose synaptic link because of "simple, not simplistic".

Yea thinking on it now...it almost has to go, because all the supporting rules adds a ton.

What a double edged sword.

I think you could simplify it pretty easily so that you didn't need 4 pages, 11 diagrams and a 3-day conference to understand how Synaptic Link rules work.

drbored wrote:
Gunna be interesting to see what they keep and what they chop.

I don't know if 'interesting' is the word I'd choose. As I keep saying, I care far less about what they're adding compared to what we're losing.

The current 'Nid Codex introduced two concepts that are so good and fit the fluff so well - adaptive physiology and synaptic links - that the idea that they're just going to be thrown out the window or, worse, only available to one way of playing 'Nids is just awful.

Synapse does tend to hinge on leadership Gaunts have a LD of 8+ according to the card given. Which honestly is shockinghly high compared to what it normally is.

Will morale be brutal or just a wound tax? Will it take a unit out of the fight for a turn forcing you to account for it, or just mean a model or two vanishes when you fail?

cody.d. wrote:
Synapse does tend to hinge on leadership Gaunts have a LD of 8+ according to the card given. Which honestly is shockinghly high compared to what it normally is.

Leadership works in reverse in 10th. High = bad, low = good.

cody.d. wrote:
Will morale be brutal or just a wound tax? Will it take a unit out of the fight for a turn forcing you to account for it, or just mean a model or two vanishes when you fail?

Morale doesn't kill models anymore (thanks Christ!). We don't know quite what "Battleshock" does to units, but odds are it has something to do with their ability to hold objectives, and could have other effects that are detrimental to the unit - cannot benefit from command abilities/auras, modifiers to shooting or moving, etc. - rather than just "More stuff dies lolz!", which was always a stupid rule.

Ah that's going to mess with my head for a while. So it's actually worse now, essentially it's a ld4 in the new edition.

If failing a "Battleshock" test means your unit is less effective but still exists I'd be okay with that I suppose. I kind of like it causing a unit to move in a possibly undesirable direction to be more thematic and interesting but it also leads to more scenarios that are hard to write rules around. Or rely on a player not stretching measurements or directions such as angling your retreat to maybe give yourself more time to rally.

Also raises questions about the factions that specialize in fear will interact. Will we get pinning back? Perhaps the ability to go to ground again, a precursour to reactions of HH2. Get 1+ to cover but you are considered to have failed a battleshock test for your next player turn. Give me stuff to do in my opponents turn please.

cody.d. wrote:
Ah that's going to mess with my head for a while. So it's actually worse now, essentially it's a ld4 in the new edition.

If failing a "Battleshock" test means your unit is less effective but still exists I'd be okay with that I suppose. I kind of like it causing a unit to move in a possibly undesirable direction to be more thematic and interesting but it also leads to more scenarios that are hard to write rules around. Or rely on a player not stretching measurements or directions such as angling your retreat to maybe give yourself more time to rally.

Also raises questions about the factions that specialize in fear will interact. Will we get pinning back? Perhaps the ability to go to ground again, a precursour to reactions of HH2. Get 1+ to cover but you are considered to have failed a battleshock test for your next player turn. Give me stuff to do in my opponents turn please.

Based on what we see on the termagant datasheet and GW's comment that all units will have some ability then it is likely you'll have lots more to do.

Morale rules don't really have good track record. So far they were always written as a complex and potentially interesting mechanic. And then they are instantly neutered, because SMs need to know no fear and the various horrors of the galaxy should be considered fearless. In 9th even worse, the entire idea of having to roll for morale is obsolete. If you suffered enough casualties for it to become relevant, your unit was likely already dead anyway.

So let's first see if they reduce the sheer deadliness of everything first. But I can't see Morale to become a decisive factor in 10th. That would mean that Night Lords would be relevant, and when have they not been getting the brown end of the stick?

As far as simplifying stuff goes, the real interesting ones are going to be AdMech (because Canticles, Doctrines, and such are fairly complicated right now), Sisters (How do you simplify Acts of Faith?), and Chaos Knights (all the Dread test effects and stuff). I should probably add Votann to that list, because their current Judgment Token system doesn't work the way it's supposed to because of the (necessary) nerf. It'll be interesting to see how that gets reworked.

I really, really hope Sisters keep the Acts of Faith as it is right now. Miracle dice are such a fun mechanism to play with and it fits thematically well as well. It's 'only' one page of rules currently and could be shortened a bit in the explanation. Sisters don't really need sacred rights and Shield of Faith could easily be a datasheet ability. Blessing may be integrated in the enhancements. I have hope they don't mess with the miracle dice, because to me they're pretty much perfect as is.

The community spends 2 years complaining there's too many rules to remember, nothing is easy to track or keep up with, too many hidden power bumps for units, bring back USRs.

They do literally all that by the intent of their words and suddenly people are upset/confused that they're getting what they asked for. How ele did people expect them to strip back faction purity rules, subfaction rules and "unforseen" interactions out the hoohaa other than reduce the amount of sheer stuff?

Us3Less wrote:
I really, really hope Sisters keep the Acts of Faith as it is right now. Miracle dice are such a fun mechanism to play with and it fits thematically well as well. It's 'only' one page of rules currently and could be shortened a bit in the explanation. Sisters don't really need sacred rights and Shield of Faith could easily be a datasheet ability. Blessing may be integrated in the enhancements. I have hope they don't mess with the miracle dice, because to me they're pretty much perfect as is.

It's a good question: What happens to the rules that define a faction?

1. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get removed wholesale. Or...

2. Are Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice written as core faction mechanics, meaning there's a page of rules beyond the 2 pages GW keeps telling us about. Or...

3. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get included in the 2 page spreads, meaning the rules get repeated over and over again depending on how many detachments there are? Or...

4. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice only appear on some of the detachments, leaving the others with something different? Or...

5. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get split out into the various formations, so one formation gets "Rapturous Blows", whereas another gets "Word of the Emperor"?

It's interesting to think how these things would be applied (and easy to assume GW will pick the worst possible combination of all 5, because it's GW ).

 GiToRaZor wrote:
But I can't see Morale to become a decisive factor in 10th. That would mean that Night Lords would be relevant, and when have they not been getting the brown end of the stick?

Assuming Night Lords exist in the new rules, and aren't just a paint job you combine with the "Big Spookums Scaryforce" detachment they invented as if it's always been a thing.

Dudeface wrote:
They do literally all that by the intent of their words and suddenly people are upset/confused that they're getting what they asked for.

Only if you don't understand or wilfully misrepresent or just pretend you don't understand the arguments being made. Which one of those three are you doing, Dudeface?

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Morale rules don't really have good track record. So far they were always written as a complex and potentially interesting mechanic. And then they are instantly neutered, because SMs need to know no fear and the various horrors of the galaxy should be considered fearless. In 9th even worse, the entire idea of having to roll for morale is obsolete. If you suffered enough casualties for it to become relevant, your unit was likely already dead anyway.

So let's first see if they reduce the sheer deadliness of everything first. But I can't see Morale to become a decisive factor in 10th. That would mean that Night Lords would be relevant, and when have they not been getting the brown end of the stick?

Since the release of the Liber Hereticus for HH last year. But I have absolutely no faith in the 10th edition rules doing the same, after the unfounded claims about the 9th edition morale rules and how they would let Night Lords do "lots of cool stuff". Assuming that the 8th Legion even exists beyond a specific Formation, as H.B.M.C points out.

 GiToRaZor wrote:
That would mean that Night Lords would be relevant, and when have they not been getting the brown end of the stick?

HH2? Where facing them with infantry force is exercise in seeing your infantry sitting duck

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
They do literally all that by the intent of their words and suddenly people are upset/confused that they're getting what they asked for.

Only if you don't understand or wilfully misrepresent or just pretend you don't understand the arguments being made. Which one of those three are you doing, Dudeface?

Clearly not understanding. Please illuminate me why this bothers you after spending so long complaining about stacking rules and bloat.

It felt like Gravis Armor was sort of a Primaris Terminator armor so what does it mean for Gravis Armor now that we actually have Primaris Terminators? I imagine Inceptors and Eradicators won't be to affected but Primaris Terminator seem like something between Heavy Intercessor and Aggressors so I wonder how this will play out.

I dunno I always saw Terminators as top of the line, basically a double marine (back in the day they'd get an extra D6 added to their save). I think they may have weakened them a bit in subsequent rulesets and I have no idea about Gravis fluff but I'd still assume Terminators would be the final word in armour.

 Ahtman wrote:
It felt like Gravis Armor was sort of a Primaris Terminator armor so what does it mean for Gravis Armor now that we actually have Primaris Terminators? I imagine Inceptors and Eradicators won't be to affected but Primaris Terminator seem like something between Heavy Intercessor and Aggressors so I wonder how this will play out.

We don't have "Primaris Terminators". We just have Terminators, with the fluff justification that anyone can be in the suit. There won't be separate profiles for "Primaris" and "First Born" Terminators. There will just be "Terminators".

(Ok, there may be "Terminators" and "Assault Terminators", but that all depends on whether they consolidate things or keep them separate, even if the full kit contains all options - we just don't know yet! ).

Dudeface wrote:
Clearly not understanding. Please illuminate me why this bothers you after spending so long complaining about stacking rules and bloat.

Because the answer to "too much bloat" isn't "get rid of everything".

I am at a complete loss as to your lack of understanding here. You don't strike me as someone lacking in intelligence, so I cannot help but feel that you are being intentionally dishonest about your level of understanding here. I'd almost say you're approaching a level of "trolling". Almost.

To be fair we don't know that they're getting rid of everything. However it's likely that yes some good stuff will be lost in the cull. If that is for the good of the game as a whole though then I'm fine with that. Some of the synaptic link abilities may make it on to data sheets for example.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
It felt like Gravis Armor was sort of a Primaris Terminator armor so what does it mean for Gravis Armor now that we actually have Primaris Terminators? I imagine Inceptors and Eradicators won't be to affected but Primaris Terminator seem like something between Heavy Intercessor and Aggressors so I wonder how this will play out.

We don't have "Primaris Terminators". We just have Terminators, with the fluff justification that anyone can be in the suit. There won't be separate profiles for "Primaris" and "First Born" Terminators. There will just be "Terminators".

(Ok, there may be "Terminators" and "Assault Terminators", but that all depends on whether they consolidate things or keep them separate, even if the full kit contains all options - we just don't know yet! ).

Dudeface wrote:
Clearly not understanding. Please illuminate me why this bothers you after spending so long complaining about stacking rules and bloat.

Because the answer to "too much bloat" isn't "get rid of everything".

I am at a complete loss as to your lack of understanding here. You don't strike me as someone lacking in intelligence, so I cannot help but feel that you are being intentionally dishonest about your level of understanding here. I'd almost say you're approaching a level of "trolling". Almost.

Back at you. You complain about to many relics, warlord traits, strats, layers of rules spread across multiple books. They've just said they'd fix that. There are fewer strats, fewer psychic powers, contained isolated army rules. Its literally what you ask for.

You can't complain about the free layered rules salad and over abundant options available to deathwing to use your other example, then once they remove them, complain that having the bespoke units with deathwing rules, in a detachment that is used to represent 1st company, I.e. all terminators, isn't enough.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
It felt like Gravis Armor was sort of a Primaris Terminator armor so what does it mean for Gravis Armor now that we actually have Primaris Terminators? I imagine Inceptors and Eradicators won't be to affected but Primaris Terminator seem like something between Heavy Intercessor and Aggressors so I wonder how this will play out.

We don't have "Primaris Terminators". We just have Terminators, with the fluff justification that anyone can be in the suit. There won't be separate profiles for "Primaris" and "First Born" Terminators. There will just be "Terminators".

(Ok, there may be "Terminators" and "Assault Terminators", but that all depends on whether they consolidate things or keep them separate, even if the full kit contains all options - we just don't know yet! ).

Oh haven't you heard? In the 3 years of the incoming edition you will have Primaris Terminators called Terminaris.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
It felt like Gravis Armor was sort of a Primaris Terminator armor so what does it mean for Gravis Armor now that we actually have Primaris Terminators? I imagine Inceptors and Eradicators won't be to affected but Primaris Terminator seem like something between Heavy Intercessor and Aggressors so I wonder how this will play out.

We don't have "Primaris Terminators". We just have Terminators, with the fluff justification that anyone can be in the suit. There won't be separate profiles for "Primaris" and "First Born" Terminators. There will just be "Terminators".

Ah so it is essentially just a bigger model than the older but that is basically it, just bigger?

On a complete aside, with 40K showing up in this weeks’ episode of South Park? I’m not sure if it’s good or bad timing!

Good because GW have the hype train running for 10th. So plenty of info for the curious to observe.

Bad, because with the hype train running, I don’t think many will be buying in from a standstill outside of “oh that model is cool”.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


2. Are Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice written as core faction mechanics, meaning there's a page of rules beyond the 2 pages GW keeps telling us about. Or...

3. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get included in the 2 page spreads, meaning the rules get repeated over and over again depending on how many detachments there are? Or...

Let's mix them together, what GW are calling 2 page of detachment's rules is in reality one page for the Army and one page for the Detachment/subfaction.

pretty sure there was a rumour the distinction between primaris and firstborn marines was going away in terms of strats and transports, anyone aware of this?

I would quite like it as the main reason I never really wanted any of the Primaris is because I simply do not like their vehicles, if I can put primaris in a rhino or a land raider I would be happy and actually get some.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
On a complete aside, with 40K showing up in this weeks’ episode of South Park? I’m not sure if it’s good or bad timing!

The most surprising part was them putting together valid-looking armies from photos, rather than just cartoon imitations like they did for pokemon.

Between this and the recent Darktide references I'm starting to think Matt and/or Trey are fans too.

 Formosa wrote:
pretty sure there was a rumour the distinction between primaris and firstborn marines was going away in terms of strats and transports, anyone aware of this?

I would quite like it as the main reason I never really wanted any of the Primaris is because I simply do not like their vehicles, if I can put primaris in a rhino or a land raider I would be happy and actually get some.

Yeah that was mentioned in a Valrak video in January. Still not confirmation yet, but with terminators amour able to fielded by both it seems more likely.

Dudeface wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
They do literally all that by the intent of their words and suddenly people are upset/confused that they're getting what they asked for.

Only if you don't understand or wilfully misrepresent or just pretend you don't understand the arguments being made. Which one of those three are you doing, Dudeface?

Clearly not understanding. Please illuminate me why this bothers you after spending so long complaining about stacking rules and bloat.

Votann lore explains how they harvest raw materials in bulk from stars and planets, shattering whole worlds to obtain vast quantities of metals and other elements. Despite this technological marvel no league has yet amassed even a fraction of the irony in a post from HMBC accusing someone else of "wilfully misrepresenting" an argument.

Just ignore his posts and move on. Trust me, it makes the forum much more pleasant for you and for everyone else.

 Formosa wrote:
pretty sure there was a rumour the distinction between primaris and firstborn marines was going away in terms of strats and transports, anyone aware of this?

I would quite like it as the main reason I never really wanted any of the Primaris is because I simply do not like their vehicles, if I can put primaris in a rhino or a land raider I would be happy and actually get some.

Sure, it's all there in the OP, quite easily searchable, i'm maintaining that just so you can check stuff like this out without much effort:

In a new video that can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw1Q2FdqkGA

Valrak added the following rumours:

- 10th edition will be 'another game' that is rebuilt 'from the ground up', i.e. a complete redesign instead of an evolution of 9th edition concepts Ambiguous
- Space Marine chapter supplements that were planned for the end of 9th edition have been postponed due to the enormity of the changes, and will instead be released in 10th edition Pending
- Among the chapters mentioned are Iron Hands and White Scars Pending
- In 10th edition, the separation between Primaris and Firstborn will be removed, including the keywords Pending
- Thus, 'Space Marines' of all generations will be one faction, removing restrictions on using certain transports etc. on the tabletop, even if the separation remains in the background

It's from 01/25/2023

So the move to these simplified detachments certainly seems simpler as far as rules go, but my reservations are in how many detachments each faction is going to get. I’m unlikely to know all of my opponents rules and detachments, so explanations are still going to be necessary. I also assume that these detachments will rapidly expand (dare I say bloat) as more and more codexes are released.
Just thinking about marines, how many ways will there be to run them?
Gladius, Phobos, first company, outriders, drop assault, armoured assault, (all speculation of course). You know that GW will want each chapter to have its flavor represented somehow. You’ve got Deathwing, Ravenwing, iron hands dreads, Blood angels death company, Ravenguard sneaky, etc.
There are going to be a metric shizzle ton of detachments to the game. Maybe not immediately (which will probably annoy some as your unique army style will have been removed until your codex drops) but within a year or so.

I’m not sure if bloat is the right term there.

Will we get more unique detachments as the Codexes roll out? Yes, absolutely.

But right now, we don’t know what that really means - nor if it’s a fixed number per Codex, or what benefits or drawbacks we’ll see.

The intent seems to be clear - to allow us to theme or otherwise flavour armies. I for one don’t consider that in itself to be bloat. Just…options.

If they don’t introduce lots of Core Rule exceptions, which stack in odd ways, then it’s just variety which remains the spice of life.

Provided they remain clearly worded and fairly set across the different sheets, could be very good.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m not sure if bloat is the right term there.

Will we get more unique detachments as the Codexes roll out? Yes, absolutely.

But right now, we don’t know what that really means - nor if it’s a fixed number per Codex, or what benefits or drawbacks we’ll see.

The intent seems to be clear - to allow us to theme or otherwise flavour armies. I for one don’t consider that in itself to be bloat. Just…options.

If they don’t introduce lots of Core Rule exceptions, which stack in odd ways, then it’s just variety which remains the spice of life.

Provided they remain clearly worded and fairly set across the different sheets, could be very good.

I broadly agree with this ^

I’m curious about balance updates and faction winrates. Rather than subfactions, specific detachments are likely to be targeted for buffs and nerfs for balance corrections. I’d like to see winrates start to get reported for detachments rather than just for factions as it would be a much better indicator of what’s really going on.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Us3Less wrote:
I really, really hope Sisters keep the Acts of Faith as it is right now. Miracle dice are such a fun mechanism to play with and it fits thematically well as well. It's 'only' one page of rules currently and could be shortened a bit in the explanation. Sisters don't really need sacred rights and Shield of Faith could easily be a datasheet ability. Blessing may be integrated in the enhancements. I have hope they don't mess with the miracle dice, because to me they're pretty much perfect as is.

It's a good question: What happens to the rules that define a faction?

1. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get removed wholesale. Or...

2. Are Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice written as core faction mechanics, meaning there's a page of rules beyond the 2 pages GW keeps telling us about. Or...

3. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get included in the 2 page spreads, meaning the rules get repeated over and over again depending on how many detachments there are? Or...

4. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice only appear on some of the detachments, leaving the others with something different? Or...

5. Do Acts of Faith and/or Miracle dice get split out into the various formations, so one formation gets "Rapturous Blows", whereas another gets "Word of the Emperor"?

It's interesting to think how these things would be applied (and easy to assume GW will pick the worst possible combination of all 5, because it's GW ).

I'm kind of afraid they'll go back to the 6th(?) ed WD style where the Acts of Faith are specific to the unit and included on the card.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m not sure if bloat is the right term there.

Will we get more unique detachments as the Codexes roll out? Yes, absolutely.

I think cries of "bloat!" are inevitable because not everyone is going to have the same interpretation of what that means. Is it five detachments, or 10, or 20?

Still, even if some factions end up with 20 or 30 detachment options to pick from it's still a vast improvement over 9E because of the one-in-one-out approach. You don't need an encylopedic knowledge of all the rules available to an opponent like now, that's all summarised in 1-2 pages that be be easily digested pre-game. There's far less scope for 'gotchas' by combining rules from pages 50+55+67+99 all together into an unexpected wombo-combo.

What's more, playtesting becomes less of a hopeless cause as there's no longer a functionally infinite number of layered special rules that can be applied. It will also be easier to apply targeted balance changes to any problematic units as they crop up, without wondering if the cause is the unit itself, subfaction rules, shared strats, etc. Those factors are going to have a much bigger impact than most people are considering right now.

Added to the OP:

Edit 03/31/2023

This video concerns Space Marine chapter supplements: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8cE1ASmoZ8

- Space Marines will get 'a lot of love' in 10th edition (duh)
- Starter Box is just step one
- 'End of Summer' second wave for SM, September/August
- 'Huge Refresh' for Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves
- Dark Angel stuff is from a source he trusts 100%
- Blood Angel and Space Wolf stuff is from a new source
- BA and SW will receive boxed sets
- Dante probably in a boxed set, presented at Warhammer fest (speculation)
- He 'knows' Epic Horus Heresy will be shown of at Warhammer Fest
- Dark Angel box set with brand-new Sammael and Belial (unclear if old or new model)
- Second wave will also include separate kits for the stuff in the 10th box set
- Sanguinary guard: personally believes they'll come, but has no concrete information
- 'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters
- Says that will occupy the first half (!) of 10th edition

First half of 10th?
Gonna be a very short edition then

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
First half of 10th?
Gonna be a very short edition then

I think he meant that the release of these three supplements will be drawn out intermittently over the first half of 10th, not that that's all that will ever be released for it

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Morale rules don't really have good track record. So far they were always written as a complex and potentially interesting mechanic. And then they are instantly neutered, because SMs need to know no fear and the various horrors of the galaxy should be considered fearless. In 9th even worse, the entire idea of having to roll for morale is obsolete. If you suffered enough casualties for it to become relevant, your unit was likely already dead anyway.

So let's first see if they reduce the sheer deadliness of everything first. But I can't see Morale to become a decisive factor in 10th. That would mean that Night Lords would be relevant, and when have they not been getting the brown end of the stick?

Right for morale to make a difference the deaths need to slow down. It needs to be slightly momentous to tip a unit over the threshold to test.

If it turns off OC then it could get really interesting since you can tactically deal with different parts of the table without having to have a unit on objective.

'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters

Everyone who? The BA, DA, and Space Wolves? All the SM supplement codices? Grey Knighes? Custodes? CSM? All factions?

Dudeface wrote:
The community spends 2 years complaining there's too many rules to remember, nothing is easy to track or keep up with, too many hidden power bumps for units, bring back USRs.

They do literally all that by the intent of their words and suddenly people are upset/confused that they're getting what they asked for. How ele did people expect them to strip back faction purity rules, subfaction rules and "unforseen" interactions out the hoohaa other than reduce the amount of sheer stuff?

It is kind of funny. I feel the dichotomy in my own head.

I know the game needs a slim down, but I love so much of what they did in 9th. Ultimately it's just an extreme lack of information and our heads running wild a bit. And I imagine the indexes will be bland. It won't be until codexes that we see some of these things we enjoyed return.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Everyone who? The BA, DA, and Space Wolves? All the SM supplement codices? Grey Knighes? Custodes? CSM? All factions?

BA, DA and Space Wolves most certainly. Deathwatch would get new upgrade sprues, maybe an HQ miniature?

Custodes aren't Marines, so, not them. CSMs basically have had their refresh. I mean, the oldest things in the range outside of vehicles would be Terminator characters and Raptors, right?

 xttz wrote:
Just ignore his posts and move on. Trust me, it makes the forum much more pleasant for you and for everyone else.

Could say the same thing about you, but I actually give a damn about Dudeface's opinions.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters

Everyone who? The BA, DA, and Space Wolves? All the SM supplement codices? Grey Knighes? Custodes? CSM? All factions?

I have absolutely no idea From the context of the video it seems like he means the three mentioned Space Marine chapters, but i'm not entirely sure, so i opted for the direct citation.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Everyone who? The BA, DA, and Space Wolves? All the SM supplement codices? Grey Knighes? Custodes? CSM? All factions?

BA, DA and Space Wolves most certainly. Deathwatch would get new upgrade sprues, maybe an HQ miniature?

Custodes aren't Marines, so, not them. CSMs basically have had their refresh. I mean, the oldest things in the range outside of vehicles would be Terminator characters and Raptors, right?

 xttz wrote:
Just ignore his posts and move on. Trust me, it makes the forum much more pleasant for you and for everyone else.

Could say the same thing about you, but I actually give a damn about Dudeface's opinions.

And that's why you're a person to respect even if disagreed with.

One would think 30k would mean enough marine releases, especially if the artificial nonsense distinction of primaris and firstborn gets dropped....

But nope, it seems we need more nerfgun marines.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
CSMs basically have had their refresh. I mean, the oldest things in the range outside of vehicles would be Terminator characters and Raptors, right?

Honestly, I'm okay with the Raptors and Warp Talon models. They actually have more details, if less detailed, than the modern CSM stuff. And their smaller stature is explained away by the Warp mutating them that way to allow them the capability of true flight.

 bullyboy wrote:
So the move to these simplified detachments certainly seems simpler as far as rules go, but my reservations are in how many detachments each faction is going to get. I’m unlikely to know all of my opponents rules and detachments, so explanations are still going to be necessary. I also assume that these detachments will rapidly expand (dare I say bloat) as more and more codexes are released.

If the idea is that people end up with two pages of rules that aren't on the datasheets - and there's a way to print them - then all you (and your opponent) should need to do is ensure you each bring two copies of those with you, and exchange a copy before the game begins. Job jobbed.

I'm glad to hear they are focusing on Marines due to their limited model range rather than say Eldar.

Loopstah wrote:
I'm glad to hear they are focusing on Marines due to their limited model range rather than say Eldar.

Well for what it's worth, the same source for these rumours also claims that Striking Scorpions are in the next KT box.

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

Spoiler:

Ha! Oh yeah. Forgot about them.

Good call.

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:
Honestly, I'm okay with the Raptors and Warp Talon models. They actually have more details, if less detailed, than the modern CSM stuff. And their smaller stature is explained away by the Warp mutating them that way to allow them the capability of true flight.

The thing about the Raptors is that they fit the redesigned Chaos aesthetic... or... really, they originated what we currently have. They're a bit heavier on the trim and whatnot - and if I'm being honest I prefer the second version of the Ratpors to the current ones - but these are still fine.

I am cautiously optimistic about this.
Sure, it will eventually bloat, as it always does.
And looking at some reactions here that does seem to be demanded by some members of the community anyways.

And there is still the issue that at one point all but the most hardcore players will get to the " your special rules are what? Guess i lost" point.

But it sounds a lot more manageable to understand and remember two pages of enemy formation (thats what this is in my book, 7th formations) rules than what we have now.

If they can now pace the inevidable powercreep so new isnt ALWAYS better we might end up with a game i enjoy playing.

Edit 03/31/2023

This video concerns Space Marine chapter supplements: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8cE1ASmoZ8

- Space Marines will get 'a lot of love' in 10th edition (duh)
- Starter Box is just step one
- 'End of Summer' second wave for SM, September/August
- 'Huge Refresh' for Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves
- Dark Angel stuff is from a source he trusts 100%
- Blood Angel and Space Wolf stuff is from a new source
- BA and SW will receive boxed sets
- Dante probably in a boxed set, presented at Warhammer fest (speculation)
- He 'knows' Epic Horus Heresy will be shown of at Warhammer Fest
- Dark Angel box set with brand-new Sammael and Belial (unclear if old or new model)
- Second wave will also include separate kits for the stuff in the 10th box set
- Sanguinary guard: personally believes they'll come, but has no concrete information
- 'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters
- Says that will occupy the first half (!) of 10th edition

Where are my GK 'bigtermies'?

Very interesting warcom article. I honestly didn't expect them to go this direction with Detachments. I think it's a nice flexible system that allows you to paint your army however you like and pick the detachment that suits them best. I see it as a huge boon for players who like to make custom chapters, craftworlds, kultures, etc.

I'm also pleased to see they are limiting Epic Heroes to one per army, I never did like seeing "Super Friends" lists in 7th edition or early 8th. I am hopeful they are strict about what is an epic hero, that way Space Wolves players and Chaos Daemons can still field armies of names heroes and daemons if they so choose.

Aash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m not sure if bloat is the right term there.

Will we get more unique detachments as the Codexes roll out? Yes, absolutely.

But right now, we don’t know what that really means - nor if it’s a fixed number per Codex, or what benefits or drawbacks we’ll see.

The intent seems to be clear - to allow us to theme or otherwise flavour armies. I for one don’t consider that in itself to be bloat. Just…options.

If they don’t introduce lots of Core Rule exceptions, which stack in odd ways, then it’s just variety which remains the spice of life.

Provided they remain clearly worded and fairly set across the different sheets, could be very good.

I broadly agree with this ^

I’m curious about balance updates and faction winrates. Rather than subfactions, specific detachments are likely to be targeted for buffs and nerds for balance corrections. I’m like to see winrates start to get reported for detachments rather than just for factions as it would be a much better indicator of what’s really going on.

Same here, I think this would be a far easier way to balance the game by looking at the results of which detachments are pulling in big win rates (and against which other detachments) when it comes to game balancing. Also, in full agreement with Mad Doc Grotsnik's post

 xttz wrote:

Loopstah wrote:
I'm glad to hear they are focusing on Marines due to their limited model range rather than say Eldar.

Well for what it's worth, the same source for these rumours also claims that Striking Scorpions are in the next KT box.

Would much, much, much preferred Warp Spiders in the KT Box, or another Aspect currently wallowing in finecast shame.

 The Red Hobbit wrote:


Would much, much, much preferred Warp Spiders in the KT Box, or another Aspect currently wallowing in finecast shame.

Umm, Scorpions are in Finecast...
Or are you saying you just don't like Scorpions?

 dreadblade wrote:

Edit 03/31/2023

This video concerns Space Marine chapter supplements: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8cE1ASmoZ8

- Space Marines will get 'a lot of love' in 10th edition (duh)
- Starter Box is just step one
- 'End of Summer' second wave for SM, September/August
- 'Huge Refresh' for Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves
- Dark Angel stuff is from a source he trusts 100%
- Blood Angel and Space Wolf stuff is from a new source
- BA and SW will receive boxed sets
- Dante probably in a boxed set, presented at Warhammer fest (speculation)
- He 'knows' Epic Horus Heresy will be shown of at Warhammer Fest
- Dark Angel box set with brand-new Sammael and Belial (unclear if old or new model)
- Second wave will also include separate kits for the stuff in the 10th box set
- Sanguinary guard: personally believes they'll come, but has no concrete information
- 'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters
- Says that will occupy the first half (!) of 10th edition

Where are my GK 'bigtermies'?

Hiding with the power armor guys who are scaled better than the bread-boxes strapped to their arms.
A GK range refresh seems like it would be easy whenever they want to do it, but with the general upscale I'm glad they didn't try to do it during the transition period.

GW barely release new characters outside of boxsets anymore so that is hardly even speculation, it's kind of just a logical deduction. If I want Dante, I'm sure it will be a case of getting him with 5 intercessors, probably an Impulsor and some of the old blood angel terminators for £100. If we're lucky, available on his own within a year.

Billicus wrote:
GW barely release new characters outside of boxsets anymore so that is hardly even speculation, it's kind of just a logical deduction. If I want Dante, I'm sure it will be a case of getting him with 5 intercessors, probably an Impulsor and some of the old blood angel terminators for £100. If we're lucky, available on his own within a year.

We've literally seen that he will be getting a solo boxed release. That's how we saw him get leaked.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Billicus wrote:
GW barely release new characters outside of boxsets anymore so that is hardly even speculation, it's kind of just a logical deduction. If I want Dante, I'm sure it will be a case of getting him with 5 intercessors, probably an Impulsor and some of the old blood angel terminators for £100. If we're lucky, available on his own within a year.

We've literally seen that he will be getting a solo boxed release. That's how we saw him get leaked.

I mean, he'll get a solo release eventually, could be they pop him into the two months early boxset tax. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the manufacture and boxing of both at the same time rather than in separate runs. (In that I suspect there are boxes of the solo Vashtor and Azrael stashed in the warehouse currently.)

If that were the case, it would be in whatever the new box design would be.

Dante's box would not look out of place right now.

I couldn't be happier than to be proved wrong on it, but nearly all the characters get their launch in "battle boxes" or an equivalent at the moment, which is the point I was making - that "Dante probably in a box set" isn't much of a rumour, it's just an obvious deduction.

An entirely speculative thought about Chaos in 10th. Yes it is viewed through Rose Tinteds. No you cannot divest them me of them on this one, because I have used a Stapler and Eternogum, which not even Swarfega* can shift.

And it’s to do with Detachments. Detachments with perhaps just an extra page, displaying your unit options drawn from different Chaos Codexes. Like allying, without allying.

Because much as a Jumbo Chaos Codex would be my preference, I think we have to accept that’s probably not happening.

But to have a few** Detachments which draw different units from different Codexes might well be the Next Best Thing.

Whether that’s practical remains to be seen, as we’re yet to actually see a Detachment sheet. But, I’d say from what we know so far, it doesn’t sound inherently implausible.

*It’s a real thing, and not a swear.

**you decide what few would be here.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
An entirely speculative thought about Chaos in 10th. Yes it is viewed through Rose Tinteds. No you cannot divest them me of them on this one, because I have used a Stapler and Eternogum, which not even Swarfega* can shift.

And it’s to do with Detachments. Detachments with perhaps just an extra page, displaying your unit options drawn from different Chaos Codexes. Like allying, without allying.

Because much as a Jumbo Chaos Codex would be my preference, I think we have to accept that’s probably not happening.

But to have a few** Detachments which draw different units from different Codexes might well be the Next Best Thing.

Given that's essentially what Disciples of the Red Angel already does (with extra steps) I'd say this is a given. Those keywords were specifically picked to still allow daemon allies. In 10th that gets simpler to implement without the tangled restrictions of superfaction abilities and detachment rules.

We also definitely shouldn't rule out AoS-style chaos god codexes, with WE+daemons or DG+daemons in the same book. If that happens I could see Vashtorr & Belakor being rolled into the next CSM book with rules to take their respective lackeys.

Tsagualsa wrote:
Added to the OP:

Edit 03/31/2023

This video concerns Space Marine chapter supplements: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8cE1ASmoZ8

- Space Marines will get 'a lot of love' in 10th edition (duh)
- Starter Box is just step one
- 'End of Summer' second wave for SM, September/August
- 'Huge Refresh' for Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves
- Dark Angel stuff is from a source he trusts 100%
- Blood Angel and Space Wolf stuff is from a new source
- BA and SW will receive boxed sets
- Dante probably in a boxed set, presented at Warhammer fest (speculation)
- He 'knows' Epic Horus Heresy will be shown of at Warhammer Fest
- Dark Angel box set with brand-new Sammael and Belial (unclear if old or new model)
- Second wave will also include separate kits for the stuff in the 10th box set
- Sanguinary guard: personally believes they'll come, but has no concrete information
- 'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters
- Says that will occupy the first half (!) of 10th edition

...sigh. Honestly, I don't think there's anything that could have made me feel worse about 10th than this.

They could have announced they're switching to a D73 system (with proprietary dice) that doesn't reduce the overall size of dice pools, and I would have preferred that to '1.5 years of more SM crap'.

 xttz wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
An entirely speculative thought about Chaos in 10th. Yes it is viewed through Rose Tinteds. No you cannot divest them me of them on this one, because I have used a Stapler and Eternogum, which not even Swarfega* can shift.

And it’s to do with Detachments. Detachments with perhaps just an extra page, displaying your unit options drawn from different Chaos Codexes. Like allying, without allying.

Because much as a Jumbo Chaos Codex would be my preference, I think we have to accept that’s probably not happening.

But to have a few** Detachments which draw different units from different Codexes might well be the Next Best Thing.

Given that's essentially what Disciples of the Red Angel already does (with extra steps) I'd say this is a given. Those keywords were specifically picked to still allow daemon allies. In 10th that gets simpler to implement without the tangled restrictions of superfaction abilities and detachment rules.

We also definitely shouldn't rule out AoS-style chaos god codexes, with WE+daemons or DG+daemons in the same book. If that happens I could see Vashtorr & Belakor being rolled into the next CSM book with rules to take their respective lackeys.

Daemon units should be the bare minimum, I want to be allowed to run plague marines in a CSM army again instead of DG having a monopoly in them

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 GiToRaZor wrote:
Morale rules don't really have good track record. So far they were always written as a complex and potentially interesting mechanic. And then they are instantly neutered, because SMs need to know no fear and the various horrors of the galaxy should be considered fearless. In 9th even worse, the entire idea of having to roll for morale is obsolete. If you suffered enough casualties for it to become relevant, your unit was likely already dead anyway.

So let's first see if they reduce the sheer deadliness of everything first. But I can't see Morale to become a decisive factor in 10th. That would mean that Night Lords would be relevant, and when have they not been getting the brown end of the stick?

Right for morale to make a difference the deaths need to slow down. It needs to be slightly momentous to tip a unit over the threshold to test.

If it turns off OC then it could get really interesting since you can tactically deal with different parts of the table without having to have a unit on objective.

Morale as a mechanic has never been good or interesting in 40k, whether it be fall back, sweeping advance, pinning, etc.

The game is 5 turns long. That means non-cqc units get 3ish 'full' activations on average. Who knows how many of those will actually be relevant to the outcome of the game? Because of that, any morale mechanic that prevents actions, or especially movement, is close enough to just killing the unit so as not to make much of a difference.

The difference between pinning a unit so it can't move or shoot, vs just killing the unit outright, is negligible in a game like 40k.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:
Very interesting warcom article. I honestly didn't expect them to go this direction with Detachments. I think it's a nice flexible system that allows you to paint your army however you like and pick the detachment that suits them best. I see it as a huge boon for players who like to make custom chapters, craftworlds, kultures, etc.

I'm also pleased to see they are limiting Epic Heroes to one per army, I never did like seeing "Super Friends" lists in 7th edition or early 8th. I am hopeful they are strict about what is an epic hero, that way Space Wolves players and Chaos Daemons can still field armies of names heroes and daemons if they so choose.

Aash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m not sure if bloat is the right term there.

Will we get more unique detachments as the Codexes roll out? Yes, absolutely.

But right now, we don’t know what that really means - nor if it’s a fixed number per Codex, or what benefits or drawbacks we’ll see.

The intent seems to be clear - to allow us to theme or otherwise flavour armies. I for one don’t consider that in itself to be bloat. Just…options.

If they don’t introduce lots of Core Rule exceptions, which stack in odd ways, then it’s just variety which remains the spice of life.

Provided they remain clearly worded and fairly set across the different sheets, could be very good.

I broadly agree with this ^

I’m curious about balance updates and faction winrates. Rather than subfactions, specific detachments are likely to be targeted for buffs and nerds for balance corrections. I’m like to see winrates start to get reported for detachments rather than just for factions as it would be a much better indicator of what’s really going on.

Same here, I think this would be a far easier way to balance the game by looking at the results of which detachments are pulling in big win rates (and against which other detachments) when it comes to game balancing. Also, in full agreement with Mad Doc Grotsnik's post

 xttz wrote:

Loopstah wrote:
I'm glad to hear they are focusing on Marines due to their limited model range rather than say Eldar.

Well for what it's worth, the same source for these rumours also claims that Striking Scorpions are in the next KT box.

Would much, much, much preferred Warp Spiders in the KT Box, or another Aspect currently wallowing in finecast shame.

Reread that post, it's "You can only include one of each named EPIC HERO per army"

Billicus wrote:

Daemon units should be the bare minimum, I want to be allowed to run plague marines in a CSM army again instead of DG having a monopoly in them

You can, they're an elites in the chaos marines book.

Billicus wrote:
GW barely release new characters outside of boxsets anymore so that is hardly even speculation, it's kind of just a logical deduction. If I want Dante, I'm sure it will be a case of getting him with 5 intercessors, probably an Impulsor and some of the old blood angel terminators for £100. If we're lucky, available on his own within a year.

Can we not clutter the forum with falsehoods that just serve to stir the pot?

Characters released alone :

Lord Invocatus
Angry Ron
Exalted Sorcerer
Ahriman
Celestine
Cannoness
Dialogus
Imagifier
Saint Katherine
Lord Discordant
Avatar
Ghaz
Abaddon
Lord Solar
Vahl
Cawl
Mozrog
Szeras
Helbrecht
Shadowsun
Creed
Mephiston
Shrike
Feirros
Bile

etc...

To be fair, at least Celestine was first released in a set with Cawl and Inquisitor Nevermentiond Again.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Billicus wrote:
GW barely release new characters outside of boxsets anymore so that is hardly even speculation, it's kind of just a logical deduction. If I want Dante, I'm sure it will be a case of getting him with 5 intercessors, probably an Impulsor and some of the old blood angel terminators for £100. If we're lucky, available on his own within a year.

Can we not clutter the forum with falsehoods that just serve to stir the pot?

Characters released alone :

Lord Invocatus
Angry Ron
Exalted Sorcerer
Ahriman
Celestine
Cannoness
Dialogus
Imagifier
Saint Katherine
Lord Discordant
Avatar
Ghaz
Abaddon
Lord Solar
Vahl
Cawl
Mozrog
Szeras
Helbrecht
Shadowsun
Creed
Mephiston
Shrike
Feirros
Bile

etc...

Some of these are not 9th edition

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Some of these are not 9th edition

Not sure what edition has to do with it since it's a presumed business practice.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
They seem determined to bring bad elements from AOS into 40k, so expect the double turn here come 11th.

What bad elements of AoS have we recieved?

My top 3 (or at least 2.5)?
- Fixed to-hit values instead of a reworked comparison table in melee. Gretchin should not be hitting The Lion (based on what we've seen so far) as easily as they hit a Guardsman or Guardian. At least they've not dragged fixed to-wound values across... yet.
- Mortal Wounds (especially coupled with GW's lack of discipline on handing them out).
- The whole Command Point mess (which I think was AOS before 40k, but it was 6 years ago so I might be mis-remembering that).

Did you teleport back in time or something?

- We haven't had WS compare since 7th.
- The prevalence of MW is unknown.
- They already stated that CP are even less than what they are now.

Not at all - the question that was asked was "What bad elements of AoS have we recieved?" (sic), with no time frame tied to the question. Certainly nothing about the question implied I was only restricted to things which may/will happen in 10th.

So please put the scoring equipment back where it started, rather than dragging it around the pitch - someone is going to have to fix all the turf you've damaged already.

ERJAK wrote:
Morale as a mechanic has never been good or interesting in 40k, whether it be fall back, sweeping advance, pinning, etc.

The game is 5 turns long. That means non-cqc units get 3ish 'full' activations on average. Who knows how many of those will actually be relevant to the outcome of the game? Because of that, any morale mechanic that prevents actions, or especially movement, is close enough to just killing the unit so as not to make much of a difference.

The difference between pinning a unit so it can't move or shoot, vs just killing the unit outright, is negligible in a game like 40k.

Fall back and sweeping can stay away. Pinning is also a little dubious.

Morale can't be so disruptive as to make vehicles better objective holders.

Tanget...AP is going down and vehicle toughness is going up. It feels like vehicles will be king of the battlefield especially that have a quantifiable OC and no morale effects. Just conjecture though.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:

Not at all - the question that was asked was "What bad elements of AoS have we recieved?" (sic), with no time frame tied to the question. Certainly nothing about the question implied I was only restricted to things which may/will happen in 10th.

So please put the scoring equipment back where it started, rather than dragging it around the pitch - someone is going to have to fix all the turf you've damaged already.

You're better than that, Dys. We're literally talking about incoming changes to 10th and you decide to lament about changes that have already occurred, mention nothing about known changes, and use that to infer double turn in 3 years? Come on.

 Dawnbringer wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:


Would much, much, much preferred Warp Spiders in the KT Box, or another Aspect currently wallowing in finecast shame.

Umm, Scorpions are in Finecast...
Or are you saying you just don't like Scorpions?

Oh no I love Scorpions, but the warp spiders are truly ancient and in need of a refresh.

ERJAK wrote:

Reread that post, it's "You can only include one of each named EPIC HERO per army"

Ah I see, thanks for the clarification.

ERJAK wrote:

Morale as a mechanic has never been good or interesting in 40k, whether it be fall back, sweeping advance, pinning, etc.

The game is 5 turns long. That means non-cqc units get 3ish 'full' activations on average. Who knows how many of those will actually be relevant to the outcome of the game? Because of that, any morale mechanic that prevents actions, or especially movement, is close enough to just killing the unit so as not to make much of a difference.

The difference between pinning a unit so it can't move or shoot, vs just killing the unit outright, is negligible in a game like 40k.

The game used to have 6 rounds and could be extended to 8. You know back when after turn 2 more than 50% of your army were still alive. I'm not saying it was perfect back then, but morale was not a useless idea, just poorly executed. I agree though that we will likely not go back to that and rather stay in a fast paced tactically arcade setting. Hence I'd expect battleshaken to just be -1 to hit and -2" to movement. Just like Kill Team injured.

ERJAK wrote:
They could have announced they're switching to a D73 system (with proprietary dice) that doesn't reduce the overall size of dice pools, and I would have preferred that to '1.5 years of more SM crap'.

My read on that is 'several small releases spread out over a long period'. I don't believe for a second GW would focus on only space marines for several consecutive releases. More likely they get small waves dropped in between other things, like how 1 month of Black Templar stuff was sandwiched between several months of new Ork & Eldar content.

Also, it's Valrak. The timeline is probably entirely speculation again.

ERJAK wrote:
The game is 5 turns long. That means non-cqc units get 3ish 'full' activations on average. Who knows how many of those will actually be relevant to the outcome of the game? Because of that, any morale mechanic that prevents actions, or especially movement, is close enough to just killing the unit so as not to make much of a difference.

That could change quite a bit if the new datasheets & stratagems continue to allow more interaction in your opponent's turn as expected. We've already seen termagants & berzerkers getting free movement in an opponent's turn, who knows what other scope there will be for more than 5 activations per game?

Yeah, I had a feeling the first 3-6 months of 10th ed would be Space Marines followed by more Space Marines and then some Space Marines for flavor.

My major hope is that they slide in a few other codexes in there. Factions that aren't going to be getting a huge model update? Just give us the one hero model and the codex so those armies can get playing without us having to wait 4+ months through the space marine releases just to get to the actual meat and potatoes of the rest of the edition.

drbored wrote:
Yeah, I had a feeling the first 3-6 months of 10th ed would be Space Marines followed by more Space Marines and then some Space Marines for flavor.

Red and Green are flavors in this case, aren't they?

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

drbored wrote:
Yeah, I had a feeling the first 3-6 months of 10th ed would be Space Marines followed by more Space Marines and then some Space Marines for flavor.

Red and Green are flavors in this case, aren't they?

Eh, you get to a certain age and they all just start tasting the same. So, you turn to other flavors that are stronger, more pungent, or spicier.

I really hope they do some consolidation. Two years to release every codex when there's a 3 year edition cycle is not sustainable

Frankly, I'm assuming that it will be more low effort stuff like the Hounds of Morkai.

I would imagine that the current Terminator pads don't fit the new Terminator sculpts, so we could see Deathwing/Wolf Guard/Blood Angel/Deathwatch/[insert chapter here] conversion sprues for the new Terminators.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I would imagine that the current Terminator pads don't fit the new Terminator sculpts, so we could see Deathwing/Wolf Guard/Blood Angel/Deathwatch/[insert chapter here] conversion sprues for the new Terminators.

As though a million etsy stores cried out at once

Wayniac wrote:
I really hope they do some consolidation. Two years to release every codex when there's a 3 year edition cycle is not sustainable

Doubt gw is in trouble to release that many books in that time.

 privateer4hire wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I would imagine that the current Terminator pads don't fit the new Terminator sculpts, so we could see Deathwing/Wolf Guard/Blood Angel/Deathwatch/[insert chapter here] conversion sprues for the new Terminators.

As though a million etsy stores cried out at once

On the contrary, this is new opportunity for them. If all it takes is resizing some files to fit the new pads, that's easy money.

I do agree though, churning out the codexes isn't sustainable for a game with this quick of a turnaround, but hey, people keep giving GW money, so our definition of 'sustainable' as gamers and GW's definition of 'sustainable' as a business selling models and books are two very different things. Might be unsustainable for some people's wallets, but as soon as the new codexes drop, they'll sell just fine.

The main issue is that there's not an avenue that GW can take that gives people MORE product while also making MORE money off of that product.

For example, let's say they make all of the base army rules for each faction free. So, none of the extra detachments, but your points and datasheets are all free.

That means, a percentage of people aren't going to buy the codex. You might say 'well those people might put that money to buying more kits' or 'it makes it easier for new people to get into the hobby' but those are tough to quantify on a spreadsheet that'll be shown to shareholders. You're giving people more, you're receiving less, ergo, you're losing out on money that could have been made by simply charging for the rules.

GW did try, they gave us PDF codexes for a while, only to pull them because it made it that much easier for people to share the codexes around.

They used to do paperback, the codexes were cheaper. They moved up to hardback where the margins are even better.

Whatever argument you can concoct up in here, GW have already considered it. People have been screaming at GW for free rules and digital codexes for a while, and they're trying to meet us while also making money.

We're getting the indexes and core rules for free, and we have the 40k app where army building will be digital at least. If you're not satisfied with that, then definitely try voting with your dollars and don't buy the new 10th ed codexes when they come out.

If the faction rules are as simple as 2 pages, the codexes shouldn't be too difficult to churn out quickly. They reprint old background - maybe adding a new page or two, or doing their recent trick of running some sentences through a thesaurus once or twice - pop in photos of the new character model for the faction and they're done.

 Shakalooloo wrote:
If the faction rules are as simple as 2 pages, the codexes shouldn't be too difficult to churn out quickly. They reprint old background - maybe adding a new page or two, or doing their recent trick of running some sentences through a thesaurus once or twice - pop in photos of the new character model for the faction and they're done.

They have been chukking out more complex codexes just fine so far. No reason to think they couldn't even if it was more than 2 pages Not like GW aims to have particularly high quality with them. What matters is more books to sell. Thus they won't reduce # of books nor will they slow down the cycle.

Now if they start reducing edition cycle to say 2 years that might require them to reduce # of books as only so many saturday's to release and they don't want too many new releases to compete with each other specific week.

So, I dunno if you guys have talked about it, but, have you already posted the new nids leaks?



Take it with THE BIGGEST GRAIN OF SALT POSSIBLE as it was posted on "English guys go full Mr Comedy Day", I think

Those names sound absolutely ridiculous I wouldn't doubt it but yeah that sounds like BS

The biggest knock against it is assuming that Magnus is the most powerful psyker in the game.

Here's something that might be more legit though. Apparently leaked intercessor data sheet:



Notice anything interesting? So much for all you need is the data sheet.

Wayniac wrote:
Here's something that might be more legit though. Apparently leaked intercessor data sheet:

Spoiler:

Notice anything interesting?

Indeed. Morale works the wrong way around, and the 'Strategic Fire' skill is missing an 'unit' after 'enemy' - I'd say fake.

Also, wounds are not 'suffered', the usual parlance is 'that wound is not lost' or 'ignore the first wound lost by', and if you roll dice you ignore 'a die' and not 'a dice', although that is not conclusive.

Yeah; completely missing any unit composition or equipment rules. Given the date and all I’m not going to trust it in the slightest.

Leadership seems low. But I think HBMC said lower is now better - not sure if that was speculation or not.

Also built-in Overwatch.

I thought I heard that for Leadership smaller numbers were better. If so, this supposed datasheet indicates that a Sergeant... makes their Leadership worse?

Could be fake for April 1 yes. I was mainly thinking about the lack of any options when I posted it. No grenade launcher, no Sgt options

Compared to the Termagant sheet it's also easy to see that the header is fake, the Termagant one has a textured background and does recede a bit to give room to the models, while the 'Primaris' one is just a straight bar with a color gradient:





The SM one also lacks the Faction Symbol as a divider between unit keywords and faction keywords. And the SM one has a space between Keywords and the following ':', the Tyranid one does not. The Tyranid one has symbols (Crosshair, crossed hammers) in front of the ranged and melee weapons, the SM one does not. The color of the profile headers is also wrong in the SM profile, and it uses the wrong font in the profile entries itself.

The datasheet seems fake to me. For example, there are a couple formatting imperfections, and the background design isn't consistent with the Termagant's and doesn't look SM-specific.

Also, it's the 1st of April.

I made a quick comparison that outlines some of the design inconsistencies:

Good catch!

Also, 'Fight Phase' should be in capitals in the last ability, because it is a game concept like To Wound etc.

And like on the second datasheet for the Termagants, the Seargant should just have his own profile line instead of changing the unit LD via an unnecessary ability

Wayniac wrote:
Here's something that might be more legit though. Apparently leaked intercessor data sheet:

Spoiler:

Notice anything interesting? So much for all you need is the data sheet.

That seems noticeably less legit tbh.

Also, I suspect the purple banner on the termagant card is because purple is the tyranid faction colour. I doubt space marines will have purple banners.

Tsagualsa wrote:
Compared to the Termagant sheet it's also easy to see that the header is fake, the Termagant one has a textured background and does recede a bit to give room to the models, while the 'Primaris' one is just a straight bar with a color gradient:

On another note, with regards to the 'real' datasheet. How do players know how many models in a unit?

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:
Compared to the Termagant sheet it's also easy to see that the header is fake, the Termagant one has a textured background and does recede a bit to give room to the models, while the 'Primaris' one is just a straight bar with a color gradient:

On another note, with regards to the 'real' datasheet. How do players know how many models in a unit?

Assumption is the points list.

Maybe back of card?

May just be a mockup/half finished thing for internal purposes rather than "fake", but that's good work pointing out all the inconsistencies, it definitely should not be treated as gospel

Billicus wrote:
May just be a mockup/half finished thing for internal purposes rather than "fake", but that's good work pointing out all the inconsistencies, it definitely should not be treated as gospel

I doubt that an internal mockup would leak when other stuff that is shown is obviously finished, but sure, we can't completely rule out that it might be legit, although with all the errors and today being April Fool's day i'm 99% sure it's fake

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
I thought I heard that for Leadership smaller numbers were better. If so, this supposed datasheet indicates that a Sergeant... makes their Leadership worse?

Yeah that's correct. The Tyranid CP datasheet has rippers with a higher leadership than termagants.

I believe the battleshock test is to roll equal/above Ld on 2D6.

There’s no guarantee that lower leadership is better. In the past ripper swarms were fearless, so a higher leadership doesn’t seem unreasonable.

Besides, we have no frame of reference for leadership in 10th. For all we know Space Marines have leadership 20.

Also, the datacard listing ripper swarm Ld as 10+ while the Termagants are 9+, and the general consensus seems to think this is for the Combat Patrol game mode, while the other datacard only showing Termagants has Ld 8+. For all we know, morale could work differently in Combat Patrol versus the main game.

Not exactly conclusive evidence that lower leadership stats are necessarily better.

Yeah, whoever put together the fake Intercessor sheet didn't realise how Leadership works in 10th.

Aash wrote:
There’s no guarantee that lower leadership is better.

They told us that lower = better.

Garrac wrote:
So, I dunno if you guys have talked about it, but, have you already posted the new nids leaks?

Spoiler:

Take it with THE BIGGEST GRAIN OF SALT POSSIBLE as it was posted on "English guys go full Mr Comedy Day", I think

Oh, I forgot to tell the source: a supposed leaker on B&C that deleted the post inmediately after. The image is from a redditor who made the screenshots on time.

Salt.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah, whoever put together the fake Intercessor sheet didn't realise how Leadership works in 10th.

Aash wrote:
There’s no guarantee that lower leadership is better.

They told us that lower = better.

I must’ve missed that. Where did they say that?

If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Wayniac wrote:
If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Lower is better, as in you must roll over the characteristic to pass the test (bringing leadership in line with all other characteristic tests, roll over the threshold to pass). Gaunt, 7+ to pass.

 Insularum wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Lower is better, as in you must roll over the characteristic to pass the test (bringing leadership in line with all other characteristic tests, roll over the threshold to pass). Gaunt, 7+ to pass.

That’s certainly the assumption everyone appears to be making (myself included), but AFAIK it is just an assumption and not officially confirmed.

So, Valrak talks about the nids rumours. He says it speaks about some nids units Valrak says he wanted to speak about on a future video, so it has some foundation, but as allways "If you want to believe it, believe it" and a last part that I havent been able to understand correctly outside the recap, if anyone gets it better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7FIwLLHq5k

Garrac wrote:
So, Valrak talks about the nids rumours. He says it speaks about some nids units Valrak says he wanted to speak about on a future video, so it has some foundation, but as allways "If you want to believe it, believe it" and a last part that I havent been able to understand correctly outside the recap, if anyone gets it better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7FIwLLHq5k

Seems like a lot of nonsense to me - IMHO the alleged 'Bolter and Chainsword leak' is an Aprils Fools joke, the name 'Magistraunt' comes from the debunked/fake 4chan rumours, the name 'Ceravex' is a trademarked term from a tool company, and the word 'Viragon' has been used in the old Warhammer 40k CCG as a Trygon variant...

In my opinion, either Valrak himself fell for an April Fool's joke, or is behind the alleged 'leak'...

Also, in the last few sentences of the video, he alludes that he can see 'April, you know, that's my girlfriend, i can see her through the window now' so i guess that's another very heavyhanded hint at it being a joke.

Tsagualsa wrote:

Garrac wrote:
So, Valrak talks about the nids rumours. He says it speaks about some nids units Valrak says he wanted to speak about on a future video, so it has some foundation, but as allways "If you want to believe it, believe it" and a last part that I havent been able to understand correctly outside the recap, if anyone gets it better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7FIwLLHq5k

Seems like a lot of nonsense to me - IMHO the alleged 'Bolter and Chainsword leak' is an Aprils Fools joke, the name 'Magistraunt' comes from the debunked/fake 4chan rumours, the name 'Ceravex' is a trademarked term from a tool company, and the word 'Viragon' has been used in the old Warhammer 40k CCG as a Trygon variant...

In my opinion, either Valrak himself fell for an April Fool's joke, or is behind the alleged 'leak'...

Also, in the last few sentences of the video, he alludes that he can see 'April, you know, that's my girlfriend, i can see her through the window now' so i guess that's another very heavyhanded hint at it being a joke.

No, his oft mentioned partner is just named April.

Without speaking to these rumours being true or not (it's absolutely the wrong day for me to take anything seriously there), a trademark being registered by a tool company would really have no impact on GW unless they also had a toyline in active production of the same name - trademarks are only valid in the categories they are trademarked in, or where there is a reasonable risk of confusion and passing off. It would not stop GW using that name at all. God knows "Cypher" is trademarked elsewhere a lot.

It would also not be the first time GW has recycled an Epic era Tyranid name for a new model that bore very little conceptual resemblence to the original.

Personally I'm hoping its an April fools, because I just cant seem to say "Ceravex" out loud without it sounding like "Cervix"

Aash wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Lower is better, as in you must roll over the characteristic to pass the test (bringing leadership in line with all other characteristic tests, roll over the threshold to pass). Gaunt, 7+ to pass.

That’s certainly the assumption everyone appears to be making (myself included), but AFAIK it is just an assumption and not officially confirmed.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned on stream. Otherwise there's no way termagants who were LD5 before are now LD8 without specific reasons for it.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Aash wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Lower is better, as in you must roll over the characteristic to pass the test (bringing leadership in line with all other characteristic tests, roll over the threshold to pass). Gaunt, 7+ to pass.

That’s certainly the assumption everyone appears to be making (myself included), but AFAIK it is just an assumption and not officially confirmed.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned on stream. Otherwise there's no way termagants who were LD5 before are now LD8 without specific reasons for it.

I watched the twitch stream back today in response to this thread and found no mention of it. They mention that morale is now battle shock, it happens in the command phase, doesn’t remove models, can impact the way units operate for a number of turns as battle shock wears them down etc, but no mention of the actual mechanics of testing, or of the change to the Leadership stat.

Happy to be proven wrong if someone can point me at the Warcom article or time stamp in one of the videos uploaded that actually addresses the leadership stat and how it works.

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Personally I'm hoping its an April fools, because I just cant seem to say "Ceravex" out loud without it sounding like "Cervix"

Glad I'm not the only one who stumbled on that.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Aash wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Lower is better, as in you must roll over the characteristic to pass the test (bringing leadership in line with all other characteristic tests, roll over the threshold to pass). Gaunt, 7+ to pass.

That’s certainly the assumption everyone appears to be making (myself included), but AFAIK it is just an assumption and not officially confirmed.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned on stream. Otherwise there's no way termagants who were LD5 before are now LD8 without specific reasons for it.

They specifically stated that in the Adepticon reveal.

ERJAK wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Aash wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
If they did, then even the Termagant sheet is wonky since it says "7+" for Leadership.

Lower is better, as in you must roll over the characteristic to pass the test (bringing leadership in line with all other characteristic tests, roll over the threshold to pass). Gaunt, 7+ to pass.

That’s certainly the assumption everyone appears to be making (myself included), but AFAIK it is just an assumption and not officially confirmed.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned on stream. Otherwise there's no way termagants who were LD5 before are now LD8 without specific reasons for it.

They specifically stated that in the Adepticon reveal.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/03/23/warhammer-preview-online-at-adepticon-2023-watch-the-live-stream-now/

So far as I can tell from the twitch video here, the only mention of morale and battle shock are at 1:21:57 - 1:24:10 (morale phase gone and now morale is in the Command Phase, called battle shock, doesn’t remove models etc.)
And 1:28:18 - 1:33:20 they discuss the new datasheets where we can see the termagant has Ld 8+, but they don’t mention the Leadership stat at all or how you test leadership/morale.

So where is it that we are supposedly told how to check morale in 10th and that a lower number is better?

I also don't remember any of the like - the only thing they said was a vague (paraphrasing) "units will become less reliable when they lose members", but no explanation beyond that.

Aash wrote:

So far as I can tell from the twitch video here, the only mention of morale and battle shock are at 1:21:57 - 1:24:10 (morale phase gone and now morale is in the Command Phase, called battle shock, doesn’t remove models etc.)
And 1:28:18 - 1:33:20 they discuss the new datasheets where we can see the termagant has Ld 8+, but they don’t mention the Leadership stat at all or how you test leadership/morale.

So where is it that we are supposedly told how to check morale in 10th and that a lower number is better?

I suspect that it was from one of the rumour roundups, rather than from the actual reveal.

I'm not sure that we actually need a specific, official confirmation here, though. The fact that leadership is [x]+, and Termagants have gone from LD 5 to LD 8+ pretty much guarantees that it's going to work that way.

 insaniak wrote:

Aash wrote:

So far as I can tell from the twitch video here, the only mention of morale and battle shock are at 1:21:57 - 1:24:10 (morale phase gone and now morale is in the Command Phase, called battle shock, doesn’t remove models etc.)
And 1:28:18 - 1:33:20 they discuss the new datasheets where we can see the termagant has Ld 8+, but they don’t mention the Leadership stat at all or how you test leadership/morale.

So where is it that we are supposedly told how to check morale in 10th and that a lower number is better?

I suspect that it was from one of the rumour roundups, rather than from the actual reveal.

I'm not sure that we actually need a specific, official confirmation here, though. The fact that leadership is [x]+, and Termagants have gone from LD 5 to LD 8+ pretty much guarantees that it's going to work that way.

I completely agree that it is a reasonable assumption that lower leadership is likely to be better, but I take issue with people passing off assumptions (however reasonable or likely) as confirmed, and when it is repeatedly stated that it was confirmed in a specific article or video feed when it demonstrably wasn’t.

Especially in a thread specifically about rumours and teasing apart what has been confirmed and what is still pending.

My point was that the '+' on the stat effectively does confirm it. If you have to roll above a number, a lower number is always going to be better.

 insaniak wrote:
My point was that the '+' on the stat effectively does confirm it. If you have to roll above a number, a lower number is always going to be better.

My point is that this is only inference, not confirmation. And I do agree that the leadership stat with the + strongly implies that a lower number will be better, but when the subject of if it was confirmed came up in this thread several people have claimed that it was confirmed and specifically pointed to the adepticon video as the source. They didn’t say, the 8+ stat suggests that lower Ld is better, they said it’s been confirmed to be the case.
I’ve simply been correcting that error.

Aash wrote:

I’ve simply been correcting that error.

I appreciate that’s how you see it, but to everybody else you’re just bogging the conversation down in semantic pedantry, apparently with no higher goal than being-right-on-the-Internet TM. Can you roll a d6 for it, or better yet, both just agree to disagree like grown-ups and let the conversation move on?

Roll Three Dice wrote:

Aash wrote:

I’ve simply been correcting that error.

I appreciate that’s how you see it, but to everybody else you’re just bogging the conversation down in semantic pedantry, apparently with no higher goal than being-right-on-the-Internet TM. Can you roll a d6 for it, or better yet, both just agree to disagree like grown-ups and let the conversation move on?

It all started as a side-discussion to the many, many things wrong with that obviously fake Primaris datasheet yesterday, so i'd say we give it a rest now

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/02/sunday-preview-death-conquers-the-mortal-realms/

Join us next week on Warhammer Community for loads of information about the next edition of Warhammer 40,000, including your first look at another new miniature.

Was expecting them to show the Termagant kit next but since it talking about a single miniature it could be one of the characters or a tyranid monster?
Personally I am going with the Lictor as its the only one we didn't get a real look at in the trailer

 Matrindur wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/02/sunday-preview-death-conquers-the-mortal-realms/

Join us next week on Warhammer Community for loads of information about the next edition of Warhammer 40,000, including your first look at another new miniature.

Was expecting them to show the Termagant kit next but since it talking about a single miniature it could be one of the characters or a tyranid monster?
Personally I am going with the Lictor as its the only one we didn't get a real look at in the trailer

They should continue their streak and preview the Primaris Lieutenant from the starter box next

 Matrindur wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/02/sunday-preview-death-conquers-the-mortal-realms/

Join us next week on Warhammer Community for loads of information about the next edition of Warhammer 40,000, including your first look at another new miniature.

Was expecting them to show the Termagant kit next but since it talking about a single miniature it could be one of the characters or a tyranid monster?
Personally I am going with the Lictor as its the only one we didn't get a real look at in the trailer

Good pic of lictor in video

Given that Leadership in Necromunda is written as 'x+' and is rolled on 2d6, it seems like a safe assumption that this is the model 40k will follow as well.

For this sunday update, we'll return to the Pastebin of the summary of the 'leaked' 50-page-document for a bit and compare its contents to stuff about 10th we already know...

GENERAL INFORMATION

- Terrain can be destroyed
- Almost all mechanics work on D6 rolls
- There are rules for rerolls and +/- 1 modifiers
- New mechanic called Advantage/Disadvantage
- Advantage means rolls of 6 are 'critical'
- Advantage stacks, so double Advantage means 5 and 6 are 'critical'
- Advantage/Disadvantage cancel each other out
- 'Criticals' count as additional successes, can trigger additional things

There is no evidence of any of this yet, outside of the trivial fact that most rolls work on a D6. Advantage/Disadvantage sounds like the core concept of the whole edition, yet we have not seen any mention of it for now.

ATTACK SEQUENCE

- Disadvantage means that 6 is a 'Glancing' hit
- 'Glancing' means not outright failure, you can combine Glances to still get some hits
- Attack sequence is hit - damage - saves - invulnerable saves
- Hit scores are fixed, modified by Advantage/Disadvantage
- To calculate Advantage/Disadvantage compare Hit traits with enemy Evade traits
- Pairings are Rapid Fire/Dodge, Tracker/Speed, True Grit/Jinx, Seeker/Obscured, Pulse/Flicker
- Unnegated Evade traits give Disadvantage
- Two Glances to Hit are one success
- Determine damage before saves
- Armour saves are fixed, modified by Advantage/Disadvantage
- Compare Armour traits with Penetrate traits to calculate Advantage/Disadvantage
- Pairings are Armored/Penetrating, Shielded/Fusion, Aegis/Infused, Artificer/Killshot
- Examples given: Power weapons are penetrating, Melta is Fusion, Infused is Force weapons, Snipers are Killshot
- There are two 'Wildcard' traits: Veteran Instincts for Hit, Hardened for Save
- Two Glances to Save are one Save
- Damage spills over but this is often limited by weapon rules
- Invulnerable saves after, and in addition to armour saves
- Mortal Wounds still exist and circumvent all this
- Traits can have tiers, and need a appropriate-tiered counter-trait to cancel them
- Weapon profiles are not uniform, a bolter on a Captain has different rules than a bolter on a Guardsman
- There are a number of rules that give Advantage/Disadvantage directly
- Blast weapons work by doing additional damage on critical successes

Again, we have seen some weapons now, but no mention of any sort of trait, either evasive or other. On the other hand, the old-style AP system seems to remain in existence, so we can probably discount most of this as fabricated.

UNIT PROFILES

- Profiles are completely redesigned
- General structure of the Profile now follows the Phases
- Profile layout:
- Stats and Picture
- Then boxes for every phase
- Boxes have Special Rules, Weapons, Enhancement slots and Keywords that are relevant in that phase
- Stats: Movement, Evade Traits, Save value + traits, Invulnerable Save value +traits, Wounds, Initiative, Morale
- Weapon profile: Range, Attacks, Hit value + traits, Penetration traitss, Damage, special rules
- Every unit has a 'Morale' special rule
- Morale threshold is when the rule is triggered
- Some recurring rules: Indomitable: no additional result, Shaken: can't get Advantage, Attrition, Broken: unit destroyed
- ATSKNF is a special Morale rule and better than Shaken

And again, most of this turned out not to be true: the only thing that is oriented by phase so far is the split between ranged and melee weapons, and again the traits are completely absent. Also, there is no Initiative stat contrary to the claims in this document, while there is a new OC stat that the document seems to fail to mention. Also absent from the datasheets we have seen so far are the 'unit morale special rules', enhancment slots and such.

ARMY SELECTION

- You select 'Battle Profiles' from your roster datasheet
- 'Battle Profile' contains all the information you need to play
- Stratagems are mainly unit upgrades now
- You pay for the availability of Stratagems with Requisition points before the game
- In-game you pay for using them with Command points
- Power levels are completely gone
- Everything uses points now, but most squad loadouts are free
- Powerful loadout options are free, but cost Requisition points instead, e.g. Lascannon, Plasma
- Many Stratagems cost 0 CP to use
- You usually get 2 CP a turn, +1 to go second, +1 if you fulfill a Secondary Mission
- Every army has a Signature Stratagem that is free
- Stratagems take up Enhancement Slots on the Battle Profile
- Relics, Warlord traits and Secondary Missions also take up Enhancement Slots
- Troops have many slots, elite units and tanks only have a few
- Scoring secondary missions gives you Victory points and an additional Command point
- You can only score each Secondary mission once, and only one per turn
- Relics and Warlord traits cost real points too
- All that stuff is supported by a new App
- All armies get new rules in a book called 'Warhosts'
- Subfactions basically gone / merged with factions
- You now build an army by selecting a Detachment
- Detachment rules will tell you which keywords you can include
- Stuff like Relics, Psychic powers etc. now also has keywords
- In practice this means that with the right Detachment, army building is much more flexible
- Instead of playing 'Eldar' you now play a Detachment that mainly contains Eldar, but could have Harlequins, Drukhari etc. as well
- Faction/Subfaction rules are now bound to the Detachment
- Supplements add a lot of keyworded things to represent a specific Chapter etc.
- Due to the keyword structure, stuff for e.g. Orks can also be in the e.g. Space Marine codex

We have not seen enough to comment on this yet.

GRAND TOURNAMENT

- GT allows only one specific faction
- GT is its own thing in organization and troop selection
- GT only allows pre-made Battle Profiles you select from
- The only thing you can change is weapons loadout and some stratagems etc.
- These function like some sort of 'sideboard'
- These GT profiles will rotate each season
- GT Terrain is drawn from a list of Terrain in the GT packs
- GT terrain is symmetrical
- Each player is supposed to bring two GT Terrain sets
- GT Battle Profiles are not in the Codex, but in the GT pack for each season

Can't comment on that either yet.

TERRAIN, COVER AND MOVEMENT

- Terrain rules much clearer
- Three classes: light, hard, fortified
- Three types: area, landmark, obstacle
- You need to discuss what happens with destroyed Terrain
- Line of Sight stays mostly the same
- If you can see any model in a unit, unit is not obscured
- If you can't, unit is hidden
- Cover is much better, offers bonuses both to Evade and Save
- Units within 6'' ignore Cover
- No Cover in Melee
- You only get Cover if fully in Area Terrain, or within 3'' of Terrain and obscured
- All distances are measured horizontally, no diagonal measurement
- Units may move upwards up to their movement allowance in addition to their horizontal movement
- Downwards movement is not limited at all
- Non-Infantry Models need to physically fit everywhere they move unless they have the 'Fleet' special rule
- Heavy Infantry like Terminators also can't ignore Obstacles
- This means that e.g. dragons teeth actually work as intended to stop tanks
- Every player can bring one obstacle and one large terrain piece in addition to mission-specific terrain
- These can be free or paid with points
- Size is a keyword in every Profile
- Not very granular: Light - Solid - Heavy - Superheavy - Titanic
- Terrain can be destroyed by units of different sizes moving through its
- Light can be destroyed by infantry size 'solid' and up
- Hard can be destroyed by terminators, tanks
- Fortified can be destroyed by superheavies
- Area terrain is one level harder to destroy, fortified area terrain is indestructable
- You can move through Light and Solid-size models of your own army
- Tanks can also move through Light enemies
- Blast weapons and weapons with 'Demolish' can also destroy terrain by scoring a number of wounds in a single turn
- There are plastic tokens to mark destroyed terrain etc.

The part about cover etc. could be what is described as the 'Benefits of Cover' on the Termagaunt profile, but it's too early to definitely call that yet. So far, the datasheets have shown no indication about there being defined unit sizes or types like 'solid' and so on, so unless Termagaunts and rippers don't have that it seems like this is also not a thing in 10th edition.

TURN STRUCTURE

- Turn structure is different now
- Battle rounds and turns stay as they are
- Within a turn, you activate units one at a time and go through all phases, in an order you determine
- You can activate several units at once, e.g. characters and units
- Units can skip phases for bonuses or to use them later in e.g. overwatch
- Fight phase cannot be skipped if enemy is in CC range
- Interventions can be used to interrupt an enemy activation
- Overwatch is an intervention that allows you to shoot during an enemy activation
- Units that are within 6'' of an unit that has fought can intervene
- Initiative is used for this
- Melee weapons have lots of attacks, but you usually just fight on your turn
- Melee weapons have a 'reach' stat that determines how many models can fight
- Reach 0: direct contact, Reach 1: contact with a friendly model in direct contact, and so on
- Weapon types have gone, but some, e.g. Pistol, remain as special rules
- Charging is done in the movement phase
- Due to the players chosing phase order each activation, you can shoot before charging, or even after fighting

We have not definitely heard about turn structure and phases, but at this point there is no indication that any of it has changed dramatically. Initiative as a Stat does not exist. Melee weapons that we have seen so far have no 'Reach' stat. Melee weapons also show totally normal amounts of attacks, generalized from two examples we have seen so far. Weapon types also still exist, we have seen Assault, Pistol, and Twin-Linked.

INITIATIVE, ACTIVATION AND INTERVENTION

- Everytime a unit has fought, nearby enemies may intervene
- Both sides roll 6D6 against their Initiative - if the intervening player has more successes, he can intervene
- Interventor immediately gets a movement phase and can pile in, and a fight phase after that
- Units with high Initiative can use this to fight back, then immediately fight again on their turn
- No strike first/strike last effects anymore
- No consolidation anymore, you use your normal movement
- There are only five movement types
- Charge: in movement phase, normal move + 2D6'', must end in CC range of enemy
- Pile-in: if within 6'' of an enemy. 6'' move that needs to end in CC range of enemy
- Retreat: normal move that needs to end outside 6'' of the enemy, forgoes shooting and psychic phase
- Run and normal Move: stay the same

There is no initiative stat, most of this section can't work the way it is described.

PSYCHIC POWERS

- Psychic powers are selected by appropriate keywords, no unified 'lore' list anymore
- Psychic phase can be whenever you like, one per activation
- Units can use different numbers of powers
- Powers have no warp charge, but a casting score. Use Advantage/Disadvantage
- You still roll 2D6 with perils on snake eyes - if you have at least one succes, the power goes through
- Deny now works as a collective action of all your psykers, use the best psy stat
- You can deny any amount of powers, but if you go over the limit you get Disadvantages
- Denying needs more successes than using powers, so double-crit when casting makes powers undeniable

We can't comment on that yet.

AIRCRAFT

- Aircraft only exist in hover model
- If an enemy comes within 6'' of an aircraft, that aircraft is removed from play and replaced on any board edge by the controlling player

Neither on this.

RANDOM TIDBITS

- Primaris 'Rupture Squads' with warp shunt modules are a new unit
- There is a plastic sprue with tokes for all sorts of effects
- Starter Box is Blood Angels vs Tyranids
- 'There are 0 accurate rules leaks out there - the AoO stuff is correct, other stuff is laughable'
- The Lion is coming and will be out before 10th edition

'Rupture Squads' are pending, but we have seen absolutely no hint for them; the stuff about BA vs. Tyranids is false, the token sprue is a reasonable speculation, and the thing about the Lion is true, but could be taken from any other source.

So, from what we can check right now, almost everything specific in this set of rumours seems to be either outright fabricated or taken from a very early version and changed considerably since then. The stuff that is true is mostly common sense like D6 being used for most rolls.

There's still a lot that we can't check right now with what GW has shown so far, but to me it seems like most of these leaks are made up!

Sounds like someone got mixed up with DnD 6th edition.

I think, at the least, that scenery/terrain being destructible is on the cards. It might not remove the piece from play, but it may negate the effects.

We actually know that psychic powers being "whenever you like" is false. They've been reorganized into whatever phase you do the thing that the psychic power is doing, like Smite in the shooting phase or Warp Time in movement.

ERJAK wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:
Added to the OP:

Edit 03/31/2023

This video concerns Space Marine chapter supplements: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8cE1ASmoZ8

- Space Marines will get 'a lot of love' in 10th edition (duh)
- Starter Box is just step one
- 'End of Summer' second wave for SM, September/August
- 'Huge Refresh' for Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves
- Dark Angel stuff is from a source he trusts 100%
- Blood Angel and Space Wolf stuff is from a new source
- BA and SW will receive boxed sets
- Dante probably in a boxed set, presented at Warhammer fest (speculation)
- He 'knows' Epic Horus Heresy will be shown of at Warhammer Fest
- Dark Angel box set with brand-new Sammael and Belial (unclear if old or new model)
- Second wave will also include separate kits for the stuff in the 10th box set
- Sanguinary guard: personally believes they'll come, but has no concrete information
- 'Everyone' will get a range refresh like Black Templars: a few units, upgrade frames and a few characters
- Says that will occupy the first half (!) of 10th edition

...sigh. Honestly, I don't think there's anything that could have made me feel worse about 10th than this.

They could have announced they're switching to a D73 system (with proprietary dice) that doesn't reduce the overall size of dice pools, and I would have preferred that to '1.5 years of more SM crap'.

I'm stoked

This section has a lot right and the rest that isn't confirmed makes a lot of sense, which is weird, because there's no evasion on datasheets so how is there so much correct here and not elsewhere?

Which of that is confirmed right? To me, it all seems like stuff we have no concept of so far from official information or is outright wrong from what we know from official information (detachments telling you which keywords you can include).

It would be very strange if they described detachments as "ah, take whatever you want! here are three simple limits!"
and then came out and said "just kidding there are actually more limits, what we just said is basically entirely untrue"

 Rihgu wrote:
Which of that is confirmed right? To me, it all seems like stuff we have no concept of so far from official information or is outright wrong from what we know from official information (detachments telling you which keywords you can include).

It would be very strange if they described detachments as "ah, take whatever you want! here are three simple limits!"
and then came out and said "just kidding there are actually more limits, what we just said is basically entirely untrue"

Sorry, I'm probably mentally reading between the lines a bit on some of them. There aren't definitive statements that you could tie to the things I'm thinking of, but a good handful are damn close.

Each detachment has its own unit restrictions, so the keyword thing is probably true.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/03/30/how-army-building-works-in-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

Tsagualsa wrote:
For this sunday update, we'll return to the Pastebin of the summary of the 'leaked' 50-page-document for a bit and compare its contents to stuff about 10th we already know...
...
There's still a lot that we can't check right now with what GW has shown so far, but to me it seems like most of these leaks are made up!

Thanks for putting that together and going through it. I really enjoy when battlefield terrain can be destroyed so it would be fun to see that come up in 40k. I'm also hoping that 10th does something different with initiative, since 8th and 9th game of figuring out who fights first isn't very fun and is often completely befuddling to the new player where rules like "Fight First" don't necessarily mean Fight First.

Of course that "leak" got bunked up so what it says is most generic stuff by accident

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/warhammer-fest-2023-is-the-first-place-you-can-play-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

10th Edition will be fully playable at Warhammer Fest.
Since the launch box contents will be there in person they kind of have to reveal all of them in the next weeks and only show what will come after at the actual reveal show

 Matrindur wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/warhammer-fest-2023-is-the-first-place-you-can-play-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

10th Edition will be fully playable at Warhammer Fest.
Since the launch box contents will be there in person they kind of have to reveal all of them in the next weeks and only show what will come after at the actual reveal show

Haha! So for once my unfounded optimism has been vindicated indeed

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/warhammer-fest-2023-is-the-first-place-you-can-play-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

10th Edition will be fully playable at Warhammer Fest.
Since the launch box contents will be there in person they kind of have to reveal all of them in the next weeks and only show what will come after at the actual reveal show

Haha! So for once my unfounded optimism has been vindicated indeed

They could still trickle us a unit a week until then and use the event to go "here's the rest of the box", so not quite!

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/go-way-behind-enemy-lines-with-a-new-space-marine-lieutenant/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=warhammer-40,000&utm_content=phobosltreveal03042023

Phobos Lieutenant reveal. Looks fine, but an odd one off Phobos model is still a weird pick for this box.

Dudeface wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/warhammer-fest-2023-is-the-first-place-you-can-play-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

10th Edition will be fully playable at Warhammer Fest.
Since the launch box contents will be there in person they kind of have to reveal all of them in the next weeks and only show what will come after at the actual reveal show

Haha! So for once my unfounded optimism has been vindicated indeed

They could still trickle us a unit a week until then and use the event to go "here's the rest of the box", so not quite!

Well, i seem to be on a streak, they actually do preview the... Primaris Lieutenant

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/go-way-behind-enemy-lines-with-a-new-space-marine-lieutenant/

 The Phazer wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/go-way-behind-enemy-lines-with-a-new-space-marine-lieutenant/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=warhammer-40,000&utm_content=phobosltreveal03042023

Phobos Lieutenant reveal. Looks fine, but an odd one off Phobos model is still a weird pick for this box.

Not if you consider it as a way to bring back Tyrannic War Veterans.

Horrifically busy / overdone.

JWBS wrote:
Horrifically busy / overdone.

Also hilariously nondescript 'preview article' - 'He's got knives, ain't that cool?'. Could at least have shown his datasheet...

 Kanluwen wrote:

 The Phazer wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/03/go-way-behind-enemy-lines-with-a-new-space-marine-lieutenant/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=warhammer-40,000&utm_content=phobosltreveal03042023

Phobos Lieutenant reveal. Looks fine, but an odd one off Phobos model is still a weird pick for this box.

Not if you consider it as a way to bring back Tyrannic War Veterans.

But the veteran unit in the trailer are wearing stock Mark X, not Phobos, so it seems like this guy will be on his own.

It's so funny how rather than end a stupid meme, they doubled down on the whole Primaris Lt crap. I'm sure there is more Lt datasheets than the entirety of some factions.

Also, yeah what a nothing article. Their dragging stuff out is so stupid.