5th Ed Rumors: Round 4

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Voodoo Boyz**

Since Round 3's thread went off in a tangent on WW2 and a bunch of other stuff, I figured that after distilling some new rumors off Warseer, putting them in a new thread might be a good idea.

These are taken from Warseer member "Champsguy"

First Update: Link

Okay, I'll give some update and a little clarification.

The rumors I gave were based off of an early version of the rulebook. I gave it a quick read-through, so I can clarify as far as how some of these rules work (i.e., I didn't just talk to a guy who told me how it would work in bullet-point fashion). I haven't had a chance to re-read it yet, as I've been too busy with work and other things to devote any time to 40K in the last few days, so certain things I'm not really sure about until I get a chance to look at the thing again.

It was an early draft, this much was obvious by sections that had old versions of charts in them (with things like "we need to update this graph" written in on top of them). Not all the rules were complete. There were a few sentence fragments and blank places where certain rules had obviously not been finished. There was also no artwork, just large blank spaces saying "put artwork here" (basically).

So, basically going off of memory, this is what I remember (not saying that other questions can't be answered, just that I didn't see or don't remember what that answer is).

Vehicles: Fire everything if you stay still (except Ordnance, it's got special rules, and I don't use Ordnance, so I didn't look closely). Fast vehicles can fire everything if they move up to 6". If you move, you can fire 1 plus defensive weapons. Fast vehicles can move up to 12" and fire 1 plus defensive. If you move more than 6", you only fire defensive (I think you can still fire defensive weapons here, but I'm not 100% on that). Fast vehicles can move up to 18" (their max speed now) and only fire defensive. Vehicles can only fire at one target. I did not see any special rules for sponsons firing at multiple targets. Not saying they won't be in the final version, or even that they aren't in the one I saw, just that I didn't see them.

Wound allocation before armor saves: Didn't see it. It may or may not be. I was looking at other sections and really didn't expect to see any changes here, so I glanced over that part and didn't look too closely. I'll try and update later on in the week, once I see it again.

Vehicle damage chart: It's about halfway between the glancing and penetrating charts of today (1-2 is the can't shoot/move thing, 3 is weapon, 4 is immobilized, 5-6 destroyed/annihilated). Glance is a -2. If you are glanced, your vehicle can at most be immobilized. Vehicles are a bit more survivable because of the way damage stacks. If you get two immobilized results, it becomes weapon destroyed. You aren't destroyed by "cumulative results" until you've been immobilized and all your weapons are gone (and then you get one more).

Transports: If your transport is destroyed, passengers now take a Str 4 hit, saves allowed (instead of a 4+). If an open-topped transport is destroyed, it's a Str 3 hit because its easier to disembark.

Plasma/frag: I don't know about their armor penetration against vehicles. I think they're the same now, but don't quote me on that.

Assaulting in cover: If you assault someone in cover, and you don't have grenades, you now become initiative 1 (instead of them becoming init 10). This works a lot better when more than two units are in combat.

LOS: I'm pretty sure that it's units that block LOS, so you shouldn't worry about spending 45 minutes drawing LOS from each individual trooper to each individual target. You draw LOS from the eyes of the model. Area terrain gives cover saves. There's an entire chapter on ruined buildings and how they affect line of sight (like a mini Cities of Death). I honestly don't remember if 6" of terrain blocks sight or not.

Blast weapons: I didn't see anything in the rules about rolling to hit at all, just scatter. But honestly, I was on the phone with a guy relating all the stuff to him, and I can't always do two things at once. So it might be there -- I didn't get to give this stuff my complete and full attention.

Running can be done w/in 12" of an enemy. You just can't charge if you run.

More rumors:

After shooting and wounding, you can choose to become pinned. You get a +1 to cover save (or a 6+ if you're in the open). It's the "get down!" rule.

If you are charged while broken, you make another fall back move immediately. If you don't get away (i.e., they can still reach you), you're destroyed. If you do get away, umm, you get away.

Gets Hot! is back to the 3rd ed version. So that Ork character doesn't have to worry about rolling 3s on his plasma gun.

There is not a new HTH chart. Sadly, the Avatar still only hits Fire Warriors on a 3+.

Preferred Enemy now allows you to reroll all misses, instead of hitting on a 3+.

Ground vehicles that move at full speed and cross dangerous terrain roll 2D6 for their test. If one "one" is rolled, they're immobilized. If two "ones" are rolled, the vehicle flips over and is considered destroyed. Kinda cool, I think, because it represents what you see in action movies.

Flamers: You now determine wounds for all template weapons firing from a squad before you take saves or remove casualties!!!

Bikes all now get a 3+ cover save for their turbo-boost. So the psy-cannon thing is out the window.

A unit with Scouts that is inside a vehicle confers that ability to the vehicle!!! Let the Pathfinders and Possessed Marines rule!

--

Honestly, one thing I noticed is that the new rules should make Dark Reapers turn back into their tank-murdering selves (at least the Exarch). An Exarch with Crack Shot and an Eldar Missile Launcher could deny a skimmer any real protection. No cover save, ka-blam!

Overall, if something remained the same, I didn't mention it. So while I understand the desire for defensive weapons to be something different than they were in 4th...

Second Update: Link

Okay, I looked at it again. A few updates.

1) Blast weapons don't roll to hit, they just scatter. However, they now operate like template weapons in that any model touched by the blast is hit. None of this "roll 4+ for partial" stuff. A unit firing multiple blast weapons (a SM Dev squad being the example) fires like a multiple barrage unit would in 4th edition. Scatter once, then lay the blasts off of the original template. These two things might make up for the lack of a to-hit roll. Oh, and you don't need to center the hole over someone when you place it before determining scatter.

2) No shooting of defensive weapons if you move full speed.

3) Yes, vehicles can now get up to a 3+ cover save, depending on what they're hiding behind.

4) Still saw nothing on 6" plus of area terrain blocking line of sight. You CAN declare certain types of terrain as LOS blocking -- it just has to be done before the game. You also decide what is difficult, what is dangerous, and what is impassable. Certain things can be difficult for one type of model and not difficult for another. So tank traps might be dangerous terrain for vehicles, but count as clear terrain for infantry. A river might be impassable for infantry, but dangerous for vehicles. You just have to decide before you play. I like this, as it gives more power to the players.

5) No re-roll of wounding against transported infantry no matter how far you moved.

6) Force weapons now just inflict instant death instead of that weird pseudo-instant death.

7) Smoke launchers are a 5+ cover save.

8) You can still only take one save per guy.

9) Yes, allocate wounds before making saves. This will probably encourage larger squads (goodbye, 6 man las-plas).

10) You can shoot over other squads if you can see over them because of elevation, etc. You can always shoot at vehicles or monstrous creatures over other squads.

Overall, it looks like a lot of streamlining went into the rules. That's good. It also looks like they wanted to move away from certain types of armies. Certain vehicles have become "viable" (to some degree) again. A Dark Eldar Ravager with 3 Dark Lances is now something you can take. You couldn't really before, because you "had" to move 6+ inches to get SMF, and that meant you could only fire one weapon. Now, with SMF just a 5+ cover save, and the Ravager able to fire all weapons if it moves 6" or less, we may actually see it shoot more often.

The problem that I see with 4th is that certain builds were simply too good to not take. As a result, a lot of different units were never used. A Falcon can have a pulse laser, a scatter laser, and a shuriken cannon, move 12", and fire them all. Well, that's a hell of a lot of firepower. Likewise, the Land Speeder w/ AC and HB was just too good to ignore. Now, with these changes, vehicles that were too good in 4th will become... not so good now.

With fast vehicles only able to move 18", it likewise eliminated the Dark Eldar rush. It again looks like they're moving away from one-turn assaults and other too-good combos.

This is overall, in my opinion, a good thing for 40K. The fewer no-brainer builds that are available, the better. Builds that were never competitive before now have a chance to be good. Vehicles as a whole are now less mobile, but more survivable. It will lead to different tactics, to be sure. Some vehicles may become more common (like the Land Raider), simply because Eldar skimmers got worse. It's hard to justify 250 for a Land Raider when a Falcon is so much faster, more survivable, and has more mobile firepower than you. Of course, the Land Raider Crusader remains 10 gallons of kick-ass in a 5 gallon jug.

So if we can keep discussing these rumors based off some kind of early leak, and not diverge too far off topic; then this could be a better round than last time.

UPDATE 1/17/07:

More stuff from Warseer: Link

Ok I have a copy of what I think is the same document (only had a quick browse)

The chart for missions says
1-2 = Recon
3-4= Take and Hold
5-6 = Total Anihiliation

Recon = You role for d3+2 objectives and if you have troops within 3" and the other guy doesnt at the end of the game, you hold that objective. The one with the most objectives wins.

Take and Hold = Is similar, except each player choses an objective within their deployment zone, not in impassible terrain, and not within 24" of the other objective.

Total Anihilation = Get 'Kill Points' for units destroyed or falling back. HQ=3pts. Fast, Heavy, Elite = 2pts Troops=1pt

Oh and later on its says VPs are used to decide draws. Units destroyed are worth their points, half strength units worth half their points. You need at least a 10% difference in VPs based on the points of the game to win (i.e. their example 1,500 points requres a 150 pints difference to register a win)

There is also a 'deployment' chart which I will put on in the morning (too tired) if someone else hasn't done it already. As noted earlier, only troops are scoring, except if falling back / it is a transport? / it has a specific rule saying it isn't scoring.

One funny thing about the deployment chart. One of the deployment types is called "Dawn of War"

**Voodoo Boyz**

Reading some of this, it really has some positives and negatives.

Tanks taking a nerf in terms of mobile firepower is a good and bad thing.

Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive. A lot is going to depend on if you can move 6" and fire a primary weapon, and/or Ordinance weapon. If Normal Tanks can keep that feature (and hopefully fire sponsons on the move) then we should see things brought a little back in line.

On the other hand, if vehicles can't move that fast and you can "forced march" with ground troops, and other troops block LOS to the guys behind them - whoa boy are things going to start to get silly; at least thinking from an Ork perspective.

On the other hand, Marines with Rhinos became a lot more viable, and in general even Eldar taking hits from a downed Waveserpent (or now a Falcon, which would lose it's godlike survivability if those damage tables and the other vehicle rules came into play) would probably be better off than they were with the 4+ to wound with a re-roll and the no more auto-entangled.

Assuming you can't launch assaults from the closed top transports, you get a happy medium between the death traps of 4th and the Rhino Rush of 3rd.

**Tacobake**

The changes to vehicles sound positive. You can always remain stationary if you want to fire all your weapons.

LoS rules make the new Grots good, especially if combined with say the pinning option.

**Da Boss**

I still think defensive weapons should have remained strength 5. But lets wait and see. I'm glad they haven't given hard and fast rules about terrain. In friendly games, this means a chat beforehand. In tournaments, it should be decided by the organisers for the players.

**Sarigar**

I'm still trying to figure out the changes to vehicles. Cover saves and Glancing hits being completely unable to destroy a vehicle sounds very resilient. Did I miss the part about only being able to glance a skimmer if it moves more than 6 inches?

I've also heard that Area Terrain is, in effect, going away to true LOS. To this day, I still get in debates about Area Terrain and LOS, plus all the various Mech players wanting to declare every piece of terrain Size 3 Area Terrain. This really won't bother me.

Allocating the wounds before armor saves. I suppose this will replace the massively overlooked Torrent of Fire rule.

All in all, I look forward to seeing some new changes. I've played since 1st edition and will continue when 5th comes out and not scream out 'the end times are here!'.

**Voodoo Boyz**

Tacobake wrote:The changes to vehicles sound positive. You can always remain stationary if you want to fire all your weapons.

LoS rules make the new Grots good, especially if combined with say the pinning option.

Grots will still suck. LD7 on the Runtherds means they'll run once they take casualties; I'd rather just blow 220 Points on 30 Boyz w/ PK Nobz + Bosspoles to "screen" whatever I wanted.

It certainly helps Burna Boyz, Tankbustas, and the like to become "decent". It also makes some things VERY silly since I can "forced march" that Slugga Screen up on turn one, and use it as a giant LOS blocking Wall for 20 Storm Boyz who will then get an assault on Turn 2 almost regardless of table terrain setup.

Couple of other points I wanted to make:

With no more "Glancing 6" to destroy a vehicle S8 just became near useless against AV14.

It also sees a significant decrease in the Ork anti-tank arsenal aside from using PK's to whack things. Necrons also take it up the proverbial metal butt; only Heavy Destroyers now have a shot to do anything to most tanks.

Though I'm sure the Necrons will be fixed with the new rules with a new Codex in 5th Ed, and to be honest as a Necron player I see armies made up of "Tracked" vehicles or any kind of vehicle heavy list an easy win; any kind of heavy vehicle - Land Raiders, Leman Russes, and even Monoliths are just easy fodder for my basic guns.

The only sad downside to S8 becoming useless agianst higher AV's is that it's just going to encourage players to take more Lascannons instead of Missile Launchers for the few places they CAN still buy anti-tank in the new Codex's.

On the other hand, once SM's get their proverbial "nerf", Tanks are going to get VERY survivable as there will be just far less anti-tank sitting around out there.

**Frazzled**

Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive.

Why? Thats what a skimmer is all about-speed. This looks like a blatant attempt to get people who had skimmer heavy armies to buy something else. I'm not impressed with that.

**Da Boss**

I think it's a bit mental from a realism point of veiw to have infantry who can move as fast in a single turn as the fastest buggies and skimmers. In the case of leaping nids, much faster in fact.

**Voodoo Boyz**

jfrazell wrote:

Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive.

Why? Thats what a skimmer is all about-speed. This looks like a blatant attempt to get people who had skimmer heavy armies to buy something else. I'm not impressed with that.

And with the ability to "fire as if moving fast", combined with the fact that most skimmers are "fast" anyway, they will still be faster than their tracked vehicle counter parts 99% of the time.

But reducing their ability to move such a drastic amount in game (such as to score, block assaults, etc) is probably a good thing; and to make them chose to move as fast as possible to get the defensive bonuses or move a little slower to fire their weapons, it brings them in line instead of "I move 12, you can now only glance, and I get to shoot everything I've got too" which is what we're dealing with now.

**Tacobake**

jfrazell wrote:

Skimmers getting nerfed is plenty positive in my eyes; and reducing the overall speed of the fastest vehicles is positive.

Why? Thats what a skimmer is all about-speed. This looks like a blatant attempt to get people who had skimmer heavy armies to buy something else. I'm not impressed with that.

To be fair, skimmers are likely just as good as other other choices in the existing codex. This is a farcry from the "Chaos Codex" yo-yo where there is a new termie kit coming out so terminators get great rules and next time it will be NEW CHAOS DREAD, NOW WITH HAVOC LAUNCHERS, and a fancy plastic kit with brand new ikons on it.

**mauleed**

So this is a big boost to transports that transport things with good armor saves. All other vehicles stay in the box.

Probably a smart marketing strategy. They sold a ton of tanks for apoc, so now release rules to make tanks useless.

**Da Boss**

Would it really hurt them to just make everything equally attractive? I don't get the "Hmmm, well, we've made our money on that in the short term, it can suck now. What should we pump up to sell more of?" way of selling games.
Though I'm not convinced this is the true way things happen- it's probably a confused jumble between that and incompetence.

**Asmodai**

"It was an early draft, this much was obvious by sections that had old versions of charts in them (with things like "we need to update this graph" written in on top of them). Not all the rules were complete. There were a few sentence fragments and blank places where certain rules had obviously not been finished. There was also no artwork, just large blank spaces saying "put artwork here" (basically). "

Uh... this gives me great pause in terms of believing the veracity of these rumours. They book is already in layout (i.e. artwork placement) before the text is finalized?

That sounds very strange. It's not impossible, but it sounds unlikely based on what I know about the publishing industry.

**Voodoo Boyz**

mauleed wrote:So this is a big boost to transports that transport things with good armor saves. All other vehicles stay in the box.

Probably a smart marketing strategy. They sold a ton of tanks for apoc, so now release rules to make tanks useless.

Not sure how bad they'll be, in general they shouldn't be too bad off. Probably better off now than they were before. Glances are far less dangerous, Pen's aren't as bad as now, and they're limiting the number of anti-tank weapons you can take in new Codex's.

Remember, if small Las/Plas goes away for regular Marines and Assault Cannons aren't the vehicle killers they are now, then only IG can really throw down as many long-range anti-tank guns "en masse". Orks anti-tank that they're currently enjoying go down in overall power, especially since Glances aren't that good now.

**mauleed**

I love how it bones the venom cannon. Anything that hurts Godzilla is fine by me.

**Gitzbitah**

Or even better-
"Bikes all now get a 3+ cover save for their turbo-boost. So the psy-cannon thing is out the window. "
If that holds up, every Waaagh! will need the supreme cover of a unit of nob bikers with painboy roaring down the field. 3+ cover, 4+ FNP will hold up to the round or so it takes them to get into close combat.

**keezus**

Voodoo Boyz wrote:With no more "Glancing 6" to destroy a vehicle S8 just became near useless against AV14.

I think you meant "Monoliths" are essentially invincible against "Witchunters (penetent engine - huur!) and Dark Eldar (haywire)", and almost invincible against "Daemonhunters (Lascannon and dread CCW on dreads and landraiders) and Eldar (fireprism, haywire, wraithlord HTH and d-cannon)". Hooray.

**OverchargeThis!**

THis is probably an intentional 'leak', to get input from the community at large. I agree that defensive weapons as S4 or less is a poor choice. I would say S5 or less, b/c heavy bolter class weapons are classic defensive armaments on vehicles.

But!! Overall, I like what I'm hearing. Great stuff. I hope smokes can be popped every turn. Just means no shooting in those turns. Makes vehicle use quite tactical imho.

**stonefox**

I actually wouldn't mind if defensive weapons were actually defensive. Nevermind the whole can/can't shoot thing. I want those suckers gunning down angry bald men when they charge my tank...and increase it to S5.

Uh... this gives me great pause in terms of believing the veracity of these rumours. They book is already in layout (i.e. artwork placement) before the text is finalized?

I thought dakka already agreed that it was minis>background/artwork>rules for 40k. When they're deciding what to do because adding more text would mean the artwork couldn't be placed on that page..."Hey Jim, do you really think players will need this rules clarification?" "Nah, Ed, see it says right there that they should just roll for it."

**glon52**

My main gripe is the slowing down of vehicles. Skimmers that move only 18" is way too slow. With forced march, even infantry can move as fast as a tank. Don't get me wrong, I like forced march. The problem is that vehicles are simply too slow. If anything, they should speed them up.

**Voodoo Boyz**

My guess is that they didn't like Fast Skimmers under their current rules.

"Oh look, I've gotten Glanced and can't shoot; I'll just zoom 24", ignoring terrain, to hide behind some cover for a turn and then I'll come out and shoot again.".

At least now you have to be somewhat close to terrain to do this; it seems like they want to stop people form being able to zoom across tables without much regard for distance like they can now.

**Tribune**

When discussing these rumours, please also note his source, which I posted the link to on Round 3's thread and appears somewhere between the two excerpts you've pulled. I ascribe little authenticity to these currently and Brim had yet to reply at all on them as of last night.

**Voodoo Boyz**

One thing I've noticed is that Brim and other Warseer "reliables" are loathe to comment on rumors posted from "leaked" preview books.

When the first set of Ork rumors, which turned out to be almost 100% spot on in terms of rules came out from Orkdom seeing a printed copy of the leaked dex, Brim and co said nothing about it.

I think that because of the nature of the source, them "confirming what the leak shows" as something they've heard would just give credence to the leaked document where almost the entire thing is bound to get online at some point.

**Wehrkind**

keezus wrote:
Voodoo Boyz wrote:With no more "Glancing 6" to destroy a vehicle S8 just became near useless against AV14.

I think you meant "Monoliths" are essentially invincible against "Witchunters (penetent engine - huur!) and Dark Eldar (haywire)", and almost invincible against "Daemonhunters (Lascannon and dread CCW on dreads and landraiders) and Eldar (fireprism, haywire, wraithlord HTH and d-cannon)". Hooray.

Well, they already kind of are. Though the Sisters enjoy the benefits of AP1 currently to give them the Pen on a hit, and even if the rumors are true and AP1 becomes +1 on the damage chart, it gives them a one in 6 chance to tag the monolith. Not good, but workable (I guess).

I wonder if power weapons and melta grenades are going to be considered AP1 as well. It would make a certain amount of sense, and keep melee a little more effective against the fortress vehicles like Monoliths and Land Raiders that there is no "rear armor" to hit in melee.

**widderslainte**

Fast vehicles can move up to 18" (their max speed now) and only fire defensive.

Glance is a -2. If you are glanced, your vehicle can at most be immobilized. Vehicles are a bit more survivable because of the way damage stacks.

Transports: If your transport is destroyed, passengers now take a Str 4 hit, saves allowed (instead of a 4+). If an open-topped transport is destroyed, it's a Str 3 hit because its easier to disembark.

Certain vehicles have become "viable" (to some degree) again. A Dark Eldar Ravager with 3 Dark Lances is now something you can take. You couldn't really before, because you "had" to move 6+ inches to get SMF, and that meant you could only fire one weapon.

With fast vehicles only able to move 18", it likewise eliminated the Dark Eldar rush. It again looks like they're moving away from one-turn assaults and other too-good combos.

Ravagers won't be more viable, because (based on these rumours and the reported SMF changes) every Dark Eldar player will be wimpering in their closet until a new codex comes out.

**AlexCage**

glon52 wrote:My main gripe is the slowing down of vehicles. Skimmers that move only 18" is way too slow. With forced march, even infantry can move as fast as a tank. Don't get me wrong, I like forced march. The problem is that vehicles are simply too slow. If anything, they should speed them up.

I think that's the main sticking point for me. Vehicles can move 12" and fire defensive weapons (so a heavy stubber or StormBolter, or, good god, Hurricane Bolters [yeah good call on that one], i.e., basically nothing). Infantry can move 12" and not fire at all. So infantry and vehicles are the same speed? Why would I ever take a transport then?! Well I suppose my Chimeras can be big metal skin for my Guard now. Of course, I could just take another unit and have 2 scoring units instead of 1 with an AV.

Also:

Ground vehicles that move at full speed and cross dangerous terrain roll 2D6 for their test. If one "one" is rolled, they're immobilized. If two "ones" are rolled, the vehicle flips over and is considered destroyed. Kinda cool, I think, because it represents what you see in action movies.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong... isn't that how it is NOW? What's new about this?

**widderslainte**

glon52 wrote:My main gripe is the slowing down of vehicles. Skimmers that move only 18" is way too slow. With forced march, even infantry can move as fast as a tank. Don't get me wrong, I like forced march. The problem is that vehicles are simply too slow. If anything, they should speed them up.

Seriously. GW needs to decide what the point of a transport is. Even with these changes, what good is a rhino?

**glon52**

Maybe GW got sick of selling vehicles.

I see house rules for vehicle movement/fire in my future.

**glon52**

An expensive storm bolter?

**Saldiven**

One comment toward the second quote of the OP.

These rules do nothing to change DE raider rush. You couldn't disembark from raiders if they moved more than 12" in 3rd or 4th edition. Limiting the raider to a max move of 18" doesn't change that. Unless they've changed the disembarkation rules, raiders and trucks will still be able to move 12", disembark, fleet (waagh), and assault.

Also, if rumors are true, then walking still isn't as fast as a vehicle. The first rumor stated that, if you "ran," then you couldn't assault that phase. Therefore, you're limited to a max move of 12", while vehicles will be going, potentially, 18". If this rumor is true, then it goes differential "fleet" from "run/forced march." If you "run," you can't assault; if you "fleet," you can.