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.

Vitruvian XVII wrote:@otaku: I highly doubt it tbh.

I see where you're coming from though, at least we'll be prepared should it happen!

Oh I doubt it too, But I think it at least has a 1% chance of being correct. Maybe 5% if it wasn't GW, but at least a greater chance than a toaster remaining just a toaster after an ork has 5 minutes with it.

I just like thinking up possible reasons, not likely ones.

Maybe, in a desperate bit to throw the 40k community into chaos and by extension destroying 40k some elaborate vengeful troll wasted months of his life writing up this "leak" codex that sounds awesome, great, perfect, amazing, and awesome again. Not everyone likes it of course, but a large enough group of players would. Doing so gets our hopes up for a game fated never to exist. When 6th edition finally drops, we end up with 5.25 and are so incredibly bummed that a number of us do not buy it. We printout these rules and play them instead, or decide it's finally worth looking at warmachine. The troll managed to make 40k look boring, and thus, lost tons of money.

Maybe, in an attempt to awaken GW to the demands of it's fans, an die-hard fan cooked up this elaborate codex contaning a horse of ideas and changes that other fans had at one point considered for the game. I myself relished in the idea of sisters of battle getting to use their pistols for CC, which may now be true. This fan-dex has enough visual credibility to sound real enough for us to discuss at length, guaranteeing GW will pick it over pixel by pixel to see who did it. Gw will not be able to ignore their fans wishes since they won't just have their own opinions to reference, but a (pretend) GW document, asking "Please let these rules or something like it be true." Should GW end up releasing 5.5, it makes it quite clear that GW does not care about it's fans (not that we expected any different) and suffers a significant rage storm, OR GW realizes they must include the changes and ideas we've been clamoring for or they will lose their players and their money to nothing more than a fan who listens to fans.

Maybe filthy Xenos did it.

All possible, none likely, but fun to think about. ^_^

Anyone that says the 6thEd rules are too dynamic of a change clearly wasn't around for 3rdEd's creation.

LeakedText wrote:Base Evasion value: 3
Modifiers:
Target unit is massive. -1
Target unit has remained stationary. -1
Target unit with Jink has moved. +1
Target unit is swarm. +1

Flyers are always 6 as well.

AresX8 wrote:6th edition is rumored to be released this summer.

Evasion values are already given. Check pg 70 of the rulebook (pg 49 of the PDF). It's explain there.

Sorry, that's what I meant. Dunno why I said next summer. I keep thinking its last year.

And I guess I skipped over that part. I'm going to spend tomorrow reading the new rulebook in its entirety, and in the meantime creating army lists for my Necrons that will probably be terrible after I finish reading the new rules.

Absolutionis wrote:Anyone that says the 6thEd rules are too dynamic of a change clearly wasn't around for 3rdEd's creation.

I think what they mean is that's it's too dynamic of a change for the company that GW is at the moment.

ShumaGorath wrote:It does all certainly sound dubious. This whole thing is a weird and shady debaucle. I suspect foul play on the part of BOK, GWs legal team, or someone else. I'm still not at all convinced that this is fake.. Or real.

But Shummy, he researched it, and for a whole two days. You can't argue with research!!!



Yes I agree with you.

tetrisphreak wrote:From what I gather on page 21 (1st page of the leaked pdf) the statement that 'units can take their own turns' is a reference to a narrative mission or two, or upcoming expansions to even further vary how the game plays out.

I've personally always wondered how 40K would fare with a you-go I-go system like malifaux and some other game systems. The assault phase would be the wrench in that cog, because all engaged models must fight, but i think it might just work. We'll have to see and wait on the final document, along with the first 21 pages and the last 25 or more pages for the narrative missions.

It actually feels well with the UGO IGO system as I've tried it out years ago in 4th edition with some friends. The catch is that you just have to resolve the assaults AFTER all the units are activated at the end of the turn which makes close combat less deadly (since you're effectively getting one assault phase per game turn instead of 2).

michaelcycle wrote:
I agree it seems far too complicated - especially after it states in the beginning to veteran players the game is meant to play faster than before.

I'm sure that one we play a few games we will pick up the changes pretty quickly. The game will likely be faster because more stuff is dying sooner and you have less stuff to move and shoot in later turns...

Quoting a friendly GW manager - "yeah the official word is - its a fake.. just had an email from head office, seems someone had a lot of time on his hands.."
Still, fun to read through

Aquaterry

Aquaterry wrote:Quoting a friendly GW manager - "yeah the official word is - its a fake.. just had an email from head office, seems someone had a lot of time on his hands.."
Still, fun to read through

Aquaterry

Isn't that what the higher-ups said about the Space Hulk box not being Space Hulk?

Absolutionis wrote:

Aquaterry wrote:Quoting a friendly GW manager - "yeah the official word is - its a fake.. just had an email from head office, seems someone had a lot of time on his hands.."
Still, fun to read through

Aquaterry

Isn't that what the higher-ups said about the Space Hulk box not being Space Hulk?

Oddly enough, they did indeed!

BDJV wrote:

Absolutionis wrote:

Aquaterry wrote:Quoting a friendly GW manager - "yeah the official word is - its a fake.. just had an email from head office, seems someone had a lot of time on his hands.."
Still, fun to read through

Aquaterry

Isn't that what the higher-ups said about the Space Hulk box not being Space Hulk?

Oddly enough, they did indeed!

Denial is just GW's way of confirming it for us

Wait...Did anybody note how boss Banshees, Incubi, and GKs got with the power weapon parry? Swords on Strike squads now make sense.

ph34r wrote:

BDJV wrote:

Absolutionis wrote:

Aquaterry wrote:Quoting a friendly GW manager - "yeah the official word is - its a fake.. just had an email from head office, seems someone had a lot of time on his hands.."
Still, fun to read through

Aquaterry

Isn't that what the higher-ups said about the Space Hulk box not being Space Hulk?

Oddly enough, they did indeed!

Denial is just GW's way of confirming it for us

I suspect this may be an early draft and not the "polished" article as some of it hands together nicely and some seems very clunky .
fake or true ??? .
I think the answer is somewhere in the middle - as was said before GW's denial is pretty much worthless .

AdeptSister wrote:Wait...Did anybody note how boss Banshees, Incubi, and GKs got with the power weapon parry? Swords on Strike squads now make sense.

Only power weapons that don't have any extra rules grant the parry save. So only banshees will get the bonus. Incubis weapons give +1 S and GKs are all force weapons.

And gaining the Invul save is a bit of a double-edged sword (pun not intended) as you're now a different save bracket, so could end up very dead if the squad takes a lot of wounds in a single heap.

airmang wrote:

AdeptSister wrote:Wait...Did anybody note how boss Banshees, Incubi, and GKs got with the power weapon parry? Swords on Strike squads now make sense.

Only power weapons that don't have any extra rules grant the parry save. So only banshees will get the bonus. Incubis weapons give +1 S and GKs are all force weapons.

Not to mention Necron Overlords. You can now get a Power Weapon and a 5+ Inv save for free.

Oh, and every single SM sergeant and squad leader that didn't have an Inv save already.

I think it is a first draft of the rules given to internal play testers, I'd say most of it is 70% complete with some revision coming to it. Odds are that GW has furthered these rules and will go to printing by late march to early April.

airmang wrote:

AdeptSister wrote:Wait...Did anybody note how boss Banshees, Incubi, and GKs got with the power weapon parry? Swords on Strike squads now make sense.

Only power weapons that don't have any extra rules grant the parry save. So only banshees will get the bonus. Incubis weapons give +1 S and GKs are all force weapons.

Alright. Thanks for the clarification. I am really happy for banshees. It makes sense and they are a little more survivable.


Also, Triach Praetorians and Spyders got a boost as well. I am really liking this.

I just played 6th edition.

Well, we playtested whatever this is at the LGS anyway.

It works pretty well. I'm tired and need to go to bed so I can't say anything too ridiculously detailed, but I'll sum it up a bit and give some quick observations.

We played a 1v1 game @1000 pts. My Blood Angels Sanguinary Guard Army vs my friend's Green Tide Orks.

The biggest surprise and ultimately the most noticeable impact on the game was the Tactical Gambit. It took us about a half hour just to figure out what the hell was going on there and who deployed when and how. The key is that you roll off to determine who deploys first, but then you bid strategy points on who actually takes the first turn. So my opponent won the roll off and chose to deploy first, but I won the bid, which meant that I got to look at how he was deployed and take the first turn. It was like I seized the initiative in 5th, so I had a big advantage...

...except he used all the strategy points to make his ENTIRE Ork army STUBBORN. You ever try killing a stubborn green tide with 16 gold space marines? I have. It ain't pretty.

It took us about 3 hours to play 5 turns. Almost all of that was searching through the rules. Actual time spent playing the game/ moving dudes/ rolling dice was very minimal. This ruleset moves much quicker than the 5th edition set. You wouldn't expect that from all the extra complexity, but it does. You only move units once per turn (for the most part) and that really speeds it up.

We didn't use any vehicles except for one ork buggy, which I destroyed by charging and attacking with infernus pistols in close combat, then shooting in the shooting phase with the same infernus pistols. I threw away 5 sanguinary guard to do it, but I wanted to see how the rules for all of that played out. The vehicle exploded and explosions are quite a bit more dangerous now. They basically work like 5th edition dangerous terrain checks. No armor saves.

He won in the end by charging his last 2 mobs of boyz (40 orks) in to alpha strike my last sanguinary guard that was tied up fighting a warboss with 1 wound left. Alpha strike is mean. Those boyz wrecked that Sanguinary Guard at I10.

Overall, I like this ruleset far more than the current 5th edition set. The best thing is just the lack of random dice rolls. It is subtle on paper but when we actually started moving dudes around it was like "wait I don't have to roll to run/move through terrain/charge" the movement values are arbitrary so you can plan everything ahead without worrying that 1 bad dice roll will ruin everything. You can premeasure movement and if you fail a charge it actually specifically states that you can choose to just move some other way. No more "Oops my unit is .01 inches out of charge range, guess they're screwed"

I like it a lot. Here's to hoping this is the real thing and not some internet hoax.

mondo80 wrote:I think it is a first draft of the rules given to internal play testers, I'd say most of it is 70% complete with some revision coming to it. Odds are that GW has furthered these rules and will go to printing by late march to early April.

Apparently the 6th ed rules are already in China for printing.

BDJV wrote:

mondo80 wrote:I think it is a first draft of the rules given to internal play testers, I'd say most of it is 70% complete with some revision coming to it. Odds are that GW has furthered these rules and will go to printing by late march to early April.

Apparently the 6th ed rules are already in China for printing.

I'm not surprised, seeing as most video games go gold (code gets copied and put on DVDs and shipped to stores) around 4 months out. I doubt printing a book takes much longer, so we could be looking at a May/June release date if this happens to be even remotely likely.

Yeah the release of 6th is rumored for sometime in July.

Dribble Joy wrote:The way they are laid out does appear a little confusing. Set out properly they are actually quite simple and much more explicit in their descriptions (baring the typos).

I really hope the bolded part was deliberate...

I want these rules to be true, but we shall see.

OK, these are the instances where you can perform Defensive Fire:

OVERWATCH
Universal, Shooting special rule
If an enemy unit ends a Move action within 12”, a
unit with this ability may perform a Defensive Fire
action and shoot at the intruding unit. If the unit
was assaulted by the enemy it can shoot
nonetheless. If the units lose contact, they
consolidate at the end of the phase as normal.

Note: The Universal rule does NOT mean all units can perform it.

...Universal special rules are conferred
to every model in the unit if at least one
model has this rule....

DEEP STRIKE
....Units within 12” of one or more enemy units that
arrived via deep strike may perform a Defensive
Fire action and target one of the units. If units
from more than one player can shoot, resolve this
in turn order.....

Trapped!
....Every enemy unit that blocks one or more access
points of the transport can immediately execute
either a Defensive Fire or Charge by Chance
action at the disembarking unit.....

Death or Glory
....A unit that does not dodge (involuntarily or not)
may carry out a Defensive fire action, targeting
the ramming unit....

Under no other circumstances can a unit perform Defensive Fire.

I've just realised what this ruleset reminds me of, with its individual boxed-out actions that you choose from.

4th edition D&D...

anyway, thanks for trying them out and reporting back, Mike

I think I might of just figured it out......

so we know the document was done back in may of last year right? Well.....if that's the case, not a single rumour pertained to the fact that necrons where getting Tesla weapons back in may, hell not up until a month before necrons came out did we know about tesla weapons.

But yet there it sits in the pdf leak, and remember this document is from may.....so ether the person's who created this are psychic or this is infact the real deal.

Dribble Joy wrote:OK, these are the instances where you can perform Defensive Fire:

OVERWATCH
Universal, Shooting special rule
If an enemy unit ends a Move action within 12”, a
unit with this ability may perform a Defensive Fire
action and shoot at the intruding unit. If the unit
was assaulted by the enemy it can shoot
nonetheless. If the units lose contact, they
consolidate at the end of the phase as normal.

Note: The Universal rule does NOT mean all units can perform it.

...Universal special rules are conferred
to every model in the unit if at least one
model has this rule....

DEEP STRIKE
....Units within 12” of one or more enemy units that
arrived via deep strike may perform a Defensive
Fire action and target one of the units. If units
from more than one player can shoot, resolve this
in turn order.....

Trapped!
....Every enemy unit that blocks one or more access
points of the transport can immediately execute
either a Defensive Fire or Charge by Chance
action at the disembarking unit.....

Death or Glory
....A unit that does not dodge (involuntarily or not)
may carry out a Defensive fire action, targeting
the ramming unit....

Under no other circumstances can a unit perform Defensive Fire.

Not quite, if a unit is assaulted and satisfies the following criteria it can Defensive fire:

If the responding unit was assaulted by the
target unit and it was not locked in combat
previously, it can shoot at the target unit. If the
units lose contact, follow the rules for lost
contact outside of the Assault phase as normal.

That is right out of the defensive fire rule.

Could someone PM me a copy please?

The college computers wont let me access it and i have no computer at home

I would be really gratful if someone could