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.

BrassScorpion wrote:

I'm also concerned about the size of the rulebook. If it includes flyer rules, modular rules, superheavy rules, generic psychic powers, and the other rules, then how large will it be? GW rulebooks are about 50/50 rules and fluff - can anyone imagine buying a $80-$100 rulebook?

I can imagine GW selling one at that price after the $74.25 US Fantasy rule book. That's the most plausible thing I've heard here yet.

If the book was the brass ring needed to get everything condensed down from several published editions down to one, I may consider it.

At that price I could no longer afford to play.

At that price I could no longer afford to play.

Huh? $57.75 every 4 years was feasible, but $74.25 every 4 years is not? That's a difference of roughly $18 per year as opposed to about $14 per year assuming a continuing 4-year revision cycle on the main rule book. $74.25 is a lot of money, but it's not like $57.75 now (or the $50 when it first was released) is exactly a bargain either. The difference over the life of the book is relatively small, so I'm once again mystified by comments of that type which I've heard in person as well as seen on forums in one form or another since the Fantasy rule book release last summer.

And for those buying used books at bargain prices the list price should be irrelevant.

If the book gives us expanded rules, such as including material that is normally spread over several books and publications, it could be feasible to purchase.

It's like buying the Core DnD books as a Pathfinder book...you get what you pay for, and if you get it altogether, saves you some money in the long run.

BrassScorpion wrote:

At that price I could no longer afford to play.

Huh? $57.75 every 4 years was feasible, but $74.25 every 4 years is not? That's a difference of roughly $18 per year as opposed to about $14 per year assuming a continuing 4-year revision cycle on the main rule book. $74.25 is a lot of money, but it's not like $57.75 now (or the $50 when it first was released) is exactly a bargain either. The difference over the life of the book is relatively small, so I'm once again mystified by comments of that type which I've heard in person as well as seen on forums in one form or another since the Fantasy rule book release last summer.

I bought the core rulebook used for half the price 1 year after the initial release for 4th and bought the mini rulebook for 5th for $5. I buy my 3 army codecies "new" from discount retailers and have only added a unit or two to each army since third edition. There is an exception for the Dark Eldar though as I bought most of that new this year. It doesn't sound like there is going to be a mini rulebook in 6th. I don't know if Fantasy had it, if not the odds are even lower for it's existence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WarOne wrote:If the book gives us expanded rules, such as including material that is normally spread over several books and publications, it could be feasible to purchase.

It's like buying the Core DnD books as a Pathfinder book...you get what you pay for, and if you get it altogether, saves you some money in the long run.

I have never bought any expansion for 40K and only recently delved into Apocalypse.

Pyriel- wrote:

* the biggest rule changes:
- similar ballistic to hit chart as wound chart: compare BS to target’s speed and unit type. BS 3 hits moving infantry on 4+, but lightning fast jetbikes on 6+ and stationary tank on 2+… HUGE

Unbeatable Dark eldar anyone?

And those GK paladin apotecharies for 75 freaking points will become even more extinct then the falchions.

What a load of dung.

Invulnerable Dark Eldar? Excuse me, but do you not realize that that means you won't have your Dark Lances to pop tranports so you can get to the gooey center. You'll have to run up first, and either assault, or stand by in assault range for a turn, until the transports are popped.

It also means you'll more often be fighting full-strength Horde squads, without the shooting to whittle them down.

megatrons2nd wrote:

It's like buying the Core DnD books as a Pathfinder book...you get what you pay for, and if you get it altogether, saves you some money in the long run.

I have never bought any expansion for 40K and only recently delved into Apocalypse.

winnertakesall wrote:If half this stuff is true, I will go down to GW HQ, and begin on slapping some sense into every single one of them.

AHaHA I remember this! now I know where family guy get their references!
On topic now: tau? black templar? necrons? I WiSH I REALLY WISH Highly unlikely though...However I do think necrons need to come out of the crypt (pun intened?) Tau really do need a boost when was the last time our cyan skinned space communist had their spot in the limelight? Black Templar meh i wish for salamanders or white scars but yeah ok

Anvildude wrote:

Pyriel- wrote:

* the biggest rule changes:
- similar ballistic to hit chart as wound chart: compare BS to target’s speed and unit type. BS 3 hits moving infantry on 4+, but lightning fast jetbikes on 6+ and stationary tank on 2+… HUGE

Unbeatable Dark eldar anyone?

And those GK paladin apotecharies for 75 freaking points will become even more extinct then the falchions.

What a load of dung.

Invulnerable Dark Eldar? Excuse me, but do you not realize that that means you won't have your Dark Lances to pop tranports so you can get to the gooey center. You'll have to run up first, and either assault, or stand by in assault range for a turn, until the transports are popped.

It also means you'll more often be fighting full-strength Horde squads, without the shooting to whittle them down.

BS4 bolters would then nail fast jetbikes on a 5+ and flamers would still auto hit. Hydras would probably just laugh.

It sounds like they are adding modifiers that go up to +2/-2 to hit. A +1 to hit a moving transport because it's a vehicle would have a huge impact on the meta game.

army310 wrote:I like some (like cover save down to a +5 ya!!)and the others sound odd to me, but its a rumor so I wait and see what will happen.

Yeah nice how would nids ever win a game if this rule was to be enacted it's BS.

Tau better damn well be one of the first new books because I don't see how there could possibly be any point in playing them if shooting takes place after assault, especially considering that most armies now can guarantee a turn 2 assault as it is, or in rare cases turn fething one. Playing Tau in 6th would basically consist of putting the models on the table, then putting them all right back in the case after the game starts, lol...

I guess Tau was always a bit of a design failure anyway. Shooty armies in the 41st millennium? To hell with that, the only point in having tanks and guns in 40k is to use them to run over/beat your enemy over the head with!

I'm going to eschew any wailing and gnashing of teeth for two important reasons.

1) The book is over one year away.
2) All of these rumors are lies. Deliberate, calculated and completely untrue. If, in 2012 a new edition of 40k comes out that's actually in any way reminiscent of the stuff being peddled in this thread, beyond the level of coincidence, I will send, at my own expense, a...

*rummages in the bitz box*

... an armless Terminator Librarian to the first person who holds me to my promise.

YOU'RE ON, BUDDY!

I know what you mean though, I'm not putting too much stock in it myself. Sounds like the changes are too radical for GW, who have seemingly been content to keep reselling basically the same ruleset for about a decade now with only minor tweaks to change things up. And all the changes they've made to Fantasy have seemingly been unpopular so I don't see them being in the mood.

At the same time though, if they expect me to be out $80 for a new rulebook then I damn well better be getting something more than "40k 3.8, the same old game we've been selling since 1998 but with small tweaks that coincidentally result in you having to buy an additional $400 worth of models to keep playing!"

I'd like to see some chaos starter set scenery and a legion codex but seems a bit too much like wishlisting. I don't believe that cover and FNP will be reduced to 5+ as this will invalidate the whole idea for how the new Dark Eldar codex plays (cover and FNP protect an otherwise vulnerable army).

Deathly Angel wrote:I'd like to see some chaos starter set scenery and a legion codex but seems a bit too much like wishlisting. I don't believe that cover and FNP will be reduced to 5+ as this will invalidate the whole idea for how the new Dark Eldar codex plays (cover and FNP protect an otherwise vulnerable army).

On the other hand, if the BS chart changes come into effect as well, DE players don't need the improved saves as they should be harder to hit as you should be moving quickly. To be honest, that sounds much more suitable to the whole theme of the army rather than skulking in cover and relying upon FNP.

Really the only bit I don't like about the rumor is the change to the turn phases. Otherwise I'm just on the wall for the others and just seams a rather drastic change to what GW has been trying to do to make the game more streamelined and faster to play. These changes will only make game last longer.

Otherwise I'm adding a mountain of salt with these rumors.

how would you choose first turn?

Credit must be given to GW when credit is due:

The improvements they have made to their their 'starter boxes' over the years have become, in my opinion, the standard upon which all other starter boxes from other companies should be judged. Complete sides, a narrative that focuses the box' contents, detailed and useful plastic miniatures, and even the few unique pieces that aren't available elsewhere. They are (or, rather, were) affordable boxed sets that made for an excellent entry point for new gamers, a great starting point for new armies, and were even worth it for veteran players when it came to bulking up existing forces.


So let's take that wonderful idea that has been developed so well through two editions of Fantasy and two editions of 40K and totally fething ruin it by making two different boxes with only one army in each, essentially putting up yet another barrier for entry into the game (and that's not accounting for how much these damned things are probably going to cost).

Run by fething monkeys...

Blarg. I hope the new rules (if they have any correlation to these rumours) don't further encourage heavy reliance on transports, or general vehicle overuse.

The perceived increased danger to foot-slogging troops makes me sad :(

Of course, concepts such as these (accurate or not) are presented in a vacuum, so hopefully there are additional rule changes to circumvent that problem.

I find hard to believe in so many changes... one thing I bet that will happen in the next edition is that the armies will grow in size.

Since this looks more like wishlist the only wish I will cast is - all codexes will be updated to the new edition in one year... PP did it

infinite_array wrote:Let's see - as to the validity of the rumors, BoK does a pretty good job of posting legitimate rumors.

It was posted ON BoK, not BY BoK. that's a difference. But ghost21 and the BoK owner said that much of it makes sense.

ChocolateGork wrote:how would you choose first turn?

It is a non-random bidding contest, the loser getting points for stratagems like in CoD.

slow slogging units very vulnerable

What the hell? They better give slow slogging units a massive boost then.

Looks like you'll be buying even MORE transports! Hooray!

Orite, and the other thing that concerns me, outside of my footslogging orks being in peril... is the presented ability for my opponent to assign damage directly to my nobs for every 5 wounds. 10 wounds into a boyz mob, and the nob dies D:

Combine that with the suggestion that IC's will be able to snipe as well?

Obviously, I hope the rulebook, if it does include these rules, has other rules to offset such events, or at very least provide new rules in FAQs for each race.

Because being able to snipe Powerklaws with general ranged fire, or allowing IC's to spoke out my Nob before he can have a swing... terrifies me...

I'm also worried, since the Ork Codex is near the last in the Codex-Revamp conveyer belt, just ahead of Chaos Daemons... so I'm a bit concerned that it may suffer from old-edition blues. Of course, Codex's aren't "revived" in the same order they were previously, but I would think that Chaos, Eldar, and Dark Angels would appear beforehand regardless.

Of course, I am letting a certain few rules scare me off the whole lot. There ARE things that look interesting, and things that even excite me.

If anybody wants me, I'll be in the "this is utter bs" corner.

I only read about the Chaos Legions-part and dismissed it as rumor. It just sounds too good to be true.

Im liking the sound of almost all of these rumors.
They sound like they're based on acutal feedback, for good and bad.

Well, isn't this interesting. I'm undecided myself, I have no experience of BoK's trustworthiness, or this new ghost21 fellow, so I'll wait for the Warseer pie-man to speak. We shall see.

A thought though: those who say that these rules will never be due to difference between them and the current rule-set, I don't see that they're any further from 5th as 3rd was from 2nd.

Wow! Grate stuff! I hope that those rumours are true because it makes this game more interesting and tactical to play. Two different starter sets sounds little bad because newcomers have to by both and you cant play with one of those two.