Definitely Not a Leaked 6th Rulebook, Don't Even Bother Looking

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.

**gorgon**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Let's apply some logic and common sense here. In the past, people have highlighted the fact that Games Developers such as Chambers/PriestlyCavatore etc have wanted to be radical with 40k but the bosses refused. As a result, they left.
Now compare these rules with Chambers' Starship rules, (or whatever they are called, help me out here) Priestly's historical stuff, and the stuff Alessio did for Warpath. Are there similarities? Is there anything in the independant stuff to compare with these rules?

I know I've ranted on in the past about giving the hobby 200+ years and 4 wives or rubbish like that, but in all honesty, this is way to far out for GW. Look at their track record the past few years. As long as they're making cash, do they care? We know the answer. Don't be fooled by sentimental talk of 25th anniversary. 6th edition will be 5th with some minor tweaks. In their heart of hearts, most people know this.
If I'm right, people will be happy. If I'm wrong, a few geeks get upset, but most people will buy 6th even if it is a steaming pile. It's the beautiful poison

Two important points here:

1) WFB received more than a tweak in 8th, so there's your case study.

2) If you play a game with these rules, it's still recognizably 40K. There are certainly some important changes (for the better, IMO). But the forward to vets in the intro section is correct that it's probably not quite as different as you think.

**ColdSadHungry**

The defensive fire thing - other than deep striking and a couple of other rarely occurring incidents, you need the overwatch rule. Since only Coteaz has it right now, that can only mean that in future codices, certain units will be given it creating a huge imbalance in the game between those codices that have it and those that don't.

This is another pointer to the rules not being any where near the final version (I don't think it's fake, rather a playtest or beta version) because I can't believe that such a big game mechanic will not be available to so many armies. I that that the leaked FAQs are very much incomplete and that the final versions of them will include updates to unit types, advising what USR each unit type has. At least, that's what I hope!

**Maelstrom808**

ColdSadHungry wrote:The defensive fire thing - other than deep striking and a couple of other rarely occurring incidents, you need the overwatch rule. Since only Coteaz has it right now, that can only mean that in future codices, certain units will be given it creating a huge imbalance in the game between those codices that have it and those that don't.

This is another pointer to the rules not being any where near the final version (I don't think it's fake, rather a playtest or beta version) because I can't believe that such a big game mechanic will not be available to so many armies. I that that the leaked FAQs are very much incomplete and that the final versions of them will include updates to unit types, advising what USR each unit type has. At least, that's what I hope!

Or....codex writers will recognize that it would create a huge imbalance and not give it to every Tom, Dick and Harry unit. Considering the rareity of it on units and the many ways they have available to bypass it in the other situations where it can become available, I think the writer(s) understand how easily it can shift the balance of power.

**Rafi**

Just as a mental exercise and assuming that the rules are fake, what if someone were to alter this rules set and claim that it is a fan-derived piece of work, that it is fake, and that it is simply a derivative work and in no way should be assumed to be a product of Games Workshop? Wouldn't that remove any objection Games Workshop has to folks distributing this rules set? I mean, the original copyright holder would be in a bit of a jam as they'd have to defend their copyright, but if it's a fan-derived piece of work distributed in this manner I have to imagine that they would have no objection ot the modification and expanded distribution, right?

**wuestenfux**

Rafi wrote:Just as a mental exercise and assuming that the rules are fake, what if someone were to alter this rules set and claim that it is a fan-derived piece of work, that it is fake, and that it is simply a derivative work and in no way should be assumed to be a product of Games Workshop? Wouldn't that remove any objection Games Workshop has to folks distributing this rules set? I mean, the original copyright holder would be in a bit of a jam as they'd have to defend their copyright, but if it's a fan-derived piece of work distributed in this manner I have to imagine that they would have no objection ot the modification and expanded distribution, right?

Sorry but in each case its intellectual property of gw.

**Squidmanlolz**

Rafi wrote:Just as a mental exercise and assuming that the rules are fake, what if someone were to alter this rules set and claim that it is a fan-derived piece of work, that it is fake, and that it is simply a derivative work and in no way should be assumed to be a product of Games Workshop? Wouldn't that remove any objection Games Workshop has to folks distributing this rules set? I mean, the original copyright holder would be in a bit of a jam as they'd have to defend their copyright, but if it's a fan-derived piece of work distributed in this manner I have to imagine that they would have no objection ot the modification and expanded distribution, right?

Anything that relates to GW's IP is seen as their property, they sued chapter-house studios for referencing the names of some of their products and profiting from selling conversion kits for said products.You would have to make your very own, original game to avoid GWs legal team.

**Harriticus**

No fluff in this makes me a sad panda.

**jvry8c**

hopefully its fake. Some things are interesting (snipers being able to pick who is wounded) but overall it kills the game and breaks game standards that have existed in 40k since 2ed edition ex: order of the turn. also the B.S. vs evasion is kind of dumb as well.

**Squidmanlolz**

Harriticus wrote:No fluff in this makes me a sad panda.

It's just a draft (if it is real). Fluff would be added after everything was play-tested and tweaked.

**Rafi**

Squidmanlolz wrote:
Rafi wrote:Just as a mental exercise and assuming that the rules are fake, what if someone were to alter this rules set and claim that it is a fan-derived piece of work, that it is fake, and that it is simply a derivative work and in no way should be assumed to be a product of Games Workshop? Wouldn't that remove any objection Games Workshop has to folks distributing this rules set? I mean, the original copyright holder would be in a bit of a jam as they'd have to defend their copyright, but if it's a fan-derived piece of work distributed in this manner I have to imagine that they would have no objection ot the modification and expanded distribution, right?

Anything that relates to GW's IP is seen as their property, they sued chapter-house studios for referencing the names of some of their products and profiting from selling conversion kits for said products.You would have to make your very own, original game to avoid GWs legal team.

Don't they have fandexes and other derivative works running around? I would imagine that chapter-house is being sued because they're profitting from a derivative work (at least according to GW's lawyers and all that good stuff). If there is no profit isn't this just fan-fiction? Again, assuming that you remove any claims that it's actually GW's rules system, so that you're not causing any confusion about where the rules came from.

**Billagio**

I feel like with this rule set there is a huge boost for assault armys.

**Gavin Thorne**

Rafi wrote:Just as a mental exercise and assuming that the rules are fake, what if someone were to alter this rules set and claim that it is a fan-derived piece of work, that it is fake, and that it is simply a derivative work and in no way should be assumed to be a product of Games Workshop? Wouldn't that remove any objection Games Workshop has to folks distributing this rules set? I mean, the original copyright holder would be in a bit of a jam as they'd have to defend their copyright, but if it's a fan-derived piece of work distributed in this manner I have to imagine that they would have no objection ot the modification and expanded distribution, right?

This thought has been bouncing around my head for the last two days. I'm wondering how one would go about publishing this ruleset if it is indeed not GW's and derivative work sound like the best way to do it. Since it would be necessary to alter the material to divorce it from GW as much as possible, it would also be a derivative work from the original author if one cannot be found... I'm content to wait and see if it's 6e, but if it's not these rules should stay out there and see actual publishing.

**Wrath**

jvry8c wrote:hopefully its fake. Some things are interesting (snipers being able to pick who is wounded) but overall it kills the game and breaks game standards that have existed in 40k since 2ed edition ex: order of the turn. also the B.S. vs evasion is kind of dumb as well.

Actually in 2E Assault moves were in the Movement phase soooooo these rules are more like 2E in that aspect.

**Darkseid**

jvry8c wrote:hopefully its fake. Some things are interesting (snipers being able to pick who is wounded) but overall it kills the game and breaks game standards that have existed in 40k since 2ed edition ex: order of the turn. also the B.S. vs evasion is kind of dumb as well.

Comments like this make me lol hard. Sure it creates some imbalances, especially with older books. But kills the game? Come on, have you even tried it?

And no, evasion is a great addition; being equally hard to hit a Land Raider and a Grot form the same distance, that is dumb.

**Kharrak**

Hold on hold on hold on.

Red Paint now adds +1 to a vehicles move VALUE, not it's distance... that's quite a buff.

So... 7" combat, 14" cruise, 21" flat out?

Too bad my boyz will only be able to get out if the vehicle moved no more than 6"(7") now :(

**Maelstrom808**

Billagio wrote:I feel like with this rule set there is a huge boost for assault armys.

Like many things with this document, the PDF giveth, and the PDF taketh away. There are plenty of negatives to go with the positives. One of the biggest is you don't have a safety buffer of not getting shot up if you win an assault in your opponent's turn.

**Marthike**

So guys this edition is it favouring assualty, shooty?

Mech or infantry?

tanks seem to get nerfed so you can't sit in your boxes and shoot but they have be made proper transports whos purpous is to transport uni in safty and unload them and let the guys inside charge someone.

**Wrath**

Marthike wrote:So guys this edition is it favouring assualty, shooty?

Too soon to tell, there is sooo much give and take with both. It looks like the situation you are in will dictate which is stronger.

**Rented Tritium**

Wrath wrote:
Marthike wrote:So guys this edition is it favouring assualty, shooty?

Too soon to tell, there is sooo much give and take with both. It looks like the situation you are in will dictate which is stronger.

And as a result, it seems that you can commit fully to shooting or assaulting without getting hugely punished for it.

**Vitruvian XVII**

Dare I say.... balance...?

**Swara**

Vitruvian XVII wrote:Dare I say.... balance...?

HERESY!

..but, after reading it a couple times now.. it seems pretty balanced, for a test book that is. The play tests will come this weekend.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

IT'S A TRAP!!!

Really, what do most people care? I'm into FOW these days anyway. And to be honest, even if 6th becomes the complete opposite of this, people will rush out to buy it.

Not a fan of the evasion thing. In the grim darkness of the far future, surely weapons have sophisticated trackers.

**Cyrax**

Vitruvian XVII wrote:Dare I say.... balance...?

December 21 it is then?

**Leth**

Yea this edition just keeps getting so much more amazing as I continue to read through it. Like I said earlier games are WAY faster. Eldar get a big boost. Banshees being able to assault out of a wave serpent that moved 12 with fleet then get a 20 inch assault. Cause crusing speed and combat speed are different for fast vehicles. So a ork could go 14 before disembarking and assaulting getting A 20 inch assault. Now all distances are measured from the access point, no free two inches. But still much better than before.

Also now with reserves not being a move on but getting placed it is not such a detriment as you dont count as moving when you place your reserves and they get to act fully in addition to starting 6 inches on the board. Outflanking tyranids anyone?

I cant wait to try out strike forces it adds a whole new level of tactical versatility to the game that just makes me happy.

**Jodiju**

Fandexes et al exist by the grace of Games Workshop, they retain the right to squash them if they choose to.

**ph34r**

My favorite thing about these rules is how much movement it cuts down.

No more move in movement phase, move in shooting phase, move in assault phase.

No more move your vehicle, measure 2" and pack all the models in to disembark, move again to assault.

No difficult terrain shenanigans.

As a guard player with a ton of guardsmen, this is a life saver.

**Wrath**

I just realized that you get 2 chances to get out of HtH before your next shoot phase happens.

I am Tau and get charged on opponents turn, if I somehow manage to stay in combat then under 5th the chargers are safe from my shooting.

In 6th there will be another turn of CC for me to get wiped out/run away from AND THEN I can shoot them because Shooting is after Assaults.

Oh I like these rules!

**Absolutionis**

ph34r wrote:As a guard player with a ton of guardsmen, this is a life saver.

Agreed. As a Tyranid player that uses Hormagants, it's also a Godsend.

Move: Move 6".
Shoot: Roll 3d6, probably move 5" or 6".
Assault: Move 6"

**Rented Tritium**

Wrath wrote:I just realized that you get 2 chances to get out of HtH before your next shoot phase happens.

I am Tau and get charged on opponents turn, if I somehow manage to stay in combat then under 5th the chargers are safe from my shooting.

In 6th there will be another turn of CC for me to get wiped out/run away from AND THEN I can shoot them because Shooting is after Assaults.

Oh I like these rules!

For the people who ask why they bothered changing turn order, this is the answer.

The old way of getting screwed because you won a fight too early or too late is just stupid. It was arbitrary and punished players randomly. Similarly, the way objectives count only when you are on them at the end of the game is arbitrary. These two fixes make the game more interactive. We will actually be trying to win combats as fast as possible now. We will actually be trying to put dudes on objectives now. We're no longer going to be punished for doing the things we're supposed to be doing too quickly.

Also, there will be a LOT less of those situations where things go badly and snowball until you literally have no chances to do anything and have to just sit around waiting to get beaten.

Most of the things people are complaining about getting changed were absolutely stupid in 5th edition when you think about them critically.

**More Dakka**

Still on the fence about this being legit.

I mean, many of the elements in here seem plausible and some actually look like well thought improvements on the current system.

The issue I have with it is that there are so many new things added in, and nothing from 5th really taken away that the whole system seems bloated.

I could see this being a middle of the road draft in which every concept has been amalgamated for play testing, which will then be pared down at a later date.

I guess the bottom line is that only time will tell (about 3 months for the official release right?)