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.

Am i the only person that thinks its rather futile to make a list based on rumors for a new rule book?

Alot of threads have been started like what will you change about your army when 5th edition comes out. Such and such army for 5th edition. Etc etc etc.

No my army wont change till i read the actual rule book. No matter what rumors are posted. Now i can understand its good to get an idea but how can anyone give advice on a new list without knowing exactly what the new rules are. For all we know these "leaks and rumors" could be made up to kinda distract everyone.

So is it only me or does anyone else feel the same way?

Well, if you have the .pdf that is allegedly a pre-release version of the 5th edition rules, then writing a list and playing a game or five would give you some idea of how to respond to the new edition (1. Quit, 2. Buy a new army, 3. Retool old army, 4. Business as usual).

I think it would be interesting to write some lists and play some trial games.

Perhaps not super useful because things will change a bit before the final version but you can get an idea if Orks are going to be kings of the battlefield.

There is a pdf out already of the new rules? Well that would be cool to read ill try and find it

While i personally dont keep up with the rumor mill i certainly dont think its a waste or futile to experiment. For all we know GW leaks things like this and looks at the publics response (the glass is very much half full on that theory). It cant hurt to discuss option and possible directions that our hobby is going.

FearPeteySodes wrote:While i personally dont keep up with the rumor mill i certainly dont think its a waste or futile to experiment. For all we know GW leaks things like this and looks at the publics response (the glass is very much half full on that theory). It cant hurt to discuss option and possible directions that our hobby is going.

Yeah that is ture i didnt think that leaking would be a good idea to get a general response. Discussing the options is not what i find futile, its basing lists around rules that arent set in stone yet. Hell discussing new rules is a good way to get ideas for house rules. So no by all means discuss the rules but base a list on rumors, no i still dont think its a good idea.

Making a list though requires almost zero effort though its a just a way to look into where your army COULD be in the new ed. Making a list and buying an army off heresay are two different things.

Considering that the .pdf is reputed to be the 5th edition of Warhammer 40k, and produced by a company with a constant turn-over policy with regard to new editions, then that suggests that no army is set in stone. Moreover it suggests that one should buy miniatures on the understanding that their associated rules can and will change in the future.

It's fun to think about what the changes (if true) will mean to the armies that get put on the board. A lot of dakka posting is mathhammer, list optimization, speculating about tactics that haven't actually been applied on a tabletop yet, etc. A lot of people here (including me) gets excited at trying to figure out what the implications of a rules overhaul like this might be.

In addition, it looks like the 5th ed leaked rules (even with all the missing sections) would still make for a more fun game than the current state of 4th edition, so why not playtest the leaked rules out? It'll probably be way more fun than yet another 4th ed game of Nidzilla vs Trifalcon Eldar or Tau Air Force

Strangelooper wrote:A lot of dakka posting is mathhammer, list optimization, speculating about tactics that haven't actually been applied on a tabletop yet, etc. A lot of people here (including me) gets excited at trying to figure out what the implications of a rules overhaul like this might be.

This is often less charitably be called "pre-judging" or "prejudice".

Strangelooper wrote:It'll probably be way more fun than yet another 4th ed game of Nidzilla vs Trifalcon Eldar or Tau Air Force

That's what I like about my gaming group. Although we don't change our armies around all that much, we play missions and scenarios so it never bogs down to playing army X again because it's the conditions of the game that keep it fresh rather than the armies.

Based on the Army Lists forum, the point is to ignore the rules that actually comprise 5th Edition.

I think a lot of us have fun trying to figure out what's going to be good before everyone else does.