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.

chaos0xomega wrote:I would say its fake, this is the same document that was posted about a year ago, just cleaned up and reworded to make it look more professional. Also,some of these rules are contradicted by the Necron release (the "Heavy" vehicle rule as described in the Necron Codex is not the same as the "Heavy" rule in this document for example)

Anyway, as someone else pointed out, if this is legit, it will be taken down in a few hours...

Someone mentioned that the datemark on this pdf is Fall-2011. The Necron Heavy rule may have changed since then.
The pdf is really comprehensive and even includes Gauss and Tesla weapons. You'd imagine the faker would have at least noticed this discrepancy.

More likely that "Heavy" just got updated between this playtest ruleset and the Necrons official release.


The reference to "heavy" in this pdf is just a casual mention of a shorthand anyways. Nothing much would change if they just erased that entry and replaced it.

Any major changes to ko steroid creatures, bikes or
Jump infantry?

Can figure out the download. If any one would be so kind, please email me the document at thunderingjove@yahoo.com.

quick question, i have yet to really get into the codex and rules and am currently building a CSM army.
would waiting for the new rule book and learning from scratch benefit me more than trying to pick up the older rules and transitioning over to the new?

i ask simply due to what i have read here that the new rules seem a tad bit more complicated in some ways and to be honest i am feeling a bit overwhelmed by the current rules as im trying to wrap my brain around it and understand/commit it to memory.

megatrons2nd wrote:

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:I use winrar. Its free. Google it.

I found a free trial, but not a free version. Anyway it helped, thank you.

Now off to reading I go.

7-zip works on it and is completely free.

Still no mention of FW IA books in the army building sections explicitly allowing them without any permission needed.

FORCE ORGANISATION
Once they have agreed a points limit, the players
will pick their forces using the Codex book of the
army they have chosen and collected.


RULESET
It is important to agree with your opponents
which rules are used in the game. For most games
the standard rules presented here are probably
your first choice.

i can see the turn sequence changing around a bit (or reverting to 2nd edition).

keeping a running tally of your score seems more fair than just a random game-ending cutoff point.

the new wound allocation rules might work better.

#1 horrible thing about these rules:

uhhh.... the idea of standing across the table from someone trying to remember all the different movement, assault and shooting actions is daunting. every action you take has a number of associated qualifiers that allow it to interact with a list of special rules. making lists of loaded keywords for people to remember is HORRIBLE game design. HORRIBLE.

so i got through about forty pages and decided to skim for a while. this rules set is 50% larger than the last one. ick.

No mishap table for Deep Striking.

Yet another hated rule of mine bites the dust.

EDIT: And you roll To Hit with Blast weapons, and scatter only if they miss, not just scatter everything. So yet another hated rule of mine bites the dust.



This is so good that... that it just can't be true!

thunderingjove wrote:Any major changes to ko steroid creatures, bikes or
Jump infantry?

Can figure out the download. If any one would be so kind, please email me the document at thunderingjove@yahoo.com.

Bikes, I saw, said they only get their +1 toughness vs shooting... so there is that.

Absolutionis wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:I would say its fake, this is the same document that was posted about a year ago, just cleaned up and reworded to make it look more professional. Also,some of these rules are contradicted by the Necron release (the "Heavy" vehicle rule as described in the Necron Codex is not the same as the "Heavy" rule in this document for example)

Anyway, as someone else pointed out, if this is legit, it will be taken down in a few hours...

The pdf is really comprehensive and even includes Gauss and Tesla weapons.
.

Actually this may just be the proof that this is real (good catch)... Tesla weapons didn't exist until the new Necron book came out (in November?), I dont think the rumors of the tesla rule came about until well after May 2011...

would waiting for the new rule book and learning from scratch benefit me more than trying to pick up the older rules and transitioning over to the new?

You would have to assume that these rumors are accurate... but I would say that this is a big enough change that you would basically be learning a new game... I'd learn the basics of 5th just to familiarize myself and make the transition easier, but... you know dont get too focused on the details.

I liked the deep strike mishaps.

H.B.M.C. wrote:No mishap table for Deep Striking.

Yet another hated rule of mine bites the dust.

Are...are you starting to approve of something GW is doing HBMC? Methinks hell has frozen over. And I just looked out my window-it's dark out, but I'm pretty sure I saw a pig go past it (I'm in a second story apt).
You know, I'm surprised none of our current white knights have stepped in to tell us this is fake-I won't name names. Their silence on the matter may suggest the level of legality, if any of them are part of GW.

I have to say though, this is a LOT of new information to take in at 2am. Some stuff is looking nice, other things look like they're too much trouble. Then again, I hate reading pdf books, so that may be making it more difficult. I'm trying to decide if a bike army is worth playing-they're harder to hit, won't suffer to ID much, but lose their bonus when in CC-a lot of units are going to be rethought now. A new age is here!! (if this rumor is true )

chaos0xomega wrote:

Absolutionis wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

would waiting for the new rule book and learning from scratch benefit me more than trying to pick up the older rules and transitioning over to the new?

You would have to assume that these rumors are accurate... but I would say that this is a big enough change that you would basically be learning a new game... I'd learn the basics of 5th just to familiarize myself and make the transition easier, but... you know dont get too focused on the details.

thanks, i think ill do that.

Having finished a first read through I have to say that I'm really hoping this is real. I'm already feeling a tremendous relief that none of my existing armies got nerfed or invalidated and am instead actually really excited about all the new possibilities this opens up! In particular the reserve rules seem to improve balance to the game by allowing everyone to avoid the 1st turn alpha strike without having to worry about coming on piecemeal. Compared with currently where only really resilient armies or ones with reserve manipulation can do so.

Or someone has pulled off an epic troll.

Vehicle rules are nice and comprehensive, giving each type its own USR list is again elegant, if this is not legit, we need to find its author and fund him to make a rules set.

I have skimmed my fav and most convuluted rules and found this is addressing them nicely, almost feels like a return to RT days, with the narrative rules mode.

again hope its a sign of things to come.

and BTW melta bombs are now melta as a USR in this rule set.

timetowaste85 wrote:Are...are you starting to approve of something GW is doing HBMC?

Look at this then look back at the rules.

Points 1, 3, 4 and 5 are all dealt with/eliminated/changed for the better.

Jeez, I'm just drooling at the idea of charging in, while using 2 flamethrowers and bolt pistols in close combat... and spending only 10pts on a power weapon to ignore armor saves and getting a 5+ parry invul save from it... wow...

chaos0xomega wrote:

Absolutionis wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:I would say its fake, this is the same document that was posted about a year ago, just cleaned up and reworded to make it look more professional. Also,some of these rules are contradicted by the Necron release (the "Heavy" vehicle rule as described in the Necron Codex is not the same as the "Heavy" rule in this document for example)

Anyway, as someone else pointed out, if this is legit, it will be taken down in a few hours...

The pdf is really comprehensive and even includes Gauss and Tesla weapons.
.

Actually this may just be the proof that this is real (good catch)... Tesla weapons didn't exist until the new Necron book came out (in November?), I dont think the rumors of the tesla rule came about until well after May 2011...

Well, anyone can set their computer time back.
If anything, it's evidence that we're either working with the real thing or the faker is really really thorough.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:Are...are you starting to approve of something GW is doing HBMC?

Look at this then look back at the rules.

Points 1, 3, 4 and 5 are all dealt with/eliminated/changed for the better.

You know I'm teasing you, right buddy?

Oh I know that, but I was giving a serious answer. I have several large problems with 5th Ed, and those reasons make me not play the game. This rule set eliminates four of those problems... and I haven't really read the LOS rules yet so maybe it eliminates the other one as well.

I skimmed line of sight, and this is the breakdown I gathered:
Wings, tails and weapons don't count, also parts that are not directly above the base don't count-you have to draw line of sight only to portions of the model that are directly above the model's base. Sounds like an improvement to me-doesn't penalize you for cool poses on your models that go outside of the base's area.

4+ cover saves are much harder to comeby in this set (only fortified barricades give a base 4+ )

And another cherry picked rule is the jetpack gets a drawback rule, allowing a 2d6" move rather than the base 6", so it gives and takes.. I like this style of rule making.

Also Rapid fire weapons shoot to max range regardeless of moving and 2 times to 12", again good shooting phases are ahead.

and this is awesome as well.

Defensive Fire
Unit Type: Support, Shooting
In dire situations soldiers excel themselves and are
able to shoot in the enemy turn. Every model in a
unit that executes a Defensive Fire action can
perform a single Shooting action. They cannot use
the multi-targeting rule but gain the relentless
shooting special rule for the duration of this
action. Every model has to fire at the target unit
that triggered the response, even if the model is
normally allowed to fire at a different target than
the unit. These Shooting actions do not impair the
ability of a model to shoot in its own Shooting
phase (except if it uses one shot weapon, of
course). Resolve the action that triggered this
action completely before you interrupt the turn
to resolve the defensive fire.
The rules for Shooting actions apply with the
following exceptions:
• 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.
• When a model fires a rail or blast weapon, check
if the target is in range (and not within
minimum range). You do not have to place a
blast marker, trace a line or roll the scatter dice.
Roll to hit as normal. If the weapon hits, it
causes a single wound. Likewise, template
weapons don't use the template to see how
many enemy models are hit. Check, if the target
unit is in range by placing the template
according to the normal rules. If at least one
enemy model is partially under the template,
the unit is in range and suffers D3 automatic
hits from the weapon.
• The target unit does not have to take Morale
checks for casualties, terror or pinning resulting
from the defensive fire.

timetowaste85 wrote:I skimmed line of sight, and this is the breakdown I gathered:
Wings, tails and weapons don't count, also parts that are not directly above the base don't count-you have to draw line of sight only to portions of the model that are directly above the model's base. Sounds like an improvement to me-doesn't penalize you for cool poses on your models that go outside of the base's area.

My St. Celestine, with her massive angelic wings from Reaper, just got a nicer and slimmer profile... <3 it.

Absolutionis wrote:]Well, anyone can set their computer time back.
If anything, it's evidence that we're either working with the real thing or the faker is really really thorough.

If a Cerobore does come out soon, though, that'd be some pretty good evidence (or a REALLY lucky guess).

timetowaste85 wrote:I skimmed line of sight, and this is the breakdown I gathered:
Wings, tails and weapons don't count, also parts that are not directly above the base don't count-you have to draw line of sight only to portions of the model that are directly above the model's base. Sounds like an improvement to me-doesn't penalize you for cool poses on your models that go outside of the base's area.

You can still remove models within a unit that are both out or range and out of LOS but this is mitigated by the fact that the owning player chooses casualties and wounds are divvied up based on armour groups. So no more killing Mr. Apothecary who's out of range and LOS just because you got enough hits to hit everyone in the unit and I had to allocate a wound to him. If he's 3+ and everyone else is 3+ (and assuming he has no other forms of save), you roll for all of them at once.

Let us both hope and pray that this doesn't start a trend in GW Codices of them giving all squad leaders (Vet Sergeants, Exarchs, Nobz, Aspiring Champs, Shas'ui's, etc.) integral 6+ Invul Saves, 'cause that would SUCK with these rules.

EDIT: Interestingly you can sink wounds with these rules as well (as the example shows), but you could kinda do that with the 5th Ed rules, so I doubt it's that big a deal.

H.B.M.C. wrote:This is so good that... that it just can't be true!

Yeah... I think if this is a hoax, I'll just ignore 6th edition and play this.

It could be a publicity stunt like the BA fake leak, but I really, really hope it's real.

I'm still reading and I'm impressed... although I have to say the rules are still presented rather poorly and stuff is all over the place, the content is good.

Does a "Zeal Bolt Pistol" exist yet? It's on the weapon summary page, but I don't remember anything like that in the BT book.

lord_blackfang wrote:I'm still reading and I'm impressed... although I have to say the rules are still presented rather poorly and stuff is all over the place, the content is good.

So are the Codices they put out. As I said, it wouldn't be a GW book if you didn't have to flip to three sections to find out one rule.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:I skimmed line of sight, and this is the breakdown I gathered:
Wings, tails and weapons don't count, also parts that are not directly above the base don't count-you have to draw line of sight only to portions of the model that are directly above the model's base. Sounds like an improvement to me-doesn't penalize you for cool poses on your models that go outside of the base's area.

You can still remove models within a unit that are both out or range and out of LOS but this is mitigated by the fact that the owning player chooses casualties and wounds are divvied up based on armour groups. So no more killing Mr. Apothecary who's out of range and LOS just because you got enough hits to hit everyone in the unit and I had to allocate a wound to him. If he's 3+ and everyone else is 3+ (and assuming he has no other forms of save), you roll for all of them at once.

Let us both hope and pray that this doesn't start a trend in GW Codices of them giving all squad leaders (Vet Sergeants, Exarchs, Nobz, Aspiring Champs, Shas'ui's, etc.) integral 6+ Invul Saves, 'cause that would SUCK with these rules.

EDIT: Interestingly you can sink wounds with these rules as well (as the example shows), but you could kinda do that with the 5th Ed rules, so I doubt it's that big a deal.

They aren't integral, but power weapons give a 5+ invul save (parry). So...you have the option of giving your sergeants that. Also, Death Company got AMAZING with these new rules!! Rage isn't so bad. Time to get me a stormraven and some more DC for my offshoot of BAs....

They do fix the loop hole for people technically "cheating" by mounting older metal termies on 40mm bases by now expressly allowing you to mount a classic model on the current sized base.

leaked PDF wrote:If you
want to unleash the full potential of Warhammer
40,000, head over to the Narrative games section
in this book. Narrative games use the standard
rules but push the boundaries to the extreme. The
arsenal of datasheets, stratagems, missions and
terrain features available in narrative games is
several times larger than that for standard play.

A narrative games section. There's a narrative game section?

Does it come with a personalised 'We're sorry for 4th and 5th' letter addressed to me, because that's what I think of when I read 'narrative game section'?

Revarien wrote:

pretre wrote:Also, no codex update for SoB. Seems strange.

We is sad pandas :(

Don't be sad...there is no update more than likely because they will be getting a new dex near the same time, thus no need for an update.

Similar treatment for BT I would guess.