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.

Nalathani wrote:I have to say, I hate watching the BOW videos. Watching those guys fidget and stutter makes me cringe. Is there like a transcript of these things floating around so I can read what they say without having to watch them?

No. Why? Because a transcript isn't cinematic.

I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

http://www.beastsofwar.com/warhammer-40k/rumor-randomly-chosen-psychic-powers-40k-6th-ed/

And another one has been added.

I give it 2 minutes before people start whinging about 40k becomming more like Fantasy.

Any summary for those of us websensed?

Random psyker powers.

First post edited to contain the link. thanks for the heads-up on that one, deejay.

I'm totally up for random psychic powers as long as there's enough to keep it interesting.
Could be something like if there's five psychic powers and on a D6 roll of 1-5 you take the power rolled but on a 6 you can pick one. I suspect there'll be 6 for each race though.
Could do what they do with the warhammer magic lores though. Each lore has one signature spell that the player can substitute one of his random rolls for. That'd work pretty well.

I didn't watch the whole video (i'm at work currently), but this almost seems as if they'd need to re-write every codex's psychic powers into a d6 rollable chart, adding extra, new powers where necessary, in the BRB.

tetrisphreak wrote:I didn't watch the whole video (i'm at work currently), but this almost seems as if they'd need to re-write every codex's psychic powers into a d6 rollable chart, adding extra, new powers where necessary, in the BRB.

Yep, they do hint at that, Wolves have 7, Blood angels have 9 are the example they have used. So yes random roll of a D6 currently would not work and some revision would be needed.
They also hinted at that being annoying for the player to have FAQ's floating about everywhere.

deejaybainbridge wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:I didn't watch the whole video (i'm at work currently), but this almost seems as if they'd need to re-write every codex's psychic powers into a d6 rollable chart, adding extra, new powers where necessary, in the BRB.

Yep, they do hint at that, Wolves have 7, Blood angels have 9 are the example they have used. So yes random roll of a D6 currently would not work and some revision would be needed.
They also hinted at that being annoying for the player to have FAQ's floating about everywhere.

That's almost no different from now - Just about every codex has a multi-page internet FAQ that players have to keep with them. This FAQ would be no different in terms of aggravation. In the scheme of things carrying around a few sheets of extra paper is nothing compared to the (hopefully) 300+ page hardcover BRB.

tetrisphreak wrote:

deejaybainbridge wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:I didn't watch the whole video (i'm at work currently), but this almost seems as if they'd need to re-write every codex's psychic powers into a d6 rollable chart, adding extra, new powers where necessary, in the BRB.

Yep, they do hint at that, Wolves have 7, Blood angels have 9 are the example they have used. So yes random roll of a D6 currently would not work and some revision would be needed.
They also hinted at that being annoying for the player to have FAQ's floating about everywhere.

That's almost no different from now - Just about every codex has a multi-page internet FAQ that players have to keep with them. This FAQ would be no different in terms of aggravation. In the scheme of things carrying around a few sheets of extra paper is nothing compared to the (hopefully) 300+ page hardcover BRB.

True, but most FAQ's are just clarification, this would result in a chart required for constant reference. I pencil in the FAQ changes to the codex. But an entire table become a bit more of a hassel. Unless of course they are all in the new rule book.

Also expecting the book to be more like fantasy, pushing 500+ pages. Nice and lightweight for carrying around with you.

Ever since there were first hints of this rumour I've not been able to figure out how it will work for some xenos armies where theres several different types of psykers. Might it result in Doom-casting Warlocks? Zoanthropes casting Catalyst? And what about Warp 'Ead's, who's powers are already randomized?

I'm not saying its a bad idea, but I just don't see how it will work in every situation. For Librarians I can see it working well though.

deejaybainbridge wrote:True, but most FAQ's are just clarification, this would result in a chart required for constant reference. I pencil in the FAQ changes to the codex. But an entire table become a bit more of a hassel. Unless of course they are all in the new rule book.

Oh? I was playing this Black Templar guy a few weeks ago and he was totally awed that I simply believed that his guys work the same as all other marines now, whenever he declared that he would take a storm shield save, fire a cyclone missile launcher or the like, he was already reaching for his copy of the FAQ.

This many changes to the basic ruleset would almost require a minidex like was put into the back of 3rd Edition.

Joey wrote:I give it 2 minutes before people start whinging about 40k becomming more like Fantasy.

Nah. For most of us BoW has become a "two nerds one hobby" meme. Their stuff is beyond white knighting and well into brown-nosing territory. I'm beginning to wonder if they haven't struck some sort of deal to have their videos used at GW training seminars. At last that would explain why he keeps using the word "cinematic" over and over and over.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was that in the back of the 6th ed rulebook or entirely new FAQs for all armies.

Jidmah wrote:

deejaybainbridge wrote:True, but most FAQ's are just clarification, this would result in a chart required for constant reference. I pencil in the FAQ changes to the codex. But an entire table become a bit more of a hassel. Unless of course they are all in the new rule book.

Oh? I was playing this Black Templar guy a few weeks ago and he was totally awed that I simply believed that his guys work the same as all other marines now, whenever he declared that he would take a storm shield save, fire a cyclone missile launcher or the like, he was already reaching for his copy of the FAQ.

That poor guy, he must have been shellshocked if he really had to reach for it each time.

Ever since there were first hints of this rumour I've not been able to figure out how it will work for some xenos armies where theres several different types of psykers. Might it result in Doom-casting Warlocks? Zoanthropes casting Catalyst? And what about Warp 'Ead's, who's powers are already randomized?

So warpheads will be double rolling? Sweet, I might get to roll, roll again, and than reroll with the upgrade! I'd have a better chance !

The fact that Weird Boyz have all their powers at hand means that they may very well be the best psyker in the game if this is true

Be a nice change, because right now they bite

Of course one in six of their powers is highly detrimental to their health...

Joey wrote:I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

How is removing models from the back "free movement"? If anything, being forced to remove models from the front would be reduced movement, not the other way 'round.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

How is removing models from the back "free movement"? If anything, being forced to remove models from the front would be reduced movement, not the other way 'round.

Because the one at the front has died, but the ones at the back got to move up a couple of inches for free.
Protip - if someone's dead, they're no longer where they were. So if his friend is where he was, that's free movement.

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

How is removing models from the back "free movement"? If anything, being forced to remove models from the front would be reduced movement, not the other way 'round.

Because the one at the front has died, but the ones at the back got to move up a couple of inches for free.
Protip - if someone's dead, they're no longer where they were. So if his friend is where he was, that's free movement.

Or, you know, the bullets hit the guy at the back. Shocking, I know.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

How is removing models from the back "free movement"? If anything, being forced to remove models from the front would be reduced movement, not the other way 'round.

Because the one at the front has died, but the ones at the back got to move up a couple of inches for free.
Protip - if someone's dead, they're no longer where they were. So if his friend is where he was, that's free movement.

Or, you know, the bullets hit the guy at the back. Shocking, I know.

Also literally impossible.

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

How is removing models from the back "free movement"? If anything, being forced to remove models from the front would be reduced movement, not the other way 'round.

Because the one at the front has died, but the ones at the back got to move up a couple of inches for free.
Protip - if someone's dead, they're no longer where they were. So if his friend is where he was, that's free movement.

Or, you know, the bullets hit the guy at the back. Shocking, I know.

Also literally impossible.

I think the idea is the front guy dies and then someone runs forward to pick up his gun, rather than bullets hitting the guy in the back, because sometimes thats impossible.

Edit: and sometimes the guy in the front has a melta, which means he is one of the last ones to die. Because internet rules say so

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:I like it. ICs should be immune,since they should be leading from the front anyway, but everything else it would work. Just leave your meltaguns a couple of inches behind the front guys.As others have said, being able to remove models from the back essentially gives assault armies free movement, sometimes 3 or 4 inches worth. It's stupid.
It's also the complete opposite of Fantasy rules. People winging about 40k becoming more like Fantasy have probably never played Fantasy, or 40k.
Oh and duels sound wicked, especially if a charector who turns down a duel loses his special ability. This would mean a priest would always accept a duel (since to refuse would mean his squad lost the re-roll to hit), whereas a pysker might not. It balances gameplay with epicnness.

How is removing models from the back "free movement"? If anything, being forced to remove models from the front would be reduced movement, not the other way 'round.

Because the one at the front has died, but the ones at the back got to move up a couple of inches for free.
Protip - if someone's dead, they're no longer where they were. So if his friend is where he was, that's free movement.

Or, you know, the bullets hit the guy at the back. Shocking, I know.

Also literally impossible.

Far from impossible, but I see your point. The rules work that way though, so it's not "free movement" per se.

Remember guys, there will be no FAQs for 6th edition. FAQs are "softrules" don't really count. If anything it will be ERATA "hard rules" that do matter.

Yes I know people call them FAQs, but really they will be Errata

Those videos were annoying....

Davor wrote:Remember guys, there will be no FAQs for 6th edition. FAQs are "softrules" don't really count. If anything it will be ERATA "hard rules" that do matter.

Yes I know people call them FAQs, but really they will be Errata

So youre saying offical rulings GW post are not actual rulings?

Defeatmyarmy wrote:

Davor wrote:Remember guys, there will be no FAQs for 6th edition. FAQs are "softrules" don't really count. If anything it will be ERATA "hard rules" that do matter.

Yes I know people call them FAQs, but really they will be Errata

So youre saying offical rulings GW post are not actual rulings?

That's what GW says as well. The FAQs are not rule changes, but rather the house rules of the GW studio.



That said, everyone uses them anyway.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Defeatmyarmy wrote:

Davor wrote:Remember guys, there will be no FAQs for 6th edition. FAQs are "softrules" don't really count. If anything it will be ERATA "hard rules" that do matter.
Yes I know people call them FAQs, but really they will be Errata

So youre saying offical rulings GW post are not actual rulings?

That's what GW says as well. The FAQs are not rule changes, but rather the house rules of the GW studio.

In GW FAQ's, even the FAQ portion change rules all the time. Basically they only call it 'Errata' when they actually want change wording of the codex/brb, but if they just change the rules it is 'FAQ'.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:That said, everyone uses them anyway.

Yeah, because GW can't write clear rules and there are huge amounts of stuff you can't make RAW based calls on that are on the FAQs.
Choices are to either:
1) Adopt your house rules on how to handle huge amount of stuff, argue about such house rules with every new guy you play against as they interpreted the rules differently
2) Use GW FAQs