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.

Having finally had a chance over the past few days to read, reread and absorb the 6th edition rulebook I have to say that I think it is the best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

The main thing that struck me about this edition and the book is the shift towards really trying to push the focus onto the setting/look/atmosphere of the 40K universe.

The focus seems to be more than ever on ways to bring that setting to life on the table and the repeated message that the game should be about creating evocative visuals and narratives through one's gameplay, etc.

This is all supported by the expanded and layered rules for terrain, battlefield conditions, scenarios, etc. I have been playing since 2nd edition, and had become somewhat jaded aboout the state of the game. I prefer scenario/campaign play over mathhammer, and this edition feels like it has heard my prayers.

The book oozes grimdark and tries to give you ways and suggestions to bring it to life on the tabletop.

I was extremetly impressed with how far they took this area of the content and the willingness to encourage/implore gamers to focus more on these aspects of what can be so great about 40K (and miniatures wargaming) and not just on number crunching over stale cookie-cutter tables.

I have been inspired to finish various terrain projects that have been lingering in various states of completion and I have even started planning out a few new ones.

I was happily surprised to see neat little battlefield rules in the normally skipped hobby section of the book.

I definitely agree, this edition seems to be the answer that some fluffy/ "fun" gamers wanted. I myself was completely burning out of 5th ed the approach that many took to it. I welcome this edition with arms wide open.

I do indeed, CT Gamer, believe that your prayers have been answered. However, I wouldn't love GW for it, because I reckon, regardless of what they say, that they've done this to boost terrain sales and, with the addittion of allies, general sales too.

However, even if they have done it because of this, I agree that it is a great thing. Of course, without TFG or whatever.

It's easy to abuse the Allies and Terrain Rules. Take the Aegis Defence Line for example. It's 50 points worth of Cover Save goodiness and can be upgraded to basically kill flyers by looking at them etc. I wouldn't be surprised, in Tournaments, to see them occur many times in certain armies.

That aside though, with the right opponent, you can really get into the game. You can re-create great moments from the fluff and it adds an extra level of surprise and tactics to the game. Indeed, Mysterious Terrain is one of my favourite things about WHFB and although I was afraid the two systems'd be too similar, I'm glad they've bought it to 40k.

Now, where's my Fortress of Redemption?

To be fair, the original Rogue Trader book fits the description that the OP sets out as well. The whole idea behind the original book was to produce small narative based games that assumed the presence of a GM to moderate the game, provide unexpected twists, ect. Of course the book was filled to the brim with the founding version of the fluff we all know and love.

Of course later suplements to RT changed the direction a bit and pushed the game toward set piece battles and by the time 2nd edition was released, the game was no longer a wargame/RPG hybrid.

TR

I love 6th ed too. They've put a lot of effort into it.
I mean, just look at the book itself: It's gorgeous!
And the rules are brilliant, what with the flyers and specific rules for flying monsters, sniper weapons work as they should and you can throw grenades for once.
Not to mention they finally got around to toning down those damned psy-powers.

The Shadow wrote:I do indeed, CT Gamer, believe that your prayers have been answered. However, I wouldn't love GW for it, because I reckon, regardless of what they say, that they've done this to boost terrain sales and, with the addittion of allies, general sales too.

However, even if they have done it because of this, I agree that it is a great thing. Of course, without TFG or whatever.

It's easy to abuse the Allies and Terrain Rules. Take the Aegis Defence Line for example. It's 50 points worth of Cover Save goodiness and can be upgraded to basically kill flyers by looking at them etc. I wouldn't be surprised, in Tournaments, to see them occur many times in certain armies.

That aside though, with the right opponent, you can really get into the game. You can re-create great moments from the fluff and it adds an extra level of surprise and tactics to the game. Indeed, Mysterious Terrain is one of my favourite things about WHFB and although I was afraid the two systems'd be too similar, I'm glad they've bought it to 40k.

Now, where's my Fortress of Redemption?

Oh, I'm not ignorant of the fact that this coincides with the existance of GW's many plastic terrain kits, etc. nor the existance of an implicit desire to sell models (shocking), but then GW likes to sell stuff.

The fact remains that the book oozes with ideas and rules to create themed battles and battlefields, to create story based scenarios, to play up aspects of the setting on the tabletop. If you buy GW's various terrain kits to facilitate this or make your own the end result will be the same: more evocative visuals and theme to one's games.

I was already focusd on scenario play and narrative campaigns. This book has given scores of new elements to use in this regard. What the tournamant players do to abuse it's contents will continue to not concern me because I abandoned that scene many moons ago...

Can we start at irregardless. It's not a word.
6th Editions merits have yet to be seen because the BRB is a basis but the codexes make the edition.

Agreed. I think this edition brings more casual way of playing 40k, with all the random terrain and objectives, challenges etc.
I also think that the game will be a bit more realistic with many new rules, like overwatch and hull points, which gets the player deeper in the game fluffwise. Atleast in my opinion

Trench-Raider wrote:To be fair, the original Rogue Trader book fits the description that the OP sets out as well. The whole idea behind the original book was to produce small narative based games that assu

Sadly I missed out on Rogue Trader by just a little bit, but it sounds like I would have enjoyed that period.

I'm really hoping for rules expansions via White Dwarf. Small things, like new fortification rules for various other races would be awesome. And maybe some conversion tutorials to make the needed scenery!

Yet to have a game, still slowly plodding through the rulebook while trying not to confuse myself too badly for my last 5th ed tournament in 2 weeks time... But 6th has me more excited about 40K than I have been in years.

It's reminding me of just how much fun second edition was. Sure, it was clunky and in some ways downright broken... but the parts of second that worked, worked. It was silly, and brutal, and pretty much everything was ridiculously over-powered.

6th edition (wound allocation aside) seems to have just taken the best bits of 2nd edition and mixed them up with the best bits of 5th... and while I'm a little nervous about how my vehicles will go and how clunky and time-consuming wound allocation is going to be, it looks like being a lot of fun to play.

AustonT wrote:Can we start at irregardless. It's not a word.
6th Editions merits have yet to be seen because the BRB is a basis but the codexes make the edition.

Irregardless of your feelings about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless

CT GAMER wrote:I have to say that I think it is the best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

irregardless of the rules themselves.

irregardless of the rules

irregardless

Hnnnggggggg

I've been playing 40k for 16 years, and only played five games of 5th edition. 6th, so far, is really cool, and is getting me excited about 40k for the first time in 4 years.

I can finally play a proper Inquisition army thanks to Allies being back. That with the other rule changes makes this the best edition yet, personally.

Buttons wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:I have to say that I think it is the best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

irregardless of the rules themselves.

irregardless of the rules

irregardless

Hnnnggggggg

You aware?

Gamewise, it looks pretty slick.

I don't have enough experience with the new rules to make a judgment there.

Now if only they would release sone terrain that wasn't IOM (and the ork barricades don't count ...proper buildings dammit! )

IOM/ORK stuff is easy to build/convert.

Eldar/DE stuff... not so much!

AustonT wrote:Can we start at irregardless. It's not a word

It is "touching" that you are so concerned about my use of a colloquial portmanteau word...

Buttons wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:I have to say that I think it is the best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

best edition of WH40K yet irregardless of the rules themselves.

irregardless of the rules themselves.

irregardless of the rules

irregardless

Hnnnggggggg

How touching that Austin's mom also felt the need to post on the matter as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

guiltl3ss wrote:I'm really hoping for rules expansions via White Dwarf. Small things, like new fortification rules for various other races would be awesome.

Agreed.

I would imagine we WILL see some of this.

Well, 6th ed may be all nice in the extra rules and the bits from 2nd ed, but I don't like the fact that you can take fortifications and buildings as part of your army. If they want to focus so much on the feeling and atmosphere of the game, then having terrain as part of an army kind of ruins it.

It's like having a guard army that always has an aegis defence line or a skyshield platform no matter where it is or who its fighting. I see people complaining about bases not maching boards. Terrain not matching the board is even worse. (i'm fine with bases and most terrain on whatever board personally)

6th is an amalgamation of 2, 3, 4 and 5.

I like it a lot.

I loved 2nd ed and this has the feel of 2nd ed. I can't wait to get a game in.

Might have to redo one of my 2nd ed armies.

Hmm which one...

Nurgle Chaos
Dark Angels

Or do something utterly different?

Aaaaaaaaah! Nothing you posted is worth reading or is of any import because you just used the non-word "irregardless". Your parents and teachers should be ashamed.

Omegus wrote:Aaaaaaaaah! Nothing you posted is worth reading or is of any import because you just used the non-word "irregardless". Your parents and teachers should be ashamed.

Thank you for being a good citizen of the internet....

Omegus wrote:Aaaaaaaaah! Nothing you posted is worth reading or is of any import because you just used the non-word "irregardless". Your parents and teachers should be ashamed.

Use of a colloquialism isn't prevented in this language, as it is it's not an incorrect term of the word.

Like aAint, it is technically a word in the sense now.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless

Though really none of what you posted is worth reading or has any impact, as it's only specific to grammar.

But you read it anyway.

Any dictionary listing it at the very least labels it irregular, and if you break it down, the "word" is nonsensical. Your first sentence is likewise barely coherent. It's not a colloquialism, unless there's a separate region of the world for the ignorant.

Anyway, carry on with whatever this thread is actually about.

I firmly agree with the OP here. I feel the game has become more realistic to the style of warfare were dealing with here. I like how assault based armies can no longer just run the board against shooty armies a majority of the time. The addition of flyers and Allies have become a welcome change for me personally. Not to mention snap fire just makes since.... despite what haters say I'm giving GW a 10/10 on this edition. I've had loads of fun with the games I've played thus far in the edition.

Surtur wrote:

AustonT wrote:Can we start at irregardless. It's not a word.
6th Editions merits have yet to be seen because the BRB is a basis but the codexes make the edition.

Irregardless of your feelings about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless

It's only socially acceptable to illiterates, lol.

I mean, people use the term labtop, and axe questions. It doesn't mean they should be encouraged.

How about we all get back to the topic? The validity (or lack thereof) of the word 'irregardless' has been well and truly hashed out by this point.