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.

I really do hope this is all true. It would be awesome!

If this rumour is true then I’ll have to agree that the restructure is probably a case of GW taking a cue from the growing success of other companies. Heck, the 6th Ed proposal sounds identical to how PP runs WM/H right now:

• Long life rule set? Check
• Updates via errata? Check
• Expansion Books? Check
• Advancing Storyline? Check

It would be interesting if the HH expansion rumour pans out as it means GW would be using their “get of out jail free” card. That being said, the primarch models would most likely be in finecast (which would suck lol).

This sounds like a "too good to be true". While I'd miss rulebooks, this would be a fantastic improvement to every aspect of 40k.

Kroothawk wrote:Just for clarification: It is the summary of the rumours in that article.
Nobody is forced to believe any rumour.
But if we see a Cerebore preorder in two weeks, it will be hard to argue that some random fans were lucky in predicting this.

This is why GW has such a strict secrecy policy now. So come February there will be no Tyranid/Necron release to prove these rumours fasle.

I can't find the post but someone menitoned how GW lied about Space Hulk, so yeah, GW can't be trusted in anything. GW clearly said the Mystery Box was NOT Space Hulk. WE all know how that turned out eh?

ShumaGorath wrote:

Branderic wrote:GW: 6th edition will allow us to release erratas and FAQs on a more frequent basis because BUY 6th EDITION.

GW could release as many FAQs a day as they realistically wanted. What keeps them from doing so is a stated business decision to avoid confusing players, not some sort of inability to use indesign.

In addition PDFs are cheaper and easier to put out than printed material. Makes some sense.

They could even charge us for the damned FAQs and Errata by shoving them into White Dwarf. But for God's sake, I hope they actually care about the game balance aspect enough to do it.

Hear, hear! If White Dwarf actually possessed regular content to add to and/or augment the game of 40K I would either subscribe or purchase issues regularly. I will not, however, pay $9 USD for a games workshop advertisement with no real content.

I would say putting back “real content” in White Dwarf would be impossible for GW. Remember the rumour late last year about GW planning to put “real content” back into White Dwarf. That pretty much lasted 2 issues and consisted of the Sisters codex spread over 2 issues and a Dreadfleet supplement (advertisement).

From what I gather, the rumour says that GW wants to increase their focus on model making which could be interpreted as a decreases focus on rules maintenance. There is the rumour of errata though but that could be interpreted as GW releasing rules errata to coincide with a new model release.

I don't think the leaked rules are legit.

Byte wrote:I don't think the leaked rules are legit.

K thanks

I could see a big rule book, with rules for things like Apocalypse driving up sales. I know I don't play Apoc any, but if it was included in the main ruleset, I might be more inclined.

I'd like it if we had one BRB that lasted a while, maybe long enough to get all the codexes updated!

I'd really like this, if true.

candy.man wrote:I would say putting back “real content” in White Dwarf would be impossible for GW. Remember the rumour late last year about GW planning to put “real content” back into White Dwarf. That pretty much lasted 2 issues and consisted of the Sisters codex spread over 2 issues and a Dreadfleet supplement (advertisement).

And official rules for the Terrorgeist and Banshee and Wraith heroes for Vampire Counts, and the Civil War supplement for Fantasy, and Cygor, Ghorgon and Jabberslyth scrolls of binding for Storm of Magic.

There's pretty much been some kind of real content since they said they were going to do it.

-Loki- wrote:

candy.man wrote:I would say putting back “real content” in White Dwarf would be impossible for GW. Remember the rumour late last year about GW planning to put “real content” back into White Dwarf. That pretty much lasted 2 issues and consisted of the Sisters codex spread over 2 issues and a Dreadfleet supplement (advertisement).

And official rules for the Terrorgeist and Banshee and Wraith heroes for Vampire Counts, and the Civil War supplement for Fantasy, and Cygor, Ghorgon and Jabberslyth scrolls of binding for Storm of Magic.

There's pretty much been some kind of real content since they said they were going to do it.

And they also had some really cool scenario rules for a campaign of Black Templars and Necrons, plus battle missions for Sisters and Grey Knights. Not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction.

Ehsteve wrote:In addition PDFs are cheaper and easier to put out than printed material. Makes some sense.

On the flip side, PDFs don't gain GW any money... So who knows what they're actually cooking up.

ShumaGorath wrote:I really don't think GW has its gak together enough to have this kind of long term plan. This all sounds like acts of opportunism based on sales rather than any concerted long term effort.

That and they change their ‘plan’ so often that even if this was the direction a year ago or even now there’s no guarantee that it’ll be the direction they take a year from now.

This, albiet short thread, kinda summarizes the 6th ed banter.

People confirm it's real.
People confirm it's fake.

No one has an actual, legitimate, credible source of proof either way.

I hope it is real!

::giggling like a schoolgirl before the big dance::

This sounds so good!

Assault before shooting is the only thing I can' get behind. It's just...no.

lord_blackfang wrote:Even if the core rules stay the same, I would still hope for a new starter with an updated rulebook (errata!) every few years.

Well, you could have the same sort of system that they have now (core rulebook and starter w/ mini rulebook), but every year or so they release an updated starter set (new models, etc.) that includes a FAQ-updated/tweaked mini rulebook and include updates/tweaks to future printings of the core rulebook. The plan being that gamers will buy new starter sets each year for the mini rulebook 'because we'd be silly to buy the core rulebook when we can get discounted models!', which should expose older gamers to new, pretty armies that they wouldn't have models for, which should result in a fair number of them starting new armies. Gamers are weak like that.

Walls wrote:This, albiet short thread, kinda summarizes the 6th ed banter.

People confirm it's real.
People confirm it's fake.

No one has an actual, legitimate, credible source of proof either way.

Ever heard of Occam's Razor?

We have a choice between two assumptions. The first assumption is that the new ruleset is a legitimate leak (we know sixth edition is coming; therefore, we also know that there will be various iterations of the new "rules-in-progress" in existence... and, as observers of human nature, we should know that sometimes individuals violate their sworn commitments and put confidential documents out into the public sphere).

Our second potential assumption is that the ruleset is an elaborate hoax that represents a gargantuan and fastidious effort on behalf of one or more mysterious individuals, who are also very clever, perceptive followers of the hobby.

I know which of those two possibilities sounds simpler to me. Therefore, it's quite reasonable to assume that the ruleset is genuine until we have some evidence that points to the alternative. Disliking the rules or having a "gut feeling" that they're "not GWey enough" isn't a worthwhile stance to hold.

However, by the same principle, it's a lot easier to believe that the anonymous source responsible for this thread is simply exaggerating what he knows, or fluffing up idealistic goals that may be floating around inside GW but are not actually reasonable for implementation.

-----------------------------

With all that pedantic junk out of the way, y personal opinion is that this new design philosophy could be excellent, but I have trouble imagining how it would actually work in practice. Like other people here I wonder how exactly they would foster sales without the monthly update system. I suppose maybe the plan would be to release new rules every time a kit is updated OR created from scratch? I'm also curious as to how they would launch the whole thing. Would they do a massive overhaul of all the Codexes at once, to be released early in the new edition? Or would they just depend on massive erratas to the currently-outdated books to get them 6th ed.-ready ASAP?

I want it to be true, and so i will believe it to be... a man can stick to its hope, right?

That is just epic amazing, just epic amazing...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and i got an evidence the book was created by GW: when it talks about models, it talk about models made with resin and plastic... A veteran player would have talked about metal models too...

Theduke07 wrote:Assault before shooting is the only thing I can' get behind. It's just...no.

It's just so streamlined because all movement occurs during one phase?

Altruizine wrote:

Walls wrote:This, albiet short thread, kinda summarizes the 6th ed banter.

People confirm it's real.
People confirm it's fake.

No one has an actual, legitimate, credible source of proof either way.

Ever heard of Occam's Razor?

We have a choice between two assumptions. The first assumption is that the new ruleset is a legitimate leak (we know sixth edition is coming; therefore, we also know that there will be various iterations of the new "rules-in-progress" in existence... and, as observers of human nature, we should know that sometimes individuals violate their sworn commitments and put confidential documents out into the public sphere).

Our second potential assumption is that the ruleset is an elaborate hoax that represents a gargantuan and fastidious effort on behalf of one or more mysterious individuals, who are also very clever, perceptive followers of the hobby.

I know which of those two possibilities sounds simpler to me. Therefore, it's quite reasonable to assume that the ruleset is genuine until we have some evidence that points to the alternative. Disliking the rules or having a "gut feeling" that they're "not GWey enough" isn't a worthwhile stance to hold.

However, by the same principle, it's a lot easier to believe that the anonymous source responsible for this thread is simply exaggerating what he knows, or fluffing up idealistic goals that may be floating around inside GW but are not actually reasonable for implementation.

-----------------------------

With all that pedantic junk out of the way, y personal opinion is that this new design philosophy could be excellent, but I have trouble imagining how it would actually work in practice. Like other people here I wonder how exactly they would foster sales without the monthly update system. I suppose maybe the plan would be to release new rules every time a kit is updated OR created from scratch? I'm also curious as to how they would launch the whole thing. Would they do a massive overhaul of all the Codexes at once, to be released early in the new edition? Or would they just depend on massive erratas to the currently-outdated books to get them 6th ed.-ready ASAP?

They re-did all the army lists en masse for 3rd edition in the rulebook when they had a dramatic overhaul of the rules set, it's not unreasonable to think they couldn't do it again. In fact, as earlier 6th Edition rumors mentioned, army lists would be in the rulebook itself. This makes a lot more sense when taking these new rumors into account.

Codexes aren't invalidated, but updates can come from multiple sources, while the core rules stay the same. Before anyone declare this unthinkable, this was common practice in days of old. Updates via White Dwarf were the norm, and now FAQs and Erratas can be made available online. Codexes will still flesh out background and provide the sales pushes needed for GW's business model of pushing the new shiny's, but in addition they can move past the release system of tying all model releases in with codexes or waves.

There was a rumor about a year or so back, and I forget the poster over at Warseer, but they talked about GW moving away from tying everything in with Codex and Armybook releases and there would be a wider variety of releases to keep interest up for all forces and allow designers to create what they thought was cool, modelwise. We've already seen this with WHFB, so it's not unreasonable to think it would happen for 40k as well.

I think if this is real it has a lot to do with the rising popularity of privateer press and how they operate.

Branderic wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Assault before shooting is the only thing I can' get behind. It's just...no.

It's just so streamlined because all movement occurs during one phase?

Which changes the dynamic of a lot of units, especially generalist ones. Making pretty much everything worse expect units that pretty much will always wipe, like FC Termies v Firewarriors.

You'd think that all the "sense-making" that GW is rumored to be doing with all these changes would throw up red flags for all the fans who have been in the hobby for a long time and have come to learn how GW functions.

However, if all this is true (including the rumored 6th Ed. rumors), I may have a couple armies that will need a good home.

Theduke07 wrote:

Branderic wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Assault before shooting is the only thing I can' get behind. It's just...no.

It's just so streamlined because all movement occurs during one phase?

Which changes the dynamic of a lot of units, especially generalist ones. Making pretty much everything worse expect units that pretty much will always wipe, like FC Termies v Firewarriors.

Generalist units weren't particularly viable in fifth either. The game distilled into one where every unit in high tier armies had a specific role.

And they get worse. I'm talking stuff like Purifiers shooting storm bolters then charging in. Anyway it's just my opinion. If I wanted to get in sword fights first I'd play Fantasy.

Theduke07 wrote:And they get worse. I'm talking stuff like Purifiers shooting storm bolters then charging in. Anyway it's just my opinion. If I wanted to get in sword fights first I'd play Fantasy.

I'm not sure purifiers getting worse is the horse you want to saddle up on. They were significantly over powered before and will still be good in the new edition anyway (besides, if you didn't want fantasy why were you playing the knights with halbderds?). Units like tactical marines, plague marines, or shoota boyz got hit by this in a much more meaningful fashion. A lot of units that weren't great before will be much better, but likewise many units that were better before (or bad before) will get worse. Just look into your codex for what will get good again in the new edition (that'll be hard in GKs, everything was amazing).