Is 10th the free edition?

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.

**Blndmage**

Wayniac wrote:
Yeah. Basically useless outside if teaching games.

They're perfectly usable for a fun night tho.

**Karol**

tauist wrote:

I don't see why not. There has been speculation about AoS being a testing ground for future 40K things, this type of thing would play into these speculations.

People on this board have been harping on and on about how the 40K rules should be free. Could GW be finally listening? Any money saved by not having to buy books usually means having more budget for buying miniatures and terrain. In extreme cases, armies receiving their codex very late in an editions lifecycle can defer miniature buying decisions until the player knows what will be a "good investment" to their army. The roaring 20's is all about that instant gratification. If everyone gets their army rules on day one, that maximizes the "shopping window" and prevents player leakage to other forms of entertainment due to getting bored waiting "to be able to play".

How is it "free" when you have to buy the sesonal rule sets anyway, and your army codex when it comes out and the index could be "free", but have stuff like points etc be "free" with a monthly subscription of W+. If the index rules are inferior or go against the core changes of the edition, like 1ksons/GK no more psychic phase change, how fun is it going to be to play a "free" rule set vs armies with codex or a more powerful index.

**Daedalus81**

Karol wrote:
How is it "free" when you have to buy the sesonal rule sets anyway, and your army codex when it comes out and the index could be "free", but have stuff like points etc be "free" with a monthly subscription of W+. If the index rules are inferior or go against the core changes of the edition, like 1ksons/GK no more psychic phase change, how fun is it going to be to play a "free" rule set vs armies with codex or a more powerful index.

The *hope* would be that codexes are just more interesting and not necessarily strictly better. Will that happen? No idea. Can it happen? Given the vastly reduced number of variables, it can -- unless they introduce another new mechanic.

**Not Online!!!**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Karol wrote:
How is it "free" when you have to buy the sesonal rule sets anyway, and your army codex when it comes out and the index could be "free", but have stuff like points etc be "free" with a monthly subscription of W+. If the index rules are inferior or go against the core changes of the edition, like 1ksons/GK no more psychic phase change, how fun is it going to be to play a "free" rule set vs armies with codex or a more powerful index.

The *hope* would be that codexes are just more interesting and not necessarily strictly better. Will that happen? No idea. Can it happen? Given the vastly reduced number of variables, it can -- unless they introduce another new mechanic.

What do you mean hope.
At this stage the Spiel of the new and improved rules should get old enough.
It wasn't the case in 7th which replaced 6th, it wasn't the case for 8th which replaced 9th and it most certainly will not be the case now.
Powercreep is a feature.

And just because GW "streamlines" doesn't mean that the lower ammount of options will mean that GW suddendly get's a grip on it's rulesdesign team and manages to knock some sense into them whilest keeping the marketing plebians out of gamedesign.

**Daedalus81**

Powercreep is not a feature. It is a consequence of the release model and lack of staff.

If the quality of rules over time is not evident to you then I'm not sure what to say there. 8th was a bit wild west with each codex being inconsistent. 9th was more consistent and tempered, but too much stuff. Fight first was the set of rules that they hadn't planned out appropriately and finally had to deal with that problem.

I can't envision things being perfect, but they can get close enough to tap it with a hammer.

**H.B.M.C.**

Daedalus81 wrote:
It is a consequence of the release model and lack of staff.

And a lackadaisical attitude towards rules design with no incentive or enthusiasm to be better.

**Daedalus81**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
It is a consequence of the release model and lack of staff.
And a lackadaisical attitude towards rules design with no incentive or enthusiasm to be better.

Yea, I do wonder if the old guard that's still there is a barrier, but I have no idea what kind of culture GW has.

**H.B.M.C.**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea, I do wonder if the old guard that's still there is a barrier, but I have no idea what kind of culture GW has.

Silo'd and competitive. Combative, even, potentially.

Remember that the boxed game division can hijak releases. Think how Combat Patrol came to be a way of playing 40k. Think of the interaction between 40k studio rules and Forge World rules.

**Asmodai**

From today's preview: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/03/30/how-army-building-works-in-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

"From the very start of this new edition we’ll be releasing dozens of packs of affordable index cards, which will collect all your rules and datacards in one place for easy reference. These will also be available free online and in the new app."

Looks like all the datasheets and army rules will be free - so the only books needed will be the mission packs for Crusade/Tournament play. (I'll probably just split the cost of the Crusade supplements with the rest of my group.)

**kodos**

same as with AoS.....

**Daedalus81**

Asmodai wrote:
From today's preview: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/03/30/how-army-building-works-in-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

"From the very start of this new edition we’ll be releasing dozens of packs of affordable index cards, which will collect all your rules and datacards in one place for easy reference. These will also be available free online and in the new app."

Looks like all the datasheets and army rules will be free - so the only books needed will be the mission packs for Crusade/Tournament play. (I'll probably just split the cost of the Crusade supplements with the rest of my group.)

Oh snap. I missed the last sentence.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

kodos wrote:
same as with AoS.....

And incredibly welcome. No more needing to buy/pirate codexes or flounder with battlescribe to find out what units do. Very cool.

Will it stay that way though??

**kodos**

you are missing that you still need to pirate the codex and flounder with battlescribe in AoS as there are really just the unit rules free and those are of no use outside of an intro game

or just ask why people still buy the battletomes even with the unit cards being free

**H.B.M.C.**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Will it stay that way though??

AoS didn't. Remember when all their free rules vanished?

**ccs**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
Will it stay that way though??
AoS didn't. Remember when all their free rules vanished?

Yes. It turned out to be a win for me.

Instead of looking at GWs site, I had to switch to Whahapedia. Which had no downside as Wagh also gave me access to all the army rules etc, is easier imo to read than BS, and works on my phone (BS has never loaded right on my phone for some reason....)

**Breotan**

(Really wish there was a delete button.)

**Coyotepunc**

Hecate wrote:
I fully expect 10th ed to bloat out over time. Capitalism tells businesses to continually provide new things to sell to buyers, or else the buyers will move on. New releases are a part of how it works. They basically have to choose between new units/models, or new rules. Rules are more cost effective. It'll happen.

I'm sure this has been said many times and many ways, but GW is a business in the business of making money. I have decided to come back for 10th edition, and I fully expect that there will be some required purchases aside from the models for my new army.

**Arbitrator**

I'm getting deja vu to the leadup to 9th when people were saying the same things about it sounding positive, cutting back on bloat, streamlining the rules, same old same old. We all know how long that lasted.

**Wayniac**

Arbitrator wrote:
I'm getting deja vu to the leadup to 9th when people were saying the same things about it sounding positive, cutting back on bloat, streamlining the rules, same old same old. We all know how long that lasted.

exactly. This is the same gak they've said for 2 editions now and it's been bs every time

**Daedalus81**

Well, enjoy your stay in the Ivory Tower of No Context. Imma be having fun over here ====> when you're done.

**alextroy**

My memory must be fuzzy. I don't recall 9th Edition being about removing bloat. I remember it being the about improving rules preciseness and mitigating feel-bad tactics.

Once we started seeing codexes, it was about revising unit statistic standards about toughness and adding army purity rules to punish soup.

In 10th, we have a solid statement of simplification, consolidation of army rules, and a strategy on detachments and unit datasheets that we will be able to measure compliance with almost no effort at all. Should be interesting to see if they go back on their stated intentions.

**PenitentJake**

^^^
This

**Tyel**

I think there's real differences over "what different posters mean by bloat" that are making following lots of threads kind of difficult.

Marines and Sisters got purity bonuses in 8th. We kind of knew everyone was going to get them in 9th. Along with more significant subfaction bonuses, better stratagems etc etc. This undoubtedly added complexity. In terms of "stacking rules" this was bloat.

The question is how far - if at all - they walk that back.

Presumably we'll get the full breakdown of what "Gladius Task Force" does in a week or three and then there will be a clearer idea of how that compares to subfaction bonuses/purity bonuses.

**Tsagualsa**

Tyel wrote:
I think there's real differences over "what different posters mean by bloat" that are making following lots of threads kind of difficult.

Marines and Sisters got purity bonuses in 8th. We kind of knew everyone was going to get them in 9th. Along with more significant subfaction bonuses, better stratagems etc etc. This undoubtedly added complexity. In terms of "stacking rules" this was bloat.

The question is how far - if at all - they walk that back.

Presumably we'll get the full breakdown of what "Gladius Task Force" does in a week or three and then there will be a clearer idea of how that compares to subfaction bonuses/purity bonuses.

IMHO by far the worst offenders in mental load and 'felt' bloat are these multi-phase abilities like battle doctrines, wanton nonsense the CSM get, or the various forms of bookkeeping points like e.g. Warpstorm points and so on. They already said that the SM doctrines are still in in some form, which, to me, means that they either have different ideas than me about what consitutes bloat, or are not intent on cutting it back that much. We'll have to see of course, but that's what i gather from their puff pieces so far.

**Tyel**

Tsagualsa wrote:
IMHO by far the worst offenders in mental load and 'felt' bloat are these multi-phase abilities like battle doctrines, wanton nonsense the CSM get, or the various forms of bookkeeping points like e.g. Warpstorm points and so on. They already said that the SM doctrines are still in in some form, which, to me, means that they either have different ideas than me about what consitutes bloat, or are not intent on cutting it back that much. We'll have to see of course, but that's what i gather from their puff pieces so far.

Yeah. For me "bloat" is the mental load of rules. Not the fact a certain space marine unit has 3 different choices of bolt gun to take.

So for example Ad Mech I think are terrible for this. The decision is "I shoot unit X at unit Y" - lets see what happens.
But then you have to check which rules apply. And with Canticles, Imperatives, Stratagems and character buffs you can end up with about 6~ rules to potentially factor into the outcome. Which if you had a computer do it would be fine. But you don't. So its just annoying.

**Daedalus81**

Tsagualsa wrote:
Tyel wrote:
I think there's real differences over "what different posters mean by bloat" that are making following lots of threads kind of difficult.

Marines and Sisters got purity bonuses in 8th. We kind of knew everyone was going to get them in 9th. Along with more significant subfaction bonuses, better stratagems etc etc. This undoubtedly added complexity. In terms of "stacking rules" this was bloat.

The question is how far - if at all - they walk that back.

Presumably we'll get the full breakdown of what "Gladius Task Force" does in a week or three and then there will be a clearer idea of how that compares to subfaction bonuses/purity bonuses.

IMHO by far the worst offenders in mental load and 'felt' bloat are these multi-phase abilities like battle doctrines, wanton nonsense the CSM get, or the various forms of bookkeeping points like e.g. Warpstorm points and so on. They already said that the SM doctrines are still in in some form, which, to me, means that they either have different ideas than me about what consitutes bloat, or are not intent on cutting it back that much. We'll have to see of course, but that's what i gather from their puff pieces so far.

Chaos Knights....so on theme, but so so difficult to deal with until you play it a ton.

**catbarf**

Arbitrator wrote:I'm getting deja vu to the leadup to 9th when people were saying the same things about it sounding positive, cutting back on bloat, streamlining the rules, same old same old. We all know how long that lasted.

I don't remember that at all. In fact, I distinctly remember extensive arguments over whether the Heavy Cover mechanic meant that the attacker gets the benefit or the defender gets the benefit, because intuitively it seemed like the defender benefits but the snippet of legalese they previewed said the opposite. The terrain rules got more complicated, they introduced Blast as a mechanic, they added an exception for vehicles and monsters to Heavy, they added another fallback mechanic, coherency got more complex, they added Actions.

I seriously don't remember anyone arguing that 9th looked simpler, streamlined, or less bloated- the prevailing sentiment was that it was adding complexity to an otherwise bare-bones core ruleset. If you can find substantial evidence to the contrary I'll eat my words.

**Wayniac**

TBH I remembered it being touted as simpler too, but on second glance yeah it seemed like adding extra complexity to appease the competitive players.

**Daedalus81**

Wayniac wrote:
TBH I remembered it being touted as simpler too, but on second glance yeah it seemed like adding extra complexity to appease the competitive players.

That's the problem with making blanket assertions. You start to believe that they're true regardless of the circumstances ( GW buffs models to sell, GW nerfs models to sell, and on and on ). People couldn't even help themselves to complaining about the April Fools video. At some point people have to take a step back and reassess how they're processing information and whether or not they're bound by group mentality.

A problem to which no one is immune.

**mrFickle**

Did GW say that 8th codexes would work in 9th which basically means there weren’t going to be any major changes one way or the other. Where as they are making such significant changes that they have to give a set of free rules so people can start playing the game.

This doesn’t prove anything other than this won’t be the same as the move from 8th to 9th

**Daedalus81**

mrFickle wrote:
Did GW say that 8th codexes would work in 9th which basically means there weren’t going to be any major changes one way or the other. Where as they are making such significant changes that they have to give a set of free rules so people can start playing the game.

Correct