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.

Don't think this has been posted yet(Spoilered for image size):

that has been out since what ... Friday?

tneva82 wrote:

 Moopy wrote:
None of it changes the way the game is played or fundamentally alters the structure of the universe. The Imperium is still bloated and endlessly big, Eldar are still "waining" or whatever that means, Chaos is still plotting to get back in. There's huge fights with heroics and trechery, and secrets are revealed or knowledge lost! But nothing really changes in the big picture- it means nothing. Oh sure there's some fluff text here and there about how "desperate" things are or "teatering on the edge" but all those vauge words haven't altered a thing for a very long time. My army composition isn't changed, etc... etc...

This assumes 40k is advancing story(that by nature then stiffles players freedom) rather than setting for players to make up their own stories.

You are supposed to do your own stories in the setting in which case there's changes. You aren't supposed to just read what GW feeds you on.

But is IS an advancing story, at least on paper. All the big summer events that I took part of are now part of the narrative in the timeline (Armageddon 3, 13th Black Crusade, Fall of Medusa, etc)- these are in most of the codexs/main rule box in some form or another. The let down is that they changed nothing.

Also, YES, you can make up your own stories AS WELL, but they're within the framework of the larger one. There's no "Supposed to" anywhere; you can but there's no rule saying that's the only way.

 General Kroll wrote:
... the setting should be set in stone IMO. But there are still tonnes of stories within that setting that can be advanced without ruining it.

Stories can be advanced, as long as they don't change the setting.

I've always seen 40K as the opposite of Battletech in structure:

40K is a setting. Battletech is a story. One is static and allows you to tell stories. The other moves forward and you can pick where to jump in.

 Moopy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Moopy wrote:
None of it changes the way the game is played or fundamentally alters the structure of the universe. The Imperium is still bloated and endlessly big, Eldar are still "waining" or whatever that means, Chaos is still plotting to get back in. There's huge fights with heroics and trechery, and secrets are revealed or knowledge lost! But nothing really changes in the big picture- it means nothing. Oh sure there's some fluff text here and there about how "desperate" things are or "teatering on the edge" but all those vauge words haven't altered a thing for a very long time. My army composition isn't changed, etc... etc...

This assumes 40k is advancing story(that by nature then stiffles players freedom) rather than setting for players to make up their own stories.

You are supposed to do your own stories in the setting in which case there's changes. You aren't supposed to just read what GW feeds you on.

But is IS an advancing story, at least on paper. All the big summer events that I took part of are now part of the narrative in the timeline (Armageddon 3, 13th Black Crusade, Fall of Medusa, etc)- these are in most of the codexs/main rule box in some form or another. The let down is that they changed nothing.

Also, YES, you can make up your own stories AS WELL, but they're within the framework of the larger one. There's no "Supposed to" anywhere; you can but there's no rule saying that's the only way.

Yeah. It's advancing story. Which is against what 40k really is. Setting. Not advancing story.

And yeah you can make up your own stories as well. You just need to rewrite those all the time when GW decides to change things...

GW should just keep 40k what it was originally. Setting. Not a story. When you have a story you need things to change which then will piss off customers whose army gets screwed. And it stiffles players own freedom as either they refrain from changing story or they have to rewrite their story all the time GW decides to spoonfeed next part of change in the story.

tneva82 wrote:


Yeah. It's advancing story. Which is against what 40k really is. Setting. Not advancing story.

And yeah you can make up your own stories as well. You just need to rewrite those all the time when GW decides to change things...

GW should just keep 40k what it was originally. Setting. Not a story. When you have a story you need things to change which then will piss off customers whose army gets screwed. And it stiffles players own freedom as either they refrain from changing story or they have to rewrite their story all the time GW decides to spoonfeed next part of change in the story.

I completely disagree that a setting has to be static. Static is ultimately boring. The Imperium will never lose the Gothic Sector no matter how many ork/necron/crazy-go-nuts things happen in it. So who cares if those things happen at all? I will say that too much change too fast is also not good, but if these rumor are true, then we're look at the first real change in the way things work in what? Over twenty years? About time.

Change does not stifle the players freedom- it offers new venues for different stories. If changes cripple a player's army, then yes that's a bad design choice, but inherently change isn't always bad. If it offers them new ways to play, then that can be fun.

If you don't agree, that's ok. I think we've made our points here for those that like and don't.

 Moopy wrote:

I completely disagree that a setting has to be static. Static is ultimately boring. The Imperium will never lose the Gothic Sector no matter how many ork/necron/crazy-go-nuts things happen in it. So who cares if those things happen at all? I will say that too much change too fast is also not good, but if these rumor are true, then we're look at the first real change in the way things work in what? Over twenty years? About time.

Change does not stifle the players freedom- it offers new venues for different stories. If changes cripple a player's army, then yes that's a bad design choice, but inherently change isn't always bad. If it offers them new ways to play, then that can be fun.

If you don't agree, that's ok. I think we've made our points here for those that like and don't.

Again you are mixing with setting and story. Setting is static. It's not supposed to change. It's there to give players freedom to take story where they want.

Change the setting and it invalidates players own stories. Players have advanced story so that chaos is at the doorsteps of Earth itself? Then GW releases next instalment and boom chaos isn't anywhere near earth. Back to drawing board player. Don't try to advance story where we didn't want you to go.

Or howabout player story has advanced to the point that hive fleet overran earth. How that makes sense when GW changes setting again and Earth is still standing? Huh?

And if story changes don't have change in armies and world then it's irrelevant change. Say hello to what GW has been doing.

tneva82 wrote:


Again you are mixing with setting and story. Setting is static. It's not supposed to change. It's there to give players freedom to take story where they want.

Change the setting and it invalidates players own stories. Players have advanced story so that chaos is at the doorsteps of Earth itself? Then GW releases next instalment and boom chaos isn't anywhere near earth. Back to drawing board player. Don't try to advance story where we didn't want you to go.

Or howabout player story has advanced to the point that hive fleet overran earth. How that makes sense when GW changes setting again and Earth is still standing? Huh?

Uhhhhhh... sorry, the content holder is not held prisoner to events made up by it's followers, nor should it be. We use your logic then as soon as someone writes a story that the imperium has stopped using bolters, then GW shouldn't make figures with bolters? Complete hogwash.

Player stories aren't cannon, as everyone tells their own stories that would contradict each other. They hold no bearing on the bigger picture, even though they are fun for the individual. The IP holder does that, and if the IP holder wants to advance things, then great! More opportunities to tell new stories! Just because you haven something in your head about how things go in your house, doesn't mean everything has to stop because it might upset you.

And again, NO, the setting never has to be static.

 Moopy wrote:


Uhhhhhh... sorry, the content holders are not held prisoner to events made up by its followers, nor should it be. We use your logic then as soon as someone writes a story that the imperium has stopped using bolters, then GW shouldn't make figures with bolters? Complete hogwash.

Player stories aren't canon, as everyone tells their own stories that would contradict each other. They hold no bearing on the bigger picture, even though they are fun for the individual. The IP holder does that, and if the IP holder wants to advance things, then great! More opportunities to tell new stories! Just because you haven something in your head about how things go in your house, doesn't mean everything has to stop because it might upset you.

Quoted for truth.

Fascinating as this discussion is, can we get back to the releases and rumours, please?

 Moopy wrote:
Uhhhhhh... sorry, the content holder is not held prisoner to events made up by it's followers, nor should it be. We use your logic then as soon as someone writes a story that the imperium has stopped using bolters, then GW shouldn't make figures with bolters? Complete hogwash.

Player stories aren't cannon, as everyone tells their own stories that would contradict each other. They hold no bearing on the bigger picture, even though they are fun for the individual. The IP holder does that, and if the IP holder wants to advance things, then great! More opportunities to tell new stories! Just because you haven something in your head about how things go in your house, doesn't mean everything has to stop because it might upset you.

And again, NO, the setting never has to be static.

Yes you are correct. However that's the point of SETTING over STORY. Players are free to create their own stories in a setting. Story however players can't do that because they get overwritten by company.

That's the difference between SETTING and STORY. You keep mixing them up.

40k used to be a SETTING. Now you want it to be STORY which is completely different to SETTING.

Whole god damn point of setting is that it is set. Then players are free to do their own stories.

Again: I'm talking about SETTING which is what 40k used to be. You are talking about STORY that you want 40k to be.

40k isn't about waiting GW to tell us whether Abbadon succeeds in 13th black crusade or not. You play it out yourself. Then you have next part of story to be played out.

You want GW to spoonfeed us the story. But that's not how 40k used to be. If you want stories there's plenty out there. Lot less settings...

... They've been adding or changing or moving the timeline around since before third edition. We had campaigns from GW such as the infamous eye of terror campaign, Armageddon, that one that introduced vostroyans.

Advancing the setting isn't w bad thing, it gives you more room to base your games/campaigns/stories on. Can set your campaign during the Beast Arises, or perhaps the time of two Imperiums, or now, with the return of the primarchs and (potential) birth of Ynnead.

I'm pretty sure more people will be happy they finally are moving things a long a little bit, than will be actually upset by it.



On topic, I want to see the actual Deathwatch upgrade sprue and the veterans kit. Hard to see them having much room for things after the shoulder pad/elbow shield thing.

Errmmm - more of the releases, less of the semantics gentlemen/women? You've made your points, and you're unlikely to concede on each others, so lets not jam up the thread with an OT conversation please. I'd suggest moving over to 40k General Diiscussion for this.

Indeed.

Thanks.

But there aren't any. No pics or nuthin'.

Fine, moving to General. link

It seems all the Pictomancers are on their jollys (vacation for all those people that don't speak niche English).

 daemonish wrote:
It seems all the Pictomancers are on their jollys (vacation for all those people that don't speak niche English).

The pictures generally come from White Dwarf. If there's no Weekly White Dwarf(which August is supposed to not have any Weekly White Dwarfs), then there's no pictures.

September is supposed to have all the Deathwatch stuff in it, since WD is going to look at the previous month's releases.

Around this time next week we'll get some shaky pics of the box and codex, maybe also that one cool dude from Warseer will start leaking the codex this weekend or so.

Requizen wrote:
Around this time next week we'll get some shaky pics of the box and codex, maybe also that one cool dude from Warseer will start leaking the codex this weekend or so.

Aren't they going up for preorder on saturday?

 Nostromodamus wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Around this time next week we'll get some shaky pics of the box and codex, maybe also that one cool dude from Warseer will start leaking the codex this weekend or so.

Aren't they going up for preorder on saturday?

from what i understand yes this weekend, they are out the 13th. its very odd that no pictures are about. very odd

Don't worry - think how much 'Squeeeee' you'll get when they all come around at once.

migooo wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Around this time next week we'll get some shaky pics of the box and codex, maybe also that one cool dude from Warseer will start leaking the codex this weekend or so.

Aren't they going up for preorder on saturday?

from what i understand yes this weekend, they are out the 13th. its very odd that no pictures are about. very odd

It's not, because as Kanluwen said, the leaks come from White Dwarf. There's no weekly WD this month, and the September issue will look back at these releases, so there's no magazine for leaks to come from yet.

It's likely one of the driving forces behind the new WD format was to better control the leaks. GW probably wants leaks to help build hype, but without WD to supply pics in advance, they have more control over the flow of information.

Which was one of the exact same reasons cited when they switched to a weekly format.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V_MkbPT6Uog/V6Dwt8BvScI/AAAAAAAALWk/EVBX1zzW03QcW4cxWniSaua_Qr_MS9q7gCLcB/s320/Novedad%2B40k%2Bdeath%2Bmasque.png

Deathwatch prices....

Boxed set of 29 with Artemis & eldar 125 euro

Codex 33 euro

Deathwatch dice 16.50 euro

Deathwatch data cards 10.50 euro

 russian69hitman wrote:
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V_MkbPT6Uog/V6Dwt8BvScI/AAAAAAAALWk/EVBX1zzW03QcW4cxWniSaua_Qr_MS9q7gCLcB/s320/Novedad%2B40k%2Bdeath%2Bmasque.png

Deathwatch prices....

Boxed set of 29 with Artemis & eldar 125 euro

Codex 33 euro

Deathwatch dice 16.50 euro

Deathwatch data cards 10.50 euro

29 models agrees with the listing of contents suggested a few days ago.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Which was one of the exact same reasons cited when they switched to a weekly format.

Weekly format was great for showing off new stuff but now they decided to join the 21st century (a decade late, but hey they got there), and realized they can use Social Media to do the same thing.

Part III posted...

Yup... seems like reincarnation is going to be a thing in eldar lore...and maybe the birth of Ynnead.

Do all of you know what this means?