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'm looking at getting back into the game after a long absence, so I finally broke down and bought the main rule book. After reading through it cover to cover twice, I've got to say this:

The 40k 8th edition main rule book is an absolute FAILURE.

I'm not talking about the rules themselves. I'm talking about the layout. It is absolute CRAP. Stuff is scattered willy nilly across pages. It's like GW doesn't want us to be able to find the references when we need them. And there are all kinds of important game mechanics that are flat out MISSING.

"Oh, but there's a ribbon that you can use as a book mark. Isn't that cool?"

No. It's pretentious. Keep your ribbon and bring in some unpaid collage intern who knows how to make a simple OUTLINE. Let them lay out the rules presentation in a manner that's easy to read and easy to refer back too.

While you're at it, find someone who knows how to take a picture from more than ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE TABLE TOP.

"Hey Fred, is there any way you can zoom in more on Guilliman's crotch? We've only got around twelve close-ups of his junk. I don't think that's gonna be nearly enough..."

I think you may need to reconsider what you find valuable in your life if you're getting this worked up over a rule book

welcome back....

Indeed, welcome back brother phydaux!

Actually, I would call the rulebook an absolute success.

Afterall, it has make you come here, to rant and vent with a ton of hypherbolic statemets. And, isnt that what this hobby is all about?

Calm your zeal brother.

I didn't notice it being bad. It seemed well enough laid out for me.

What's missing, and what's scattered around? There's only like 6 pages of rules, then a little section on missions with the force org and the basic strategems and such.

I think this has been my experience with practically every GW book lol

I'm sorry it wasn't written like the national building code

 Galas wrote:
Actually, I would call the rulebook an absolute success.

Afterall, it has make you come here, to rant and vent with a ton of hypherbolic statemets. And, isnt that what this hobby is all about?

You are correct. They layout of that book is absolutely terrible. It's all scattered, rules everywhere. No cohesiveness, much like the game its self.

8th edition is just as bad rules wise as 7th was, just in the exact opposite direction. Overly simplified to the point where you need more pages of FAQ's than there are pages of rules simply due to the fact that they didn't write the rules properly in any fashion.

Why they did away with USR's is mind boggling.

I really wish they would fire the entire rules development team and get some actual developers that know how to write rules concisely and consistently.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
You are correct. They layout of that book is absolutely terrible. It's all scattered, rules everywhere. No cohesiveness, much like the game its self.

8th edition is just as bad rules wise as 7th was, just in the exact opposite direction. Overly simplified to the point where you need more pages of FAQ's than there are pages of rules simply due to the fact that they didn't write the rules properly in any fashion.

Why they did away with USR's is mind boggling.

I really wish they would fire the entire rules development team and get some actual developers that know how to write rules concisely and consistently.

There's like a page and a half of errata for the main rules - 1/4 of it is from the recent update. The rest is FAQ and quite a bit of that is devoted to the most recent rule changes, too.

They're doing just fine even if they're feeling their way in the dark at times. I'd rather have a team that is genuine and learns from their mistakes than one who thinks they're zeus' gift to nerds everywhere.

The way I know it isn't is that it lasted almost a year before dakka had this thread. 7th had threads like these within the first week lol

Step up your game dakkanauts.

Do what I did. Take it to Office Max, have them cut the binding, take the rule pages, place them in a newly spun spiral binding. It is really nice to have the 40ish pages together in a format that lays flat and open. The lore portion is in its own binding.

True stuff. I'd have liked for the main rules, deployments, and detachments to all be together so I could use the fancy little ribbon to mark where they all are. As is I've gotta tab them and the missions I sort of like since its all so far apart.

Oh and the base stratagems and warlord traits.

FYI, the game mechanics are not missing.

They are deleted.

They're doing just fine even if they're feeling their way in the dark at times. I'd rather have a team that is genuine and learns from their mistakes than one who thinks they're zeus' gift to nerds everywhere.

Nothing wrong with learning from mistakes and making erratas to bad rules. Nobody's perfect, thats fine. But when a person (such as myself or others on this and other forums) can see obvious gaping flaws in rules at their release, even before testing it on an actual battlefield, I would say there is a problem, too much of a problem for me to have faith in this design team who I feel doesn't know what they are doing.

The worst part is that there is no consistency. I just want somebody at GW to have a bad case of OCD. I really do, but all of them seem to be scattered to the wind. The most recent Codexes have been a slight improvement, so credit where credit is due.

Overall I love 8th edition and it can be complex but not to the point of being overwhelming.

Despite everything I love about 8th, OP is right on the money with the layout being crap. And this extends past the rulebook into codexes. How the feth dataslates are organized is a mystery not even Tzeentch could unravel. And holy flying feth, why are the detachment rules sandwiched between randomly assorted mission types? It's a fething shambles, and leads me to disregard physical books entirely for the ability to control+f a pdf.

I would love if they released a printed. compendium with only the rules that are also updated with all the FAQ stuff. That way you would not have to carry the fluff and artwork to games and you would not have to access 1 year old designers commentary files during games. Besides then buying the rules would be cheaper for new players.

would have been better with a slip case around the thing, a book with the lore, a separate book with the rules, well booklet really, then a book with the scenarios in.

Then chapter approved comes out, shrink wrapped - replaces the rules booklet annually with changes baked in and gives you a book of new scenarios and other stuff

at least then you don't need to carry the fluff bit about.

Bonus for going the way Codex Titanicus went and having the pages drilled for a binder and a peal away binding

I think the problem stems from the fact that there are three ways to play. It might be confusing. If you just skip the situational parts (open play/narrative play) it's actually a pretty good book.

quentra wrote:
Despite everything I love about 8th, OP is right on the money with the layout being crap. And this extends past the rulebook into codexes. How the feth dataslates are organized is a mystery not even Tzeentch could unravel.

In order of Battlefield Role (HQ-Troops-Elites-Fast Attack-Heavy Support-Flyers-Lords of War-Fortifications then alphabetical order, isn't it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

quentra wrote:
And holy flying feth, why are the detachment rules sandwiched between randomly assorted mission types?

Detachment rules are ... Narrative play, I think? So they come after all the Open Play rules (which includes some scenarios), but before Matched Play.

conker249 wrote:Do what I did. Take it to Office Max, have them cut the binding, take the rule pages, place them in a newly spun spiral binding. It is really nice to have the 40ish pages together in a format that lays flat and open. The lore portion is in its own binding.

This is a fantastic idea actually, much nicer than my group's current "solution" of photocopying the relevant pages, especially as one or two pages invariably go missing.

I just bring the fold-out battle primer to the table. After a year~ish of play, I don't need to consult the half-dozen or so other relevant pages for things like detachments, generic warlord traits or terrain. Every place I play does either CA or custom missions.

Not much point in carrying around the big hardcover book.

It is annoying i have to admit... for example:the rule about a vechile being 75% obscured means it has +1 to the save is not actually in the area talking about cover... you have to go specifically to the infintry in cover section seperate from the cover main rules and there it talks about vechiles in cover... despite it supposed to be about infintry in cover... i remember it took us like 20m to find this rule when someone said it wasn't real.

 lolman1c wrote:
It is annoying i have to admit... for example:the rule about a vechile being 75% obscured means it has +1 to the save is not actually in the area talking about cover... you have to go specifically to the infintry in cover section seperate from the cover main rules and there it talks about vechiles in cover... despite it supposed to be about infintry in cover... i remember it took us like 20m to find this rule when someone said it wasn't real.

Pretty sure that isn't a real rule, at least not in normal play. Is it a planetstrike rule? What page is it on.

phydaux wrote:I'm looking at getting back into the game after a long absence, so I finally broke down and bought the main rule book. After reading through it cover to cover twice, I've got to say this:

The 40k 8th edition main rule book is an absolute FAILURE.

I'm not talking about the rules themselves. I'm talking about the layout. It is absolute CRAP. Stuff is scattered willy nilly across pages. It's like GW doesn't want us to be able to find the references when we need them. And there are all kinds of important game mechanics that are flat out MISSING.

"Oh, but there's a ribbon that you can use as a book mark. Isn't that cool?"

No. It's pretentious. Keep your ribbon and bring in some unpaid collage intern who knows how to make a simple OUTLINE. Let them lay out the rules presentation in a manner that's easy to read and easy to refer back too.

While you're at it, find someone who knows how to take a picture from more than ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE TABLE TOP.

"Hey Fred, is there any way you can zoom in more on Guilliman's crotch? We've only got around twelve close-ups of his junk. I don't think that's gonna be nearly enough..."

That made me laugh a lot,

Galas wrote:Actually, I would call the rulebook an absolute success.

Afterall, it has make you come here, to rant and vent with a ton of hypherbolic statemets. And, isnt that what this hobby is all about?

But not as much as that.

I dislike the 8th ed rulebook too. I haven't actually read it properly, the way I did all the previous rulebooks, which I read cover to cover. The layout of the background pages is confusing and too text-light. It sort of reads more like a magazine (a bit like that issue of White Dwarf where they explained the realms in AoS). When I pick up a 300page hardback book, I expect some serious content, but there really isn't any, which is stupid when you consider how much content they have to draw from. Well... I don't necessarily want a carbon copy of the previous book, but it would be nice to go deeper into the universe and have some interesting concept art and maybe some descriptions of interesting planets, battles and so on. The 4th ed had a lot of this, and was really interesting because of it.

I think the rulebook is fine. I actually think the layout works pretty well, with the lore and pictures in the front, and rules and options toward the back. Never had any issues finding what I need.

People complained about the 5th Edition D&D books when they came out too, but mostly over the index, which I agree isn't great, but those books weren't as bad as some claimed.

GW rulebooks have, for some time, had the rather amazing ability to be laid out so badly that every edition of WH and 40k for the last 15 years has had at least one rule I can never find, even though I know it exists. At this point I think it's actually a talent.