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.

So a few people have begun to herald the end of the 8th edition, now with the release of Sisters.

For those who aren't up on the Curse of Sisters: In the past GW has remarkably released a new edition several times, just months after Sisters releases. They have usually either been dead last, second to last, or skipped entirely. Much to the detriment of people who ordered the armies.

What do you think will happen? Will GW repeat the past and disappoint everyone who purchases the box set, or will 9th be delayed until 2021?

I think peeps need to chill.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
In the past GW has remarkably released a new edition several times, just months after Sisters released

Citation needed

Well, let's see if history actually has a precedent?

2nd ed. Yup. Came out 1997 (not sure when). 40k 3rd released in 1998.

3rd ed. Had a rulebook list and later a CA list in 2001 and finally codex Witch Hunters in 2003. 3rd ed lasted until 2004.

4th ed used the same WH dex through to 2008

As did 5th ed until the WD list in 2011. 5th was replaced by 6th in 2012.

6th ed list came out in 2013 and the edition ended in 2014

7th list was the same till the edition's end in 2017.

Sooo.... what can we see from this? When the SoB codex comes out the edition has roughly a year left until it gets overturned completely or just tuned up. Coincidence more than likely but interesting food for thought.

I'll give GW major credit if that's next year's April fools joke

Didn't valrak have a rumour from one of his "reliable sources" saying that ninth edition was due next summer?

 Grimtuff wrote:
Coincidence more than likely but interesting food for thought.

At what point does something change from a string of "coincidences" to a trend or president? That sounds a bit snarky and sarcastic, but I mean it seriously.

Also, I find it a little hard to believe that the release of Sisters and a new edition are completely unrelated at all. Now, this notion does not presupposed that somehow a Sisters release causes an edition to end. Rather, they could be related in the sense that that Sisters sit at or near the "tail-end" of release priority for a given edition, and so generally a Sister's release could signal the beginning of the sun-set phase of an edition.

This actually makes some sense with Psychic Awakening. That is, it could be a "narrative" ramp to climbing to the culminating development(s) of 9th Edition. It also means they can push out 9th with a look forward at somewhat less non-plastic kits.

I wouldn't call this notion crazy. It's not proof of anything in-itself. But I think the notion has at least some merit. I also don't believe in notion of coincidence anyway. Especially not in cases of things as related as GW's release schedule.

An important note to make is that with Age of Sigmar's push to 2.0, they slowed down the pace of releases for books leading up to a new edition. They pushed Underworlds and 40k harder in the lead-up to it. They also, in that timeframe, made the decisions that unfortunately led to the negative feedback they're getting with regards to Cities of Sigmar(things were left in, factionwise, that shouldn't have been since it led to them having to be dropped like rocks when Cities dropped).


I think that if we see anything for 40k, it will be a 1.5 version.

People are absurdly possessed with the thought of 9th edition.

It just isn't coming until they're ready to make sweeping changes to the system. Otherwise CA does the job.

 H wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
Coincidence more than likely but interesting food for thought.

At what point does something change from a string of "coincidences" to a trend or president?

In the case of the latter, normally following an election. Or, depending on the country, a military coup.

 Dysartes wrote:
In the case of the latter, normally following an election. Or, depending on the country, a military coup.

Typing is hard when you aren't smart,

I think there has been a curse - but its because the releases have tended to be rules rather than models, so GW have chucked them out when not busy with other things. This tends to happen in the dead zone before a new edition.

It doesn't necessarily mean the curse is over - but when sisters join the range - its not going to be quite the same situation. This isn't "here's some rules for models we sold twenty years ago, stop whinging at us" its "look at the new shiny thing, pls buy, to be joined by even more new shiny things very soon".

You could say "8th's run its course, 9th inc" - but really I don't see what major changes are necessary to the game. They will instead release psychic awakening for the next 6 months or so. They can throw in updated codexes after that - presumably as some models are released too.

They may re-do the main 40k box in 2020 but eh.

It would hardly be surprising if 9th edition is scheduled for next year - how long did 1st ed. AoS last? two years?

We'll know that 9th edition is nigh when Dark Imperium goes out of print. :-P

There might be something in that. I don't know if you guys noticed but theres been feth all 40K on their community site considering its their flagship product range.

Hardly anything is related to 40k, Apart form the repeated bleating about Sm and some Eldar sprinkled in around the new release....

Everything seems very AOS/Specialist games focused.

Probably nothing to it though. I'm happy whatever happens. Got armies to build and paint come what may

 Grimtuff wrote:
Well, let's see if history actually has a precedent?

2nd ed. Yup. Came out 1997 (not sure when). 40k 3rd released in 1998.

3rd ed. Had a rulebook list and later a CA list in 2001 and finally codex Witch Hunters in 2003. 3rd ed lasted until 2004.

4th ed used the same WH dex through to 2008

As did 5th ed until the WD list in 2011. 5th was replaced by 6th in 2012.

6th ed list came out in 2013 and the edition ended in 2014

7th list was the same till the edition's end in 2017.

Sooo.... what can we see from this? When the SoB codex comes out the edition has roughly a year left until it gets overturned completely or just tuned up. Coincidence more than likely but interesting food for thought.

Minor correction: Averages less than a year left. Some of those were only a few months (2nd ed I think was only 3 months or so).

I think it is pretty unlikely GW will again fully re-boot 40K as to invalidate Codexes so quickly.

Will GW perhaps release a new starter with a new, updated rulebook incorporating FAQ-changes and perhaps a few more streamlining things here and there? Sure, that's possible, even in 2020. But it wont invalidate Sisters or any other of the older books (and GW never actually labels editions anyhow .. so you could argue if 7th was 7th or 6.5 and the current one is actually 7th or whatever).

The more likely curse is, of course, Sisters being an "average" book in the slipstream of the insane Marine releases, which would sadly make it pretty much of a dud.

I might add that FLG/Reece joked about it in a recent podcast, and BoLS did a whole article about it. There is a habit, they've done the same thing for every edition. Sisters come out close to ending. Given the work that went into these new models, they have been radio silent playing them up. Whereas the SM mini-dexes got like a article a week, and the contrast paints got a whole series and a multi-professional panel of expert painters discussing them.

Sisters get a "Here's a box of 3-5 new models, and one of them's a glitzy rhino."

So much for GK getting a re-do.

Pretty crazy when you see it written out that way, right?

But it's not going to happen this time. As other folks have mentioned, this time around, we've got the shift to annual updating via CA, plus the presence of models with the dex release and the promise of more, plus all of the Psychic Awakening still to come. I'd like to add to that list all of the interlocking mini-games that would be affected by such a switch; I don't think we've ever had such a high degree of system interactivity at the time a sisters dex dropped, or at the time a new edition was released.

I think GW has figured out that the persistent edition/ slow change model is far better for both profit margins and the long term health of the hobby. It actually gives us hope that they will achieve everything we've always wanted- replace finecast, give us back our Drukari characters, build real alien auxilia armies for Tau, starting with Kroot, flesh out the Inquisition and other Imperial Agents, etc, etc.

A ninth edition bumps the timeline on any of those things by years, and would diminish my faith that GW would ever figure it out.

Theoretically, if they repeated the Index tactic it might be possible to keep me on board, but probably not; I almost jumped ship when they hiked their prices. The only thing keeping me on board is edition persistence; I do spend more than I should, but it's worth it if it increases the value of the investments I've already made.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I might add that FLG/Reece joked about it in a recent podcast, and BoLS did a whole article about it.

Yeah, but those are click bait sites, devoted to ad revenue over any other consideration. BoLs will do an article about dogs in 40k if Purina will slip 'em a dollar.

Sisters get a "Here's a box of 3-5 new models, and one of them's a glitzy rhino.

There isn't a rhino in that box, glitzy or otherwise.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
It would hardly be surprising if 9th edition is scheduled for next year - how long did 1st ed. AoS last? two years?

Three. 2015 to 2018.

PenitentJake wrote:
Pretty crazy when you see it written out that way, right?

But it's not going to happen this time. As other folks have mentioned, this time around, we've got the shift to annual updating via CA, plus the presence of models with the dex release and the promise of more, plus all of the Psychic Awakening still to come. I'd like to add to that list all of the interlocking mini-games that would be affected by such a switch; I don't think we've ever had such a high degree of system interactivity at the time a sisters dex dropped, or at the time a new edition was released.

I think GW has figured out that the persistent edition/ slow change model is far better for both profit margins and the long term health of the hobby. It actually gives us hope that they will achieve everything we've always wanted- replace finecast, give us back our Drukari characters, build real alien auxilia armies for Tau, starting with Kroot, flesh out the Inquisition and other Imperial Agents, etc, etc.

A ninth edition bumps the timeline on any of those things by years, and would diminish my faith that GW would ever figure it out.

Theoretically, if they repeated the Index tactic it might be possible to keep me on board, but probably not; I almost jumped ship when they hiked their prices. The only thing keeping me on board is edition persistence; I do spend more than I should, but it's worth it if it increases the value of the investments I've already made.

An annual Chapter Approved update isn't going to prevent 9th ed any more than an annual General's Handbook prevented AoS 2nd ed. GW doesn't release new editions because the rules need it but because they want to sell a new starter box and rule book.

That doesn't mean codices will be invalidated. Complete reboots don't happen half as often as new editions building on the same framework as the previous one. Editions mean nothing for the lifespan of a codex. GW is more likely to shift design paradigms halfway through an edition that makes older codices feel obsolete compared to new ones than they are to throw out the complete rule set and reboot it with a new edition. Codex Witchhunters existed through the shifts of early and middle 4th ed, and then early and middle of 5th ed again before it got replaced with a subpar White Dwarf codex for instance, making it a little less appealing with every boost other armies with new codices got in that space.

This Sisters thing is not a curse, it's just a show of where GW's priorities are. Sisters get new rules when the things the writers want for an edition are out, when there's spare time, or when they're out of stuff to release and they have release slots left to fill towards the end of the edition.

I'm pretty sure we have at least another year. You guys are quick to forget that we just got a "new" rule book like 2-3 weeks ago.

 Geifer wrote:

An annual Chapter Approved update isn't going to prevent 9th ed any more than an annual General's Handbook prevented AoS 2nd ed. GW doesn't release new editions because the rules need it but because they want to sell a new starter box and rule book.

The biggest reason we got AoS 2.0 is that the game's mechanics were rebuilt in such a way that a simple General's Handbook couldn't provide all the mechanisms to detail it...but it left army books more or less intact.

Curse? More like a Herald of Change. When the Sisters of Battle get updated, they herald the coming of the next edition of the game.

I would not be surprised if 9th Edition rolled out around May 2020.