Switch Theme:

Do the 40k rules need a complete re-write?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Does 40k need a complete re-write?
Yes total re-write from scratch.
Yes total re write but based on WHFB.
No it just needs some more special rules.
No it has no problems at all as it is.

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Dakka Veteran





For everyone wanting to scrap the rules and fire everyone, be careful of what you wish for. You might end up with a simple "beer and pretzels" game, and the entire 40k universe blown up.

In their effort to sell models, I think Gdub has painted themself in a corner letting models create the game rules. There are such extreme differences in power level between the armies, Id say thats the main issue is make a serious effort to balance out the armies through point adjustments or special rules.




 
   
Made in ie
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Frostgrave

It needs a complete re-write by a proper editor and games writer, backed up by a play-testing team. The current guys just can't do it.

It's been essentially the same game from the past 4 editions, with extra bloat slapped on.

They should make an effort to improve clarity (by proofreading and editing), and streamline the game by dropping as many special rules as possible (I reckon you could drop at least half of them without any rules refactoring) and put the abilities back in the stats.

Leave the core game system mechanics the same, but give it a fresh, clean writeup.
   
Made in pl
Elite Tyranid Warrior





Something between current mess and AoS would be welcome.
   
Made in ca
Jinking Ravenwing Land Speeder Pilot




Canada

it needs weight watchers thats all it needs, gut the special rules available and points balances and youd go a long way to fixing the game. add to that locking up super heavies and gmc's into apoc (with the exception of imperial knights but you can lock them into there codex with the allies matrix) and you will take this even further.

and if you can cut down on the ration of special rules thrown around so bloody recklessly and you will see 40k become a lot better. a unit of bikers have something like 20 rules surrounding them at any given point after optionals (before ic's) and thats before another unit gets thrown into the mix for them to interact with. and then we have some units starved of them like the rhino which hasnt evolved since 4th bloody edition beyond costs (a testament to its brilliant simplicity). if we can cut those down and gut them especially on shooting centric units and you will see 40k do much better

DA army: 3500pts,
admech army: 600pts
ravenguard: 565 pts

 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut





When a game can be decided by which army you pick and come up against, there are serious problems.
When you can be wiped out in a couple of turns there are problems.
When the latest codex is always more powerful than the last there are problems.
When you no longer monopolize the wargame community there are problems.
When you charge extortianate prices for your models there are problems.

Games workshop, let alone 40k needs a complete rewrite
   
Made in us
Unshakeable Grey Knight Land Raider Pilot






 Squidmanlolz wrote:
It depends on what you want from the game. A lot of people want 40k to be a balanced, competitive game. I disagree with that sentiment. 40k is FAR from perfect, but it's still fun. It's a beer-and-chips game with good quality miniatures. Personally, I wouldn't change the course of friendly 40k.
If you were to try to remake the game into something competitive or balanced, I'd vote for FFG to do the rules. But, I don't see the need to overhaul 40k.


I agree with this 100 percent. The game seems fine to me. However that being said I play with buddies at home in a completely non serious setting. I mean sometimes a game will take 3 or 4 hours just because of all the extra talking and whatnot that goes on during the game.

TheMostWize:
Successful Trades: 6
With: Khestra the Unbeheld(2), jason2250, warriorpriest, ironsilk, Helbig, Zero_Cool, FishFuzz99, tomjoad, Uriels_Flame, Corbett (3) 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Space Wolves Scout





Farmington Hills

They need to go back to the old Necromunda/40k/Apoc style, where there are 3 related games that share most of the rules, but work on different levels of detail and scale up from somewhere around 5 models to the old apoc scale huge sets.

So people can go in, and get essentially a warband that they can name and customize each of their guys, and perhaps expand it with a specialist or Inquisitor or Hive node or whatever, and can play quick skirmish matches against an opponent using all the nice tiles GW has put out for Space Hulk, Deathwatch, Assassins, etc.

They could then start expanding this into a classic 40k style army with some additional troops, terrain and such. Indeed, as their collection grows, it would be like an escalation league as they flesh out units, add transports, and things like tanks that are the "boss monsters" of the skirmish game.

Finally, you can get to the apoc level where knights, superheavies and formations start showing up.

The big thing though is formations. GW has gone crazy and the formations are so hit or miss that it really eliminates any attempt at good unit design at the codex level. Everyone just looks for broken formation combinations to cheese the game. Formations are so hit or miss, (or missing in the case of some armies) that they now dictate what people play instead of the look and feel of the units themselves.

I'm hesitant to go AoS style with no points, because even with units arranged in tier systems it doesn't seem to work out well. Even if there is no longer a force org chart, there needs to be a points style measure of unit effectiveness out there.

Of course, GW could invest in some simulation software that iterates units through 1000s of randomly generated fights and uses a ELO style algorithm to converge on a points cost, but that is really outside the box thinking for them.
   
Made in pl
On a Canoptek Spyder's Waiting List




Olsztyn, Poland

IMO it needs way less special rules. Some of them should just be listed as traits at the models' codex page, I see no reason to have to open the rulebook and find the rule just to realize that "alright, it makes them walk through difficult terrain" or "alright, they cant fit in a transport". All the special rules on top of exceptions to special rules are silly too. There is way too much stuff to memorize. Why have a mostly empty codex page when you can just list traits on it?

They also need to decrease the price of codices and the rulebook (WHY IS THE RULEBOOK 3 BOOKS IN ONE???), my currently 500 point army of Necrons cost me as much as a rulebook + codex + templates + dice would cost me. Ive been through 3 different 500 point armies in total and I havent bought a codex or the rulebook once because it's just a HORRIBLE price.

The fanbase CLEARLY wants a game that can be competitive and/or casual, I see absolutely NO reason for the rules to not be free and digitally available on the internet where they can be updated and fixed at any time. Errata is confusing, FAQs are dumb, and honestly the only thing having codices and rules in the form of stupidly overpriced books does is showing that GW ARE greedy and dont care about the playerbase.

Hope Rides Alone. 
   
Made in us
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





Orem, Utah

Game Theory is a thing- and if GW used it, they could calculate the value of their units. They probably can't afford a proper game theorist (they often gain employment as military specialists, because Game Theory has applications there).


I don't think there's a chance GW will drop 40k for pointless anarchy like they did WFB. The General's Handbook is basically an apology without admitting to wrongdoing.

They might take other things from AoS, since it is basically a streamlined version of their core rules set.


I honestly think that 40k could go the other way. Start using stat cards for your troops like other games do, then we can check rules interactions without flipping through books. It is amazing how much the interface can fix complexity issues.

 
   
Made in au
!!Goffik Rocker!!





Melbourne .au

I'd strip it back to something much more like 3rd edition, but with universal special rules added in to cover contingencies and unique units - in the same way that Kings of War has them. Rather than piles of unique special rules scattered across many, many codices and other Datafax/dataslate/formation/etc sources. Not sure if that counts as a "complete rewrite" since it'd much more be stripping back the bloat to the core that worked very well, and then carefully adding the more fluffy layers back in an (ideally) balanced and measured way.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/07/06 02:33:23


   
Made in us
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc





Orem, Utah

4th was my favorite.

The core rules are probably not as much a problem as are the codexes. They've suffered from power creep and rules creep.

 
   
Made in au
Stalwart Tribune





Newcastle NSW

Needs to be rewritten to Deathwatch / AoS style rules. Easier rules would bring more people to the game.
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Custodian






Holy Terra

 Phydox wrote:
You might end up with a simple "beer and pretzels" game
As opposed to ... ?

There is a lot of AoSphobia among 40k players - but it really seems like AoS is based on 6E and 7E 40k. Although I don't currently play it myself, AoS currently gets a ton of play in my group. It's not a perfect game but it is fast and fun, two fronts where 40k could stand to improve. I think 40k will be "AoS-ified," except this will really just mean that 40k will continue down the path it is already on and has been on for a number of years now. Unlike with WHFB, there is no reason to "blow up" the setting to accomplish this.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/07 15:35:57


   
Made in ca
Pulsating Possessed Space Marine of Slaanesh





Florida, USA

You really don't want an AoS'ing to 40k. Why do we need two pizza and pop games? At least one of their main lines should be more beer and pretzels, and it sure as hell isn't going to be AoS. Re-write the whole damn thing, Exterminatus, with extreme prejudice.

----Warhammer 40,000----
10,000  
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Custodian






Holy Terra

If 40k is not beer & pretzels/pizza & pop/bubblegum & juiceboxes or whatever you want to call it, then I really don't know what is.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/09/07 15:55:53


   
Made in ca
Pulsating Possessed Space Marine of Slaanesh





Florida, USA

Oh, 40k wishes it was beer and pretzels. It WANTS to be beer and pretzels. It's trying SO HARD to be beer and pretzels. But it has zero alcohol content.

----Warhammer 40,000----
10,000  
   
Made in at
Privateer




Austria

40k wants to be beer&pretzel but is something like compost

and now after they 40kied Warhammer everyone thinks compost with a sugar toping would be a huge improvement for 40k

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in de
A Crystal Tree in the Dome of the Seers






Hamburg

Total rewrite. The core ruleset should be rather tight, like that of WMH. Otherwise, it would not be worth the effort.

Former moderator 40kOnline

Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!

Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."

Armies: Eldar, Necrons, Blood Angels, Grey Knights; World Eaters (30k); Bloodbound; Cryx, Circle, Cyriss 
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

 TheSilo wrote:
niv-mizzet wrote:
There is no option for my vote.
"No, but it needs LESS special rules."

Out of hundreds of units, there are maybe a dozen that are too wacky OP, and maybe another dozen that are wacky UP.
Rein those in closer to the center, and start simplifying rules.


I very much agree: simplify, streamline, and de-randomify.


Agreed!

Roll back the clock to a 5E baseline, and streamline things from there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Aipoch wrote:
You really don't want an AoS'ing to 40k.


It depends on what you mean by AoSing...

If you mean:
- radically streamline the core rules to their bare minimum
- do away with the plethora of "Special Rules" and any rules that reference other rules
- break up the Igo-Ugo system with game round initiative
- place ALL relevant unit rules on the unit datasheet
- give away all of the rules for FREE

That's a recipe for success.

If you mean:
- actually advance the story timeline in a meaningful way
- remove points, only to bring them back

Then I think GW has learned that's not desirable.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/09/07 16:58:15


-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in at
Privateer




Austria

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

If you mean:
- radically streamline the core rules to their bare minimum
- do away with the plethora of "Special Rules" and any rules that reference other rules
- break up the Igo-Ugo system with game round initiative
- place ALL relevant unit rules on the unit datasheet
- give away all of the rules for FREE
That's a recipe for success.


No, this alone does not do anything to improve the game or make it more fun.
It is just shifting around the problem and it makes no difference if the rules are in the rulebook or on the datasheet

But it is ok, some people like it that way with every single unit comes with its own set of core and special rules

I would prefer a clear and compact set of rules with a minimum of faction specific rules so that I just need a core rulebook and the unit entry to know everything (und not hundreds of self printed sheets of papers just to know my own army)

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

It makes the game far less tedious of having to look things up to determine how each special snowflake acts on the tabletop. Reduction of tedium results in less un-fun time being wasted, and more time for the actual fun bits of playing the game.

Or, go back to 3E's minimal special rules, that would be fine, too.

-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in at
Privateer




Austria

But this has nothing to do with AoS

or to give an example, there are 2 similar games out there
same setting, same amount of models, same "target" and all your points aply to both
but there is a huge difference in quality and gameplay expirience

Age of Sigmar and A Fantastic Saga

they only advantage of AoS is that GW put money into advertising and players are using it because it is the replacement for Warhammer.

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

I am not at all sure what you're getting at. I believe that GW can take the lessons of AoS and effectively apply them to 40k to provide a far better playing experience than what we have today.

I do not believe that AoS, as it is currently available from GW (with the General's Handbook) is a bad game in any form. I think it is categorically superior to WFB as a game and a system.

I further believe that the AoS game engine is categorically superior to 40k 6E / 7E.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/07 18:24:44


-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in at
Privateer




Austria

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I I think it is categorically superior to WFB as a game and a system.

I don’t see how a Mass-Skirmish game focused on big monster can be the superior version of a rank&file game focused on regiments

and compared to other skirmish games (GW and not GW) AoS is mediocre at best

I further believe that the AoS game engine is categorically superior to 40k 6E / 7E.

the game engine of both is the same
AoS in its current form is just a view months old and therefore misses the powercreep and bloated rules of 40k, but if GW continue with Aos without regulary restarting it it will be similar to 40k in 4 years.

I believe that GW can take the lessons of AoS and effectively apply them to 40k to provide a far better playing experience than what we have today.

GW already prove that the only lesson the learned is that completely killing the background is a bad idea
regarding rules they did not get anything from the change of AoS except that removing points does not work out well
writing clear rules and getting complex without being complicated and add balanced factions rules is nothing we will see in the near future (neither from AoS nor from 40k)

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in ca
Pulsating Possessed Space Marine of Slaanesh





Florida, USA

The whole "you don't have to look things up now" is a fair point, but that isn't the main problem. Having a datacard for each unit just makes sense, with a master rulebook holding all of them for reference and ideas. One you use during the course of the game, one you use during your freetime to plan new combos and strategies from units you might not have.

AoS and 40K both suffer from the same problem; they are neither a skirmish game nor a massed army game, yet they try to do both at the same time. 28mm scale does not lend well to massed army conflict; it's just too big to have the scale of a battle be confined to a 4' x 6' table.

AoS does have speed of play going for it, but it would get a 9/10 for speed of play and a 2/10 for depth of strategy. 40k is suffering from the opposite, plays very slow from the number of rules, but has an immense depth of strategy. Unfortunately, that depth is heavily offset by the power creep of the game, which is currently 11/10.

----Warhammer 40,000----
10,000  
   
Made in ca
Zealot





Considering how other newer competing miniature wargames are doing in terms of balanced gameplay, GW seriously need to scrap what they are doing and start fresh. The system they have now is seriously outdated from the quality standard put forth by competitors.

AoS, despite it's rough launch, is now on the right path I think.

Indeed the safest road to Hell is the gradual one—the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. - C.S. Lewis
 
   
Made in us
Stubborn White Lion




West Lafayette, IN

Can't vote, as my answer would be "Go back to 3rd, with some codex rewrites."

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming 
   
Made in gb
Boosting Space Marine Biker





A Dark Place

Total re-write.
Hell, if they just copy-pasted the *OPR ruleset I'd be happy (at least as a starting off point).

*In case you haven't seen it


darefsky wrote:Heck I have had times where I have sat down to paint, gotten everything ready, looked at it and went "nope I'm done."
 
   
Made in no
Regular Dakkanaut






many hate it, but the 40k needs to do an AoS.
simpler rules = more fun!

when you need to drag a rulebook that is bigger then ikea cataloge, something is fundamently wrong!

darkswordminiatures.com
Collects: 40K;Cult Mechanicus. GF9;Tanks. Flames of War. Wings of Glory. Warmachine. SW Armada. 
   
Made in it
Abhorrent Grotesque Aberration




Italy

FrozenDwarf wrote:
many hate it, but the 40k needs to do an AoS.
simpler rules = more fun!

when you need to drag a rulebook that is bigger then ikea cataloge, something is fundamently wrong!


I strongly disagree, the rules are fine and AOS is garbage. 40k is not complicated, its only issue is that there are some armies that are overpowered. Drop grav, D weapons and decurions, decrease the efficiency of some psychic phases (for example: you can never have more than 10+1d6 dice for casting psychic powers, regardless of the number of psykers involved), increase the cost of some big tau shooty robots and the game would be way better. In general if you play not competitively at any cost but organize balanced games with friends then 40k is still awesome.

Orks 8500
Space Wolves 5300
Drukhari 4700 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Polls
Go to: