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.

wuestenfux wrote:

zilegil wrote:Jidmha you genius as always. Nob bikers are going to be scary.

Explain? Wound groups are different there.

If your opponent directs attacks at your painboy or waagh! banner without killing them, and you have a wounded big choppa left, you can kill that big choppa to heal your important nob back to full health.

In addition, nothing forces you to remove unwounded models as casualties anymore, you can do all the wound shenanigans you did before, only patch up will start killing them. So it's possible for ten nobz to suffer ten wounds in assault without casualties, then maybe have all ten of them shooting. Once the turn has ended, and only at the end of the turn, you lose five of them of your choice, while healing the other five to full health.

Andrew1975 wrote:

necron overlord wrote:I know but reading them will take a bit and I just want a summary of it to know if its bad or good.

So basically every time someone new comes into this thread you want us to reinterate the last 25 pages of comments........Just read the thread! I mean you're asking for opinions on opinions on a spurious text....Just read the thread!

No I just do not have time to read every thing and this the only time I will do that.

This ruleset means the death of hero sniping with power fists. Infact with the new sniper rules being so cool (Directed hits and effective pinning) and independent characters being able to snipe we might see a major decrease of pimped out squad leaders. (cept for orks who can just give the nob eavy armour

Dribble Joy wrote:All tanks got an upgrade for firing on the move (MT(2)).

Remember however that firing an Ordinance weapon costs two Heavy Fire actions, so they will only be able to fire one other weapon.

Actually, AV14 tanks get MT3!

I'm off to design a Battlewagon around having 3/6 Fire actions...

ChocolateGork wrote:This ruleset means the death of hero sniping with power fists. Infact with the new sniper rules being so cool (Directed hits and effective pinning) and independent characters being able to snipe we might see a major decrease of pimped out squad leaders. (cept for orks who can just give the nob eavy armour

And Genestealer Broodlords.

Cannibal wrote:Question: I see a lot about titans and flyers. Is there anything in there about making Forge World rules definatively legal?

No, but a statement stating the exact opposite. They tell you that you should only use the basic rules and codices for regular and pick-up games.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Kirasu wrote:Yeah the charge distances havent really changed much to be honest.. Usually just a few inches due to fleet changes

Moving vehicle 6" then charging 6" is the same as getting out beforehand and just charging 12"

Its just a different way of doing it

It makes quite a bit of difference if a unit has Overwatch though. If you did it the old way, they'd shoot the Battlewagon. With the new way, they'll get to shoot the assaluting unit.

I may be missing something, but my reading of DF and OW is that DF is a Shooting action that can only be used when the unit is assaulted. Meanwhile, OW is a special rule that allows a DF action vs units "ending a move action within 12."

So OW isn't a requirement for DF actions, it's a special rule expanding the circumstances under which DF actions can take place.

Am I wrong?

I definitely welcome the new To-Hit chart in close combat. When I first started playing this game, the very first army I picked was Chaos Daemons (yeah, it was a REAL bad idea). I immediately got latched on to the Bloodthirster because of how big and impressive it looked. When I started playing, though, I realized that he is probably the worst model ever. WS10 was 100000% useless because of the way the To-Hit chart worked. Average ol' Marines needed 5's to hit and I needed 3's to hit. If I was fighting a WS5 unit, they instead needed 4's to hit and I still needed 3's to hit. I have TWICE your weapon skill and I am the most feared close combat being in the entire universe. How are you hitting me with "average" rolls?

The new To-Hit chart is soooOoOOOoOoOoOOOo much better. Now, I hit you on 2's and you need 6's. Like it should f'n be. I should be so god damn badass in close combat that it should be sheer stroke of luck that you are hitting me (assuming that you are a Tac Squad).

Jidmah wrote:

Cannibal wrote:Question: I see a lot about titans and flyers. Is there anything in there about making Forge World rules definatively legal?

No, but a statement stating the exact opposite. They tell you that you should only use the basic rules and codices for regular and pick-up games.

Would you mind copy pasting the wording?

Anyone else notice that not only can units now voluntarily move off the board, but units that fall back off the board or intentionally move off no longer count as destroyed?


Also, I cannot find any caveat about losing a mission if your army leaves the board (I may just be missing it though), if it's not actually there then coupled with the above it could lead to a lot of "I shoot turn 1, you don't do enough back, I withdraw at the beginning of my turn 2 and game ends in victory for me!" games.

gorgon wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Kirasu wrote:Yeah the charge distances havent really changed much to be honest.. Usually just a few inches due to fleet changes

Moving vehicle 6" then charging 6" is the same as getting out beforehand and just charging 12"

Its just a different way of doing it

It makes quite a bit of difference if a unit has Overwatch though. If you did it the old way, they'd shoot the Battlewagon. With the new way, they'll get to shoot the assaluting unit.

I may be missing something, but my reading of DF and OW is that DF is a Shooting action that can only be used when the unit is assaulted. Meanwhile, OW is a special rule that allows a DF action vs units "ending their move within 12."

So OW isn't a requirement for DF actions, it's a special rule expanding the circumstances under which DF actions can take place.

Am I wrong?

Yeah, you are sort of wrong. OW isn't the only time you can use DF, but it is the only trigger that allows you to use DF against an assault. Nothing in DF tells you when it triggers. The triggers are in other sections (like OW, and under Deep Striking). The only part of the DF rule that deals with assaults is handling this situation: DF tells you you must let the triggering action complete before you may fire at the enemy unit. Any unit with a speed over 6" can use the charge action to double move and get into base to base contact. You must wait till they finish this move, but when they do, you are now locked in combat and unable to use a shooting action (and DF as a result). The part about assaults is telling you that you may go ahead and fire at the enemy unit after it completes it's move, as long as you were not already engaged by another unit.

In the Codex Update, only Coteaz is retroactively given Overwatch. I'm not certain it merits the amount of discussion it's getting...

I guess I see what you're saying. Think it could be a lot clearer, however. As is, there are going to be a lot of questions.

faeslayer wrote:In the Codex Update, only Coteaz is retroactively given Overwatch. I'm not certain it merits the amount of discussion it's getting...

The Fire at Will strategem makes it more available. p. 148

gorgon wrote:I may be missing something, but my reading of DF and OW is that DF is a Shooting action that can only be used when the unit is assaulted. Meanwhile, OW is a special rule that allows a DF action vs units "ending a move action within 12."

So OW isn't a requirement for DF actions, it's a special rule expanding the circumstances under which DF actions can take place.

Am I wrong?

DF is special action that you can use at your enemy's turn, only at specific cases, like an enemy unit Deep Striking in 12" of you. Overwatch simply adds another case of enemy assaulting you.

Edit: Ninja'd byMaelstrom808

Two things caught my eye as a Tyranid player:

1. Psychic Counter (pdf pg 8): 5+ Psychic hoods for everyone!

2. Channel is a psychic power now. You can now counter Force Weapon activation!

Vaktathi wrote:Anyone else notice that not only can units now voluntarily move off the board, but units that fall back off the board or intentionally move off no longer count as destroyed?


Also, I cannot find any caveat about losing a mission if your army leaves the board (I may just be missing it though), if it's not actually there then coupled with the above it could lead to a lot of "I shoot turn 1, you don't do enough back, I withdraw at the beginning of my turn 2 and game ends in victory for me!" games.

The unit has to be Broken to voluntarily leave the table.

benogham wrote:There is something stated elsewhere that is a bit disturbing :
page 147, "Fire Points" of the bastion. The "heck" of the bastion is mentionned. Heck is GERMAN for the "back" and not english.

Can it be an german playtest version translated in english by a native german speaker, or a hoax from a german fanboy ? I don't know the policy og GW regarding playtesting, so, do they playtest abroad ?

One of GW's handful of playtest groups is in Germany.

Also note that, and believe this true across the board, the use of the German "heck" for rear is with in the unit profile. These profiles are created early on and it is likely it just did not get changed.

This document looks exactly like hundreds of final draft documents i have worked with that are being passed between developers as they look for missed typos and things like "heck" still showing up in a profile created by a german dev group.

While this document was originally created in Apple Pages and converted to PDF with Adobe last May that does not show the final state of the document. It could have been saved 1/09/12 and we would not necessarily see that time stamp.

There is very little doubt among any of my fellow developers that this is real. I think there may be a few more changes before release, maybe May/June, but this is a final stage development document folks. This is not the work of a "lone gunman". That makes no sense at all.

If there was any doubt concerning it being real GW put all that to bed by the amount of money they are spending having their legal council track down and send take down notices. That is not cheap but it is what they have to do if they do not want a case of their not defending a claimed IP to exist. That could cause the loss of IP. Were this no a true document, even a fake one that referenced their IP, they would not be required to defend it under law. The only reason for that is one of copyright. That means the language used in the document is virtually identical to what will be the final copyrighted publication.

That said sites that are removing comment threads are acting on a lack of understanding pertaining to their rights. any person has the right to reproduce parts of a copyright document for the purposes of review/ critique etc.

I for one as a 25 year veteran of this game am very excited to start playing games with the new rules and look forward to buying the full book when it comes out. This will be the first time 40K as a game will approach being a game that compares well with other games.

Don't worry about getting copies of the new rules PDF. Bits want to be free and now that there is a copy out there eventual the now free roaming bits will find their way to your Mac. Or Windows machine if you are stuck with that.

-STUCARIUS-

I really hope that df is almost like stand and shoot in whfb. Hate how my guardsmen stand there and let someone charge them. And now that charges are longer...

From what I heard so far, this edition will be -far- shootier than stabbier. With DF, OW, shooting at things deepstriking too close, sharper blast scattering, the ability to easily target a specific model in a unit, flamers hittim embarked units through fire points and most vehicles and MCs being quite easy to hit, CC looks riskier than ever.

gorgon wrote:I guess I see what you're saying. Think it could be a lot clearer, however. As is, there are going to be a lot of questions.

I agree, but:

1) It's just a playtest version, and there is a lot that could be written with more clarity.

2) It's GW (probably), what do expect?

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:I really hope that df is almost like stand and shoot in whfb. Hate how my guardsmen stand there and let someone charge them. And now that charges are longer...

Charges aren't longer and in fact if you stay in terrain they cant double their movement to get to you. But it seems you have a lot more to fear from deep-striking units.

Sephyr wrote:From what I heard so far, this edition will be -far- shootier than stabbier. With DF, OW, shooting at things deepstriking too close, sharper blast scattering, the ability to easily target a specific model in a unit, flamers hittim embarked units through fire points and most vehicles and MCs being quite easy to hit, CC looks riskier than ever.

My assessment of it in general terms is shooting is now the focus of the game (as it should be in a sci-fi based game). You have many more options when it comes to shooting, and it is woven into just about every aspect of the game. Assaulting is still a more decisive way of removing an enemy unit (and in many ways more decisive than it was before), but shooting is going to be involved in almost everything you do, one way or another.

Maelstrom808 wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Anyone else notice that not only can units now voluntarily move off the board, but units that fall back off the board or intentionally move off no longer count as destroyed?


Also, I cannot find any caveat about losing a mission if your army leaves the board (I may just be missing it though), if it's not actually there then coupled with the above it could lead to a lot of "I shoot turn 1, you don't do enough back, I withdraw at the beginning of my turn 2 and game ends in victory for me!" games.

The unit has to be Broken to voluntarily leave the table.

Ah, you are correct, I misread that, good catch.

im starting to notice errors popping up which is increasing my doubt for this being legit., one refering to fantasy rather than 40k "the canny Mekboys of the Orcs" the math for the instant dead example is off as well, ill keep looking but begins to feel unprofessional

tkrettler91 wrote:im starting to notice error after error popping up which is increasing my doubt for this being legit., one refering to fantasy rather than 40k "the canny Mekboys of the Orcs" the math for the instant dead example is off as well, ill keep looking but begins to feel unprofessional

You mine, just like the real books?

Ork vs Orc is just one of dozens of typos in that document. It is a working copy, after all.

Clay Williams wrote:Lol scarabs take one wound to power fists now ... I happy.

Incorrect. You're applying 5th edition ID rules to this leaked text. In this case, you take an additional wound for when the strength of the weapon is 4 more than your toughness. 2 additional wounds if the strength is 5 more than your toughness.

So a Str. 8 Power Fist will cause 3 wounds per hit on a scarab swarm.

Read through most of it. I'm at a crossroads as to whether or not it could potentially be testing rules or not. I only read the first page of this thread, so if the following has been said over and over again within the first 32+ pages... Sorry. Also, this is by far not an organized post from me.

The rules seem to be both fan made, a throwback to previous editions (Evasion, really?) and an update. Along with being at a crossroads as to whether or not this is legit, I am in the same boat concerning whether or not I like them. I didn't like 4th or 5th edition when they first came out and I ultimately probably won't like these.

Something that I didn't get to last night, and I don't even know if they're in there (though I saw reference to them): I like the idea of narrative combat missions. I'm a huge fan of campaigns in 40k, which I hope this may potentially lend assistance toward. I am a much bigger fan of campaigns than tournaments since it sometimes breaks players out of their ultra-competitive list building mode and turns them toward thinking up unique stories and backgrounds and building lists that fit it (again, sometimes).

Regardless, the ultimate thing concerning the rules is that I stopped caring much about them long ago(oh, I'll learn them from top to bottom, front to back, page to page) and just use 40k as an excuse to socialize and have fun in a competitive atmosphere.

puma713 wrote:

Clay Williams wrote:Lol scarabs take one wound to power fists now ... I happy.

Incorrect. You're applying 5th edition ID rules to this leaked text. In this case, you take an additional wound for when the strength of the weapon is 4 more than your toughness. 2 additional wounds if the strength is 5 more than your toughness.

So a Str. 8 Power Fist will cause 3 wounds per hit on a scarab swarm.

Incorrect. Swarms have Eternal Warrior (1) and laugh at your puny fist.

lord_blackfang wrote:

puma713 wrote:

Clay Williams wrote:Lol scarabs take one wound to power fists now ... I happy.

Incorrect. You're applying 5th edition ID rules to this leaked text. In this case, you take an additional wound for when the strength of the weapon is 4 more than your toughness. 2 additional wounds if the strength is 5 more than your toughness.

So a Str. 8 Power Fist will cause 3 wounds per hit on a scarab swarm.

Incorrect. Swarms have Eternal Warrior (1) and laugh at your puny fist.

Yeah, I was just about to edit out my post, but since you ninja'ed me, I'll just leave it. However, with Scarabs being so prevalent so far, I wonder if this will remain in the release version.

EW scarabs that can assault 21".

busby wrote:Regardless,

Don't you mean irregardless?