Switch Theme:

Heresy/30k - News & Rumours - Sons of Horus Praetor - Pg44  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
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 se
Fresh-Faced New User




 jojo_monkey_boy wrote:
 MajorWesJanson wrote:
When 30k was essentially compatible with 40k, it opened up a much wider playerbase of opponents.



Which doesn't make a ton of sense. None of the 30k armies are designed or balanced to play against factions outside of 30k. If you wanted to play against those factions, why not play 40k?


Because I thought the legion rules, models, and background were cool, and my friends didn't want to invest in HH armies. Balance was hardly GWs strong suite back then either, so what did it matter?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/17 20:33:28


 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




To all the people who propose HH to go 9th - while it might be good for the system in the short term for how long would that be? Codexes can be updated in 1 year time for a 40k army. 10th edition may be out next year even. So who will rebalance HH for 10th edition? HH players and 40k players might be able to play with each other for 1-2 years and then what? I dont see GW updating the HH rules often

40k ruleset for HH might be good for HH in the short term but its a bad decision for the setting in the long run. Speaking as a HH player leave HH with its own ruleset.
   
Made in sk
Fresh-Faced New User



Slovakia

 Galas wrote:
TBH as someone that loves 8th and 9th and really started playing 40k (I was a fantasy and MESBG before) with 8th, one of the reasons I want to try HH with this box set is specifically because they have different rules.

Maybe I'm in the minority but I don't need Warhammer 40k 2.0. If I want to play 9th, I can just play 9th.

I'm in the same boat. I started with 40k 2 years ago, so in 8th. Never played it before. Got into HH (ZM to be precise), just a month ago, exactly because it has different rules, so I can play scifi warhammer in 2 flavors. And I just don't understand why some people want HH to have the same rules as 40k... you can already play 40k, even with FW models... I really, really hope the 2 systems stay separate. I'm really enjoying the rules of HH. I don't want another 40k. I already have that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/17 21:41:16


 
   
Made in us
Hoary Long Fang with Lascannon





Farmington Hills

Balerion wrote:
 Galas wrote:
TBH as someone that loves 8th and 9th and really started playing 40k (I was a fantasy and MESBG before) with 8th, one of the reasons I want to try HH with this box set is specifically because they have different rules.

Maybe I'm in the minority but I don't need Warhammer 40k 2.0. If I want to play 9th, I can just play 9th.

I'm in the same boat. I started with 40k 2 years ago, so in 8th. Never played it before. Got into HH (ZM to be precise), just a month ago, exactly because it has different rules, so I can play scifi warhammer in 2 flavors. And I just don't understand why some people want HH to have the same rules as 40k... you can already play 40k, even with FW models... I really, really hope the 2 systems stay separate. I'm really enjoying the rules of HH. I don't want another 40k. I already have that.


There is nothing stopping GW from posting unit stats online and updating them on a annual basis. The problem with 30k has always been the very long stretches without rules updates or balance patches, which causes them to nerf certain units into near uselessness while releasing new OP stuff all the time. The rules from 7th themselves are not too bad. They get away from the aura/strategim spam that 8th and later have become. Could they adopt certain things from 8th? Perhaps, but 30k needs it's own feel of massive armies compared to modern 40k's handful of units focus.
   
Made in us
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit





United States

Are we pretending Horus Heresy as a core ruleset is in a bad state or something? The only major change I would make to core HH is removal of Look Out Sir and the way casualties are taken.

The army lists are the unbalanced part, newer factions are laughably more powerful than pre-book 7 Legions.

Like in 7th edition 40K, the game was really not bad until they started bloating every codex release and adding overpowered formations to sell derelict kits. That's not directly what happening here, but it is a similar comparison.

Just update the Isstvan-era legions and bring them up to the power level of post book 7 Legions. They recently did this with the Night Lords in book 9. Actually gave them multiple buffs, rites of war, characters, even a new unit (I have reservations against it's poor design, but its still a new unit). They still aren't as powerful as the Dark Angels of Thousands sons but they are definitely improved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a side note, FW should hire me , cause I've already rewritten most of the legion rules to attempt balancing them for my group. Hell I'd send them the PDFs for free.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/17 22:43:49


 
   
Made in us
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot





 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Are we pretending Horus Heresy as a core ruleset is in a bad state or something?

Age of Darkness could be the best written ruleset in wargaming ever, but if it's not in lockstep with 40k people will declare it terrible regardless.
   
Made in au
Warp-Screaming Noise Marine




Australia

I am/was an avid 30k player who is fortunate enough to live in a country where there is a phenomenal HH community, the kind of superfan that travelled to HH Weekenders, but I still think that moving to 9th is the way to go. It's better for the long-term popularity of the game. The more popular the game, the more releases and better support we get, and the greater the likelihood that the HH will be able to grow in communities where there isn't a preexisting playerbase. Timmy might be willing to buy some HH if he can play it against Bob's Tau, who in turn might be convinced to buy in, etc. It's definitely not about just wanting another flavour of marines for me. I don't think this is an unreasonable stance to take. That the overwhelming majority of the folks who want 30k to stay the same come from strong HH gaming communities speaks volumes.

Mind you, I'd prefer to see 9th adapted as opposed to a direct translation (think e.g. Adeptus Titanicus with its "basic" and then "advanced" and "optional" rules), with elements of the existing HH rulleset being adapted. There are lots of bits I'm not a huge fan of and would like to avoid, although the edition as a whole is still very good.

As it stands though, I do not expect it to go to 9th.

Emperor's Children
The Fourth Seal  
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

I'd be pleased as a peach if Horus Heresy continues to remain a separate standalone and non-intercompatible ruleset with 40k.

I enjoy the balance and flavor that comes with there *not* being filthy xenos factions all over the place (and I say this as a 40k xenos main) and there being a relatively high degree of homogeneity in statlines, etc. within the game. Even with that homogeneity, the game still manages to provide highly thematic and unique flavor to all the various factions and it never feels like you're playing yet another mirror match.

Making the game cross compatible otherwise just turns Horus Heresy into a massive expansion for 40k Space Marines, and nobody really wins there (except maybe SM players who will get *even more* toys and releases than they already do, something I've seen quite a few of you "merge the rulesets" types whinge about before).

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Are we pretending Horus Heresy as a core ruleset is in a bad state or something? .

It's based on 7th edition, so yes, personally that would constitute a 'bad state'... although not as bad as updating it to 9th.

If they had stuck with the 5th edition rules, I'd be more receptive...

 
   
Made in us
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit





United States

 insaniak wrote:
 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Are we pretending Horus Heresy as a core ruleset is in a bad state or something? .

It's based on 7th edition, so yes, personally that would constitute a 'bad state'... although not as bad as updating it to 9th.

If they had stuck with the 5th edition rules, I'd be more receptive...



So if there was no overwatch, look out sir, challenges, psychic phase, fortifications, lords of war, and if vehicles returned to exploding on a 6 without needing AP 1/2 all the time the game would be in a good state to you? Cause thats pretty much the general changes from 5th-7th. Nothing wrong with liking an old edition over a new one, but the editions are too similar to really label one as a bad state.

I feel like people just follow the bandwagon hating on 7th and don't seem to admit that the main reason the edition suffered was the implementation of apocalypse style formations with rules upon rules into the basic game. This annoys me because the generalization that 7th was trash all around leads to people hollering for 8th/9th style Horus Heresy.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:

So if there was no overwatch, look out sir, challenges, psychic phase, fortifications, lords of war, and if vehicles returned to exploding on a 6 without needing AP 1/2 all the time the game would be in a good state to you? Cause thats pretty much the general changes from 5th-7th. Nothing wrong with liking an old edition over a new one, but the editions are too similar to really label one as a bad state.

I feel like people just follow the bandwagon hating on 7th and don't seem to admit that the main reason the edition suffered was the implementation of apocalypse style formations with rules upon rules into the basic game. This annoys me because the generalization that 7th was trash all around leads to people hollering for 8th/9th style Horus Heresy.



5th edition wasn't perfect - specifically the vehicle rules needed tweaking and the rules for wounding units with multiple wounds were not the best, but once 40K moved on, there's no reason FW couldn't have fixed those issues themselves and stuck with a system that was otherwise the best flowing and tightest edition of the game since 3rd edition using the rulebook lists.

I didn't hate 7th ed because all the cool kids were doing it. I realised about halfway through sixth edition that almost all of the changes from 5th edition were to the detriment of my enjoyment of the game. They were either unnecessary changes that made the game less fun, or (like overwatch) they were good ideas that were badly implemented... which made them less fun. And 7th edition just went further down that same road.




 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Trustworthy Shas'vre





Leicester

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
 Theophony wrote:
IT should be it's own rules set. 40K is mainly marine on marine already, but in this setting there is very little Xenos with odd rules to worry about. it can be a simpler and cleaner rule set just because there is so little variation in armies. Yes each army has unique troops, but nothing earth shattering that rewrites whole swaths of army builds. GW can make the base game standard and then have 20 Legion books to pump out before version 2.0 (they won't get near all of them done before that happens though). It's a big financial win for them to have two separate rules as they can sell twice as many rulebooks and codex books.


I know Mechanicus and Solar Aux aren't big but they do exist

And are lovely models.

What about the 2 board games, were they any good rules wise?


Betrayal at Calth is a really fun skirmish game; different mechanics but plays somewhat like Blackstone fortress in a way. It’s a shame that everyone just bought it for the models and never played the game. Also a shame that GW never bothered to expand upon it, as the mechanics had the potential to be a neat skirmish game.

Never got round to playing Burning of Prospero, partly because it uses a completely different rule set, so I can’t just use the learning from B@C. Never understood why GW did that, even the tiles are different formats.

DS:80+S+GM+B+I+Pw40k08D+A++WD355R+T(M)DM+
 Zed wrote:
*All statements reflect my opinion at this moment. if some sort of pretty new model gets released (or if I change my mind at random) I reserve the right to jump on any bandwagon at will.
 
   
Made in us
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit





United States

 insaniak wrote:
 Midnightdeathblade wrote:

So if there was no overwatch, look out sir, challenges, psychic phase, fortifications, lords of war, and if vehicles returned to exploding on a 6 without needing AP 1/2 all the time the game would be in a good state to you? Cause thats pretty much the general changes from 5th-7th. Nothing wrong with liking an old edition over a new one, but the editions are too similar to really label one as a bad state.

I feel like people just follow the bandwagon hating on 7th and don't seem to admit that the main reason the edition suffered was the implementation of apocalypse style formations with rules upon rules into the basic game. This annoys me because the generalization that 7th was trash all around leads to people hollering for 8th/9th style Horus Heresy.



5th edition wasn't perfect - specifically the vehicle rules needed tweaking and the rules for wounding units with multiple wounds were not the best, but once 40K moved on, there's no reason FW couldn't have fixed those issues themselves and stuck with a system that was otherwise the best flowing and tightest edition of the game since 3rd edition using the rulebook lists.

I didn't hate 7th ed because all the cool kids were doing it. I realised about halfway through sixth edition that almost all of the changes from 5th edition were to the detriment of my enjoyment of the game. They were either unnecessary changes that made the game less fun, or (like overwatch) they were good ideas that were badly implemented... which made them less fun. And 7th edition just went further down that same road.


This is a fair statement, I happened to enjoy 5th-7th relatively equally. Good times all around.



This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/18 07:20:04


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Was 5th the edition that introduced Hull Points?

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in au
Been Around the Block





For my part, I intend to buy the starter, paint them as Crimson Fists and then play the battle of the farm with them vs a friend’s orks using the rules “Renegade Scout”.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Was 5th the edition that introduced Hull Points?

No, that was 6th. One of the entries on my 'good idea, badly implemented' list.

 
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Reaver Titan Princeps





Warwickscire

plessiez wrote:
For my part, I intend to buy the starter, paint them as Crimson Fists and then play the battle of the farm with them vs a friend’s orks using the rules “Renegade Scout”.


Good stuff! Bonus points if you're able to secure the Proteus Land Speeder with Mk VI pilots, a Rogue Trader reprint and this piece of terrain:

   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Glumy wrote:
To all the people who propose HH to go 9th - while it might be good for the system in the short term for how long would that be? Codexes can be updated in 1 year time for a 40k army. 10th edition may be out next year even. So who will rebalance HH for 10th edition? HH players and 40k players might be able to play with each other for 1-2 years and then what? I dont see GW updating the HH rules often

40k ruleset for HH might be good for HH in the short term but its a bad decision for the setting in the long run. Speaking as a HH player leave HH with its own ruleset.


I think this is the biggest barrier. You'll be tying a game with a small development team in with the frenzied update and release schedule and codex creep of 40k.

Lots of other GW classic games survive without much support (and in fact prosper when the fan communities get together). why not HH?

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
 
   
Made in gb
Hungry Ork Hunta Lying in Wait





Out of the two options -

1) Keep 7th tweaked ruleset and continue to slowly stagnate as players bleed out slowly and significant barrier to entry with ruleset coming across as a regression to some people (Going back editions)

2) Update/hybridize the ruleset. I think a great ruleset could be made by streamlining, incorporating some elements of 9th (statlines need adjusting IMO, keep templates if they want)

The issue with HH is the initial buy in, some people just don't gel with the ruleset when coming from 9th and sadly some elements of gatekeeping (But I am not approaching that subject with a barge pole here, no community is without that issue)
   
Made in fi
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






 zedmeister wrote:
plessiez wrote:
For my part, I intend to buy the starter, paint them as Crimson Fists and then play the battle of the farm with them vs a friend’s orks using the rules “Renegade Scout”.


Good stuff! Bonus points if you're able to secure the Proteus Land Speeder with Mk VI pilots, a Rogue Trader reprint and this piece of terrain:



I dont recall that mission needing a Land Speeder? It was just the RTB01 beakies vs the metal Ork box IIRC
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Reaver Titan Princeps





Warwickscire

 tauist wrote:
I dont recall that mission needing a Land Speeder? It was just the RTB01 beakies vs the metal Ork box IIRC


I know, just thought it'd be a very fitting addition!
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran



South East London

I must admit I have a ton of Heresy stuff but have only ever played 1 game of 30K.

It was huge in my club and had more players than 40K at one point.

I just took so long painting up an army that I missed it and then 9th came out and now HH games are less common.

I have played 40K since Rogue Trader so using 7th edition rules isn't an issue for me but it is hard now to remember 2 different rules sets, so I can see why some would prefer an update to 9th.

Personally, I don't think 9th edition actually fits HH very well and I would also be unhappy if I had to replace the books as they weren't cheap.

I just wonder though if GW are aware of both sides of the argument and this will be a full refresh though?

Rumours are this isn't a Horus Heresy starter but instead a Siege of Terra starter.

So this could be a new game, although the images suggest it isn't using 9th edition rules due to the scatter die pictured.

I think after the death of Alan Bligh GW really didn't know what to do with HH. Alan was so heavily involved with it from the start that I think it knocked them for six when he sadly died.

I hope they don't make huge changes but I also concede that if they are doing this in plastic they need to appeal to a newer audience. Although Heresy players never seemed to shy away from sinking a lot of cash into the game.

"Dig in and wait for Winter" 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Grot Snipa





Atlanta, GA

chaos0xomega wrote:
I'd be pleased as a peach if Horus Heresy continues to remain a separate standalone and non-intercompatible ruleset with 40k.

I enjoy the balance and flavor that comes with there *not* being filthy xenos factions all over the place (and I say this as a 40k xenos main) and there being a relatively high degree of homogeneity in statlines, etc. within the game. Even with that homogeneity, the game still manages to provide highly thematic and unique flavor to all the various factions and it never feels like you're playing yet another mirror match.

Making the game cross compatible otherwise just turns Horus Heresy into a massive expansion for 40k Space Marines, and nobody really wins there (except maybe SM players who will get *even more* toys and releases than they already do, something I've seen quite a few of you "merge the rulesets" types whinge about before).


This is basically how I feel about it, as well. Horus Heresy being compatible with current 40k essentially turns it into "Warhammer 40K but 10,000 years earlier" and I don't know if GW wants to go that route. Sure I guess it would be fine if folks could play their xenos armies, but.... you can already play xenos armies against space marines. In the current edition of Warhammer 40k. Do you really need a "Horus Heresy" label on your rules so that you can do that in a different game system as well? Because at that point it's not even a different system anymore if we're talking compatibility. You might as well have GW do an Index with Legion rules as a supplement to actual 40k.


1) Keep 7th tweaked ruleset and continue to slowly stagnate as players bleed out slowly and significant barrier to entry with ruleset coming across as a regression to some people (Going back editions)


Who's to say that the game will stagnate and bleed players? Right now THE biggest barrier to entry into 30K is the lack of easily available starter sets and plastic minis. Almost everything plastic that's distinctly labeled "Horus Heresy" is GW Direct Order only, and there aren't any starter or Start Collecting or Combat Patrol boxes.

Not that the game couldn't use some sort of "gamer edition" book that maybe combined legion rules(maybe without legion-specific Rites of War) and the Age of Darkness: Army List. But I think that more readily available plastics will be a huge boon to the game.



There's also the big question of who exactly would be updating the game to a 9th ed ruleset if such a thing were to happen. The current design team isn't exactly huge, and any sort of transition to those rules would have had to start years ago at this point. I don't expect that GW would also toss that work on the shoulders of the existing 40K rules team - they're already busy working on 40k codexes and supplements as it is.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Halifax

A separate HH game is a great opportunity to try out stuff that might make it into Warhammer 40,000 too. Good time to make D12s standard.

   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




If there's a core set or some kind of release of a boxed set with the contents that are in these supposed leaks, I would be much more likely to buy into Horus Heresy.
If GW went up on Monday and posted that the leaks were true and the rules weren't changing from the red books, I'd order the red books from FW the same day.

Availability of plastic vehicles is the principle driving force for me. I've worked with FW resin vehicles many times and I've never found it as easy or quick as a plastic model.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/18 12:39:53


 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Battlefield Tourist





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

StraightSilver wrote:
I must admit I have a ton of Heresy stuff but have only ever played 1 game of 30K.

It was huge in my club and had more players than 40K at one point.

I just took so long painting up an army that I missed it and then 9th came out and now HH games are less common.


This is an interesting point about HH gaming. Unless you have a very close knit club or group it's always going to be too niche to be there as a PUG (I would say this is the case for 90% of games - 40k and AoS, perhaps Blood Bowl, probably excluded).

But, it has a very, very dedicated fan community. These are people (and I have been one of them!) that dictate most if not all of their hobby time to 30k, and most of their disposable income too, as it don't come cheap.

30k events used to be a big thing and I can see why as you have lots of other dedicated hobbyists, who have also probably spent thousands of £ on their army, spent hundreds of hours building, painting and converting it and they can come together and play against like minded hobbyists. I know you get this with most games, but the monetary cost of HH (and the fact that you have to be into 40k to even know about it) seems to reinforce it.

Anecdotally, my 30k play (and this is going back a fair bit, before the FW releases when everything was DIY conversions) was at events with others from dedicated forums and fan communities. We had guys writing up fluff for the narrative (even Graham McNeil writing some background for one of them!) It was that focussed and you had some of the most themed games that I have ever been lucky enough to be involved with, with campaigns of the Great Crusade and things like that. On one occasion following I took my stuff to play 40k at a local club the following week (all 'counts as' in those days as no FW books), and played some guys Marine army which was about 6 or 7 different colour schemes (I guess where he had got bored after starting on each one). One assault marine was literally a pair of legs glued to a base. Halfway through a game one of the old metal dreadnoughts with no arms (are you getting the theme here?) fell off some terrain - you could see it wasn't going to be able to balance - and rolled into my assault squad. A squad that had taken me probably a couple of dozen hours to complete converting, I'd had to drill holes into the armour and fill with modelling railway rivets to represent mk5 armour. They were smashed to bits by the dreadnought. "Oh sorry mate!" He picks up the dreadnought and carries on rolling dice...

So I don't think most serious HH players and collectors are bothered about having a homogenous ruleset that links with 9th and means he can play Dave's Ork army every Thursday down at the club. They want to be able to keep hold of their lovely, super expensive books and not have to change them every 2 years. Or have to add new miniatures to a squad that has already cost over £100 because a 'rites of war' has changed. They want stability, and to play against other people that have invested a similar amount of time, money and care in their HH force.
I think this is why you have had such a strong, emotive backlash to the suggestions of a new 9th-edition esque ruleset for the game.

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
Small but perfectly formed! A Great Crusade Epic 6mm project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/694411.page
 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

I have to say I don't understand this talk about "going back to old editions"


7th does not exist anymore. Warhammer 40k is Warhammer 40k. With his own ruleset.

Horus Heresy has is own ruleset too, and any new player for both HH or W40K doesnt need, and probably doesnt care about the difference.

Necromunda is also heavely based in Warhammer 2nd edition. Does anybody say that thats a problem? (Necromunda rules have a ton of problems but thats not one of them) Or talks about how using an old w40k edition as his base is a problem for new players?

The reason HH won't be more popular is because GW basically dropped support for it. Theres nothing inherently flawed about the game or setting. Just like it wasnt with Adeptus Titanicus, Aeronautica Imperialis, BloodBowl, Necromunda, Underworlds, or Fantasy with the Old World.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/18 14:03:44


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




South New Jersey

plessiez wrote:
For my part, I intend to buy the starter, paint them as Crimson Fists and then play the battle of the farm with them vs a friend’s orks using the rules “Renegade Scout”.


Nordic Weasel gang represent!

   
Made in us
Wraith






Milton, WI

 Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
Out of the two options -

1) Keep 7th tweaked ruleset and continue to slowly stagnate as players bleed out slowly and significant barrier to entry with ruleset coming across as a regression to some people (Going back editions)

2) Update/hybridize the ruleset. I think a great ruleset could be made by streamlining, incorporating some elements of 9th (statlines need adjusting IMO, keep templates if they want)

The issue with HH is the initial buy in, some people just don't gel with the ruleset when coming from 9th and sadly some elements of gatekeeping (But I am not approaching that subject with a barge pole here, no community is without that issue)


Your "options" are written in a heavily slanted manner, to present your favored option as the only true option.

Changing the Ruleset would hurt the game more than keeping the rules stable.
Learning a ruleset once, and not having to re-learn every few years is a boon.
I enjoy the fact that I can still play Warmaster, Epic, or many rulesets in the historical realm, without having to re-learn, or figure out what version people are using.

If you "bring forward" the rules, the series of campaign books would then have to be revised, which is exactly the type of thing that will bleed off players and create a barrier to entry.
"Which version of the $125 Massacre book do I need?", "there's 2 editions of the red rulesbook?"

Teaching new players the rules for Horus Heresy is learning a new game, not regressing.
I do not believe the HH rules reference that they are a version of the core 40k rules.

IMO, none of 40k's later editions have been true evolutions either, they simply change sections of the rules arbitrarily, improving some aspects, and creating new problems in other areas.




Bam, said the lady!
DR:70S+GM++B+I+Pw40k09/f++D++A(WTF)/hWD153R+++T(S)DM++++
Dakka, what is good in life?
To crush other websites,
See their user posts driven before you,
And hear the lamentation of the newbs.
-Frazzled-10/22/09 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran



London

 Jadenim wrote:
 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
What about the 2 board games, were they any good rules wise?


Betrayal at Calth is a really fun skirmish game; different mechanics but plays somewhat like Blackstone fortress in a way. It’s a shame that everyone just bought it for the models and never played the game. Also a shame that GW never bothered to expand upon it, as the mechanics had the potential to be a neat skirmish game.

Never got round to playing Burning of Prospero, partly because it uses a completely different rule set, so I can’t just use the learning from B@C. Never understood why GW did that, even the tiles are different formats.


Calth was an excellent 40k game, sorta more 40k than 40k as it were. The weapons made sense in the background (bolters had an important role in suppressing enemy marines and removing freedom of action for example) and didn't feel as sueless as they can do in 40k when unbuffed. I don't know if it was because it was a different stand alone design team, or if they felt the game couldn't be expanded, or simply the writer had a different bunch of really great ideas, but its very different. Also sadly not as good. A lot of it is about emphasising amazing stuff over the regular units and uses the old different sided dice, same target number mechanic of some boardgames to do so.

Calth also got the extra mission treatment for whatever reason, whilst Prospero was a one off.

Here is an entertaining review...
https://www.alwaysboardneverboring.com/2017/01/horus-heresy-burning-of-prospero.html
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: