40k 7th Edition release 24th may - All info in 1st post, psychic power cards added (5/21)

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.

**TheNightWillEnd**

leth said: If little timmy wants to use his riptide, with dante and jump troopers with terminators I will happily play against that list with no problems. If old john wants to play his night lords army with all raptors I am cool with that too. Sure we could always do that before but now it is nice that there is a structure in place that we can reference when we want to do such things. I like that they are giving us rules for OPTIONS that we can decide to use or not.

That's fine if you're playing in a club of guys who all know each other well. But, in places where gaming is a bit more sparse and you have to rely on pickup games or conventions to get some matches in, this stuff really hurts. You pretty much gotta take whatever games you can get, but you never know what you're going to face. Maybe it will be 7 Heldrakes and a transcendent C'tan. Because that will be fun. I understand that GW seems to think that the entire gaming community exists within their corner store and adults can pick up the baton and negotiate or fix their rules in an improvised way. For those of us who don't live in that world, it'd really be nice to just simply be able to show up and play a game with someone according to existing rules and know that you won't have to potentially face the decision of taking your gear and going back home or engage in a very unfun, one-sided match.

**Grunt_For_Christ**

How many years has it been since 6th came out? If it's nearing 5, it would fit into the trend they've been on for the last 15 years.

I'm just so tired of having to relearn my army over and over again. And usually not in a fun way. I just today got the tyranid book (only because I got it used at a great price).

That was at 10am.

So a 1:30am I find out I might have to spend $20 on another book that screws with the poorly oiled, neglected, expensive Hive-car that I was just about to start driving again?

I agree with NightWill. I don't live in a place where there are many gamers or many games. My current gaming club consists of:

1. My wife
2. Me
3. My cat who likes to fap models off the table when she can reach them.

We don't want to learn rules AGAIN. I used to support this hobby often and happily. My time spent on this hobby should be in painting, gaming, and having a good time. Not having to forget everything I've learned every 5 years and suffering with a sub-par codex for 2 of those years because they can't release more than one book at a time.

Also, is this why I can't find any errata/FAQ sections on GW's new horribly designed website? Are they taking down those services to enhance the 'mutual frustration experience' at the game table?

**filbert**

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
How many years has it been since 6th came out? If it's nearing 5, it would fit into the trend they've been on for the last 15 years.

According to Lexicanum, which I have no reason to doubt, 6th Edition has been out less than 2 years:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Warhammer_40,000#Sixth_Edition_.282012.29

The Sixth Edition was released in June 2012 and is the current edition of Warhammer 40,000. New editions include a larger emphasis on flying units and hardcover all-color Codices.

**f2k**

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:
How many years has it been since 6th came out? If it's nearing 5, it would fit into the trend they've been on for the last 15 years.

I'm just so tired of having to relearn my army over and over again. And usually not in a fun way. I just today got the tyranid book (only because I got it used at a great price).

That was at 10am.

So a 1:30am I find out I might have to spend $20 on another book that screws with the poorly oiled, neglected, expensive Hive-car that I was just about to start driving again?

I agree with NightWill. I don't live in a place where there are many gamers or many games. My current gaming club consists of:

1. My wife
2. Me
3. My cat who likes to fap models off the table when she can reach them.

We don't want to learn rules AGAIN. I used to support this hobby often and happily. My time spent on this hobby should be in painting, gaming, and having a good time. Not having to forget everything I've learned every 5 years and suffering with a sub-par codex for 2 of those years because they can't release more than one book at a time.

Also, is this why I can't find any errata/FAQ sections on GW's new horribly designed website? Are they taking down those services to enhance the 'mutual frustration experience' at the game table?

Actually, sixth edition is just around two years old by now. Seventh edition will be, as far as I know, the fastest update we've ever seen.

As for relearning... Well... If it's just the three of you, then what's the problem? Just play the edition you want to play. The real issue is those who mainly play pick-up games or go to tournaments.

Finally, as for FAQ's... I've heard rumours that they've resurfaced somewhere on the Black Library page. But I'll be damned if I can find them...

EDIT: Well, it appears that I am truly damned 'cause I finally managed to find them tucked away under "digital editions"...

**Trasvi**

Powerguy wrote:
To me it seems like Unbound (or rather the concept of armies getting buffs if they are Bound) is a concept ripped straight from Warmachine tier lists. In Warmachine you can take anything in your faction with very few restrictions but then can get benefits if you deliberately limit yourself within a certain themed force. This is a great system and rewards people for taking themed lists to the point that they are still very competitive. The problem is that this is very tricky to implement in 40k, the existing FOC system had no concept of army buffs for restricting yourself (it was just a framework for the army to be built in). It seems like we are moving from the existing system that sat roughly in the middle of the 'use whatever you want vs theme/balance' scale, to a dual system with one on each extreme of the scale and nothing left in the middle as a reference point.

GW did do theme lists for a while in 3rd, and do still do bonuses for restricting yourself (via dataslates).
The Warmahordes Tier list is a significantly more restrictive system than unbound would be: as far as I can tell from that WD paragraph, you would get the 'bound' bonus for simply sticking to the current FOC. FOC is more like the FA restrictions present on most units. The reason you don't generally see ridiculously spammy lists in Warmahordes is because it is so much better internally balanced.
It would be more like, if PP started letting you take Cygnar casters in a Cyris army and then decided, 'oh well, I guess you can have +1MAT if you stay with a Cyris caster and obey the FA allowance. But then when you start running a Cygnar caster in a Cyris army and discover how ridiculous it is to give RAT9 to all of your 'Jacks.

**Mr Morden**

I'll wait and see but I really don't want WFB magic in 40k....

**Left Hand of the Pheonix**

I do like the sound of unbound, could be fun to do a all paladin list with no draigo or do a full pheonix lord army backed up y an army of crimson hunters.

But my main point is this, if you do play an army full of fliers there is a HUGE problem. I believe there is a rule which states if you don't have any models on the board at the end of any FULL game turn, you lose. That is ANY game turn. So if you go 2nd with all your heldrakes, you lose. Go first you still lose. You need ground troops still, to ensure you don't auto lose the game.

I also do like the psychic phase could be fun to use, but hope it means that blessings could be stopped, because that would be a game-changer.

**GuardStrider**

tag8833 wrote:
MWHistorian wrote:
It's like GW heard the complaints of six and deliberately did the exact opposite just to give the players the middle finger.
(Of course that's not what happened. GW doesn't listen to complaints.)

This is one of the reasons that I think the White Dwarf pages are a hoax.
1) There was no one out there complaining the FOC is too restrictive in 6th edition. Likewise there were no complaints that Riptides and Helldrakes were rare.
2) There were countless complaints that the FOC wasn't restrictive enough. Likewise there were 100s of complaints that Riptides and Helldrakes were too common.
3) The Unbound FOC was the #1 "most exciting" thing cited in the WD about 7th edition, when it was clearly going to be hugely unpopular, and the examples cited were likewise lists that would be hugely unpopular to play against.
4) The people who read White Dwarf are going to be serious 40k fans. That means they are going to immediately understand the ramifications.
5) There was nothing stopping you from ignoring the FOC for a Campaign or Narrative game. I guess the only thing stopping you was the willingness of your opponent, which is not fixed.

In short, I think GW is not stupid. The are greedy and short-sighted, but not stupid or evil. There might be a way in which short-sighted greed makes Unbound FOC options seem like a good idea (doubt it), but there is no way where writing the WD article in that fashion would be anything but stupid. The WD article isn't incompetent, it isn't oblivious it is stupid, and that doesn't seem like GW.

On the other side of the argument, a phoney WD article written in that way is sure to garner tons of attention (20 pages in this thread in 1 day). It is the perfect way to troll the community. We have a history of fakes being released to troll the 40k online community in the past. Decent quality on the fake, but logic clearly argues it is a fake.

One last thing, the new psychic powers available to everyone except tyranids echoes the Facebook post from the Knights release where "They can ally with anyone except tyranids" which became something of a punch line. It is the sort of inside joke that someone looking to troll the online community would include.

I pray you are correct.

I never played 40k though I am about to really invest on buidling a IG army. And even with the WHFB experience of only 2 months I can see how terrible is this idea.

**Lobokai**

Anyone able to confirm the rumors that they'll be a pdf update for the existing rulebook? and updated FAQs?

Sadly, such a reasonable thing seems to be unlikely when dealing with GW

**Thorgrim Bloodcrow**

Not sure if it was mentioned because I can't be fethed reading through seventy some pages of posts to read about it but I'm quite interested in the Daemon summoning.

It's here in the last paragraph under the Psychic phase: http://imgur.com/a/Kbyu1#1

I'll admit I'm a bit torn because fluff wise there's no way in heck that my Rune Priests would ever summon a Daemon to fight for them but I'm really interested in what the possibilities could be and what conversions people might create. I myself am going to start looking at converting a Daemon into a beast from Fenrisian folklore (aka my own made up fluff).

Anyone else have any similar plans?

**ausYenLoWang**

Lobukia wrote:
Anyone able to confirm the rumors that they'll be a pdf update for the existing rulebook? and updated FAQs?

Sadly, such a reasonable thing seems to be unlikely when dealing with GW

pdf update? they are changing the edition. it snot a 6.5 this is a full 7th ed.. you get nothing free

ill go so far as to say you will be paying more as there is bits and bobs on the side that you will be needing mission cards etc.

**insaniak**

snowman40k wrote:
Don't forget that Dakka is a hotbed of resentment that happens 99% of the time GW farts. Don't buy into it.

There is nothing to 'buy into'. If people are saying they don't like something, it's generally because they don't like that thing, not because it's cool to be in the cranky crowd. There is plenty of positivity around here when people think it is warranted. Just see the discussion on the Imperial Knights (at least up until the rules were spoilered) for a prime example of this in action.

Dakka isn't some hive-mind conspiracy that is out to drag poor, innocent little GW down into the mud. It's a community of people from a wide range of backgrounds with an incredibly varied range of different ideas on what makes up a good wargaming experience. So if there seems to be one overwhelming theme to the commentary where one particular company is concerned, sure, you can dismiss that as the mindless mob in action... Or you could consider that just maybe there's a reason for it.

**Lobokai**

Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:
Not sure if it was mentioned because I can't be fethed reading through seventy some pages of posts to read about it but I'm quite interested in the Daemon summoning.

It's here in the last paragraph under the Psychic phase: http://imgur.com/a/Kbyu1#1

I'll admit I'm a bit torn because fluff wise there's no way in heck that my Rune Priests would ever summon a Daemon to fight for them but I'm really interested in what the possibilities could be and what conversions people might create. I myself am going to start looking at converting a Daemon into a beast from Fenrisian folklore (aka my own made up fluff).

Anyone else have any similar plans?

Well you should have at least searched the thread OR read the page you posted too. Two new powers, only the "bad" one allows summoning.... your Rune Priest can't do it anyway, won't have access to the daemonic powers. But, if somehow he could/can, summoning a kraken from Fenris would be very cool.

**insaniak**

Leth wrote:
If little timmy wants to use his riptide, with dante and jump troopers with terminators I will happily play against that list with no problems. If old john wants to play his night lords army with all raptors I am cool with that too. Sure we could always do that before but now it is nice that there is a structure in place that we can reference when we want to do such things. I like that they are giving us rules for OPTIONS that we can decide to use or not.

I'm a little confused by this comment... There is no 'structure' in place for this. Just a rule that removes the existing structure. Which, as you say, you could have done before.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lobukia wrote:
Two new powers, only the "bad" one allows summoning.... your Rune Priest can't do it anyway, won't have access to the daemonic powers. ...

And again, it's only a guess that the two types of Daemonology will be divided between 'good' and 'bad' armies...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Left Hand of the Pheonix wrote:
But my main point is this, if you do play an army full of fliers there is a HUGE problem. I believe there is a rule which states if you don't have any models on the board at the end of any FULL game turn, you lose. That is ANY game turn. So if you go 2nd with all your heldrakes, you lose. Go first you still lose. You need ground troops still, to ensure you don't auto lose the game.

That rule exists in 6th edition, sure. We're talking about 7th edition... so right now, there is no way of knowing if an all-flier list is viable.

**StraightSilver**

I for one don't really have any major problems with the changes being implemented.

If you look at the majority of the WD battle Reports they haven't been sticking to the FOC for ages, and always have quirky missions with odd victory conditions so maybe this was a teaser that we weren't aware of?

And unbound armies are exactly what we had in Rogue Trader, there were no FOC charts then and you could field whatever you liked, however games were a lot smaller then.

And I like the idea of making the psychic phase more dynamic, but it does seem to hark back to the 2nd Edition psychic rules, with dispels and cards, that just took absolutely aaaaages!!

My biggest issue:

6th Edition has been out for roughly 2 years. In that time I have played approximately 6 games. I used to play 5th once a week.

The reason I have played so few games? I only play with painted armies and this takes time, time that i could spend playing ( I work full time so at weekends if I'm painting I'm not playing).

6th introduced a huge amount of new Codexes, fliers, fortifications, allies etc all of which needed painting.

I don't have a problem with that but 2 years later I am just about ready to start gaming and it's all change again!!

I have no problem with a new edition, or sweeping changes, just please GW let's have 7th last at least 5 years please.

**Nid Bits**

snowman40k wrote:
Long time supporter of 40k, been around since RT.
I actually think 6th had a lot going for it. There was codex imbalances that came close to ruining it for me, but as long as I was with friends I had a ton of fun.

But if what that WD article said is true and anyone can just bring anything they want, then I'm out. I'll be done. Sure, I could work around the gaky rules and stupid people with their stupid lists, but its more about how the GW game designers have no clue what they're doing and don't really care. They're like a bunch of kids playing in a sandbox, oblivious of everything around them. They don't listen to their customers and don't care to.

*sigh. Just breathe a little? So new ed makes you want to leave the game, not because of the game per se but because of the designers?? I was around for 2nd, then broke until 5th and now started 6th. Tried a few other systems but the quality and lore of 40k keeps drawing me back (my subjective experience).

Why not just stick with 6th? Stick to the rules that as you say 'had a lot going for it'. Hell, I bought the digital rulebook 1 week before it was pulled from iTunes (thanks for the heads up GW, great use of the release blackout!! ) so they sure as hell are not getting any more money from me for a compiled ruleset with a few changes to FOC (if that's all they are doing).

Channel some Jack Sparrow and peruse the new rules then decide to toss it or use it.

Don't forget that Dakka is a hotbed of resentment that happens 99% of the time GW farts. Don't buy into it. We don't have the full rules and the possibility exists these new rumors are fake.

If anyone just bought the digital rule book then ask apple for a refund saying you are unhappy with the product in a broad sense and only tell them of the new upcoming rule book if they ask you more specifically, they will refund your purchase, and let you delete your already downloaded version on your ipad on the honour system. It happened to me and now I am waiting for the new rule to be released.

**bodazoka**

I wonder if tournament players would prefer to unrestricted armies? sure you could stack yourself with whatever is the best out of your codex but that IMO will not win you a tournament. You will hammer allot of armies for sure but when you come up against that foil army.. you are screwed.

I love the magic phase in fantasy I am super excited to see it in 40K also!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I seriously do not understand people wanting 5 years between releases..

**Rostere**

LOL. If there really is no FoC you can now truly make an army with the Inquisition Codex: 33 lvl 1 psyker Inquisitors with force swords and some servo skulls, all independent units :S

**snowman40k**

If anyone just bought the digital rule book then ask apple for a refund saying you are unhappy with the product in a broad sense and only tell them of the new upcoming rule book if they ask you more specifically, they will refund your purchase, and let you delete your already downloaded version on your ipad on the honour system. It happened to me and now I am waiting for the new rule to be released.

I've just PM'd you about this. Talk soon.

**mitch_rifle**

bodazoka wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I seriously do not understand people wanting 5 years between releases..

The ludicrous cost, slap in the face to those who bought limited edition as well

**RoninXiC**

A quick release which actually FIXES things, enables the use of more choices, better balance etc.
Those things WOULD make it ok to release a new edition rather quickly.

But

That's not what GW does. They only stirr things up. Add stuff, leave the old annoying things in.
They don't want to make the game better, they want to make it different.

**unmercifulconker**

A new Rulebook costs £50+ why the feck would I want to pay that every 2 years.

**Yodhrin**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
I just can't understand the thinking behind why people suddenly say "Now I can field this!". You always could. Nothing was stopping you outside of your opponent.

It's like "forging a narrative", you've never needed a set of rules to tell you that you can field anything. You could always do that.

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment; you can't say "nothing was stopping you outside of your opponent" as if that's an impediment so minor as to be unworthy of even a moment's consideration. Lots of people who play 40K are pedants who refuse to think outside the box GW puts them in; remember the "40K Approved" stamp appearing in FW books? I remember exactly the argument you're using here being used by people then as well - there's no need for FW to explicitly say this or that unit is allowed, because all you need is opponent's permission anyway, and technically anyone could still refuse to play FW units even with the stamp. It sounds logical, but it doesn't account for the reasons why people refuse to play FW(or non-FoC games), and a major one is "s'not in da rulez, is it guv". Put it in the rules, and the majority of those people will accept it, and that's generally a large enough number to shift the direction of social pressure from "no" by-default, to "yes" by-default - for anyone who already games with people capable of thinking outside the rules, it makes no difference, but for anyone else, it's not giving them permission, it's making it more likely their opponent will.

**ruprecht**

I too have decided, based on speculation, hivemind melodrama and a leaked high-level preview of a couple of ruleset changes, to write off the new edition of rules and stick with the old rules that I have been complaining about as being broken for almost two years.

Kids today and their internet forums, sheesh.

**ausYenLoWang**

unmercifulconker wrote:
A new Rulebook costs £50+ why the feck would I want to pay that every 2 years.

because thats less than ONE night at the pub.... its not a huge investment

and iv drunk in pubs in about 13 countries and 50 quid... HAHA that can be a cheap night

**unmercifulconker**

ausYenLoWang wrote:
unmercifulconker wrote:
A new Rulebook costs £50+ why the feck would I want to pay that every 2 years.

because thats less than ONE night at the pub.... its not a huge investment

and iv drunk in pubs in about 13 countries and 50 quid... HAHA that can be a cheap night

£50 is less than one night in a pub? Are the drinks £5 a pint?

The pub is a choice, if I want to play warhammer I have to buy the rulebook. I do not want to have to fork out whatever it is every 2 years just to have the choice to play.

**Kilkrazy**

bodazoka wrote:
I wonder if tournament players would prefer to unrestricted armies? sure you could stack yourself with whatever is the best out of your codex but that IMO will not win you a tournament. You will hammer allot of armies for sure but when you come up against that foil army.. you are screwed.

I love the magic phase in fantasy I am super excited to see it in 40K also!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I seriously do not understand people wanting 5 years between releases..

I can't speak for others, but my view is I don't need or want frequent changes of the game. I play other games if I want variety. I would greatly prefer GW to "finish" 40K, stop messing around with the rules and codexes, and make campaign books and optional rules for people who want even more variety.

**ruprecht**

unmercifulconker wrote:

I do not want to have to fork out whatever it is every 2 years just to have the choice to play.

It's not every two years. It's two years this time - which happens to coincide with a previous release that was widely regarded as broken.

**insaniak**

ausYenLoWang wrote:
unmercifulconker wrote:
A new Rulebook costs £50+ why the feck would I want to pay that every 2 years.

because thats less than ONE night at the pub....

That's an argument for staying away from the pub, not for buying a new rulebook...

**StarTrotter**

ausYenLoWang wrote:
unmercifulconker wrote:
A new Rulebook costs £50+ why the feck would I want to pay that every 2 years.

because thats less than ONE night at the pub.... its not a huge investment

and iv drunk in pubs in about 13 countries and 50 quid... HAHA that can be a cheap night

The problem comes when you compare it to other rulebooks though that give you more for less.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ruprecht wrote:
unmercifulconker wrote:

I do not want to have to fork out whatever it is every 2 years just to have the choice to play.

It's not every two years. It's two years this time - which happens to coincide with a previous release that was widely regarded as broken.

You mean like every other edition?