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.

**krazynadechukr**

Dark angels will become Excommunicate Traitoris in 2014! Plot twist!

**StarTrotter**

techsoldaten wrote:
StarTrotter wrote:

It's not confirmed that everybody will get to summon. As others have mentioned, WD isn't exactly known for being loyal. I do have my hunch that they weren't breaking rules for this though but until it's confirmed... And to be realistic Chaos has always been an accessory. Chaos guard, CSM, chaos orks. Heck, there used to be chaos genestealers.

Bloodthirsters have never been an accessory. That's a big leap from where we have been in past editions.

Well except when daemons were just a small segment of the CSM codex

**tomjoad**

Never mind about my guessing HBMC was mostly kidding. When good posters go bad, I guess.

**ClockworkZion**

azreal13 wrote:
This whole thread has just devolved into

"Aargh, this thing is really worrying/concerning/angering/rage quit"

"Ah, but we don't know that yet!"

For pages and pages, someone, please, try and come up with something new to say, or at least recognise you're trapped in a circular argument and stop until new info lands.

I hope if GW does a Collector's Edition this time that they go with laminated pages. I'd use my current CE if I wasn't worried about the ink rubbing off of the non-laminated pages (not to mention the paper absorbing oils from my skin, yuck).

Is that new enough?

**edlowe**

So is it the new starter set or just the rulebook out on the 24th?

**ClockworkZion**

edlowe wrote:
So is it the new starter set or just the rulebook out on the 24th?

Starter set rumors exist but I haven't seen anything saying when that's coming out. It's usually a bit of time after the rulebook though.

**krazynadechukr**

edlowe wrote:
So is it the new starter set or just the rulebook out on the 24th?

rulebook may, starter august.

**StarTrotter**

WrentheFaceless wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

Can you please kindly point me to where it says that exactly? Keep in mind it's gw "play testing" which, for all we know, might mean it is a legitimate rule. Plus, considering how the Maelific is played up in the same page, it's doubtful it's restricted to just CSM and Daemons

**Accolade**

krazynadechukr wrote:
Dark angels will become Excommunicate Traitoris in 2014! Plot twist!

That Battle Report where Ezekial summons the Bloodthirster is the secret the Dark Angels were trying to keep....secret!!!

**Peregrine**

ClockworkZion wrote:
You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Sigh. This isn't just a battle report, it's them saying "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules". I really doubt what they meant was "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules, except we're just making it up and you can't actually do it with the new rules".

**ClockworkZion**

Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

**edlowe**

Cheers! Guess I'll wait for the boxset. I've been considering getting back into 40k proper for a while, fun enough I've just started some daemons, guess they could be the start of lots of armies now.

**WrentheFaceless**

StarTrotter wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there is foolish.

The first paragraph states the DA player only let his guy use the Maelific powers to playtest....

Can you please kindly point me to where it says that exactly? Keep in mind it's gw "play testing" which, for all we know, might mean it is a legitimate rule. Plus, considering how the Maelific is played up in the same page, it's doubtful it's restricted to just CSM and Daemons

Sure

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DXGwfut9Ljw/U2pfaITCiGI/AAAAAAAAeWs/ApmCM8sXaTY/s1600/beware-the-daemon.jpg

**StarTrotter**

Leth wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
Clearly because a completly seriously written, not at all in jest mini report in the WD stated that this will be the norm.

What possible reasons are we given to believe that everything written there isn't the truth? It says that Ezekiel is using the Malefic deck, that he summons a Bloodthirster, and that something bad happens to him (it gets cut off there, but the idea that summoning Daemons requires a sacrifice from the psyker involved seems perfectly legitimate from a rules perspective).

Attempting to read anything more into what's there other than what's already there is foolish. "Maybe they weren't being serious" isn't an argument. It's speculation and baseless speculation at that. Operate with the facts as they are known. What we know is that Dark Angel armies can apparently summong Bloodthirsters, although there's a cost involved. Is there more too it? Perhaps, but mocking those that refuse to invent additional meaning makes you look really pathetic.

I believe that said that they "Allowed him" to do it implying that it might not be the norm.

It's actually not allowed him. It's the DA "allowing" Ezekiel to do it. This can mean from it being a random let's do it for fun to it being a real thing. Plus, why would this even be a moral dilemma if not? Why not use Chaos for this instead?

**techsoldaten**

Here's a prediction:

When a Space Marine Librarian summons a Daemon, it is going to get ATSKNF, POTMS, Chapter Tactics, immunity from daemonic instability, no need to roll on the warp storm table, probably pick up some artefacts on the way out the warp, be able to ride in transports, be able to assault from summoning, have skyfire and up to 4 mastery levels, allow the user to choose psychic powers, be able to overwatch on nearby units, and get rage, counterattack, shrouded, invulnerable save buffs, etc, depending on allegiance.

When a Chaos Sorcerer summons a Daemon, it is going to get fear and soulblaze and cost 10 points less than the loyalist version.

**Accolade**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

Alas, if only that they had some...a little....*any* PR.

Going off some of the more recent WDW articles, I think they read this stuff and laugh at us.

**H.B.M.C.**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

GW would have to acknowledge the Internet for that to happen first, and if they were that concerned about rumorus (something they clearly are not), then they wouldn't keep everyone in the dark.

**streetsamurai**

wow, dark angels summonning daemons has gotten me extremely worried about this edition. Hopefully this was only a playtest, or that it cause severe penality to any loyalist army that use it (like that the rest of your army turn against the daemon, which in rules form, would give the control of the summoned daemons to your opponent). If not, I hate to say it, but it will pretty much kill 40k

**techsoldaten**

streetsamurai wrote:
wow, dark angels summonning daemons has gotten me extremely worried about this edition. Hopefully this was only a playtest, or that it cause severe penality to any loyalist army that use it (like that the rest of your army turn against the daemon, which in rules form, would give the control of the summoned daemons to your opponent). If not, I hate to say it, but it will pretty much kill 40k

Might as well pull the old Mars Attacks army out of storage. I yearn for more realism in games.

**StarTrotter**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

Psssht they are too busy flipping through hundreds of dollars we spent on our favorite hobby. "Buying their toys"

**ClockworkZion**

Peregrine wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Sigh. This isn't just a battle report, it's them saying "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules". I really doubt what they meant was "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules, except we're just making it up and you can't actually do it with the new rules".

The blurb was about a game, much like a battle report is and like a battle report it was basically is "look at what the cool new stuff can do on the table!"), so yeah, I'd lump this in with a Battle Report in the level of actual weight I'd give it. Mostly because they regularly toss rules to the side anymore in the WD.

Heck when I'm asking if GW is even playing the same game as the player base, if they WD team is any indication the answer would be "NO" in hundred foot tall letters. They "forge narratives" in their reports more than they follow the rules anymore, so forgive me if I'm skeptical of what's in the WD (which is really a sad state of affairs if a customer can't trust the magazine that is made by the company that makes the product and is designed to push said product).

**H.B.M.C.**

tomjoad wrote:
Never mind about my guessing HBMC was mostly kidding. When good posters go bad, I guess.

Look I can see the point WrentheFaceless is making, but I think that we should take things like this at face value because we have no other information to suggest otherwise.

**ClockworkZion**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if GW runs across the rumors threads and shakes their heads at us getting the facts so wrong (when we do I mean) or laughing at how wound up we get about things.

GW would have to acknowledge the Internet for that to happen first, and if they were that concerned about rumorus (something they clearly are not), then they wouldn't keep everyone in the dark.

Oh I didn't mean the company as a whole, I meant more like GW Studio employees.

**Accolade**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
You mean like how the rules "clearly allowed" multiple Battle Reports where they didn't use points and just brought everything they had for an army and even summed it up with "look at all the fun you can have when you forget about some of the rules"?

Sigh. This isn't just a battle report, it's them saying "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules". I really doubt what they meant was "look at this cool thing you can do with the new rules, except we're just making it up and you can't actually do it with the new rules".

The blurb was about a game, much like a battle report is and like a battle report it was basically is "look at what the cool new stuff can do on the table!"), so yeah, I'd lump this in with a Battle Report in the level of actual weight I'd give it. Mostly because they regularly toss rules to the side anymore in the WD.

Heck when I'm asking if GW is even playing the same game as the player base, if they WD team is any indication the answer would be "NO" in hundred foot tall letters. They "forge narratives" in their reports more than they follow the rules anymore, so forgive me if I'm skeptical of what's in the WD (which is really a sad state of affairs if a customer can't trust the magazine that is made by the company that makes the product and is designed to push said product).

I agree with you Clockwork. Although I do wonder if 7th is an attempt to bring the game more in line with the way the White Dwarf plays games (i.e. do whatever the hell you want!)

**Formosa**

krazynadechukr wrote:
WayneTheGame wrote:
Not sure if it was mentioned but there's a sidebar in that WD scan that talks about a Dark Angel v. Tyranid batrep/playtest/something where the Dark Angel Librarian (actually I think it's the Chief Librarian - Ezekiel?) uses his last Wound to sacrifice himself and summon a Bloodthirster which helps them win the game.

Let me say that again: A SPACE MARINE Librarian, and a DARK ANGEL at that, SUMMONS A BLOODTHIRSTER. That's taking a dump on 30 years of backstory. And no it wasn't Mat Ward who did it
'
That's some narrative forging right there.
firstly, I'm sure it was just a fun twist to the end of a losing game... Can't imagine GW allowing this any official way in 7th. (Crosses fingers)

However, I played dark angels for 10 years, and read all the background and fluff on them. The stories of Johnston buying his time when the heresy broke out in order to side with the winning side, the secrets the angels have of Johnston in the center of the roc, the whispered rumors the "loyal" da were in fact the ones ready to side with Horus (which is the great secret) and the "fallen" were the terra da that were ousted and called the traitors... Now with Ezekiel (knowing how to) channel a blood thirster? Sounds like GW has the makings of an entire multi-year story campaign direction it could take...

Only one thing in this list is true, lion in the rock, everything else is just false, as a ten year vet you should know this.

The horus heresy books debunked the "lion was waiting for a winner" and the "loyalist are actually the fallen", ezekial summoning a gd goes against all established da fluff, da hate chaos and will torture and kill anyone tainted or useing it.

Fluff murder aside I'm looking forward to the New book, a psychic phase is something I have wanted for a long while, adamantium will looks like it's going to change possibly, psy hoods too

**XT-1984**

SM summoning Daemons is stupid?

Yeah because no SM has ever committed heresy before.

That said, I recon DA will be limited to the Sanc half of the powers. Not surprising the guy whose main army is Black Legion wanted to use a Greater Daemon for a laugh trying out new, unreleased rules for the first time.

**ruprecht**

lol I skipped 12 pages and you're all still hurfblurfing about Ezekiel.

**ClockworkZion**

Accolade wrote:
I agree with you Clockwork. Although I do wonder if 7th is an attempt to bring the game more in line with the way the White Dwarf plays games (i.e. do whatever the hell you want!)

I admit it's possible, but I want to hear it from GW instead of getting wound up about something I haven't even read yet. Jumping to conclusions may be good exercise but I like to get all the facts in if possible before I form hard conclusions on things.

**H.B.M.C.**

XT-1984 wrote:
Yeah because no SM has ever committed heresy before.

This is not an argument.

**Shingen**

You could always summon an avatar or mephiston. That would be amusing!