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.

text removed.


Reds8n

 Squidbot wrote:
Huh, Dakka is being weird. Anyway, to me this is the most important paragraph. Not only the word "allowing", but also the words research and playtesting.

And that's the most troublesome, because that's not how you playtest a game or rules. They should be testing it to see if it's worded clearly, if it can be abused, if armies that can't do it are at a disadvantage, all that kind of combos not "Hey it'd be awesome if I let my Librarian summon a Bloodthirster with his last Wound; think of the narrative!" which seems to be what they did. When you playtest you don't just throw something cool out there, you try to break it so you know what needs to be shored up, reworded, or outright fixed to prevent rule disputes and potential abuse.

If that's what they consider "research and playtesting" then it explains a lot, because they're doing it wrong.

 Steve steveson wrote:
The problem people are having is that many of those opinions are based on assumptions beyond what is written. I think more and more people are getting fed up with reading that the sky is falling with every single release.

Then don't read these threads. The first post is always updated with the latest info, nobody is forced to trawl through every post made, you choose to do so, and that choice implies tacit acceptance that you might, shock-horror, read things you disagree with. The only boring thing about these threads I can see is the small group that insist on coming into every rumour thread on the rumour forum where we discuss rumours and give our opinions on rumours, to tell everyone to shut up about rumours....until after the products have already been released.

Maybe you just want to read four pages of people saying "I may or may not like this rumoured model/rule change once it is released, I will reserve judgement, good day sir!", but at that point you might as well not bother having a discussion forum at all.

 Squidbot wrote:
Huh, Dakka is being weird. Anyway, to me this is the most important paragraph. Not only the word "allowing", but also the words research and playtesting.

*sigh* To reuse my previous example; I go to the pub, my mate buys me a new beer to try, I taste it, like it, and say "I'd best order another, purely for research purposes of course" - am I seriously stating that I require further empirical testing to determine my opinion about said beer, or am I making light of the fact I liked it and want another? Words mean different things in different contexts, and it is by no means clear that they were using the words "research" and "playtesting" to imply a rigorous analysis of the new rules.

What if some of the mission cards are army specific?

We already know you have a hand of random mission cards throughout the game in addition to Primary and Secondary objectives that you play and discard when each objective is complete.

However what if one of those Mission Cards is army specific, or simply Good or Evil specific.

In other words if you do something outrageously out of character for you army you can't claim that objective? It won't cost you the game necessarily but might dent your chances.

And everybody is assuming that if you get a Summon Daemon psychic power off it automatically turns you into a Blood Thirster.

But what if you roll on a chart?

Cast power, roll D6.

1-2 - Lose psyker
3-4 - Psyker becomes Chaos Spawn controlled by opposing player
5-6 - Player become Greater Daemon

Good players discard mission card as incomplete.

Chaos players get +2 to roll and complete mission card?

This is just speculation but it would mean the new powers aren't so bad?

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
The problem people are having is that many of those opinions are based on assumptions beyond what is written. I think more and more people are getting fed up with reading that the sky is falling with every single release.

Then don't read these threads. The first post is always updated with the latest info, nobody is forced to trawl through every post made, you choose to do so, and that choice implies tacit acceptance that you might, shock-horror, read things you disagree with. The only boring thing about these threads I can see is the small group that insist on coming into every rumour thread on the rumour forum where we discuss rumours and give our opinions on rumours, to tell everyone to shut up about rumours....until after the products have already been released.

Maybe you just want to read four pages of people saying "I may or may not like this rumoured model/rule change once it is released, I will reserve judgement, good day sir!", but at that point you might as well not bother having a discussion forum at all.

It's more about the people raging at eachother regarding something that hasn't been confirmed, arguing over something that is out of their control.

 Squidbot wrote:
Huh, Dakka is being weird. Anyway, to me this is the most important paragraph. Not only the word "allowing", but also the words research and playtesting.

You really believe they are play testing something that is already being printed for mass production? They are doing no such thing, it's just a joke. The edition is finished and being shipped for distribution in a few weeks already

 monders wrote:
It's reassuring that so many folks have seen (and thoroughly read and committed to memory) the new rule set and know for a fact where the game is broken and just what people will bring to the table.

Oh wait, it wasn't the rules, it was a tiny article in aWhite Dwarf?! Ahhh, my mistake. My hyperbole alarm was going off something rotten. I think it may be busted.

It sounds like some of you have proper jeb ends in your gaming groups, with all this wailing about UNBOUND TABLINGS EVERYWHERE!

(I'm just jealous because I don't have a gaming group).

Is it bad that I read that in my head hearing christopher walkens voice?

All in all, I really hope that this book comes at and makes a bunch of fools out of the lot of ya... no animosity, its just we come to this every single time GW releases a new set of rules for anything and the only time its really been warranted was when "codex" legion of the damned hit (what the zog was that anyway?).

Dont let these secrets of scary people cause speculation to the point where every game you see is going to be 100's of psykers vs 100's psykers in a race to see who can summon the most daemons... I get that its not out yet, but lets be a little more realistic... cant do it in fantasy with storm of magic, you most likely will not be able to do it here

StraightSilver wrote:
What if some of the mission cards are army specific?

We already know you have a hand of random mission cards throughout the game in addition to Primary and Secondary objectives that you play and discard when each objective is complete.

However what if one of those Mission Cards is army specific, or simply Good or Evil specific.

In other words if you do something outrageously out of character for you army you can't claim that objective? It won't cost you the game necessarily but might dent your chances.

And everybody is assuming that if you get a Summon Daemon psychic power off it automatically turns you into a Blood Thirster.

But what if you roll on a chart?

Cast power, roll D6.

1-2 - Lose psyker
3-4 - Psyker becomes Chaos Spawn controlled by opposing player
5-6 - Player become Greater Daemon

Good players discard mission card as incomplete.

Chaos players get +2 to roll and complete mission card?

This is just speculation but it would mean the new powers aren't so bad?

And this is my point exactly, people are assuming that the game is to be played with the few bits they've read.
There is a great void of missing information people are not taking into account!

 Kirasu wrote:


You really believe they are play testing something that is already being printed for mass production? They are doing no such thing, it's just a joke. The edition is finished and being shipped for distribution in a few weeks already

Your concept of play testing is rather limited. They are testing the rules for their own purposes.

So what are the chances of plastic greater demon kits shortly after the release of seventh ed? ;-)

I really don't understand how so many people don't know how play testing works! There are not making up rules that won't be in the game. They are play testing rules that -might- be in the game, and they are play testing rules that are in the game but may now be slightly reworked, how do you know if a rule needs reworking? Play test it! I'm sure you can summon deamons in the game, but we don't know for sure yet it the "good guys" have access to that power or if they realized how unfluffy it is for a Dark Angel to let himself be taken over by a deamon and toned it down a bit. I find it very telling that the last two paragraphs of that bit are not pictured.

Secondly, people talking about them still play testing rules for something that is already at the printers... uh, it's a magazine talking about a new edition that has been obviously planned and written throughout the course of at least a couple of years. Who's to say that game he's referring to didn't happen a year ago instead of a week ago? We have no idea the timeframe of these things. Jes is just giving us some teasers about new rules and some play test game they had. I really think we all need to chill the feth out until the actual rules leak or the rulebook is released, whatever comes first.

 insaniak wrote:

 ascended_mike wrote:
There may be things that haven't leaked, that will further balance the game. We don't know anything for certain until the book hits the shelves, do we? There could be a change to some rule or another that effects the game in a major way, there could be nothing else, but we do not know.

The thing is, balance isn't the only complaint about the changes that we've heard so far. The sheer fluff-destroying nonsense of letting everybody (except Tyranids, of course) summon daemons is just annoying, and the re-introduction of a psychic phase when so many armies don't even have psykers is bizarre.

The silly thing in all of this is that the basic idea of the Unbound army is a good one. As a modeller and a fan of quirky and unusual armies, the idea of being able to build an army out of anything you want is hugely appealing. I just can't see any way that it can not lead to abuse with the current crop of codexes.

The Psyhic phase is not all that unusual when you think about it. People have been clamoring for a way to block Blessings and other psychic powers. The psychic phase gives them that chance, even for races that don't have psykers. While I expect a heavy psyker army will still be able to get the majority of its powers through against a nonpsychic army, the nonpsychic army is STILL in a better place of being able to block some of those powers. It's also a good way to codify all the powers into a single arena, rather than having powers fired off in various different timings of various different phases.

As to "fluff destroying nonsense of letting everybody ... summon daemons", I'll simply stay here in the "wait and see" category. Everyone gets Daemonology, but we have nothing but a WDW designer note to suggest that everyone gets access to both Sanctic AND Malefic versions of that Discipline. I also find it unusual that everyone is up in arms about "Order" forces summoning Daemons, but noone seems to think or care about CSM or Chaos Daemons getting access to "Sanctic" if we're operating under the "Everyone gets everything" mindset. Even if they both do, which I admit is a possibility, so what? Perhaps GW is actually forward thinking enough think about Counts-As forces; even here on Dakka we have people using SM rules to represent CSM forces, this is something for them is it not? I guess some care more about fluff than actual fun?

As to Unbound leading to abuse. Of course it will. Almost every major rule in that book will be abused in some way, shape or fashion. There will be endless RAW silliness debated in YMDC. However, I find it highly telling that so many people seem to be focusing in on the negative aspect of Unbound (ER MER GERD!!! TERN RERPTERDS!!) and ignoring the fun silly and not broken armies that will come out of it. And not just focusing on the negatives, but doing so to the extent that they are already quitting a game that hasn't even been released. Not just that, a game whose actual rule implementation is not even remotely known. We have basically 2.5 pages of designer notes. That's it. And yet somehow, 40k is dead, the rules are the worst, and GW needs to burn to the ground. People can talk all they want about GW patterns and "we've seen this before" and all that. Fact is every edition has changes that people like, and changes that people don't like. I submit that it is literally impossible for an edition of the game to exist that has 100% of players approving of 100% of the rules. But we don't have rules. We don't even have rumors of rule implementation. We have descriptions of rules; that's it. Ideas of rules.

As to "this is just a ploy by GW to sell more models!" Of course it is. What else would you expect? GW doesn't survive by codex and rulebook alone.

 Pox Apostle wrote:
I really don't understand how so many people don't know how play testing works! There are not making up rules that won't be in the game. They are play testing rules that -might- be in the game, and they are play testing rules that are in the game but may now be slightly reworked, how do you know if a rule needs reworking? Play test it! I'm sure you can summon deamons in the game, but we don't know for sure yet it the "good guys" have access to that power or if they realized how unfluffy it is for a Dark Angel to let himself be taken over by a deamon and toned it down a bit. I find it very telling that the last two paragraphs of that bit are not pictured.

Secondly, people talking about them still play testing rules for something that is already at the printers... uh, it's a magazine talking about a new edition that has been obviously planned and written throughout the course of at least a couple of years. Who's to say that game he's referring to didn't happen a year ago instead of a week ago? We have no idea the timeframe of these things. Jes is just giving us some teasers about new rules and some play test game they had. I really think we all need to chill the feth out until the actual rules leak or the rulebook is released, whatever comes first.

Whilst I have no interest in this ongoing argument, I will point out that for a launch of the size of a new edition of 40K the rulebook will have been finalized at the latest 6 months ago and the books are already printed, whilst the lead time for white dwarf itself is about 8 weeks. There is no 'playtesting things that may be in the new book' because the book would be being printed as they were compiling this article.

 Squidbot wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:


You really believe they are play testing something that is already being printed for mass production? They are doing no such thing, it's just a joke. The edition is finished and being shipped for distribution in a few weeks already

Your concept of play testing is rather limited. They are testing the rules for their own purposes.

Exactly his point. They are slowly driving their new car through a park, because it was meant for driving through parks, rather than smashing it into a wall and see if the passengers survive. If you get hit by another car and die, you were doing it wrong, you should have come to an agreement with the other driver before he decided to cross you path at twice the speed limit while ignoring a red light.

 monders wrote:
wait, it wasn't the rules, it was a tiny article in a White Dwarf

The problem is that this article is the only absolutely verifiable information we have on 7e, so yes, it is going to be seized upon because it may not be much but it is all we have. By refusing to engage at all with the player community GW are allowing random and perhaps out-of-context leaks to dictate what people will be talking about.

It baffles me. It is honestly beyond belief that any company in this day and age would be so inept at communication. One blog, updated two or three times a week with previews of work-in-progress, discussions of hot topics like allies, balance, and sneak peaks of in-progress new sculpts... that would bcome THE source for info on WHFB and 40K, and would enable GW to get people talking about what they want people to be talking about - in context, and with the opportunity to do follow up posts to clarify anything that was miscommunicated.

GW have a huge playerbase who are ravenously hungry for info on their games - on a scale that any other tabletop/minis company would kill for... and they do nothing with it. With no hyperbole whatsoever I wonder if they even have a director of communications, and if so what the hell s/he does all day.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 Moopy wrote:
Wow... WD promo: what a bunch of utter garbage. Nothing but 30k for me at this point.

Won't 30K use the same rules edition, so will be 7th as well?

It will yep, thankfully 30k seems to have a distinct lack of waac douches playing it, probably due to not being allowed at tournaments.

Every single 30k army I have seen plays to the fluff, it's why I play 30k exclusively now.

UNCLEBADTOUCH wrote:
So what are the chances of plastic greater demon kits shortly after the release of seventh ed? ;-)

With accessory sprues so that you can personalise your pet bloodthirster to fit in with the rest of your army.

I want a bloodthirster wearing a flak jacket and carrying a lasgun for my IG.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 Moopy wrote:
Wow... WD promo: what a bunch of utter garbage. Nothing but 30k for me at this point.

Won't 30K use the same rules edition, so will be 7th as well?

Always a good question! I think not- the current version of 30k left out a lot of the brutal stupidity of 6th ed.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Squidbot wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:


You really believe they are play testing something that is already being printed for mass production? They are doing no such thing, it's just a joke. The edition is finished and being shipped for distribution in a few weeks already

Your concept of play testing is rather limited. They are testing the rules for their own purposes.

Exactly his point. They are slowly driving their new car through a park, because it was meant for driving through parks, rather than smashing it into a wall and see if the passengers survive. If you get hit by another car and die, you were doing it wrong, you should have come to an agreement with the other driver before he decided to cross you path at twice the speed limit while ignoring a red light.

Again, I guess you're just choosing to ignore the word "allowing". Read into the article what you will.

About the word 'allowing'...

"Thud allowed his Fire Warriors to be charged by Squidbot's Space Marines, so he could get in a counter charge with his allied Wraithknight."


If you're so hung up on the allowing business, how do you interpret that? Space Marines cannot assault Tau unless explicitly permitted by the Tau player?


All this discussion around the wording is a bit silly. Clearly the new rules allow (there's that word again) Azrael to turn into a Bloodthirster somehow, and the WD writer was a bit cheeky about it to pretend that the fluff still matters to the Design Studio.

 streamdragon wrote:
However, I find it highly telling that so many people seem to be focusing in on the negative aspect of Unbound (ER MER GERD!!! TERN RERPTERDS!!) and ignoring the fun silly and not broken armies that will come out of it..

Of course they are. If people are seeing the Unbound option as game-breaking, the fact that it can also be used to create fun, fluffy lists doesn't make it seem any less game-breaking.

 Thud wrote:
About the word 'allowing'...

"Thud allowed his Fire Warriors to be charged by Squidbot's Space Marines, so he could get in a counter charge with his allied Wraithknight."


If you're so hung up on the allowing business, how do you interpret that? Space Marines cannot assault Tau unless explicitly permitted by the Tau player?


All this discussion around the wording is a bit silly. Clearly the new rules allow (there's that word again) Azrael to turn into a Bloodthirster somehow, and the WD writer was a bit cheeky about it to pretend that the fluff still matters to the Design Studio.

I interpret it in context.
And no, the rules do not clearly allow anything. Because we haven't read them.

 Squidbot wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Squidbot wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:


You really believe they are play testing something that is already being printed for mass production? They are doing no such thing, it's just a joke. The edition is finished and being shipped for distribution in a few weeks already

Your concept of play testing is rather limited. They are testing the rules for their own purposes.

Exactly his point. They are slowly driving their new car through a park, because it was meant for driving through parks, rather than smashing it into a wall and see if the passengers survive. If you get hit by another car and die, you were doing it wrong, you should have come to an agreement with the other driver before he decided to cross you path at twice the speed limit while ignoring a red light.

Again, I guess you're just choosing to ignore the word "allowing". Read into the article what you will.

What? I'm not talking about the article at all. I'm talking about GW obviously missing the point of play testing when it comes to delivering new codices, rulebooks and expansions.

6E is only going on 4 years old. It's already broken and I've not played for over 6 months but this is the final nail in the coffin. Adieu GW

 Soteks Prophet wrote:
6E is only going on 4 years old. It's already broken and I've not played for over 6 months but this is the final nail in the coffin. Adieu GW

I assume you mean 2 years?

People who only want to complain about people discussing the rules might prefer not to read the thread in which people are discussing the rules.

 ruprecht wrote:

 Soteks Prophet wrote:
6E is only going on 4 years old. It's already broken and I've not played for over 6 months but this is the final nail in the coffin. Adieu GW

This is exactly the sort of histrionic overreaction people are shaking their heads at. I'm looking forward to release day when the fact-based assessments will start to come out, but this thread is just tragicomedy.

You may have missed this, so I reposted it for your convenience

Trasvi wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Well first off we would have to try and round up all the Taudar power gamers and force them to play each other. They'd be locked in an eternal stalemate.

Hey, someone might be legitimately playing Tau with Eldar allies to embrace such fluff as...

There have actually been a number of hints that the Tau race was in some way created by, or at least protected by, the Eldar. I can't remember exactly where but the Xenology book definitely talked about it.

I think they just kind of had to be BB with *someone* out of game fairness (sorry, Tyranids) and GW picked the two most 'good' armies as likely allies.

Its not just "soneone" they choose Eldar AND Space Marines (totally against all fluff) and so Tau are BB with half the armies in the game.

back OT - if they simply port over WFB magic (as seems to be the implication) thats likely the final nail in the coffin of any kind of balance and fun.

So you're nitpicking he wording of a paragraph of White Dwarf now? There's scraping the bottom of the barrel, and then there's this, so well done.

I have to chip in and add that I'm looking forward to playing an unbound Tau Gundrone force. Now at least I can use them all at the one time.

Cheers

Andrew