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.

**Zweischneid**

There will possibly be FAQs for older Codexes. But to "update" the 6th Ed. book to 7th, that would seem like a mighty big FAQ, even if they'd wanted to do it (and only counting the changes we've seen).

But as said, it might be sensible to FAQ Codexes, iron out possible hick-ups with the new Psychic Phase for example, etc..

**insaniak**

agnosto wrote:
We were all pleasantly surprised when the armies received FAQs when 6th came around.

I'm not sure who 'all' is referring to there... At the very least it shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone who was around for the release of 4th or 5th edition, when they did the exact same thing.

A rulebook errata for the new edition would be unlikely, particularly given how large some of the changes are. But updates for the codexes is pretty much standard at this point. The only reason to not expect that to happen would be if they were just scrapping all of the current codexes and starting over.

**Colpicklejar**

Zweischneid wrote:
There will possibly be FAQs for older Codexes. But to "update" the 6th Ed. book to 7th, that would seem like a mighty big FAQ, even if they'd wanted to do it (and only counting the changes we've seen).

But as said, it might be sensible to FAQ Codexes, iron out possible hick-ups with the new Psychic Phase for example, etc..

Have they...not done this in the past? Have certain codices just been left flapping in the wind with huge unanswered questions to an edition switch?

**Zweischneid**

Colpicklejar wrote:
Zweischneid wrote:
There will possibly be FAQs for older Codexes. But to "update" the 6th Ed. book to 7th, that would seem like a mighty big FAQ, even if they'd wanted to do it (and only counting the changes we've seen).

But as said, it might be sensible to FAQ Codexes, iron out possible hick-ups with the new Psychic Phase for example, etc..

Have they...not done this in the past? Have certain codices just been left flapping in the wind with huge unanswered questions to an edition switch?

Well, there have always been FAQs.

That doesn't mean that the FAQs they brought out addressed all the questions they should've addressed

**SlyasR**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I wonder if Demons will be immune to Perils, or just will only take them on double 6 even when using demonology.

No actually the chaos gods love to harass daemons

Chaos is a fickle

**agnosto**

insaniak wrote:
agnosto wrote:
We were all pleasantly surprised when the armies received FAQs when 6th came around.

I'm not sure who 'all' is referring to there... At the very least it shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone who was around for the release of 4th or 5th edition, when they did the exact same thing.

A rulebook errata for the new edition would be unlikely, particularly given how large some of the changes are. But updates for the codexes is pretty much standard at this point. The only reason to not expect that to happen would be if they were just scrapping all of the current codexes and starting over.

I'll admit to having an faulty memory but I think there was a decided derth of support in that area for some time prior to the release of the edition. Not really important, I'm happy to be incorrect.

**BladeWalker**

Never did get the DV box. Would be great to get it with the new rules in it. I'd buy that.

I'm most curious about deployments, reserves, and assault changes. Jervis is a chill dude in the videos.

**Breotan**

Zweischneid wrote:
Colpicklejar wrote:
Zweischneid wrote:
There will possibly be FAQs for older Codexes. But to "update" the 6th Ed. book to 7th, that would seem like a mighty big FAQ, even if they'd wanted to do it (and only counting the changes we've seen).

But as said, it might be sensible to FAQ Codexes, iron out possible hick-ups with the new Psychic Phase for example, etc..
Have they...not done this in the past? Have certain codices just been left flapping in the wind with huge unanswered questions to an edition switch?
Well, there have always been FAQs.

That doesn't mean that the FAQs they brought out addressed all the questions they should've addressed

Or were issued in a timely manner.

**Anpu42**

Looking at the just a -2 BS for Snap Fire my Space Wolves realy will not need Allied AAA Defences between Ven-Riflemen-Dreads and Bjorn with a Las-Cannon.

**mercury14**

So do we specifically know if "jink is better" means it will be 4+ if it's used? Or could "better" mean something else?

So... Something like a Vyper is completely horrible now then, right?

Dark Eldar Reaver jetbikes?

**insaniak**

Breotan wrote:
Or were issued in a timely manner.

If I remember correctly, the 6th edition update FAQs were up on release day.

Their FAQ support since then has admittedly been a bit rubbish (and nonexistant for the last year), but they've generally done pretty good with the edition changes.

**mercury14**

Of course I guess it means Reaver jetbikes can bladevane all day long with a 2+ cover save.

**RiTides**

There's still no FAQ for the tyranids dex, right? How many months out from its release now :-/

Thanks for the rumors here gents, it is much appreciated!

**SlyasR**

Anpu42 wrote:
Looking at the just a -2 BS for Snap Fire my Space Wolves realy will not need Allied AAA Defences between Ven-Riflemen-Dreads and Bjorn with a Las-Cannon.

I really hope this -2BS is true for poor Bjorns sake

**paqman**

Anpu42 wrote:
Looking at the just a -2 BS for Snap Fire my Space Wolves realy will not need Allied AAA Defences between Ven-Riflemen-Dreads and Bjorn with a Las-Cannon.

Mmmm, I have the Venerable option on my Dreadnought as space marine as well... those extra 25pts might be worth it and bring back my 2 nice RifleDread in action... if the rumor is true!

**Azreal13**

insaniak wrote:
Breotan wrote:
Or were issued in a timely manner.

If I remember correctly, the 6th edition update FAQs were up on release day.

Their FAQ support since then has admittedly been a bit rubbish (and nonexistant for the last year), but they've generally done pretty good with the edition changes.

I do wonder if the lack of FAQ support, even by their own low standard, and what could quite conceivably be a very, shall we say, time intensive? turnaround period from 6th to 7th are related?

Still, if the new book addresses a lot of the imbalances and inconsistencies it will have been worth tolerating the last year or so of 6th....

If...

**mercury14**

Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

**Dracos**

I guess that you mean "by most units with BS4"? Maybe the BS3 armies?

**Azreal13**

mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

I speculated earlier that Hard To Hit could remain a straight 6+ or something else (re-roll successful hits?) as there's nothing linking the snap shot and HTH rules right now other than one makes the other happen, the two mechanics could be easily divorced.

**BlaxicanX**

That's a good point.

**Brother Weasel**

mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

lower then 4bs? or maybe they want to hit 75% of the time and not 25%?

**mercury14**

azreal13 wrote:
mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

I speculated earlier that Hard To Hit could remain a straight 6+ or something else (re-roll successful hits?) as there's nothing linking the snap shot and HTH rules right now other than one makes the other happen, the two mechanics could be easily divorced.

I hope so. My Crimson Hunters would go from glass cannon to tissue paper cannon. :(

So something like a Vyper though... Looks like it's taking a huge hit.... Right? Night Spinners and Prisms can't even shoot if they jink... (aside from one firing mode on the prism it it snap fires I guess)>

SM speeders... Necron skimmers... Nerf batted hard or am I missing something?

**Ferrum_Sanguinis**

mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

And since most skyfire weapons have crap S7 strength?

**MWHistorian**

azreal13 wrote:
insaniak wrote:
Breotan wrote:
Or were issued in a timely manner.

If I remember correctly, the 6th edition update FAQs were up on release day.

Their FAQ support since then has admittedly been a bit rubbish (and nonexistant for the last year), but they've generally done pretty good with the edition changes.

I do wonder if the lack of FAQ support, even by their own low standard, and what could quite conceivably be a very, shall we say, time intensive? turnaround period from 6th to 7th are related?

Still, if the new book addresses a lot of the imbalances and inconsistencies it will have been worth tolerating the last year or so of 6th....

If...

That's looking like a really big IF.

**WrentheFaceless**

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

And since most skyfire weapons have crap S7 strength?

Wouding most FMCs on a 3+ (most are T6) and most flying vehicles which are AV10-11 on a 3+ or 4+ is 'crap'?

Or does everyone use Stormravens these days that I'm not aware of.

**Ferrum_Sanguinis**

WrentheFaceless wrote:
Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

And since most skyfire weapons have crap S7 strength?

Wouding most FMCs on a 3+ (most are T6) and most flying vehicles which are AV10-11 on a 3+ or 4+ is 'crap'?

Or does everyone use Stormravens these days that I'm not aware of.

When the choice is to wound on a 3+ (with armors save)/glance/pen on a 3+ with skyfire weapons, or wound on a 2+ with no saves and glance/pen on a 1+ with a Lascannon, which would you choose? It is well worth the risk. Especially since flak missiles are overcosted as hell.

**ClockworkZion**

agnosto wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
That write off doesn't help during the year when your "job" is "full time student" though. The point was the cost for GW's books is lower than what I pay for my textbooks and I can use them longer (unless GW goes to a 4 month edition plan that is).

I understand your point but I disagree with it in that textbooks have added, pecuniary benefits as they ultimately lead to a degree which, ideally, will result in higher job earnings. Ideally, the knowledge that you gain from using your textbooks in conjunction with the class will yield benefits throughout your life while GW books...not so much.

I'm a full-time grad student with a full-time job so the tax savings is important to me. Without knowing you personally, I would have no idea if this would be the case for you as well. You can also resell textbooks for nearer to what you paid for them than GW books (as there is no collector value in GW books). Alternatively, you can rent textbooks and unlike GW e-books, e-textbooks are generally much cheaper than their physical counterparts.

Again, not a good comparison as the books serve different purposes. A better comparison would be between GW books and other game manufacturers which, as you probably know, would not put GW in a good light.

The books are an additional cost to the classes I'm paying for to be able to get a better job, so yeah it's a bad comparison, because GW doesn't charge me a couple thousand dollars for a couple months of participation. Regardless when it comes to "how long will I used this" vs "how much it costs" GW isn't as bad as some of the other stuff I've spent money one.

Still doesn't mean I like how much things cost though.

**Murrdox**

mercury14 wrote:

Night Spinners and Prisms can't even shoot if they jink... (aside from one firing mode on the prism it it snap fires I guess)>

I know I must be the only Eldar player that takes Night Spinners, but this really irritates me. I guess I can save 15 points on my Night Spinners now since Holofields will pretty much be superfluous.

**mercury14**

Murrdox wrote:
mercury14 wrote:

Night Spinners and Prisms can't even shoot if they jink... (aside from one firing mode on the prism it it snap fires I guess)>

I know I must be the only Eldar player that takes Night Spinners, but this really irritates me. I guess I can save 15 points on my Night Spinners now since Holofields will pretty much be superfluous.

Yeah but you pretty much have to spend +10 to get a shuricannon now unless you want to do nothing in the shooting phase. :(

Vypers, Spinners, Prisms, Falcons, and Hornets are all getting the shaft. Hard.

**WrentheFaceless**

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
mercury14 wrote:
Why bother taking skyfire if flyers get hit on a 5+ by most units?

And since most skyfire weapons have crap S7 strength?

Wouding most FMCs on a 3+ (most are T6) and most flying vehicles which are AV10-11 on a 3+ or 4+ is 'crap'?

Or does everyone use Stormravens these days that I'm not aware of.

When the choice is to wound on a 3+ (with armors save)/glance/pen on a 3+ with skyfire weapons, or wound on a 2+ with no saves and glance/pen on a 1+ with a Lascannon, which would you choose? It is well worth the risk. Especially since flak missiles are overcosted as hell.

Rather hit on 4s than 1s, or rather hit on 3s than 5's. What good is one shot at high str if you miss it?