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.

I understand if you don't have a club or group of friends (Like a pick up gamer)

But i've read countless stories of groups disbanding and playing other games because 40k's new army books and rules are not as entertaining/overpowered/ect.

But.... instead of quitting... why not just play another edition? I love 4th edition and a few of my friends still play it, and some army books are pretty much compatable from 3rd to 6th, which leaves wiggle room for using new books with older eds or vise versa. I should know, I do it constantly.

This goes for Fantasy too

Just because the new thing is... well.. new it doesnt mean it should be the end all be all. many people grewup and love this game, so if those hardcore lovers hate what its become... why not just only pay attention to an older ruleset(s)?

I'm interested in other people's thoughts?

Some combination of tournaments using the newest rules and not wanting to have an issue with miscommunications when dealing with pick-up games; if one person thinks you're playing one edition and another thinks you are playing a different one problems can arise.

It further fractures the player base and the expectations.

Like everything with Warhammer games, it works best in small groups with everyone in agreement. I'm sure there are plenty of folks playing various older versions. You just don't hear about it as they aren't the main crowd.

Folks want new shinies for their army, thus gotta buy the new rules.

Because I'd be playing by myself. For pick up games it's impossible. I don't know anyone that goes around with an older edition rule book and codex.

When the choices are:
1. Play new 40k
2. Play old 40k
3. Play something else

3. seems to be getting a lot more traction as both 1 and 2 are deeply flawed sadly. As mentioned, 2. fragments the playerbase even more which is bad for a declining userbase, and getting people to agree on what edition, and then what codexes, what changes are required is far more work than you should need to do to play a game.

well, yeah of ccourse it probably won't' work for pick up games hahha I mentioned that. I'm just talking about the the clubs and groups. Especially since they have the time to get used to old rules and yadda yadda yadda

 Yonan wrote:
When the choices are:
1. Play new 40k
2. Play old 40k
3. Play something else

3. seems to be getting a lot more traction as both 1 and 2 are deeply flawed sadly. As mentioned, 2. fragments the playerbase even more which is bad for a declining userbase, and getting people to agree on what edition, and then what codexes, what changes are required is far more work than you should need to do to play a game.

I didn't want to say it, but #3 was far easier and far better. Better game, better companies, sometimes better minis. Actually possible to get games.

Some people do play older editions, but you have to find other people willing to play older editions, you can't just show up for a pickup game looking for someone to play 5th or looking to play 3rd.

It also gets confusing when it comes to codexes. Which codex do you use for your army? The current one? Any of them?

It's much easier when everyone just agrees to use the newest book available.

If you have a good club I think you can agree to play older editions or any mixture of official and house rules you like. That also means you can play the latest edition with house ruled modifications. I would be happy to play 7th edition without the various things I don't like. I don't think there is anything worse in the basic rules than any previous edition. They all have flaws.

 FJ wrote:
well, yeah of ccourse it probably won't' work for pick up games hahha I mentioned that. I'm just talking about the the clubs and groups. Especially since they have the time to get used to old rules and yadda yadda yadda

Even within a club or group it is fragmenting when a new rule set comes out that not everyone likes. Some people will be eager to try the new rules, some people will rejig their armies for the new edition and not want to play the new one, new p,ayers come along who don't know the old rules (40k has never been all that simple, learning multiple editions is a pain in the arse). Personally I'd like to play 2nd edition more, but I'm one of the few players around my area from that era to even know what the rules are like and even then I often forget the specifics.

I mostly quit WHFB thanks to 8th edition because I didn't like the rules, didn't want to change my armies to fit rules I don't even like, most people just play the newest edition and most my friends who would be keen to play older editions have already quit for various reasons.

The new 40k rules are really encouraging me to quit 40k too, it feels like its taking the "game" out of "wargame", it seems like its just becoming an excuse to line up some models, roll some dice and then pack them up again.

As said above, there are plenty that do. My own local group will be sticking with 6th, as out of the 4 of us, I may well be the only one who knows there has been a new edition. When we're getting maybe a game a month and Deadzone and soon Malifaux (with any luck) are also options, no one really wants to buy another 50 quid book. 6th is fine, so we're sticking with it, and when it comes to codexes, Psychic powers are going to be the only non-compatible bit, and are easily house-ruled.

Our group still plays 2nd and 4th on occasion, mainly because with the onset of kids, mortgages etc. we just didn't feel like dishing out the amounts GW expects just to play the game.
Problem is; in a fixed group, playing the same edition to long will inevitably lead to the feeling when playing that you've done it all before.
This can be remedied somewhat through switching armies, tweaking the rules, introducing house-rules for newer units that weren't around during older editions and so on.
But ultimately I've noticed playing with the same game with the friends over an extended period of time (our group has been playing together since 2nd edition), gets old after a while.
So people will try and find a new thrill. Either through trying a new edition (which we didn't) or by moving on to other games (which we did).

I play 5th with a couple of friends. We didn´t really like 6th and we do not play oftenly enough to get bored of the old options. We use stuff from 5th (SW, CSM, Daemons, Nids, SM and IG), heavily house-ruled. If we want to try something new, we try a campaign or a new mission, or some of the endless combinations of units we are yet ro try. It is amazing how many different lists work fine with a little fix in the rules.

I know of a group that is playing 2nd. They are rewriting everything.

I know of at least two groups writing everything from the scratch. Actually I am doing the same, but it is time consuming and very difficult to find testers.



I think playing another edition is viable, and just a matter of organization. Using the Internet, doing tests through Vassal... I have not enough spare time to create groups, but I am always on the edge of joining another.

 Frank&Stein wrote:
Our group still plays 2nd and 4th on occasion, mainly because with the onset of kids, mortgages etc. we just didn't feel like dishing out the amounts GW expects just to play the game.
Problem is; in a fixed group, playing the same edition to long will inevitably lead to the feeling when playing that you've done it all before.
This can be remedied somewhat through switching armies, tweaking the rules, introducing house-rules for newer units that weren't around during older editions and so on.
But ultimately I've noticed playing with the same game with the friends over an extended period of time (our group has been playing together since 2nd edition), gets old after a while.
So people will try and find a new thrill. Either through trying a new edition (which we didn't) or by moving on to other games (which we did).

Yes, that is definitely a factor to consider. One of the great things about larger clubs is that there nearly always are several different games in play at any one time, which gives you the opportunity to try something different quite easily.

Larger clubs also have a more veteran membership who have are likely to have knowledge and access to a lot of different games they have played in the past. I am not in a club right now, but as a vet I could easily bring to the table 15mm ACW, Battletech, naval forces for WW1, WW2 and Space games, 15mm SF, several Ancient/Mediaeval armies and 6mm Napoleonics out of my what I call "collection" going back many years. All with appropriate rules too!

My friends and I have decided to stick with 6th. We all really liked the edition and have gotten pretty good at power gaming so we're sticking with.

I'll still be learning the 7e rules for pick up games but trust me; there are people that do it!

 Yonan wrote:
When the choices are:
1. Play new 40k
2. Play old 40k
3. Play something else

3. seems to be getting a lot more traction as both 1 and 2 are deeply flawed sadly. As mentioned, 2. fragments the playerbase even more which is bad for a declining userbase, and getting people to agree on what edition, and then what codexes, what changes are required is far more work than you should need to do to play a game.

Just to throw out a couple more options:

4. 1 and 3
5. 2 and 3

Just cuz you play different games does not and in of itself mean you have to quit playing your preferred version of 40k. Our gaming group plays 5 different games regularly, of which 40k is just 1.

It's baffling that people would choose to play 6th or 7th. It's just so terrible.

I don't play pick-up games at this point, and the few guys I regularly play 40K with don't really play 40K with anyone else but me We've basically decided to stick with 6th edition and our current 'dexes for the time being. The game stopped being about the rules and who wins or loses a long time ago. It's just an excuse to throw some dice, push man-dollies about the table, and have adult conversations.

I'll be versed enough in 6th and 7th to play pick up games as I meet new folks, but I won't actively pursue anything of substance. For better or for worse, I'll just bring my Draigowing to 7E since it seems like that's the army of mine that has fared the best in the transition.

Basically, when I go to the game shop, I bring 4 different armies from 4 different games. I don't care what I play as long as I'm meeting new folks and rolling dice (or twisting fate... oh, Malifaux).

It can also be kind of difficult to use older editions because many of us might dislike the rules changes, but we like and want to buy new models. It then becomes a negotiation of how to use a new, different unit, when the codex you are using doesn't have rules for it, or points for it. For instance, whether I wanted the new rules or not, I was GONNA have those ork flyers when they came out. If I was playing 2nd or 4th edition, how do I use it? Do I use the VDR ( ) from 3rd?

Not that these things are impossible to work out, of course, but it's another difficulty.

A couple of reasons:
1) The older versions aren't necessarily better. The older the edition is, the more ambiguous the rules are, the more effort you have to put into getting a consent on certain things.
2) You can't use new codices and the new models contained within in old editions.
3) Not everyone in a group of friends wants to stay with the old edition. It's hard to tell a dark eldar player that his long-awaited codex doesn't count because you're playing 4th.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Some combination of tournaments using the newest rules and not wanting to have an issue with miscommunications when dealing with pick-up games; if one person thinks you're playing one edition and another thinks you are playing a different one problems can arise.

In my case, I've only played games against one person for the past 6-7 years or so. Could easily use any ruleset we want. Could make our own, custom-tailored for just us. But I'm still gonna be picking up the 7th edition ruleset, because whenever the rules aren't quite clear to either me or her, there are two places I go to look for clarification. First, the FAQs on GW's site. Second, if that's unclear or doesn't cover it, the Dakka YMDC forum.

GW doesn't keep FAQs for older editions of the rules.

And I'd imagine it's MUCH easier to get clarification out of YMDC if both the question and the answers are being thought of with the same ruleset in mind.

 Jidmah wrote:
A couple of reasons:
1) The older versions aren't necessarily better. The older the edition is, the more ambiguous the rules are, the more effort you have to put into getting a consent on certain things.
2) You can't use new codices and the new models contained within in old editions.
3) Not everyone in a group of friends wants to stay with the old edition. It's hard to tell a dark eldar player that his long-awaited codex doesn't count because you're playing 4th.

GW's ability to write clear rules is the same now as it was in 3rd edition. The difference now is there are a lot more rules being written and released much faster, not just special rules but entire new chunks of rules like Flyers, Fortifications and Formations.

If anything, the newer editions are likely to be more ambiguous just because of the extra amount of ground they cover.

If you want rules clarification, the 5th edition has the benefit of the INAT FAQ.

Our club is playing 2nd edition at the moment. It's much cheaper and a lot of fun.
If I had no choice, if everyone else played 7th, then I guess I'd have to bite the bullet and buy the new books. I have updated the rules for most of the stuff we have. The only down side of course, is there's no Tau or Dark Eldar rules. But we get Squats, Daemon World, Chaos Cult, and Genestealer Cult lists!

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
A couple of reasons:
1) The older versions aren't necessarily better. The older the edition is, the more ambiguous the rules are, the more effort you have to put into getting a consent on certain things.
2) You can't use new codices and the new models contained within in old editions.
3) Not everyone in a group of friends wants to stay with the old edition. It's hard to tell a dark eldar player that his long-awaited codex doesn't count because you're playing 4th.

GW's ability to write clear rules is the same now as it was in 3rd edition. The difference now is there are a lot more rules being written and released much faster, not just special rules but entire new chunks of rules like Flyers, Fortifications and Formations.

If anything, the newer editions are likely to be more ambiguous just because of the extra amount of ground they cover.

If you want rules clarification, the 5th edition has the benefit of the INAT FAQ.

I disagree. Even if the rules are unintuitive and badly balanced, the quality of the framework itself has increased a lot during 6th and 7th.

Just have a quick glance at YMDC. When I joined this forum in 5th, threads containing five or more pages of people fighting over two or more interpretations of a single rule made up two thirds of that forum. "What counts as hull?", "What save does the KFF provide?", "Is a ram a tank-shock?", "Can skimmers ignore intervening models when tank-shocking?", "What happens if eldar warpstorm spins a model in a direction that doesn't fit?", "Do I need to tell my opponent what's in my transports?". Just a couple of often-recurring 10+ page threads from the top of my head.

Right now we have six multi-page discussions on the first three pages on four topics (CCB+new charriot rules, daemons arriving, super-heavy walkers tank shocking, set modifiers vs invisibility), and one of those could be resolved 100% by rules GW implemented.

If that's not a clear sign for improvement, I don't know what is.

Oh, and INAT is only an argument if your group actually agreed to use it. Mine didn't back then.

 Jidmah wrote:


If that's not a clear sign for improvement, I don't know what is.

Or maybe there are 1) fewer people playing this edition of 40K than there ever has been or 2) those of us still playing don't care enough about a shoddy ruleset to argue about RAI/RAW anymore. Either one of those would account for your decrease in rules threads and is more likely to me than the rules getting tighter as you seem to imply.

I'm not bothering with 7th, not because 6th was a beacon of clarity, but because I recognize 7th for what it represents: a bald-faced cash grab.

I'd hardly call a rough estimate of threads in YMDC as a clear and definitive metric for improvement.

 Harriticus wrote:
It's baffling that people would choose to play 6th or 7th. It's just so terrible.

I considered staying with 6th mainly because I like the current IG codex. Not because I like 6th all that much. I'm going to give 7th a try only because the two people interested in playing 40k with me are both Orks and they're excited about the new book.

I've tried out 2nd ed and absolutely love it. Still haven't given 7th ed a try. I'm fortunate enough to have a buddy who is willing to play older editions.