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.

Interesting to hear - a bunch of us are planning to start a 3rd Ed campaign this winter, we're at the painting/book-buying stage now.

I will follow this thread with interest...

Momotaro wrote:
Interesting to hear - a bunch of us are planning to start a 3rd Ed campaign this winter, we're at the painting/book-buying stage now.

I will follow this thread with interest...

Awesome that people are still playing.
You should live stream some of those games, so that those of us who cannot find games any more, can watch and re live the nostalgia!

Momotaro wrote:
Interesting to hear - a bunch of us are planning to start a 3rd Ed campaign this winter, we're at the painting/book-buying stage now.

I will follow this thread with interest...

Save yourselves some money - just buy the rulebook, and leave all the other crap out.

I remember the whining about 3rd, and the rumours going round; it was as bad as the whining about Age of Sigmar. When it actually came out, I was pleasantly surprised by the game - nice and streamlined, and it allowed you to crack on with much larger armies than in 2nd edition. The selection of missions included in the rulebook - complete with various Force Organisation Charts (the reason that what is now a Combined Arms Detachment was the standard chart was that there were originally others to compare it against!) - has never been equaled, IMO. I missed them when 4th edition did away with them.

The major flaw was the lack of background information, especially in the early Codex books; GW realised this themselves,certainly by the time of the Revised Chaos Codex, Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters.

Most of the things people complain about came from army books, so don't use them and it makes thins a lot easier.

The major flaw was the lack of background information, especially in the early Codex books; GW realised this themselves,certainly by the time of the Revised Chaos Codex, Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters.

That is exactly why I sat 3rd ed out. It was a real shock to me to go from my glorious Chaos/Angels of Death/Ork books with their glorious dioramas, full fluff sections and general balls to the wall insanity down to what basically amounted to an "army pamphlet."

While I hated the simplified rules at the time, in retrospect it was a good move. They just shouldn't have also streamlined all the character and fluff from the game as well. Especially for an army as colorful as Orks. Their book went from one of the best 2nd ed books (in terms of fun, fluff and general character) to "these are Orks. They are green. They have tribes. Here are the squads you may play." I REALLY hated those initial 3rd ed books. Gav Thorpe even mentioned at one point that he realized after the fact that they had gone too far in removing things.

Outside of that, if you're tired of all the "stuff" in 7th, 3rd would probably be a really good way for you to recharge your 40k batteries. I remember my friends who played 3rd telling me how they could play 3 or 4 games in an evening where we had only managed one or 2 under second ed rules.

Third edition is a bit complex. If you try to break it, it's just as broken as some people comment. Rhino Rush, sweeping advance, and the rapid fire rules were simply bad. Huge chunks of the rules were undertested. Anything with mobility, blasts, indirect fire, or infiltrate/deep strike was underpowered and overcosted.

But... the game was quick and simple. The basic engine of the rules has never been as clear and clean as in early 3rd. If you play it, I'd highly recommend one of two approaches:
1) Just use the big black book. No codices, no updates, no add ons. Just play the rules as written.
2) Play with everything. This means the basic rules, plus Trial Vehicle Rules (TVR) and Trial Assault Rules (TAR) which basically replace the core rules for assault and vehicles. You should also include every codex, every sublist, and ever chapter approved. Just go nuts.

Either way, it's oldhammer now, so make it your own.

 Redbad wrote:


Awesome that people are still playing.
You should live stream some of those games, so that those of us who cannot find games any more, can watch and re live the nostalgia!

More than a couple of us are fairly new to the game, so it will be good to learn the rules as we go. I may take you up on that suggestion!

 AndrewGPaul wrote:


Save yourselves some money - just buy the rulebook, and leave all the other crap out.

We're all definitely on the fluffy side, so I've been enjoying reading the army books as much as anything. Definitely a jump from the earlier ones to stuff like the Witchunters book.

The rulebook is a really neat one-stop game package, isn't it? So apart from Tau and Necrons, which aren't in the main rules, I can see us starting with the army lists in there at 750 points and expanding/exploring the codices as we please. If we break the game with something, we'll just stop using it.

Momotaro wrote:

The rulebook is a really neat one-stop game package, isn't it? So apart from Tau and Necrons, which aren't in the main rules, I can see us starting with the army lists in there at 750 points and expanding/exploring the codices as we please. If we break the game with something, we'll just stop using it.

One thing to keep in mind is that with the high points costs and limited options in the BBB, it's actually tougher to break the game than you'd think.

All in all, I highly recommend a healthy, take one of everything approach, although there are some really, really bad options in the BBB lists.

I remember the transition between 2nd ed and 3rd. I was actually working at GW at the time. I shelled out right away for the big awesome rulebook and box of awesome new plastic marines, and crappy, crappy dark eldar (but hey, they were plastic!!!).

I really liked the vehicle rules in that edition, for some reason I thought they were pretty fair. I do remember that demolisher cannons were freaking deadly back then, especially against enemies in ruins, anyone remember how that worked? I think they cause auto wounds or something on top of the template wounds. Anyways, they made sense as seige weapons, vs now where all you have to do is have on foot in some rubble and have it magically protect you from the strongest ground weapons in the galaxy.

I know there was some jankyness with close combat, stringing enemies out because there was no pile-in moves. Man it was a LONG time ago...


Just realized last week that I have the much vaunted 3.5 Ed Chaos Space Marine codex sitting on my bookshelf. Have to say I really liked it. Interesting that they did not have Fearless either, but some veteran abilities and legion abilities that helped with that, plus there was no sweeping advance rule in 3rd so it didn't really matter as much. I think there was a "Trapped" mechanic that worked similarly, but that was only if you broke from combat and ran into another unit on the way to your board edge

3rd was the edition I missed completely. Had fallen out of playing and by the time I got back in, 4th had dropped.

I started in third and bounced around a lot in terms of armies, before leaving early in fourth to play Warmachine for a while. I just came back to the hobby and boy did a lot change (like Rapid Fire just being a lot better now).

My best memories of 3rd edition though was when the Eye of Terror stuff was happening and my LGS at the time did Apocalypse style games for it where everyone brought 500 points and it was four tables put into one with X amount of slots for each side of good and evil, and as people got eliminated new people got introduced and deployed for their respective sides. There were also hero style NPCs that basically joined the game on various turns.

There were a total of three campaigns I did, the first being a giant cathedral in the center that had multiple levels, and each side was trying to capture it. I think the NPC chaos guys started there. There were four Chaos Lords that showed up, with one starting on the table, and they were all really well modeled and painted for their respective gods. Another campaign I did showcased BFG so you'd get ships to play with but then you could use them to board other ships which would put you on various 40k tables that showed off the interior. I remember one was heavily Nurgle Themed and full of plague zombies since those were new in the Eye of Terror.

The final campaign was the gate of Cadia. There was a giant tank rolling down the center, towards some massive gates, with Abaddon riding on the top platform. Basically it was an Ogre style game where the tank had to be stopped before it reached the gates or blew them up.

My best memory of 3rd edition is that it led to 4th edition. 4th is, by far, my favorite edition to date.

I really only had 2 beefs with 4th.

1) Non-skimmer vehicles were serious frickin' death traps (entangled.... suuuuuuck!)

2) Independent characters could only fight in CC if they were in base contact at their intitiative step. Made Powerfist Warbosses useless. The enemy would alway kill the guys in base with your Warboss, well before Initiative one and he'd be left standing around with his thumb up his butt.

A few tweaks to those rules and you'd have the best edition so far, imo.

The good parts of 4th edition are better than the good parts of nearly any other edition, but the bad parts of it were some of the worst rules 40k ever had.

Transport vehicles were borderline unplayable. They were either skimmers with godlike invulnerability, or tracked vehicles that were deathtraps.

It's hard to call 4th the best when a big chunk had to be rewritten from the ground up.

Let's also not forget the wonky, Alpha/Beta/Gamma levels for missions, or the slow and horribly unbalanced codex release schedule.

 Polonius wrote:
The good parts of 4th edition are better than the good parts of nearly any other edition, but the bad parts of it were some of the worst rules 40k ever had.

Transport vehicles were borderline unplayable. They were either skimmers with godlike invulnerability, or tracked vehicles that were deathtraps.

It's hard to call 4th the best when a big chunk had to be rewritten from the ground up.

Let's also not forget the wonky, Alpha/Beta/Gamma levels for missions, or the slow and horribly unbalanced codex release schedule.

I like alpha/gamma/omega missions. It turned every mission into 3 variations. I love the victory points, targeting rules, area terrain with sizes, and most importantly the simple wound allocation system.

The vehicle rules were a flipping disaster though, I agree. About the only thing I like in 7th edition is the vehicle rules (they still suck, but they're better than most previous editions and have a more predictable lifespan.... the sheer randomness of vehicle destruction in 3rd/4th/5th could be infuriating. Some vehicles exploding on the first glancing hit, others living through half a dozen penetrating hits).

I definitely had the most fun and the most tactical games (without devolving into much in the way of taking advantage of the rules to win) in 4th than in any other edition.

So it's possible to play 3E without a Codex?
How does that work?

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
So it's possible to play 3E without a Codex?
How does that work?

The rulebook came with stripped down army lists for every faction available at the time. It was a complete departure form 2nd edition, so there had to be stop-gap army lists until they could push out all the codices.

Ah, I see! I get it now!

Guess it's kind of a foreign concept to me as someone who started in 7E!

It was really nice for someone starting that edition, which me and my cousin did. We could play a full game with just his book, nothing else, and it was a fun full game. I think that spoiled me a bit for later editions, because I still resent the idea of having to buy more books to use an army.

And if you were one of the lucky ones who got the 1st printing, you got two rulebooks. One that disintegrates, and then the replacement sent from GW.

 Nevelon wrote:
And if you were one of the lucky ones who got the 1st printing, you got two rulebooks. One that disintegrates, and then the replacement sent from GW.

I'll have to get mine out of storage. I bought it on release, but I don't know if it's a first printing or not. It certainly held up well.

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
And if you were one of the lucky ones who got the 1st printing, you got two rulebooks. One that disintegrates, and then the replacement sent from GW.

I'll have to get mine out of storage. I bought it on release, but I don't know if it's a first printing or not. It certainly held up well.

I know I’ve got two on the shelf, one with a cover, one without.

Props to GW customer service, they had a bad batch of books go out, and replaced them no muss, no fuss. I’m not sure how widespread the issue was, but recall a good deal of chatter about it back in the day. It may not have been the whole print run, but was a good number of them.

I loved my first game of 3rd edition. I was not in love with the removal of modifiers, but the simplification and the move towards focus on line troops was awesome. I remember charging grots into terminators and actually killing one. It was a huge moral victory.

it was a rules system that worked well with an interesting art design but everything around it from the models to the lore was so god awful that more often than not would more of than not become the butt of jokes every year since. in addition it had armies that were at best developed to a bare minimum like squats and genestealer cults and as a result games suffered a serious amount of boring dice rolling when those armies were on table. in addition the technical limitations of the time led to some outlandish model design that are really really ugly. some of the worst models ever produced are from 3rd edition.

3rd edition was also home to the longest games in 40k's history with matches lasting several hours and often being abandoned before a conclusion was ever reached because people simply stopped wanting to invest time or couldnt be bothered to see the end.

it wouldnt be until 4th edition that maches became noticeably shorter and model design and artwork were reigned in to become more sensible, in addition armies that felt half baked were removed meaning more time to work on the development of the other armies. which ment a greater level of care that could be taken in their development.

3rd ed made me step away from the hobby for over a decade.

 ionusx wrote:
it was a rules system that worked well with an interesting art design but everything around it from the models to the lore was so god awful that more often than not would more of than not become the butt of jokes every year since. in addition it had armies that were at best developed to a bare minimum like squats and genestealer cults and as a result games suffered a serious amount of boring dice rolling when those armies were on table. in addition the technical limitations of the time led to some outlandish model design that are really really ugly. some of the worst models ever produced are from 3rd edition.

3rd edition was also home to the longest games in 40k's history with matches lasting several hours and often being abandoned before a conclusion was ever reached because people simply stopped wanting to invest time or couldnt be bothered to see the end.

it wouldnt be until 4th edition that maches became noticeably shorter and model design and artwork were reigned in to become more sensible, in addition armies that felt half baked were removed meaning more time to work on the development of the other armies. which ment a greater level of care that could be taken in their development.

You're thinking of 2nd edition. Genestealer Cults and Squats disappeared at the start of 3rd, and 3rd edition was a huge simplification of the rules that made the game play much faster. Also many 3rd edition models are still on the tables today, or have only been updated in some ways to add more options, like the Ork Boyz and Chaos Marines models. 2nd is the wackadoo edition with all the glory and horror that brings.

 docdoom77 wrote:
I loved my first game of 3rd edition. I was not in love with the removal of modifiers, but the simplification and the move towards focus on line troops was awesome. I remember charging grots into terminators and actually killing one. It was a huge moral victory.

The focus on line troops is another thing I remember. I still like the basic troops the most for any army.

I wish my grots could kill a terminator.

My first 40k kit was the silly DEldar vs Space Marines Starter Box. I still have some of those DEldar lying around, probably broken and unloved.

Since clearly I went the other way with it.

Nope. 2nd games were fast if you knew what you were doing, play it often enough and you learn the stats. 3rd with its emphasis on more models bogged the game down. I have seen first hand games side by side at equal points and after the 3rd guys quit making fun of the 2nd guys when the 2nd guys finished their game long before the 3rd guys.

The reason there was not a lot of fluff in the codices was because GW reduced the price of all of them. It was one of the few benefits over 2nd since GW felt prices were too high on the older codices and cut all the fat to offer them for $20 each. This was supposed to bring about a new cheaper age of GW. Yeah we see where that went.

Well of course 3rd ed games took longer when people were still playing 2nd ed - they didn't know the rules very well yet vs. people who'd been playing 2nd for years. There's a lot less detail to get bogged down in in 3rd edition.

While the 3rd ed pamphlet codices were cheaper, I really appreciate the fluff and art that was added to them.

My first codex was the 2nd ed IG codex. My first game was 3rd ed. In fact, 3rd ed came out right after I bought that codex. I ended up buying two boxed sets of the 3rd ed and then one Battle for MacCragge set. I still have all the marines and they are in Simple Green even as I type this.

It was definitely easier to learn the rules of 3rd than 2nd, nd even later editions. And things were really fast until the codeci started coming out and every army had their own special rules, which eventually morphed into all the USR we have now. Eldar was the first to have Fleet of Foot, IIRC.

Col. Dash wrote:
Nope. 2nd games were fast if you knew what you were doing, play it often enough and you learn the stats. 3rd with its emphasis on more models bogged the game down. I have seen first hand games side by side at equal points and after the 3rd guys quit making fun of the 2nd guys when the 2nd guys finished their game long before the 3rd guys.

"equal points" is meaningless when the whole basis of the points system changed. Might as well complain that 1,00 points of Warmachine takes much longer than 1,500 points of 40k.

Looking at some of the armies used in battle reports in 2nd edition, it's a totally different scale. One of the earliest ones I can remember (just after Dark Millennium came out) had a Blood Angels army with less than thirty infantry, a captain whose only equipment upgrade was a boltgun, and the only vehicle was a single Rhino (transporting Terminators). It was up against an Ork army mostly made up of 5-strong units. The photos and sample armies in the 3rd edition rules and early Codexes follow this at first, but the model count creeps up quickly enough.

The simplicity also made modelling opportunities easier. Because you went from a myriad of different weapons to "close combat weapon", you could kit Tactical Marines out with chainswords or hand flamers just because it looked cool.