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.

A long time ago on a hot Australian Christmas day I was in a 3 hour car ride reading my newly acquired copy of the 3rd edition 40k rulebook. The book binding promptly gave way in the heat. Terrible binding and Australian heat are not the point of this thread however.

When I read the book and the white dwarf magazines that came out prior and post release, I had a distinct impression of what the designers were trying to achieve with certain rule changes. In many cases I agreed with and liked their intent but their execution left odd question marks. I'd like to go back to that time and re-examine what could have been done.

Key changes included:
• A halving of unit/model points values (at least for non characters)
• An increase in the cost of special weapons
• A complete re-write of the assault rules
• The movement stat was removed in favour of a general increase and homogenization to 6" movement for all models
• Save modifiers were replaced by the AP system
• High stats were lowered across the board, with WS and BS being capped at 5
• BS modifiers were replaced with cover saves
• Terminator saves changed from 3+ on 2d6 to 2+ on 1d6 (no 5++ initially)
• The ability to run was removed entirely
• Weapon systems changed from basic/move or fire/sustained fire to pistol/rapid fire/assault/heavy/ordnance
• Plasma weapons changed dramatically
• Ranged weapons were diversified by race
• All power weapons were homogenized
• Game turns went from 4 to 6
• Charging was no longer a movement option and became part of the assault phase


The legacy of those changes can still be seen today in 7th edition. Ballistic skill for Marine characters is still oddly capped at 5 even though BS 6-10 is completely workable now. Dreadnoughts suffer along with BS 4. Movement is still homogenized at 6" with an ever increasing list of rules to get around the limitation (fleet being the first). The jink rule exists to cover the old negative to BS from fast moving targets. Power weapon diversity has returned (thankfully). Feel No Pain was introduced, presumably to provide some survivability to units whose armour was next to irrelevant with the AP system. And many more little changes that edge us back closer to how 2nd edition worked, without actually rolling back the initial change.

The impression I had was that the designers were trying to:
• Allow for bigger armies
• Streamline the rules to allow for faster play
• Introduce greater differentiation between the Imperium and Xenos

Many years later we still have those bigger armies, Xenos rules and weapons often have the same stats but different names and any semblance of streamlining is long gone.

Let us collectively go back, re-examine 2nd edition and compare that with both 3rd edition and 7th edition. What are the changes and what way could they have been handled better?

I'll start with Movement
Movement Speed
In 2nd edition, all models had a movement number on their profile. Typically this was 4. Eldar and tyranids had 5 or 6 depending on the model. (Ok and squats had 3, but let's not dredge up that discussion)
This variation was removed, which is good for streamlining but bad for army diversity. It's hard to be the army known for being fast and mobile when everyone moves the same speed. We don't even have to look past the end of 3rd edition before we find a special rule introduced (fleet) to counteract this change. Fleet has changed many times since then, but the point has always been to represent one model being faster than another. So why not scrap fleet and re-introduce different movement speeds for different models? That seems to be the more sensible option to me. If you want to streamline it, consider having fewer variations in speed than 2nd edition had.
I welcomed the increase from 4" to 6" for normal (human) infantry. This made getting somewhere and actually achieving objectives a possibility for all units, not just for those with transports and higher base speed. What speed is best for a re-imagined 3rd edition? I have no idea. My gut instinct tells me that rolling back to 4" is not the answer however.

Run
Run was removed as an option entirely. I recall this being on the premise that the general increase from 4" to 6" was representative of models running from one bit of cover to another. It's a half-run, all the time. Run, shoot, run, shoot. It made sense, but it also lacked tactical flexibility. It has already come back, but now it occurs in the shooting phase. That never made sense, so let's put that back in the movement phase; if only to avoid double handling of models. Remember, streamlining is about speeding up the game. Having to pick up models multiple times in a turn takes more time. Run needs to exist to retain the tactical diversity.

Difficult Terrain
In 2nd edition terrain either halved or quartered your movement. This was replaced with a dice roll. Why? If you want to streamline it, surely just saying your movement is halved is enough. I don't recall ever using the quarter value anyway. I can't think of any reason not to roll this back to 'halves your movement'.

Charging
And here's the killer. As best as I can infer, this change occurred so that assault units with guns could actually make use of their guns. Especially those guns which were not pistols and therefore not usable in hand to hand. I really have no idea what to do with this. I like being able to use my guns and charge. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Perhaps this is a case of 'the change is good, leave it alone'?

Hiding
Hiding was dropped entirely. I approve! Hiding, in my recollection, was merely a way to slow down the game and irritate your opponent. We used to play that you could declare a unit was hiding during deployment. I have no idea if that was an official rule or not, but the result was that every unit always started the game hiding which had a detrimental effect on how the game had to be played (and how you'd pick your army for the next game!).

Vehicle Movement
Vehicles went from all having their own speed, and different speed categories to all having the same speed, fewer categories (although the original number has since returned) and being able to go from stationary to flat-out in a single turn. I can't fault this. Furthermore the restrictions on turning were removed. Again I can't fault this. The wording in more recent editions may lack finesse but the intent is good.

So that's my summary of movement. What are your thoughts? What else changed? What was good, what was bad, and what would you do instead?

Ahhh, the good old days of 2nd ed...

Other changes included dropping sustained fire/jam dice for a set number of shots. Bit more streamlined but I've got to admit I enjoyed sustained fire.

Power weapons used to get a ST boost just for being a power weapon. Don't remember the exact stats but I do remember that doing a drive-by with a power sword by a biker was a viable tactic. The change to User ST and no Armor save was good, but not too enthused with the current set-up with AP values and varying ST.

Split fire was a thing. Yes children, once upon a time, you could shoot your squad heavy weapon at a tank (large target) and your lasguns/boltguns/whatever at Infantry (small target) . But... you generally had to shoot at the closest large or small target.

One thing you didn't point out in the walk/run/charge bit above. You had to choose which of the three you were going to do at the beginning of your turn (what is now movement phase, I guess). SO you couldn't just punch an assault unit forward and then decide post-shooting whether it was assaulting unit A, B, or C. You had to declare before taking any shots...

Re this " A halving of unit/model points values (at least for non characters) " Yeah, that was to sell more models. Suddenly my 1500 point Marine army (just over 30 Infantry and a couple of characters) needed twice as many models. Imagine that...

One thing not mentioned about the assault rule change is that in 2nd, models not actually in btb with the enemy could still shoot (pile-in was way different, 2" IIRC). And you could shoot into HTH combat! Hits were randomized between units. I had no issue with shooting into a HTH between my IG and a Greater Daemon or a squad of Genestealers...

Overwatch. Real Overwatch, as in I give up moving/shooting in my turn so that I can shoot at something during your turn.

Oh yeah, and twin-linked meant twice the number of shots (or double the sustained fire dice), not a re-roll on a miss.

Sure there's more, but TTFN.

Also the over-the-top silliness of old grimdark was traded for serious, depressing new grimdark. The lore lost a lot of its humor because 40k was no longer into comedy. : (

I personally hated 2nd ed.

 Pouncey wrote:
Also the over-the-top silliness of old grimdark was traded for serious, depressing new grimdark. The lore lost a lot of its humor because 40k was no longer into comedy. : (

Yep, altho I seem to recall a rather silly Ork army I put together in 3rd where every unit was random. Madboyz, splatta kannon, don't recall what else. Basic idea was I had little control over what my units might do... Nowadays tho, yeah, not nearly as much fun.

I miss wargear cards.....

Amongst other things.

Martel732 wrote:
I personally hated 2nd ed.

I don't mind 2nd ed. rules in Necromunda where there's <15 models per side and people are fairly restricted in what they can take.

The game fell down in terms of balancing units (Wolf Guard Terminators) and too many games came down to who brought the more unkillable special character. The base rules weren't too bad (IMHO), but fell apart because every writer had to make the special character they introduced the biggest badass in the galaxy topping the previous book's unstoppable killing machine.

One thing to add to "split fire" comment above, just so the "youngsters" have better understanding on how detailed 2nd ed was:

- EVERY model, not only walkers/vechicles had firing arc (90 degrees front) and placement of individual models allowed shooting at different targets. Every member of a squad could have such "split fire", not only heavy/special weapon...

I personally liked 2nd very much and still love Necromunda, but sentiments aside, even with twice the models you needed in 3rd ed, games in 3rd were fast. Even nowadays, in "bloated 7th", games take a lot less time (with lot more minis per side), that games of 2nd ed. Even with all those "randumb" rules like run/difficult terrain rolls, Maelstrom or Mysterious Objectives etc... Especially "to hit" modifiers (essentialy per model LOS checking and shooting), psychic phase and resolving CC took ages back then.

I fully believe that cover saves need to go and be replaced with To Hit modifiers. The AP system should also be replaced with armor save modifiers.
Preferential wound allocation was better than from-the-front allocation. Are you seriously telling me that Marine #8 can't pick up Marine #3's plasma gun and be the new plasma gunner?

To hit modifiers can't work on a D6.

The difference between Eldar, CSM, and Tyranids and the rest of the field in 2nd was worse than any balance issues that exist today.

Of course they do. -1 for soft cover like bushes. -2 for craters and trees. -3 for ruins. -4 for fortified buildings. Stealth is -1, shrouded is -2.
A six always hits, of course. Some very special units like Vindicares could ignore cover.

 Verviedi wrote:
Of course they do. -1 for soft cover like bushes. -2 for craters and trees. -3 for ruins. -4 for fortified buildings. Stealth is -1, shrouded is -2.
A six always hits, of course. Some very special units like Vindicares could ignore cover.

Those end up not working. You need a D10 or D20.

nou wrote:
One thing to add to "split fire" comment above, just so the "youngsters" have better understanding on how detailed 2nd ed was:

- EVERY model, not only walkers/vechicles had firing arc (90 degrees front) and placement of individual models allowed shooting at different targets. Every member of a squad could have such "split fire", not only heavy/special weapon...

Just to point out that Warmachine has "firing arcs" in the form of a "front arc" for every single model, and the rules allow you to not only split fire, but also charge separate enemy units. While I realize that the two game systems are different scales, I've often thought after having come back to 40K after years of Warmachine that the Warhammer 40K rules could benefit from aspects of the WM ruleset. Notably, I think that the entire "I move my entire army, and then I shoot/assault/whatever with my entire army" mechanic is showing its age, and that a "this tactical squad moves, shoots, assaults, and then my next tac squad moves/shoots/assaults" mechanic would probably make the game a bit more tactical. But that's neither here not there in the "2nd vs. 7th edition" discussion....

How so? The system could easily be a flat -1 for a merged Stealth and Shrouded rule, -1 for soft cover, and -2 for hard cover. I see no reason that would be incompatible with D6.

Martel732 wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Of course they do. -1 for soft cover like bushes. -2 for craters and trees. -3 for ruins. -4 for fortified buildings. Stealth is -1, shrouded is -2.
A six always hits, of course. Some very special units like Vindicares could ignore cover.

Those end up not working. You need a D10 or D20.

Bull, it works with a D6 just as well.

I've never played 2nd ed (or anything pre-4th ed for that matter) but from what I read it sounds like at least some of those changes needed to be made as 40K was moving away from its small-scale Rogue Trader roots.

I actualy like how CCWs became very binary- you were either using your own strength with a generic CCW or you had something really epic like a power weapon, power fist or anything else with 'Poweeeer' in the name. CCWs shouldn't have AP values, they either ignore armour or they don't.

Wasn't there somekind of 'heavy CCW' rule where things like Ork Choppas had a pseudo-rending ability? I remember someone looking over the 4th ed Ork codex and saying "Well we can't get through Terminator armour as easily, but at least we get the extra ST on the charge.."

 don_mondo wrote:

Split fire was a thing. Yes children, once upon a time, you could shoot your squad heavy weapon at a tank (large target) and your lasguns/boltguns/whatever at Infantry (small target) . But... you generally had to shoot at the closest large or small target.

Make the bad man stop telling lies! :O

The problem with "to hit" modifiers is NOT that they do or do not work with d6. They work acceptably fine. It is that they take ages to resolve if you have mixed cover and multi-model units. For those, who have not played even a single game of 2nd ed, please go and resolve even a single round of shooting between two units, which both have mixed "to hit" modifiers for different members of a squad and different weapons (so different save roll modifiers). Calculate to-hit and save rolls for each model shooting. Every time you have to shoot something or roll a save, you need to recalculate every roll you make, each turn again and again for dozens of models. No more easily memorable flat "to hit", trivial S vs T and flat save-or-no-save. Every shot of every unit different, all day long (sometimes literally all day long...). Do you realy, realy think, that this is how modern, pick-up 40K shoud be like?

 Pouncey wrote:
Also the over-the-top silliness of old grimdark was traded for serious, depressing new grimdark. The lore lost a lot of its humor because 40k was no longer into comedy. : (

That's why I play Orks

If the grimdark ever becomes a bit too grim, just remember that 'Red Ones Go Faster'.

 SDFarsight wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Also the over-the-top silliness of old grimdark was traded for serious, depressing new grimdark. The lore lost a lot of its humor because 40k was no longer into comedy. : (

That's why I play Orks

If the grimdark ever becomes a bit too grim, just remember that 'Red Ones Go Faster'.

Same here.

nou wrote:
One thing to add to "split fire" comment above, just so the "youngsters" have better understanding on how detailed 2nd ed was:

- EVERY model, not only walkers/vechicles had firing arc (90 degrees front) and placement of individual models allowed shooting at different targets. Every member of a squad could have such "split fire", not only heavy/special weapon...

How did the 90 degree firing arc work with round bases?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SDFarsight wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Also the over-the-top silliness of old grimdark was traded for serious, depressing new grimdark. The lore lost a lot of its humor because 40k was no longer into comedy. : (

That's why I play Orks

If the grimdark ever becomes a bit too grim, just remember that 'Red Ones Go Faster'.

They probably ripped that idea off from the reality that red cars IRL get more speeding tickets.

 Stormonu wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Of course they do. -1 for soft cover like bushes. -2 for craters and trees. -3 for ruins. -4 for fortified buildings. Stealth is -1, shrouded is -2.
A six always hits, of course. Some very special units like Vindicares could ignore cover.

Those end up not working. You need a D10 or D20.

Bull, it works with a D6 just as well.

No, it doesn't because even a-1 to hit is enormous.

2nd ed was a dumpster fire of epic proportions.

Zustiur wrote:

Run
Run was removed as an option entirely. I recall this being on the premise that the general increase from 4" to 6" was representative of models running from one bit of cover to another. It's a half-run, all the time. Run, shoot, run, shoot. It made sense, but it also lacked tactical flexibility. It has already come back, but now it occurs in the shooting phase. That never made sense, so let's put that back in the movement phase; if only to avoid double handling of models. Remember, streamlining is about speeding up the game. Having to pick up models multiple times in a turn takes more time. Run needs to exist to retain the tactical diversity.

Putting the Run into the shooting phase was actually a very deliberate move to stop players from running in the movement phase and then forgetting about it by the time their shooting phase comes along and shooting with that unit when they shouldn't.

Yes, it results in double-handling, but it does remove the need to try to track who ran and who didn't.

 don_mondo wrote:
Power weapons used to get a ST boost just for being a power weapon. Don't remember the exact stats but I do remember that doing a drive-by with a power sword by a biker was a viable tactic. The change to User ST and no Armor save was good, but not too enthused with the current set-up with AP values and varying ST.

Likewise, chainswords were S4 with an armour modifier, rather than having the same specs as a pointy stick.

 don_mondo wrote:

Re this " A halving of unit/model points values (at least for non characters) " Yeah, that was to sell more models. Suddenly my 1500 point Marine army (just over 30 Infantry and a couple of characters) needed twice as many models. Imagine that...

For what it's worth, that wasn't entirely driven by GW.

Over the lifespan of 2nd edition, players started to try to play bigger and bigger games with it. By the last year, my gaming group was regularly playing 5000point or larger games, and we weren't the only ones.

While I'm sure it was also driven by the desire to make sales, this is one situation where the games designers actually listened to what the players wanted, which was the ability to play larger games in less than a week and a half.

 Pouncey wrote:

How did the 90 degree firing arc work with round bases?

There were a lot of arguments.

IIRC, there was a handy little 'fire arc' template in the box (although I might be misremembering and merging that with the vehicle turn template... have to have a look through my box of cardboard stuff later , but it was a little imprecise.

The main thing I remember was how strong Eldar was, and how useless paying for Power Armor was considering near EVERYTHING made it worthless in some form while you still had the smaller numbers.

Martel732 wrote:
To hit modifiers can't work on a D6.

They worked fine in WHFB.

 don_mondo wrote:
Power weapons used to get a ST boost just for being a power weapon. Don't remember the exact stats but I do remember that doing a drive-by with a power sword by a biker was a viable tactic. The change to User ST and no Armor save was good, but not too enthused with the current set-up with AP values and varying ST.

Actually power weapons used to be simply fixed S and save modifier. Power sword for example S5. So if you had higher S than 5 power sword was pretty useless except for the parry.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Asmodai wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I personally hated 2nd ed.

I don't mind 2nd ed. rules in Necromunda where there's <15 models per side and people are fairly restricted in what they can take.

The game fell down in terms of balancing units (Wolf Guard Terminators) and too many games came down to who brought the more unkillable special character. The base rules weren't too bad (IMHO), but fell apart because every writer had to make the special character they introduced the biggest badass in the galaxy topping the previous book's unstoppable killing machine.

Thing about those unkillable characters is that unless opponent brought in equally expensive characters etc they struggled to kill much.

Short of failed break test it takes 10 player turns in close combat for Abbadon to kill squad of IG troopers. That's more player turns standard game had!

We don't bother bringing in expensive characters(apart from psykers) for the simple reason: They struggle to kill much during 8 player turns and simple vortex grenade is cheap equalizer. Makes pointless to have expensive characters when at the best of times they don't kill much and could get vortexed(albeit vortex grenade has fell out of favour as well due to lack of good targets!).

I fully believe that cover saves need to go and be replaced with To Hit modifiers. The AP system should also be replaced with armor save modifiers.

That just adds complication though. It was hard enough in 2nd ed and we only had like 1/4-1/2 the number of models to deal with. Sorting that for a modern 1750-2000 point game is a lot more than I really want to deal with. "I'm shooting at your scouts who are in soft cover, shrouded, wearing camo cloaks, but I have an omniscope ...." then, once you've solved all that ... "You're wearing scout armour and have gone to ground but my gun gives me bonus to penetrate and I have a blessing ...". All of that versus "I'm shooting at you. You have a 3+ cover save." I'll take cover saves and AP all day every day. Switching back to modifiers is only going to add to all the things we have to remember while also compounding issues with special rules.

Personally, I vastly preferred 2nd, even with its flaws and would have preferred to see a massaged 2nd edition as opposed to the fire sale that was 3rd edition. When 3rd launched it was quite shocking to me. It was akin to someone taking your chess set away and replacing it with checkers. There was a heck of a lot of "wait, but what about..." - "that's gone.". The game in 2nd felt a heck of a lot more like the fluff and it showed on the table top.

2nd was unapologetic in its chunkiness. Much like a lot of older games from the 80's-90's it asked a bit more of its players. A normal game would take 2-3 hours, or an evening with a larger game taking the better part of a day. While a lot of the rules seem clunky, much like today's clusterfeth edition it all became second nature. I had the good fortune of playing with friends and decent people so while there was plenty of room for arguments/asshattery it was rare. This was a time when GW was staffed entirely by artists and gaming geeks without a modicum of business acumen amongst them. The game has no goal of being used for tournaments. When GW ran tournaments they were normally narrative with weird arbitrary exclusions and limitations aimed at forcing gamers to think outside the box, etc.

While 3rd moved to streamline a lot of the game functions it sapped a hell of a lot of "feel" from the armies. Wargear lists were cut in half, wargear cards disappeared, stat lines for almost everything across the board dropped immensely and most special rules for units disappeared. A lot of units disappeared as well (Harlequins and Exodites vanished from the Eldar --- Daemons were dumbed down immensely, Chaos cultists lists disappeared, GSC disappeared, and Sisters of Battle lost a lot of unique traits and were rolled into Witch Hunters etc.). The codices (which had to be pumped out) went from very well written books with colour and plenty of fluff to small 30-page black and white "magazines" etc.

Imagine a great movie you really like...now imagine a half-ass TV show based on the movie? That's what 3rd felt like to a lot of us.

Removing the Movement stat was one of the worst decisions. As can be seen now, where the "basic" movement has been adjusted by a half dozen special rules to counter the fact that they magically decided everyone moves the same (despite 15 years of fluff at this point indicating who was faster etc.). Facing something like a Tyranid army in 2nd was fun because you knew damn well they all ran 12" or more...and your Marines (even Eldar) didn't. It was a real matter of shoot them before they get to you. You couldn't be saved by poorly rolled random movement etc. Removing the Movement stat to simplify things really did the opposite.

Hand to hand combat was terrible in 2nd. It provided for epic game-long fights between characters but it was one of the weakest parts of 2nd edition. Took forever and was far too finnicky. This should have been addressed in a subsequent edition.

The magic phase was...meh. Sometimes it could take forever, sometimes it went quick enough. It was fun drawing random spells (which I'm sure a lot of people would hate) and psyker spells were pretty damn powerful. Recently a friend and I played a game of 2nd and started working on changing the psyker phase to make it much more quick and efficient --- we went to rolling sustained fire dice for power, etc. It worked out quite well.

Weapons were far more diverse in 2nd. This was neat but sometimes they had ridiculous special rules (clearly aimed at smaller games). For the most part though, they were good. It would have been nice to streamline the dice roll for armour penetration as some of their formulas were silly. As stated above, power weapons etc. had a specific strength and did not reflect that of the user (hence why Howling Banshees were dangerous with a Strength 5 weapon with a -3 save modifier).

Personally I preferred save modifiers as it was more interesting than the simple "yes/no" option. Contrary to what people seem to think - this wasn't time consuming or difficult. You got exceptionally fast at working these out. Power sword vs. Space Marine in normal power armour? Saves on a six. Terminator hit by a lascannon? They have 2D6 armour and save on a 3+, the Lascannon is a -6 save modifier so they get a 9+ save on 2D6. It was a lot easier than people think. However it's worth nothing that 2nd was a different level of power. You didn't have the somewhat absurd "roll 40 dice!" attacks by characters etc. Most units on the table had a genuine expectation of lasting more than half of a turn. There was no pie-plates being tossed around the board (until that damn Demolisher Leman Russ showed up!).

I personally would toss the limited arc-of-fire stuff, but it did add some tactical thinking to the game. A unit could only overwatch fire in its arc etc., so flanking an overwatch unit could happen. Shooting at the nearest unit OR vehicle was exceptionally simple (while the special and heavy weapons could target specific things) and --- get this, no single character could be targeted by itself unless it was the nearest target. You didn't have to bubble wrap your characters to make it across the board.

I vastly preferred the no-pre-measuring rules as well. Going to charge that unit? You have 8" of charge distance - better hope you're there, or you'll end up 1" from a unit which will open fire on you next turn. Grenades were terrible and should have been changed. They were actual templates with scatter and rolling to hit units etc. (so yes, a unit all hurling grenades would be a nightmare to work out sometimes).

Vehicles were more heavily armored (and far more varied, ranging from Armour 10 to Armour 26-28 I believe). The datafaxes were cool and easy to use. A lot of vehicles had weaknesses though. Tanks for instance, while tough to crack could be struck in the tracks --- so even something like a heavy bolter was worth chattering at a tank if you were desperate. Vehicles had actual crews who could get out and become a unit if their vehicle was destroyed (or indeed you could re-occupy vehicles with crewmen etc.). There were a lot more cool/random things which could happen to vehicles. They were also fast. Like silly fast (up to 36" in some cases). The movement rules were terribly complicated though and made a little worse by having different speed bands. There is a better set of rules somewhere between 2nd and 3rd for vehicles.

The codices were, by far, the high water mark of GW's publications. Wonderful fluff, good artwork, nice colour sections, and comparatively vast army lists. People nowdays should buy them if only for the fluff and "feel". The Chaos codex shines particularly in 2nd edition (though it was terribly powerful --- power creep was a thing back then too, just not quite as egregious as it is now). You got a lot more bang for your back with the old codices as well. They included more wargear, more items, more special rules, wargear cards you could cut out. The Chaos codex included Chaos Cultists army list, Chaos Daemons army list, and Chaos Space Marines army lists. Did you know in 2nd that groups of Chaos daemons became psykers? Yep. A group of daemons could cast spells...

One thing which was exceptionally tough to understand was the huge nerfing of every unit in the game, across the board. This has carried on and made things difficult for GW the past ten years. In the Eldar army for example, Exarchs went from powerful characters to mediocre squad leaders. Warlocks went from potent (psykers were almost universally available in three "levels" in 2nd edition) battlefield psykers to hopeless buff-machines with no capability to actually fight in combat on the tabletop. Even things like the Avatar had their stats chopped tremendously. By doing this GW shrunk tremendously the area it had to work within for 3rd-7th edition. They did the same thing when they changed vehicles to be armour 10-14. That's not much variation. They now struggle and have to create new rules/hull points etc. to justify larger or stronger vehicles. Same thing with the stat lines. A Space Marine captain's stat lines were a joke compared to 2nd...so this then requires even more of the un-ending special rules added to later editions (instead of simply having a kick ass stat line which expresses how excellent he is/was). GW really put themselves in a corner by limiting the scope of stats for so many units. I'll break out the old 3rd ed and 2nd ed. Eldar codices later and give you proper examples.

If someone had taken 2nd and modified, cleaned it up, etc. it would have been a brilliant game. I've debated trying to do so myself. However it would have never supported the huge increase in models/stuff on the table that they're pushing, so it died a quick death. Personally I'd gladly play a 2nd edition game which took all afternoon. With good friends it was a heck of a good time.

 Elbows wrote:
Personally, I vastly preferred 2nd, even with its flaws and would have preferred to see a massaged 2nd edition as opposed to the fire sale that was 3rd edition. When 3rd launched it was quite shocking to me. It was akin to someone taking your chess set away and replacing it with checkers. There was a heck of a lot of "wait, but what about..." - "that's gone.". The game in 2nd felt a heck of a lot more like the fluff and it showed on the table top.

2nd was unapologetic in its chunkiness. Much like a lot of older games from the 80's-90's it asked a bit more of its players. A normal game would take 2-3 hours, or an evening with a larger game taking the better part of a day. While a lot of the rules seem clunky, much like today's clusterfeth edition it all became second nature. I had the good fortune of playing with friends and decent people so while there was plenty of room for arguments/asshattery it was rare. This was a time when GW was staffed entirely by artists and gaming geeks without a modicum of business acumen amongst them. The game has no goal of being used for tournaments. When GW ran tournaments they were normally narrative with weird arbitrary exclusions and limitations aimed at forcing gamers to think outside the box, etc.

While 3rd moved to streamline a lot of the game functions it sapped a hell of a lot of "feel" from the armies. Wargear lists were cut in half, wargear cards disappeared, stat lines for almost everything across the board dropped immensely and most special rules for units disappeared. A lot of units disappeared as well (Harlequins and Exodites vanished from the Eldar --- Daemons were dumbed down immensely, Chaos cultists lists disappeared, GSC disappeared, and Sisters of Battle lost a lot of unique traits and were rolled into Witch Hunters etc.). The codices (which had to be pumped out) went from very well written books with colour and plenty of fluff to small 30-page black and white "magazines" etc.

Imagine a great movie you really like...now imagine a half-ass TV show based on the movie? That's what 3rd felt like to a lot of us.

Removing the Movement stat was one of the worst decisions. As can be seen now, where the "basic" movement has been adjusted by a half dozen special rules to counter the fact that they magically decided everyone moves the same (despite 15 years of fluff at this point indicating who was faster etc.). Facing something like a Tyranid army in 2nd was fun because you knew damn well they all ran 12" or more...and your Marines (even Eldar) didn't. It was a real matter of shoot them before they get to you. You couldn't be saved by poorly rolled random movement etc. Removing the Movement stat to simplify things really did the opposite.

Hand to hand combat was terrible in 2nd. It provided for epic game-long fights between characters but it was one of the weakest parts of 2nd edition. Took forever and was far too finnicky. This should have been addressed in a subsequent edition.

The magic phase was...meh. Sometimes it could take forever, sometimes it went quick enough. It was fun drawing random spells (which I'm sure a lot of people would hate) and psyker spells were pretty damn powerful. Recently a friend and I played a game of 2nd and started working on changing the psyker phase to make it much more quick and efficient --- we went to rolling sustained fire dice for power, etc. It worked out quite well.

Weapons were far more diverse in 2nd. This was neat but sometimes they had ridiculous special rules (clearly aimed at smaller games). For the most part though, they were good. It would have been nice to streamline the dice roll for armour penetration as some of their formulas were silly. As stated above, power weapons etc. had a specific strength and did not reflect that of the user (hence why Howling Banshees were dangerous with a Strength 5 weapon with a -3 save modifier).

Personally I preferred save modifiers as it was more interesting than the simple "yes/no" option. Contrary to what people seem to think - this wasn't time consuming or difficult. You got exceptionally fast at working these out. Power sword vs. Space Marine in normal power armour? Saves on a six. Terminator hit by a lascannon? They have 2D6 armour and save on a 3+, the Lascannon is a -6 save modifier so they get a 9+ save on 2D6. It was a lot easier than people think. However it's worth nothing that 2nd was a different level of power. You didn't have the somewhat absurd "roll 40 dice!" attacks by characters etc. Most units on the table had a genuine expectation of lasting more than half of a turn. There was no pie-plates being tossed around the board (until that damn Demolisher Leman Russ showed up!).

I personally would toss the limited arc-of-fire stuff, but it did add some tactical thinking to the game. A unit could only overwatch fire in its arc etc., so flanking an overwatch unit could happen. Shooting at the nearest unit OR vehicle was exceptionally simple (while the special and heavy weapons could target specific things) and --- get this, no single character could be targeted by itself unless it was the nearest target. You didn't have to bubble wrap your characters to make it across the board.

I vastly preferred the no-pre-measuring rules as well. Going to charge that unit? You have 8" of charge distance - better hope you're there, or you'll end up 1" from a unit which will open fire on you next turn. Grenades were terrible and should have been changed. They were actual templates with scatter and rolling to hit units etc. (so yes, a unit all hurling grenades would be a nightmare to work out sometimes).

Vehicles were more heavily armored (and far more varied, ranging from Armour 10 to Armour 26-28 I believe). The datafaxes were cool and easy to use. A lot of vehicles had weaknesses though. Tanks for instance, while tough to crack could be struck in the tracks --- so even something like a heavy bolter was worth chattering at a tank if you were desperate. Vehicles had actual crews who could get out and become a unit if their vehicle was destroyed (or indeed you could re-occupy vehicles with crewmen etc.). There were a lot more cool/random things which could happen to vehicles. They were also fast. Like silly fast (up to 36" in some cases). The movement rules were terribly complicated though and made a little worse by having different speed bands. There is a better set of rules somewhere between 2nd and 3rd for vehicles.

The codices were, by far, the high water mark of GW's publications. Wonderful fluff, good artwork, nice colour sections, and comparatively vast army lists. People nowdays should buy them if only for the fluff and "feel". The Chaos codex shines particularly in 2nd edition (though it was terribly powerful --- power creep was a thing back then too, just not quite as egregious as it is now). You got a lot more bang for your back with the old codices as well. They included more wargear, more items, more special rules, wargear cards you could cut out. The Chaos codex included Chaos Cultists army list, Chaos Daemons army list, and Chaos Space Marines army lists. Did you know in 2nd that groups of Chaos daemons became psykers? Yep. A group of daemons could cast spells...

One thing which was exceptionally tough to understand was the huge nerfing of every unit in the game, across the board. This has carried on and made things difficult for GW the past ten years. In the Eldar army for example, Exarchs went from powerful characters to mediocre squad leaders. Warlocks went from potent (psykers were almost universally available in three "levels" in 2nd edition) battlefield psykers to hopeless buff-machines with no capability to actually fight in combat on the tabletop. Even things like the Avatar had their stats chopped tremendously. By doing this GW shrunk tremendously the area it had to work within for 3rd-7th edition. They did the same thing when they changed vehicles to be armour 10-14. That's not much variation. They now struggle and have to create new rules/hull points etc. to justify larger or stronger vehicles. Same thing with the stat lines. A Space Marine captain's stat lines were a joke compared to 2nd...so this then requires even more of the un-ending special rules added to later editions (instead of simply having a kick ass stat line which expresses how excellent he is/was). GW really put themselves in a corner by limiting the scope of stats for so many units. I'll break out the old 3rd ed and 2nd ed. Eldar codices later and give you proper examples.

If someone had taken 2nd and modified, cleaned it up, etc. it would have been a brilliant game. I've debated trying to do so myself. However it would have never supported the huge increase in models/stuff on the table that they're pushing, so it died a quick death. Personally I'd gladly play a 2nd edition game which took all afternoon. With good friends it was a heck of a good time.

If I could Super-Double-Exalt this post I would.

100% agree with all of it.

Well put

No idea on the gameplay front, but I'll echo the difference in Codex quality from older ones to newer.

The latest Eldar codex barely even mentions the War in Heaven!

Martel732 wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Of course they do. -1 for soft cover like bushes. -2 for craters and trees. -3 for ruins. -4 for fortified buildings. Stealth is -1, shrouded is -2.
A six always hits, of course. Some very special units like Vindicares could ignore cover.

Those end up not working. You need a D10 or D20.

Bull, it works with a D6 just as well.

No, it doesn't because even a-1 to hit is enormous.

2nd ed was a dumpster fire of epic proportions.

Bolt Action works just fine with negative modifiers to hit on a D6. Your argument is invalid.