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.

Davor wrote:

That is right. Nothing changes because you are still complaining and not backing up your statements. Just saying so doesn't mean it will happen. If you have already explained why, I must have missed it. Can you please link up so I can see your point of view? If you haven't can you please explain why? I can't understand you right now because you are just acting like a little child complaining and pouting about something that hasn't even happened.

I indeed have explained it several times, I really can't be bothered to find the old posts, so one more time, really briefly:

It really relates to what one sees as the defining features of the Imperium and the 40K as a whole.
This quote is relevant:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Honestly, if Roboute becomes a "heretic", it will only be in the eyes of the exceedingly corrupt Imperial Government, High Lords of Terra, and the Ecclesiarchy. He is probably committed to the Emperor's original vision, something no one else in the galaxy can boast. He will probably try to turn the Imperium back to what it is supposed to be.

This is indeed a logical prediction of what will happen. But to me (and to many others, I'm sure) the Imperium being a decomposing, corrupt, theocratic dystopia, its glory days being barely remembered legends is a big part of the charm. I don't want the Imperium to be 'fixed'. The mere reappearance of a Primarch already breaks the mythic past vibe, and If he starts to reform (as I'm sure he will) more of the flavour of the Imperium will be lost. (Hell, maybe he will get rid off the Ecclesiarchy, so that GW finally has an excuse to squat the Sisters for good!)

With his ability to influence the Armies of the Imperium, it stands to reason he will be a Lord of War choice for all armies of the Imperium. I am fine with that. I want to be able to run Big Blue with my Crimson Fists. He really shines with the Ultras though.

All command warlord traits. Nasty.

 Latro_ wrote:
His fist gun:
24" s6 ap2 assault 3 rending

sword looks to be s10, ap1, armourbane, concussion, soul blaze, whirling flame, touch of the emperor
touch of the emperor looks to make it a D attack somehow, i'd speculate on any 6's to hit

was right in the guess just confirmed on a 6 hits with SD
whirling flame, instead of 6 attacks instead for every unit within 1" in combat he can make a number of attacks equal to the number of models in those units!!!

OMG!!!!!

so say he is in CC with a unit of 10 orks and 15 grots by what they just said if he was within 1" of either unit he'd make 25 attacks (unless i heard that wrong)

.....
..... his sword is filthy !

D on a 6 to hit, S10 armourbane, concussive, soul blaze.


Can instead do his.....err... whirlyflamerule attack : all units within 1" take a # of hits equal to the number of minis in 1".


.. no tarpitting there then.

 Snake Tortoise wrote:

Spoiler:

 Azreal13 wrote:



You know why TV shows have a shelf life? Or why movie sequels are almost always inferior to their predecessors? It's because if you have to work with a narrative, you either have to offer resolution or keep one-upping previous events. If you don't offer resolution, the audience gets bored and frustrated, if you continue to go bigger, you eventually cross into parody.

GW are already bordering on the latter, if they keep moving things forward (even if this is a single step for now) where can you see the game in 3 years? 10? 40K has lasted 30 years inhabiting, give or take, the same snap shot of time. It might seem exciting to have these long hinted at events actually occur in the fluff and in game, but ultimately what GW have done by moving the narrative forward rather than diving deeper into the universe is start a stopwatch that's going to keep counting down for their customers. What was a sandbox for the gamer and designers to play in is becoming a vector headed towards a conclusion. When your stated aim is to make the best toy soldiers in the world and keep doing it forever, starting your golden goose IP on a journey towards a conclusion isn't the best idea

.

Hmm... well put. What if they move it forwards a bit and then take a step back and leave it alone for a while? Moving the plot forwards now doesn't necessarily mean it has to keep moving, though I imagine there's a risk that now they have the ball rolling it will be difficult to stop.

Leaving it alone would be the best case scenario at this point. The danger there is that it sets up expectations, look how strongly certain ideas persist even now, even those that are long since passed the point of probability or even totally debunked, within the player base. Up to this point, "40K is a setting and not an ongoing story" has been inviolate, now it is not. This will invariably mean the click bait vendors will raid this new, rich seam of nonsense every time there's a faction update or rumour of a new edition, get people stirred up and, inevitably, disappoint a few people.

Then, even more problematically, there's the danger it's successful! This is speaking as a fan, rather than a business point of view. It's no secret GW has been in the doldrums, financially speaking, for the last few years, so if this reinvigorates 40K and makes GW a butt load of money, the commercial pressures to keep doing it will likely swiftly overcome any creative sensibilities about maintaining the integrity of the setting.

Of course, none of this may happen, all the people deploying liberal quantities of handwavium ITT may just be correct. But I witnessed the End Times of WHFB (both literally and figuratively) through the prism of this board, and there's so much deja vu right now it's giving me vertigo.

This could actually lead to an Imperium even more messed up than 'current' - it is very easy indeed to imagine another civil war taking place.

Those rules sound kind of ridiculous.

Crimson wrote:

Davor wrote:

That is right. Nothing changes because you are still complaining and not backing up your statements. Just saying so doesn't mean it will happen. If you have already explained why, I must have missed it. Can you please link up so I can see your point of view? If you haven't can you please explain why? I can't understand you right now because you are just acting like a little child complaining and pouting about something that hasn't even happened.

I indeed have explained it several times, I really can't be bothered to find the old posts, so one more time, really briefly:

It really relates to what one sees as the defining features of the Imperium and the 40K as a whole.
This quote is relevant:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Honestly, if Roboute becomes a "heretic", it will only be in the eyes of the exceedingly corrupt Imperial Government, High Lords of Terra, and the Ecclesiarchy. He is probably committed to the Emperor's original vision, something no one else in the galaxy can boast. He will probably try to turn the Imperium back to what it is supposed to be.

This is indeed a logical prediction of what will happen. But to me (and to many others, I'm sure) the Imperium being a decomposing, corrupt, theocratic dystopia, its glory days being barely remembered legends is a big part of the charm. I don't want the Imperium to be 'fixed'. The mere reappearance of a Primarch already breaks the mythic past vibe, and If he starts to reform (as I'm sure he will) more of the flavour of the Imperium will be lost. (Hell, maybe he will get rid off the Ecclesiarchy, so that GW finally has an excuse to squat the Sisters for good!)

Thank you very much for this. I can sort of see your point. I still think it's too early to get so upset. After all this could make it even more grim dark and see the Imperium split and fight amongst themselves now. Alphairus said it best.

Alpharius wrote:This could actually lead to an Imperium even more messed up than 'current' - it is very easy indeed to imagine another civil war taking place.

The "setting" is going to be the same. Nothing is changing.

That said I think a Primarch coming back is like Necrons being added, or Tau being added. The Imperium is not going to turn into Star Trek Federation faction being all clean and what not. Yes GW can drop the ball on this and then again they can make it better. So I say let's just see what happens before we start complaining. After all the emotional turmoil can be for naught.

if they brought him back they can also kill him. If things get out of hand and the setting is in danger of being ruined, they just have to have someone properly chop his head off.

Until it does get out of hand, give them a chance. It might be awesome, it might flop. Naysaying before it has a chance to do either is silly.

For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

 Crimson wrote:

Davor wrote:

That is right. Nothing changes because you are still complaining and not backing up your statements. Just saying so doesn't mean it will happen. If you have already explained why, I must have missed it. Can you please link up so I can see your point of view? If you haven't can you please explain why? I can't understand you right now because you are just acting like a little child complaining and pouting about something that hasn't even happened.

I indeed have explained it several times, I really can't be bothered to find the old posts, so one more time, really briefly:

It really relates to what one sees as the defining features of the Imperium and the 40K as a whole.
This quote is relevant:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Honestly, if Roboute becomes a "heretic", it will only be in the eyes of the exceedingly corrupt Imperial Government, High Lords of Terra, and the Ecclesiarchy. He is probably committed to the Emperor's original vision, something no one else in the galaxy can boast. He will probably try to turn the Imperium back to what it is supposed to be.

This is indeed a logical prediction of what will happen. But to me (and to many others, I'm sure) the Imperium being a decomposing, corrupt, theocratic dystopia, its glory days being barely remembered legends is a big part of the charm. I don't want the Imperium to be 'fixed'. The mere reappearance of a Primarch already breaks the mythic past vibe, and If he starts to reform (as I'm sure he will) more of the flavour of the Imperium will be lost. (Hell, maybe he will get rid off the Ecclesiarchy, so that GW finally has an excuse to squat the Sisters for good!)

What makes you think you he's going to fix the Imperium? What makes you think he isn't​ going to be labled a heretic by the High Lords and Ecclisiarchy (both of whom are directly threatened by his power) and forced into becoming Horus 2.0?

Guilliman has every chance of dividing the Imperium more than uniting it.

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Then the people already calling it a flop should just move on and not stick around and mope then. It's one thing being sceptical, since I am sceptical that 8th edition is going to be any good but not complaining about it until I try it out first. So if people already made up their mind they should move on then and go to somewhere that they will enjoy then. To stick around they have no right to complain and whine then. After all nobody is forcing them to stay and then they need to take consequence of their actions and accept it if they stick around.

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

Don't have to play to have an opinion on this.

 ProtoClone wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

Don't have to play to have an opinion on this.

No, but it looks foolish. I don't play Warmachine, but I also don't go on their forums and complain about how bad the MKIII release is. Same reason I don't go and bash the newest X-Wing release

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ProtoClone wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

Don't have to play to have an opinion on this.

No, but it looks foolish. I don't play Warmachine, but I also don't go on their forums and complain about how bad the MKIII release is. Same reason I don't go and bash the newest X-Wing release

I don't play 40k anymore, but I am still following the story. I still read the books because I still like the setting. So what if someone doesn't play? There are other aspects this story affects beyond the game and that is the conversation.

Some people are just really invested in the lore, and there's nothing wrong with that. I love the 40k setting even if the game is pretty awful in terms of balance.

If those stats/abilities are correct...RG can wreck just about anything in CC and laugh the entire time. Knights have zero chance.

 ProtoClone wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ProtoClone wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

Don't have to play to have an opinion on this.

No, but it looks foolish. I don't play Warmachine, but I also don't go on their forums and complain about how bad the MKIII release is. Same reason I don't go and bash the newest X-Wing release

I don't play 40k anymore, but I am still following the story. I still read the books because I still like the setting. So what if someone doesn't play? There are other aspects this story affects beyond the game and that is the conversation.

I'll accept that. What I think is silly is criticizing the story when it hasn't even been released yet. What if the return of Roboute is amazing and makes the lore better?

By Badtucker on disqus - RG rules screenshot

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ProtoClone wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ProtoClone wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

Don't have to play to have an opinion on this.

No, but it looks foolish. I don't play Warmachine, but I also don't go on their forums and complain about how bad the MKIII release is. Same reason I don't go and bash the newest X-Wing release

I don't play 40k anymore, but I am still following the story. I still read the books because I still like the setting. So what if someone doesn't play? There are other aspects this story affects beyond the game and that is the conversation.

I'll accept that. What I think is silly is criticizing the story when it hasn't even been released yet. What if the return of Roboute is amazing and makes the lore better?

That stands to be seen.

I think they have every right based on what happened with WHFB. Past experiences have made some of us a tad bitter.

Except some of us think that the WHFB thing was actually awesome. The world was stale as hell. The game was stale. The setting felt meh. End Times set it on fire with a bang and AoS fluff is actually really good and getting even better as the universe gets extended.

If they do 40k half so well advancing the story as they are doing with AoS then we're in for a treat.

I guess as long as they dont turn the Guard into the Freeguilds...

 Bobthehero wrote:
I guess as long as they dont turn the Guard into the Freeguilds...

Seriously, freeguild and guard aren't really different, considering they vary a lot from city/planet to city/planet and they generally work as a more "defensive" rather than "shock" force.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Spoiler:

If you replace "empire" with "game" and "Horus" with "Kirby" in the bottom quote, it's ironically equally as appropriate in real life as the original is in the fluff. I'll take them screwing up the fluff if they fix the actual rules. I can always unilaterally change the former while playing pickup games but not the bloated, greedy, corpse of the latter.

Many fans are heavily invested in old 40k and every year they see Games Workshop move a little further from what they love. No wonder people are worried that a big new event in the lore might be a destructive force for the universe they love.

Personally, I don't mind a little change here and there but I'm also in the worried camp. I want GW to move back in the direction that appeals to me obviously and this could be a decisive move in the opposite, 'Saturday morning cartoon' and toy robot action figure direction.

It's cool if you like what happening but loads of people don't, we don't have to fight about it.

Warhams-77 wrote:
By Badtucker on disqus - RG rules screenshot

Spoiler:

Holy crap. Really hope he can be taken by any Imperium force. I'd love to have him lead my Guard.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
For some people, the fact that they've done it is already sufficient to call it a flop.

I'd count myself in the deeply sceptical but still open minded camp, but it's difficult to see a route forward that's not going to look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Azrael, gotta ask you a question. Do you play 40k currently? If not, when did you quit? Seems kinda pointless to bemoan a game you aren't playing

Into 7th, I still have two armies with a third (more 30K orientated but with an eye towards using it in 40K also) WIP.

I have stopped playing, because I find the game deeply unsatisfying to play as it stands, but I'd say I'm lapsed rather than quit.

Equally, I'm not bemoaning the game (in this context,) I'm not even specifically criticising the details of the changes (although god knows I have my reservations) I'm questioning the wisdom of taking any setting and moving the timeline forward, because this in and of itself presents creative challenges for maintaining the longevity of the game's fiction.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Except some of us think that the WHFB thing was actually awesome. The world was stale as hell. The game was stale. The setting felt meh. End Times set it on fire with a bang and AoS fluff is actually really good and getting even better as the universe gets extended.

If they do 40k half so well advancing the story as they are doing with AoS then we're in for a treat.

Some people can't the forest for the trees. AoS is and always will be the devil to them, no matter what good may come from it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Casey's Law wrote:
Many fans are heavily invested in old 40k and every year they see Games Workshop move a little further from what they love. No wonder people are worried that a big new event in the lore might be a destructive force for the universe they love.

Personally, I don't mind a little change here and there but I'm also in the worried camp. I want GW to move back in the direction that appeals to me obviously and this could be a decisive move in the opposite, 'Saturday morning cartoon' and toy robot action figure direction.

I hope they blow it up, AoS style. 30 years of "2 minutes to midnight" grows stale. At least there's things finally at stake now.