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.

Ad mech is one faction on the new site

That's one of the questions I asked. Could some brave, benevolent soul help transcribe all the questions and answers here? I'd do it, but I forgot my headphones, and I don't think they use subtitles. If the video can be watched later, I'll do it for youse, but if not, please be nice <3

I asked if attributes will be the same style as now, or if they will change to AoS style.

 Pacific wrote:

 Thud wrote:
The level of self-awareness in that FAQ is pretty impressive.

I'm quite optimistic.

Me too. This kind of post would have been absolutely unthinkable a couple of years ago, in fact there wouldn't have been any post at all.

Definitely feels like a change of character by GW in terms of how it engages with fans, and I think 100% improvement for the better.

I agree. An attitude like this FAQ demonstrates has given me that most dangerous of things... Hope.

maybe I'm reading this wrong, but points only in matched play.?

Are you getting rid of points?
Not at all. There will be a full points system, for use in matched play - one of three ways to play
covered in the rulebook.


What do you mean “3 ways to play”?
We realise that people like to play Warhammer 40,000 in different ways. 3 broad systems are
covered in the new edition:
1) Open play is the most flexible, and easiest to get started with,
allowing you to use any miniatures you like. So unbound with no point restrictions ?

2) Narrative play is where you can refight the iconic
battles of the 41st Millennium, or create your own campaigns and sagas. Themed massed battle no points.?
3) Matched play is designed for more balanced and competitive games, ideal for gaming clubs, leagues and
tournaments. However you want to enjoy playing Warhammer 40,000, there will be rules for that. Points to allow for pick up games.?

Is that the gist of it ?

 loki old fart wrote:

Is that the gist of it ?

because of the success in AoS, we get Unbound without points, Scenarios without points and standard games with points

Yeah, that's how it works in AoS, more or less. No one generally plays outside of Matched Play.

Pretty much.

Though Narrative Play also allows for 'set force' historical re-fights.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The points are also 'blocked' in AoS.

So you start with say, 5 Ironjaw Brutes, and they cost you X points. Their upgrades are free. If you want to expand the unit, it's their X cost again for up to 5.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Pretty much.

Though Narrative Play also allows for 'set force' historical re-fights.

Much like LOTR as well - The scenarios mostly have set forces for both sides, or for tournament/general matchup play there are points for everything and a set of battle types...

You could already play in those ways before, it's not like GW was hammering down on people not using completely matched points. And people can make their own decisions. You know, like adults. I appreciate that they put it out so people aren't scared off by "complexity" but it wasn't necessary.

You can use points in all of them if you want to. Ultimately you decide how you want to play and what is legal in open play.

But a space marine/imperial guard/SoB force holding off hordes of tyranids/orks/necrons shouldn't be equal in points.

 biggie_reg wrote:
You could already play in those ways before, it's not like GW was hammering down on people not using completely matched points. And people can make their own decisions. You know, like adults. I appreciate that they put it out so people aren't scared off by "complexity" but it wasn't necessary.

Jjohnso11 wrote:
You can use points in all of them if you want to. Ultimately you decide how you want to play and what is legal in open play.

Heresy!

Though Narrative Play also allows for 'set force' historical re-fights.

Yea that could be very cool, 'historical battles' which you could play again and again.

I can also see a possibilities for more free form, narrative battles.

Say a scenario Tallarn Desert Raiders armoured column punches through Ork lines to capture a set of objectives.

1. I can ignore any force org or points and assemble a convincing representation of an armoured column and Ork defence force appropriate for the scenario.
2. I can have really weird deployment zones to represent the scenario, say the initial Ork defence force can only deploy packed in the two forts that are the objectives, or that Ork relief forces come on behind the Imperials to represent
forces racing back from the front lines.
3. I can have asymmetrical victory conditions. Say I make the Tallarn force much larger than the Orks. The Imperials would win a major victory if they capture both objectives by turn 3 or a minor victory if they do it by turn 5.
The Orks only win if they delay the Imperials sufficiently.
4. I can tie lots of scenarios together, say a minor victory leads to the Imperials digging in or a major victory see them crashing into the Orks rear echelons. I can also put in things like a optional space marine reserve deployed by drop pod. Whether this reserve is used or not could affect the narrative in different ways and effect future campaign scenarios.

Now I know I can do all this now, but I think having the narrative way of playing official endorsed and enshrined in the BRB will encourage people to play and create these scenarios far more frequently.

Hehe! You should visit the SHOP section on the new website. Really cute pics

You know, I'm actually curious. With all the positive changes, with MOST people being happier with GW in the recent bit of time since Rountree took over, with AoS coming into its own, with the hype train being real and active, and 8th being announced and being listed as having game styles similar to AoS and everything else, sales up, communication, better "deals" by buying bulk boxes...do you think Kirby is actually looking bad and going "crap; why didn't I do that?" Under Rountree, GW has made massive changes. Is every change we want right on the table? No, not quite. A lot of boxes are still costly. But free base rules is one of the last holdouts for 40k. Most people are happy. If you aren't happy, well, you are of course free to not be. But I think it's safe to say the naysayers are in the minority now. GW has stepped its game up. There are still bummer moments. I've had like 2-3 opportunities to buy SWA and skipped cuz no daemons. Even SoB got rules. I'm bummed. But I'm a minority there. It's okay. They can't please 100% of us 100% of the time. I'm looking forward to 8th. I run a screamer-star. And I'm content to watch it go away while things like wraith decurians and wraithknights and stuff also become manageable. Bring on 8th!!

Kirby didn't give a flying feth when he was CEO, why would he now

Ragnar69 wrote:
Hehe! You should visit the SHOP section on the new website. Really cute pics

https://warhammer40000.com/shop/
"Your order is
INCOMING!"

 Kroem wrote:

Though Narrative Play also allows for 'set force' historical re-fights.

Yea that could be very cool, 'historical battles' which you could play again and again.

I can also see a possibilities for more free form, narrative battles.

Say a scenario Tallarn Desert Raiders armoured column punches through Ork lines to capture a set of objectives.

1. I can ignore any force org or points and assemble a convincing representation of an armoured column and Ork defence force appropriate for the scenario.
2. I can have really weird deployment zones to represent the scenario, say the initial Ork defence force can only deploy packed in the two forts that are the objectives, or that Ork relief forces come on behind the Imperials to represent
forces racing back from the front lines.
3. I can have asymmetrical victory conditions. Say I make the Tallarn force much larger than the Orks. The Imperials would win a major victory if they capture both objectives by turn 3 or a minor victory if they do it by turn 5.
The Orks only win if they delay the Imperials sufficiently.
4. I can tie lots of scenarios together, say a minor victory leads to the Imperials digging in or a major victory see them crashing into the Orks rear echelons. I can also put in things like a optional space marine reserve deployed by drop pod. Whether this reserve is used or not could affect the narrative in different ways and effect future campaign scenarios.

Now I know I can do all this now, but I think having the narrative way of playing official endorsed and enshrined in the BRB will encourage people to play and create these scenarios far more frequently.

Yup.

Asymmetrical victory conditions are fun. If one side is meant to be horribly outnumbered, their success is down to the type of damage they inflict. Take out all the enemy transports? Perhaps a narrow victory. Take out all their HQ? Major victory - whereas the larger side needs to take and hold objectives.

AoS started off with similar, thanks to Sudden Death. Sure, it wasn't especially popular, but it did make for some interesting games, especially as the outnumbered player got to choose the condition.

Making scenarios was pretty much all we did in our teens. It's awesome fun.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Yeah, that's how it works in AoS, more or less. No one generally plays outside of Matched Play.

I do! it's more fun than people give it credit for. Especially with scenarios as people are talking about.

I take it wrath of magnus and curse of the wulfen or worthless now

 loki old fart wrote:
I take it wrath of magnus and curse of the wulfen or worthless now

Fluff is still valid, just the rules portion isn't.

 loki old fart wrote:
I take it wrath of magnus and curse of the wulfen or worthless now

The fluff is not.

The scenarios aren't necessarily.

The rules/points? Probably.

 loki old fart wrote:
I take it wrath of magnus and curse of the wulfen or worthless now

The rules in them are not valid for 8th edition. The background, art images and everything else in the books are still perfectly valid, as are the rules for games of 7th.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Making scenarios was pretty much all we did in our teens. It's awesome fun.

Yeah, I could invent scenarios as a 12 year old, asymmetric forces, asymmetric victory conditions, that's why I never seem to understand why people are enthused by a game telling you how to create narrative games and whatnot.... the hard thing is creating BALANCED games, anyone can create narrative ones with or without a book telling us what to do.

The rules - yeah once 8th is released.
The fluff - it depends if you care about it or not and the level of enjoyment you get out of re-reading it.

On the brightside at least CotW had a longer shelf life than the first Imperial Knights codex .

Hm... I like the attitude change.

Let's see about those rules, then - those will be the true dealbreakers.

I don't see anything wrong with no points scenarios; it works really well in STAW!

Certain missions (kabayashi Maru) hav eyou playing against a set table using something vastly outmatched where a buddy takes up the riengs of the NPC and you gotta try to win. Its basically beer and pretzels and you get to brag about having beat it afterwards.

The same could go for 40.... A wildly outnumbered SM company recreating the tyranic invasion of maccgragre, or the istavan dropsite massacre. Or a battle trying to keep demons from flooding a webway.

Just because points are optional sometimes does not mean it has to go bad, it could be you and four buddies taking turns at beating a 'challenge' while you get drunk.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Yeah, that's how it works in AoS, more or less. No one generally plays outside of Matched Play.

I think the people who would create an account and post on the internet probably skew those numbers a bit. It is quite possible their are more players that play out side of Matched Play or who would want to. They just play super casual and aren't the type to talk with others about their hobby over the internet. They are also probably the sort that don't play at stores/clubs so they come off rather invisible. I don't know if their is enough of them to have GW bother with rules though.

I know I am getting there where I would much rather have a well tested campaign book with the army lists predefined for both sides (as long as it doesn't involve crazy model purchases) with a rough description of how to setup the table rather than build my own list. I am also not opposed to playing games without using points. Heck, when I play my buddy who just uses my collection some games we sometimes basically just grab some stuff that looks about even. Because outside skirmish games, he is not going to build an army list, and I don't like trying to figure out what stuff he want is his list all the time.

I will miss all of the Codexes but at the same time I feel there were just too many. Like, Ad Mech didn't need to be 2 different books. And that's just 1 of many examples.

I haven't read all the details, so I don't know all that's coming, but would I'd love is free rules and warscrolls (or whatever the 40k word for them will be) for every unit in the game as downloadable PDFs. And separately a small printed "just the rules" book, and nice glossy printed warscrolls on cards that you can buy separately if you want.

And then as far as books go, they should be fluffier things that are more about special stories and campaigns and missions and stuff, rather than where they store all of the rules and stats that become obsolete as soon as the next errata is published.

I'd also love to see unit cards included with models.. they included warscrolls with AOS models, but they're just added on as an extra page in the model building instructions and just don't look as nice as a color unit card would be.. and if they're printing them in the thousands, the cost of said cards really isn't much...

I guess what I'm saying is I like cards.