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.

Like a junkie here I am refreshing a page endlessly. Seems like they're going to be late again today.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Eyjio wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I mentioned it a few times but Mortal Wounds may be taking the place of rending. mandiblasters rendingnthrough he weak points of armour is super duper fluffy.

But we already saw a rending weapon in the soulreaper cannon. It just had -1 AP more than expected; none of this mortal wounds nonsense.

Because all weapons never change rules like how sniper weapons never lost rending or pinning. Oh wait.

New edition, new rules, weapons based more on their fluff to determine their crunch.

Which is fair enough, but you can't call it a replacement to rending then; it's just a rules change to one weapon instead.

Eyjio wrote:

Which is fair enough, but you can't call it a replacement to rending then; it's just a rules change to one weapon instead.

Maybe. No one really knows for sure yet. Getting rid of rending simplifies it though.

Eyjio wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I mentioned it a few times but Mortal Wounds may be taking the place of rending. mandiblasters rendingnthrough he weak points of armour is super duper fluffy.

But we already saw a rending weapon in the soulreaper cannon. It just had -1 AP more than expected; none of this mortal wounds nonsense.

The advantage of bespoke rules is that they're not bound to using one USR to create a given effect. Where previously Rend was the substitute for all not-quite-powerful-enough-for-AP 2 effects, now they can give Mortal Wound on 6 for units that can pierce armor via their skill (like Eldar) or just -1 AP for just above average power like an assault cannon.

Daedalus81 wrote:
Like a junkie here I am refreshing a page endlessly.

Well they will be pleased to hear that

Daedalus81 wrote:
Like a junkie here I am refreshing a page endlessly. Seems like they're going to be late again today.

right there with ya bud. Straight addicted to these teaseing news leaks

Mymearan wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
PLEASE read all information in OP before making assumptions on information, as those assumptions may already be covered by other articles.

Can I make bloodsumptions, though? Or murdersumptions?

Yes.

Thanks! Making fun of GW's silly naming convention is always fun! All the time! Sorry, all the bloodymurdertime!

To be fair, the bloody mcbloodface faction in AoS does have the silliest names in all of Warhammer!

Maybe they shouldn't have hired Nathan Explosion to head the model naming team.

Every time I refresh and it's not there, I die a little inside.

 EnTyme wrote:
Maybe they shouldn't have hired Nathan Explosion to head the model naming team.

The “This cafe is blacker than the blackest black… TIMES INFINITYYYYYY” guy?

tneva82 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Fluff says Mandiblasters are good vs Organic targets (and honestly I can see miniature plasma explosions being good against other targets) and nothing implies they can hit vehicles yet. If they can, who cares?

You said it yourself. ORGANIC. How is terminator armour organic? Land raider? Warhound? Warlord?

And if you don't care about fluff you shouldn't have problem with say assault marines getting bolt pistols that shoot 2d6 wound lascannon equilavents or grots that will wreck even warlord titan in close combat in one round with killing power to spare. Both can be made to be anything from too weak to balanced just right to overpowerful. And by rewriting fluff they are even fluffy! So by your logic you should have no problem with either of those two changes?

Terminator armor has weak points and I imagine there is a few spots on a Land Raider where shooting the shards into it and making them explode might be worth knocking off a HP.
Same justification in them having worked against Necrons. See? No problem.

Oh yeah, and if the Titan is damaged enough why shouldn't a grot be able to hit that weak spot that finally tips it over and makes it lose that final HP?

Just refreshed for 13 minutes straight, break time

 Rippy wrote:
Just refreshed for 13 minutes straight, break time

My F5 key has broken and I am still jamming my finger into the shards as I bleed profusely. We must carry on!

 EnTyme wrote:

Mymearan wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
PLEASE read all information in OP before making assumptions on information, as those assumptions may already be covered by other articles.

Can I make bloodsumptions, though? Or murdersumptions?

Yes.

Thanks! Making fun of GW's silly naming convention is always fun! All the time! Sorry, all the bloodymurdertime!

To be fair, the bloody mcbloodface faction in AoS does have the silliest names in all of Warhammer!

Maybe they shouldn't have hired Nathan Explosion to head the model naming team.

I'm half expecting a new Bloodbound model to have the ability: Bloodtrocuted.

Man though the impatience of waiting for that new article. Like a bunch of junkies waiting for that next hit.

Going to sleep in 10 minutes sorry dudes, OP update may have to wait 5 hours

 Rippy wrote:
Going to sleep in 10 minutes sorry dudes, OP update may have to wait 5 hours

It's just 40k, we'll be fine.

 EnTyme wrote:

Maybe they shouldn't have hired Nathan Explosion to head the model naming team.

Too funny.

Just yesterday I was setting up my Dark Eldar 3D 'Arena of Blood' for a photo shoot, and my seven year old kid approached and asked "What are those?" (pointing at the spiky obstacles).

Me: "Those are 'murder stakes' "

Him: Looks over the arena and the Wyches. "Oh. There's a lot of murder things in there... 'murder knife', she's got a 'murder net', he's got a 'murder whip'... "



On a thread related note, I haven't played 40K using 40K rules for about 14 years. I'll be picking this up for sure. Overall the changes sound great.

 Kirasu wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Going to sleep in 10 minutes sorry dudes, OP update may have to wait 5 hours

It's just 40k, we'll be fine.

No friend, it's New 40k

Random thought - if, as I suspect, Vehicles literally have no special rules beyond what is on their data sheet, then a vehicle, when assaulted, will have to either stay and fight or withdraw normally and lose a round of shooting. That's interesting and kind of makes up for increased durability in assault.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/12/new-warhammer-40000-points-power-levels-may12gw-homepage-post-4/

I'm actually really, really hoping vehicles have normal melee stats. "RUN THEM DOWN!"

Also that guy on the baneblade finally gets to hit them with his sword.

Ninjas lurk in the shadows.

In matched play, your points will be capped across the whole game. So if you’re planning to summon units to the battlefield, you will need to set points aside to do this.

The points for units don’t appear on the datasheet but will be elsewhere in the same book. This is because you don’t need them to play if you don’t want, which frees up room to include more rules for weapons on the datasheet. It also means that, in the future, points for units could change without invalidating existing books – so if one unit or weapon starts to dominate tournaments, or certain units don’t seem to be carrying their weight in competitive games, we can address the balance.

Ninjad.

Looks promising. Not a surprise with summoning.

Wow odd numbered points for weapons...never thought i'd see the day!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Marines are 1 point cheaper and a multi-melta is almost 3 times the cost.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Fluff says Mandiblasters are good vs Organic targets (and honestly I can see miniature plasma explosions being good against other targets) and nothing implies they can hit vehicles yet. If they can, who cares?

You said it yourself. ORGANIC. How is terminator armour organic? Land raider? Warhound? Warlord?

And if you don't care about fluff you shouldn't have problem with say assault marines getting bolt pistols that shoot 2d6 wound lascannon equilavents or grots that will wreck even warlord titan in close combat in one round with killing power to spare. Both can be made to be anything from too weak to balanced just right to overpowerful. And by rewriting fluff they are even fluffy! So by your logic you should have no problem with either of those two changes?

Terminator armor has weak points and I imagine there is a few spots on a Land Raider where shooting the shards into it and making them explode might be worth knocking off a HP.
Same justification in them having worked against Necrons. See? No problem.

Oh yeah, and if the Titan is damaged enough why shouldn't a grot be able to hit that weak spot that finally tips it over and makes it lose that final HP?

I'd forget it, I've made this argument, and seen at least one other person put forward a similar idea, but because it runs contrary to the direction of the doom train it gets ignored.

Disagreeing with a point of view is a person's prerogative, but continuallly and totally disregarding a logical alternative to the point of acting like it was never proposed is just disingenuous.

This was one of the least informative previews to date. How about some printed examples?

I'd really like to see how they're going to put such a granular points system in a different part of the book without making it a nightmare to list build by hand.

It's overall a good plan. I like the ability to re-point down the line, but it sounds awfully clunky in practice.

 docdoom77 wrote:
This was one of the least informative previews to date. How about some printed examples?

I'd really like to see how they're going to put such a granular points system in a different part of the book without making it a nightmare to list build by hand.

It's overall a good plan. I like the ability to re-point down the line, but it sounds awfully clunky in practice.

27 points for a freaking multi-melta? o.O

 kestral wrote:
Random thought - if, as I suspect, Vehicles literally have no special rules beyond what is on their data sheet, then a vehicle, when assaulted, will have to either stay and fight or withdraw normally and lose a round of shooting. That's interesting and kind of makes up for increased durability in assault.

This had occurred to me as well, but I was thinking specifically along the lines of Imperial Knight Titans. They no longer have to worry about getting bogged down in combat and effectively removed from play.

My last game where I took an IK was against Tyanids. My IK got to shoot once before being tied up with an endless swam of termagants. I would have loved the ability to just walk away. The potential issue would then become... They'll just follow and chase my IK around the table in a game of Cat & Mouse.

I am betting all heavy weapons have taken a good size jump up in points.

Man, it looks like I sold my Daemon summon army at the right time!