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.

I really just wish they would have kept to selling small versions of the soft back rule books, those things were amazing and actually felt like luxury items. As honestly, more convenient to carry was always better.

I was on the fence about buying this book, but if it hasn't been updated with the new FAQs I don't see the point of getting it since I already have the main rulebook.

GW just never ceases to amaze me. Such utter disdain for the community that makes them rich. An expensive AF reprint of outdated rules....come on man.

So what exactly is the point of this book? I mean this as a real question, since if the reports are accurate it's a useless reprint that you couldn't actually use to play a proper game.

new player wants a rule book, but doesn't want to buy empire or a hard copy, may think about illegaly downloading, but the floppy is cheaper, so to not be an donkey-cave they huy the floppy thnking that this is the most up to date version of the rules.?

HoundsofDemos wrote:
So what exactly is the point of this book? I mean this as a real question, since if the reports are accurate it's a useless reprint that you couldn't actually use to play a proper game.

AoS released one, so 40k felt compelled to do the same. They just didn't get the memo about updating it...

 Ordana wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
So what exactly is the point of this book? I mean this as a real question, since if the reports are accurate it's a useless reprint that you couldn't actually use to play a proper game.

AoS released one, so 40k felt compelled to do the same. They just didn't get the memo about updating it...

That's the most bizarre thing about this. Why update one but not the another? It makes no sense.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
So what exactly is the point of this book? I mean this as a real question, since if the reports are accurate it's a useless reprint that you couldn't actually use to play a proper game.

AoS released one, so 40k felt compelled to do the same. They just didn't get the memo about updating it...

That's the most bizarre thing about this. Why update one but not the another? It makes no sense.

Because they are different teams working on their own.

The above is something I've always wondered about. I know every company has it's own culture and internal practices but GW from the outside looking in really seems to lack any kind of central direction. This pops up in how the background can vary wildly from codex to codex and BL and how rules often seem like they are written in a vacuum with little over all plan on where the game is going.

Chaos 2.0 codex was a complete copy paste bust, this only prepared me for the copy paste bust of the rules book XD

 vaklor4 wrote:
Chaos 2.0 codex was a complete copy paste bust, this only prepared me for the copy paste bust of the rules book XD

Well, being pepsi man, you can stop them. You're the only one who can.

AngryAngel80 wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:
Chaos 2.0 codex was a complete copy paste bust, this only prepared me for the copy paste bust of the rules book XD

Well, being pepsi man, you can stop them. You're the only one who can.

By god, you're right.

When 4chan has a better work ethic than you...

I think most people have better work ethic than GW, or they'd be fired.

The Facebook post with a link to the community article is still on the Warhammer 40,000 Facebook page. The top comment there is from the team and reads:

Warhammer 40,000 wrote:Hey folks, there's a lot of you asking about the contents of the upcoming Warhammer 40,000 - The Rules. Everything we know about that book right now is included in the article above.

Now if that's not textbook question dodging, I don't know what is. This is a shameful display. I think I owe BaconCatBug an apology.

Well I mean they know what people wanted to hear about with the book. The PR people aren't idiots, they just like to lead astray or speak half truths and when they can't do either just say nothing and hope mistakes get made.

When you got nothing to say, you say nothing It works, the book is going to sell just fine probably.
Or in a few months, someone at the company will think no one wants a small version.
Also, its $85 ! What is with that price.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
The Facebook post with a link to the community article is still on the Warhammer 40,000 Facebook page. The top comment there is from the team and reads:

Warhammer 40,000 wrote:Hey folks, there's a lot of you asking about the contents of the upcoming Warhammer 40,000 - The Rules. Everything we know about that book right now is included in the article above.

Now if that's not textbook question dodging, I don't know what is. This is a shameful display. I think I owe BaconCatBug an apology.

Yeah when i saw that i knew the updates were not there. If they were they would be happy to say. As it is they didn't want to hurt pre orders so tried that evasion. Hopefully it hurt sales even more

Apple fox wrote:
When you got nothing to say, you say nothing It works, the book is going to sell just fine probably.
Or in a few months, someone at the company will think no one wants a small version.
Also, its $85 ! What is with that price.

Well you live in Australia....
Your new, but not improved, book is $14 cheaper than the original book. Wich, other than your insane starting price, is a better deal than here in the USA - ours is $60/$50.

Seriously, do any of you down there not simply pirate your books??

Knowingly selling an obsolete product, while marketing it as a new release and deliberately obfuscating the fact that it is obsolete, seems very close to outright fraud. IMO.

GW generally does not usually update print books to include FAQ updates. That would require a reprinting, re-editing, etc, which is all very costly, and would lag many months behind downloadable FAQ material (if for no other reason than it takes time to get printed and shipped). It also introduces confusion when two books say different things.

Most other game companies also don't reprint books with newest Errata/FAQ either, they just refer people to the newest errata, keeping the original book the same and ensuring all updates/errata/faq are working off the same source material. Some do when they run out of stock and do another print run (though typically they also call it out as an updated edition of the book or whatnot to make it clear it's a different version than the first print run), but usually if they have enough material to warrant it they'll keep it for a major edition change.

I'm not sure why people are so bent out of shape about this, it's been pretty standard with GW forever and isn't any different with most other gaming companies.

 Vaktathi wrote:
GW generally does not usually update print books to include FAQ updates...

Try to keep up.

This is not a simple reprint of the previous rulebook. It's a new book with a different format. The "costly reprinting, re-editing etc." you invoke to excuse GW has in fact been done. The page numbers are different, meaning the existing errata documents will be directing people to the wrong pages if they use them with this new book, so the "confusion" you likewise invoke has not been avoided. Plus, this is a 40K-only problem: the AoS equivalent does include rules updates.

Now do you understand "why people are so bent out of shape"?

 Vaktathi wrote:
GW generally does not usually update print books to include FAQ updates. That would require a reprinting, re-editing, etc, which is all very costly, and would lag many months behind downloadable FAQ material (if for no other reason than it takes time to get printed and shipped). It also introduces confusion when two books say different things.

Most other game companies also don't reprint books with newest Errata/FAQ either, they just refer people to the newest errata, keeping the original book the same and ensuring all updates/errata/faq are working off the same source material. Some do when they run out of stock and do another print run (though typically they also call it out as an updated edition of the book or whatnot to make it clear it's a different version than the first print run), but usually if they have enough material to warrant it they'll keep it for a major edition change.

I'm not sure why people are so bent out of shape about this, it's been pretty standard with GW forever and isn't any different with most other gaming companies.

What a strange post.

It's better if both books are wrong because that will avoid player confusion. Correcting mistakes is hard work so better not to bother. No other company corrects mistakes anyway in the Industry (demonstrably wrong) so it's all good.

Some of the fan base will justify anything. Because they do tolerate such nonsense GW gets away with numerous things other companies wouldn't dream of doing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
When you got nothing to say, you say nothing It works, the book is going to sell just fine probably.
Or in a few months, someone at the company will think no one wants a small version.
Also, its $85 ! What is with that price.

Well you live in Australia....
Your new, but not improved, book is $14 cheaper than the original book. Wich, other than your insane starting price, is a better deal than here in the USA - ours is $60/$50.

Seriously, do any of you down there not simply pirate your books??

Why pirate an out of date rulebook.

 Vaktathi wrote:
GW generally does not usually update print books to include FAQ updates. That would require a reprinting, re-editing, etc, which is all very costly, and would lag many months behind downloadable FAQ material (if for no other reason than it takes time to get printed and shipped). It also introduces confusion when two books say different things.

Most other game companies also don't reprint books with newest Errata/FAQ either, they just refer people to the newest errata, keeping the original book the same and ensuring all updates/errata/faq are working off the same source material. Some do when they run out of stock and do another print run (though typically they also call it out as an updated edition of the book or whatnot to make it clear it's a different version than the first print run), but usually if they have enough material to warrant it they'll keep it for a major edition change.

I'm not sure why people are so bent out of shape about this, it's been pretty standard with GW forever and isn't any different with most other gaming companies.

All of this is entirely irrelevant because this is a new book, not a reprint.
No one is complaining they aren't throwing every book they have in storage in the shredder every 6 months to make a faq updated print.

They are complaining that a new book is 3 years out of date the day it comes out while its companion book for the other major game system IS up-to-date and has incorporated the new rules.

 Ordana wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
GW generally does not usually update print books to include FAQ updates. That would require a reprinting, re-editing, etc, which is all very costly, and would lag many months behind downloadable FAQ material (if for no other reason than it takes time to get printed and shipped). It also introduces confusion when two books say different things.

Most other game companies also don't reprint books with newest Errata/FAQ either, they just refer people to the newest errata, keeping the original book the same and ensuring all updates/errata/faq are working off the same source material. Some do when they run out of stock and do another print run (though typically they also call it out as an updated edition of the book or whatnot to make it clear it's a different version than the first print run), but usually if they have enough material to warrant it they'll keep it for a major edition change.

I'm not sure why people are so bent out of shape about this, it's been pretty standard with GW forever and isn't any different with most other gaming companies.

All of this is entirely irrelevant because this is a new book, not a reprint.
No one is complaining they aren't throwing every book they have in storage in the shredder every 6 months to make a faq updated print.

They are complaining that a new book is 3 years out of date the day it comes out while its companion book for the other major game system IS up-to-date and has incorporated the new rules.

New runs of existing rule books should be updated with errata. That is an industry standard.

Nobody is saying all print books should be kept updated but if you are putting it through the printer again to update stocks the new run should incorporate all known errata at that point. Most companies would do that as a matter of course - call it professionalism or pride in their product or whatever.

They don't even do that for the .epub digital versions.
Print run updates? Never.

GW have always been lax about doing things the 'normal' way, which can sometimes be a good thing.
But keeping their published rules updated? 'Shoddy' is a more polite term than I would want to use for them.

 Vaktathi wrote:
GW generally does not usually update print books to include FAQ updates. That would require a reprinting, re-editing, etc, which is all very costly, and would lag many months behind downloadable FAQ material (if for no other reason than it takes time to get printed and shipped). It also introduces confusion when two books say different things.

Most other game companies also don't reprint books with newest Errata/FAQ either, they just refer people to the newest errata, keeping the original book the same and ensuring all updates/errata/faq are working off the same source material. Some do when they run out of stock and do another print run (though typically they also call it out as an updated edition of the book or whatnot to make it clear it's a different version than the first print run), but usually if they have enough material to warrant it they'll keep it for a major edition change.

I'm not sure why people are so bent out of shape about this, it's been pretty standard with GW forever and isn't any different with most other gaming companies.

Well a) this book as is is useless b) GW themselves made better product in the AOS side...so hardly something GW can't do. AOS was able to do it. Why not the big seller can't

edit: and as above said that re-editing etc is done. And now we need 2nd set of errata's. one for original book, one for the new book.

Sorry, missed that it was a shorter format book, and the page count thing I can understand the irritation over. That said, still looking at other gaming companies and past 40k releases (like the 5E rulebook/mini-rulebook and at least one of my same-edition/different format Flames of War & Heavy Gear book sets as well), that's not spectacularly uncommon or unique to GW, including errata/FAQ with newer printings is pretty hit or miss as far as "standards" go in the wargaming world.

Have they made a statement about this yet? The FB page is on full blast right now for this, nearly every comment is telling them to sit and spin.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
GW's FB post on the release of this book was totally removed from existence within 2 hours of posting earlier this evening. Nearly every comment was about either the high cost or the fact it was just a reprint without updates. It was gaining laughing face or angry emotes at a rate quicker than thumbs up likes.
I guess even the fans aren't impressed with this piece of laziness.

I wonder how many people will pre-order it expecting updates in it and be rather disappointed.

Best bit was people asking if it had the updated rules and their FB team going "we only know what's in the article"...
I can only assume that's because hundreds (thousands?) of books in a print run get made, and shipped in less than a week, and no-one has made an official decision on which rules they're putting in the new book. I mean, it definitely couldn't be that either a) the people who run their FB don't get told and can't ask someone with actual knowledge on their products or b) that they're not allowed, or don't want to, tell us what's in it because people will suss out the scam. Definitely not.