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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It could be the allow one "irregular" unit per army.

Which has you pay for the full increment anyway and was designed for Starters and Paint sets that didn't include full unit sizes.

I kinda like this all in one Combiweapon thing. Combi flamer have been useless since forever. Combi sternguard were ridiculous to use as cheap anti tank, and often the bolter part was useless to the dedicated target.

Now it makes the bolter strictly anti Infantry, it's an extra oomf in your face when getting shot at with a Bolter.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I kinda like this all in one Combiweapon thing. Combi flamer have been useless since forever. Combi sternguard were ridiculous to use as cheap anti tank, and often the bolter part was useless to the dedicated target.

Now it makes the bolter strictly anti Infantry, it's an extra oomf in your face when getting shot at with a Bolter.

It's ok-ish into tanks.

If you have 10 dudes in RF range -- 20 * .666 * .167 = 2.2 MW / 5.4 with OoM on.

tneva82 wrote:
We don't know 2 page army rules have psychic powers

We also don't know that they don't have psychic powers.

We do know we ought to stick to what's revealed, rather than wander off in the direction of unknown unknowns.

At least for the N&R thread

In these case it is safe too look at how AoS does it, since 40K is always chasing after AoS.

In AoS casters indeed have their own specific power only, plus a generic attack spell and a generic defense spell. In addition to those, depending on faction/allegiance they get to select an additional power from a list.

But is there room in 2 pager for faction rules, stratagems, artefacts, warlord traits AND spells? Plus of course all the art and borders invariably in them.

And does GW really intend to start inventing up much in form of new never heard psychic powers...

Or is this just return to 3rd ed style like it looks like.

tneva82 wrote:
But is there room in 2 pager for faction rules, stratagems, artefacts, warlord traits AND spells? Plus of course all the art and borders invariably in them.

I could see them throwing in rare psychic abilities as character enhancements for factions like GK and TS. Wouldn't require any chance to the detachment structure.

tneva82 wrote:
But is there room in 2 pager for faction rules, stratagems, artefacts, warlord traits AND spells? Plus of course all the art and borders invariably in them.

Relics and Warlord traits were all combined into "Enhancements", so probably a combined 6 or so per Deatchment.

tneva82 wrote:


Or is this just return to 3rd ed style like it looks like.

I'd very happy if the game returned to more of a 3rd ed style like we are seeing so far with psychic powers. No need for a half dozen different "power" weapon profiles, dozens of "bolter" variants, overly complex unit profiles, etc. . . . While I find OPR/GDF to be a bit too simple/lite for my tastes, 6th-9th editions (not including early 8th) made the game needlessly more complex with little additional "fun." A return to the level of complexity of 3rd/4th/5th editions would be fantastic IMHO.

edit: But given GW's track record, I'd bet the complexity (more bloat really) will return after the first couple codexes. Complaints of limited psychic power options and consolidated weapon profiles? Let's just add more "options" and different profiles with each new codex. And then we're back to where we are now . . . (and GW will burn it all down again to sell you a "new and improved!" 11th edition . . .).

The spacemarine cards will be an expensief set.

Tsagualsa wrote:

Crispy78 wrote:

Freeing up psychic powers to be used in any phase is good. I like the scaling up in power of the 'eadbanger power, and the risks involved! On the other hand, sounds like there might not be any selecting of powers / spells, just get what's on the unit card. And yeah, the librarian doesn't really thrill me.

There is always the possibility that later on we get 'different' units with a range of 'spells', something like a Brutal-Kunnin' Weirdboy with offensive powers and a Kunnin'-Brutal Weirdboy with e.g. movement powers, or one card for a SM Epistolarius, one for a Codificier and one for a Magister. Or Enhancements/Stratagems that change the powers, we know from the 'Artificer Armour' Enhancment that the datasheets are not totally immutable.

I think you mean:
Space Marine Librarian
Space Marine Librarian in Phobos armour
Space marine Librarian in Terminator armour.

Different armour, different power. That's the codex way.

Leggy wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

Crispy78 wrote:

Freeing up psychic powers to be used in any phase is good. I like the scaling up in power of the 'eadbanger power, and the risks involved! On the other hand, sounds like there might not be any selecting of powers / spells, just get what's on the unit card. And yeah, the librarian doesn't really thrill me.

There is always the possibility that later on we get 'different' units with a range of 'spells', something like a Brutal-Kunnin' Weirdboy with offensive powers and a Kunnin'-Brutal Weirdboy with e.g. movement powers, or one card for a SM Epistolarius, one for a Codificier and one for a Magister. Or Enhancements/Stratagems that change the powers, we know from the 'Artificer Armour' Enhancment that the datasheets are not totally immutable.

I think you mean:
Space Marine Librarian
Space Marine Librarian in Phobos armour
Space marine Librarian in Terminator armour.

Different armour, different power. That's the codex way.

Yeah, that's also something the new edition seems to need, because of the thing about who can lead what units. Between armour styles and ranks you can easily have 6 combinations if you just stick to Librarian 'Lords' and 'Heros' and have one armour for each, and it can potentially go even higher if you include jump units and/or bikes in the mix. Add one or two Psychic Powers that are bought as Enhancements, and you have more than a dozen combinations easily, more than you would need. Only the way you go about selecting them is totally different, but most options could be preserved. And of course special characters come into the mix, too.

Two levels of librarians seems highly unlikely to me. I think those times when one model could be two levels of rank are over.

 ph34r wrote:
Two levels of librarians seems highly unlikely to me. I think those times when one model could be two levels of rank are over.

I wouldn't completely dismiss the possibility of a Chief Librarian upgrade in the enhancement options, but it would certainly be a once per army choice, if it exists at all.

 skeleton wrote:
The spacemarine cards will be an expensief set.

Could be, but at least all datasheets will be free to download from day one.

If past trends hold, we probably won't get a preview article today, though we know that Terrain and Transports will be this week.

That leaves four slots for the last set of rules previews next week before Warhammer Fest. (Faction previews have already been promised for next month several times.)

I'm guessing at least one of them will be on the generic strategems - so far we've only seen one out of the twelve.

Not sure about the other three slots.Maybe Fight phase if there are changes there or a run-down of USRs. I'd be also curious to see if mission design and actions have changed.


EDIT: I was wrong: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/19/transports-are-the-fast-and-flexible-way-to-travel-the-new-edition-in-style/

Wyrdboy is M 6" will the rest of the orks be going back to 6" as well?

I'd guess one of the preview articles may cover the allied units and how they work in lists.

 Asmodai wrote:
If past trends hold, we probably won't get a preview article today.

Probably some useless (in a way it is both short, and adds absolutely nothing new) lore article today. I hope I am wrong though.

 Asmodai wrote:
If past trends hold, we probably won't get a preview article today, though we know that Terrain and Transports will be this week.

That leaves four slots for the last set of rules previews next week before Warhammer Fest. (Faction previews have already been promised for next month several times.)

I'm guessing at least one of them will be on the generic strategems - so far we've only seen one out of the twelve.

Not sure about the other three slots.Maybe Fight phase if there are changes there or a run-down of USRs. I'd be also curious to see if mission design and actions have changed.

We have yet to hear about Aggressors in Landraiders.

Transports article is up:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/19/transports-are-the-fast-and-flexible-way-to-travel-the-new-edition-in-style/



Firing deck indeed allows X models to fire, not X units like the community article said last week.







Rides all around!

Not much info about transports but what they have said looks fine. I like how making the Firing Deck weapons count as part of the vehicle neatly sidesteps a lot of the issues about buffs/debuffs and passengers we've seen in 8th and 9th. Being able to get out and shoot after moving also means we might see more transports in general because it's now definitely faster to use them, unlike now.

It's a bit odd that they haven't just gone with the old Bulky and Very Bulky keywords for bigger infantry models and are instead spelling out how many of some models can go into vehicles. Seems a little clunky, but not really a big problem.

Confirms that when they first said the Firing Deck number was Units that could fire it was a typo, as it is actually just the number of models (which is what I suspected due to it making much more sense).

Ork Landships Hoooo!

Sad to see the Rhino is still restricted, but at least Land Raiders and Drop Pods are an option for Primaris now.

I absolutely love the Falcon rule too. Very flavorful and fun. Would be great to get some plastic Fire Dragons to go with it.

Ok these are pretty dope. People are going to want to have transports held back with a unit to run up and dump out onto an objective when a fellow unit loses their OC. Very cool.

AND ASSAULT RAMP!

Slipspace wrote:
Not much info about transports but what they have said looks fine. I like how making the Firing Deck weapons count as part of the vehicle neatly sidesteps a lot of the issues about buffs/debuffs and passengers we've seen in 8th and 9th. Being able to get out and shoot after moving also means we might see more transports in general because it's now definitely faster to use them, unlike now.

It's a bit odd that they haven't just gone with the old Bulky and Very Bulky keywords for bigger infantry models and are instead spelling out how many of some models can go into vehicles. Seems a little clunky, but not really a big problem.

Apparently there are still restrictions for some units like Terminators and for Transports like the Rhino (mentioned in the article) so the Bulky/Very Bulky keyword might not have been sufficient or would have lead to wordy exceptions, and this time they seem to go for lists and enumerations in some cases. It's probably a wash in the grand scheme of things.

Primaris Drop pod model then?

 NAVARRO wrote:
Primaris Drop pod model then?

Sure, why not. Add in Drop pods for the new generation of Dreadnoughts while you're at it.

This article showcases a lot of what seems to be to be "forced synergies" that might result in only particular combinations of units being viable.