<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/69.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition thread, by the venerable Kid_Kyoto about the sort of rules changes that we can expect from GW. Unfortunately it's degenerated into another embarrassing wishlisting of rules people imagine they would like to see. I've attempted twice to discuss what I perceive to be will actually be the direction of change to the 5th edition rules in their transition to 6th edition. So I'm going to try and have that discussion here. To that end, I beg the moderation team to crack down on off-topic posts and in particular on wishlisting. We already have a thread for that.

Right, to start off I've seen three trends from 4th to 5th edition:

1. Universal Special Rules split into main rules and universal special rules. Examples include: Fleet, Counter-Attack, etc.

2. Flat rules fitted to the traditional Warhammer 40,000 curve: Examples include Preferred Enemy, Hit and Run, etc.

3. Introduction of concepts tested in other games. Examples include wound allocation previously used in Epic Armageddon, re-rolls for high Ballastic skill previous used in Blood Bowl blocking.

This will follow on the trend of GW being more explicit and holistic in their game design, witness the 'innovations' of integrating buildings, terrain, and so on into the game over the course of 3rd, 4th, and 5th edition.

So a couple of predictions:

Instant Death: I think we'll see non-stipulative Instant Death go from being caused by Strength twice or more the target's Toughness to being caused by wound rolls of 2+.

Eternal Warrior: I think we'll see Eternal Warrior give the bearing model a characteristic test against Instant Death rather than automatically negating Instant Death.

Combat Resolution: I think we'll see a return to combats in the main rules resolved by factors beyond wounds as stuff like Banners and Instruments of Chaos become more widespread.

Snipers: I think we'll see models with Sniper weapons will lose Rending and see it replaced by something like Telion's Eye of Vengeance.

Tank Shock: I think we're going to see tank shock and ramming cleaned up a bit so that they match the re-write in the FAQ.

Vehicles: I think we're going to see units in transports with fire points become vulnerable to template weapons like units in buildings currently are. Likewise I think they're going to do something about the one-way protection that transports give to psyckers.

Now I'm going to suggest a couple of things that it seems they could do, but are doubtful because the transition may be too shocking for some players:

Variable charge ranges: GW first instituted this with War of the Ring and continued its application in Warhammer Fantasy Battles (8th edition). If it is implemented, I expect we'll see Running become a 6" move and assaults become 1D6".

Shooting in Assault: GW first instituted this in Epic Armageddon, and it really works well where instead of Assaults they have "Engagements" where models that make it into base-to-base can use their close combat ability to attack, and those that don't can use their "firefight" ability to attack. In Epic Armageddon Firefight is a flat dice roll (like Close Combat) separate from the weapons that they're armed with, but I can see this working if models are restricted to using Assault Weapons.

Blast Markers (presumably renamed, or the 3" and 5" blast markers will be renamed): These were first implemented in Epic 40,000 and carried forward into Battlefleet Gothic and Epic Armageddon. While the stated design goal of 3rd edition was to get rid of clutter like blast markers, 5th edition brought in a whole sprue of markers for stuff like Objectives. These are great for tracking state changes in units, and tracking stuff like suppression, break points, and so on.

Universal Fall Back: Currently there's Fearless units that don't fall back but suffer No Retreat wounds, and there's normal units that fall back and risk a Sweeping Advance, and there's And They Shall Know No Fear, and ungainly hybrid conferring some of the advantages of both. Given the trend of integrating rules, I expect that these rules will be hybridized so that all units will be affected by something like No Retreat upon losing combat. Fearless units won't fall back, normal units will fall back (enemies consolidate), and And They Shall Know No Fear will allow automatic regrouping and regrouping under 50% (concurrently I'd predict that Combat Tactics will give the unit the option to fall back or not).

Terrain buy in: I think GW will give terrain points values so that players can not only buy in with their army's but also with terrain. Having the right army is just one part of strategy, and another part is finding the right battlefield... From an economic perspective, this would push sales of terrain, and provide GW with an angle for new products they can sell for armies.

So, there's some predictions I'd made for some general and army-specific changes for the transition to 6th edition, and my reasons for believing they'll come true - essentially being extensions of the trend I've seen in the progression from 4th to 5th. What do you think of my reasoning? What predictions would you make about 6th edition and what evidence and reasoning do you base them on?

Edited tags.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299248.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299248.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW it would make for a much better game... most of it anyway.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299260.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299260.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
The main change I would predict, because it makes sense, is only being able to cause wounds to enemies you can see. Being able to see 4 guys, inflicting 10 wounds and killing the whole squad is just dumb.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299286.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299286.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
It would represent troops digging in before an assault and would make foot sloggers more viable

so... instead a of a dedicated transport, they may "dig an emplacement" or similar and start with an extra heavy weapon and cover save if they don't move... it would provide an interesting counter to the proliferation of mech...


... it would take a lot to roll in though, so not sure if they'll try it in 6th]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299287.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299287.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
That was a 4th edition rule and it didn't survive the transition to 5th edition. I've noticed that GW isn't big on bringing back legacy rules that were deliberately excised in the latest edition. So I'm not sure sure "it makes 'sense" in the sense of a good reason for predicting what we might see in 6th edition. Sorry.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299310.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299310.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299311.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299311.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299317.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299317.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Well, first I talked about the trends that I identified in the transition from 4th edition to 5th edition and then extended those trends, that I ennumerated for your reading convenience, and applied them to existing rules.

For example, Eternal Warrior is flat. Therefore I applied trend #2, such as occurred with Preferred Warrior moving from a flat 3+ to a re-roll, and Hit and Run being moved to a Initiative test rather than being automatic.

I apologize for being so obscure in my reasoning.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299447.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299447.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW that would indicate that they're going to change Eternal Warrior at any point. Is it possible that they'll change EW? Of course. Is it likely? Maybe. Do we have anything specific to that rule we can make an inference on? No. What you're doing is at [i]best[i] guessing.

Real prediction would be using data from more recent GW publications to infer what the next ruleset would look like. A reasonable prediction would be the inclusion of a "measure any time" rule, as seen in War both for the Ring and WHFB 8th. Another would be that the "typical" cover save might move to 5+, judging from the cover-granting psychic powers in the BA and SW books. That's not as strong a prediction, but still based on enough solid information to actually be a prediction.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299489.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2299489.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition BA and DE codices and the Spearhead rule.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300921.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300921.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition HtH a bit. Right now the game is pretty much decided in HtH (unless you are IG). I was trying to figure it it out and the best idea I came up with was something along the lines of making the wounds in HtH come out of base to base models first. And then everyone within two inches of an enemy can attack.

Granted I face off against orks a lot so my view of this may be a bit slanted. But when facing off against a 6x30 ork strong mobs you see that HtH is a bit broken. Even if I kill of 5 - 10 orks they just get removed from the back and not much happens except that I die.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300937.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300937.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
No offense to GW but the trend I have noticed since Ed 1 is product sales. Not that it is a bad thing, but an expensive one From 4th to 5th it seemed like the common points played in a game doubled (maybe not double, but increased), requiring a player to field more models. With the addition of Apocolypse, fielding armor became a norm and also IMO more fun/challenging.
I can not predict the specifics of rules I see coming down the pipe but I do think there are two different ways things could go:

A bit of reverting (but like Nurglitch said, GW is not big on legacy rules). With Inquisitor a little on the rise I could see 40k going back to the days of old where armies and characters are more "customized". This would possibly play out with things you are predicting with the "Eternal". Similar to the last IG codex. Revising the army lists always brings out new models and new codex(s). Taking the game back to the days of the 1st edition getting closer to a roleplaying style could open the door for a lot more in the means of sales/models etc.

On the other hand (once again not very rule specific), speed of gameplay has always been increasing. The ability to play large points in little time. I have noticed with Ed 5 there are more options of what and where to shoot, and how to not be shot. I think this has slowed the game down a little. Epic did not last, but you did field a lot of armies. I'm sure GW has learned a lot from those rules and could be refering to that style of play to allow the player to put more out on the table. The 4th & 5th edition seemed to progressively lure younger players, made it a little less complex, easier to just grab dice and roll. This could possibly continue as the 40k world is more exposed. Something like a feature film could make or break the game in an attempt to make it mainstream to children under the age of say 14.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300950.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300950.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300968.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300968.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition 40K got any more simplified you might as well roll a dice each, whoever gets higer wins the game.

(not a complaint that it's too simple. )]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300973.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300973.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW won't care about this and will do it anyway. I would counter that due to the steady stream of new plastic daemon models that GW will not want to discourage anyone from playing them.

I would agree that measure anytime should be available as I believe, though I could be mistaken, that such a system is currently used in fantasy and other games.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300976.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2300976.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition ID on wound on 2+ doesn't seem likely as ID would become far, far more prevalent and weapons that did not normally cause instant death suddenly would; autocannons in particular. Ogryn, Nobz, and Warbosses all begin falling over dead and FNP is much more limited as an ability; even a heavy bolter could ignore FNP in many situations.

Eternal warrior going to a test would result in more dice being rolled, which seems contrary to the trend of GW streamlining special rules into less clunky mechanics. The predicted changes to ID and EW would result in having to 'spam' EW to counter the new prevalence of ID, which is contrary to GW's recent trend of making special rules more special.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2301309.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2301309.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW has actually gone back and forth with regard to rules before. For example, the way terrain was handled in 3rd, 4th, and 5th editions. Thankfully, GW has the sense to some times correct themselves over rules editions.

I predict that they'll get rid of the wound wrapping system as it is in 5th ed. People seem to complain about that and TLoS nearly as much as people comoplained about SMF in 4th ed. GW was smart enough to change SMF, so I can only hope they'll be smart enough to fix other new problems they created.

Also, the rules for buildings are definitely going to be expanded next edition. I could almost see some cityfight and cities of death stuff hardcoded into buildings (for example, any unit stationed on the top floor of a multi-story building gets "plunging fire" or something).

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2301910.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2301910.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2301975.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2301975.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Excellent post: not for the kudos you give me, but for contributing on topic and in depth. Pay attention people, this is how its done. I think I'll add another trend:

4. Rules are redesigned to expand the game's commercial options (examples: Building rules help sell model kits).

Masterslowpoke:

Saving throws are already curved, rather than flat. It's a case of interactions between types of saves (cover, invulnerable, armour) than within saves, so no, not really.

I think you're onto something with the pre-measuring though. That falls under #3.

However, maybe you could share what you believe constitutes "enough solid information".

sourclams:

I'd gotten the impression that the Universal Special Rules were just being given a lick of army-appropriate paint to provide special rules for units rather than following the practice of reinventing the wheel with every unit (hence the overwhelming prevalence of Furious Charge, Feel No Pain, Relentless, and so on). Not unusual for us to arrive at very different impressions of the same thing, so I'd be interested in how you get your impression.

MikhailLenin:

Please explain why you expect this to come about in 6th edition.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2305886.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2305886.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
A model may take a Cover save and either it's armor save or an Invuln. FnP is still on top of everything.


this may cause MEQs to become neigh indestructable in cover. this could be balanced out by making Cover not nessacerly a good thing.

Cover might be harder to get/not as good.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306037.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306037.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Beyond that, the only real rulebook rule I wish existed was "a model using a two handed weapon gains +1 str when using it in combat."

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306072.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306072.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306132.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306132.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306150.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306150.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Grey Templar wrote:I could see models being allowed to take multiple saves similer to fantesy.

A model may take a Cover save and either it's armor save or an Invuln. FnP is still on top of everything.


this may cause MEQs to become neigh indestructable in cover. this could be balanced out by making Cover not nessacerly a good thing.

Cover might be harder to get/not as good.


I disagree.

As you say, it makes MEQs neigh indestructable, and MEQ's really do not need another buff. Also, between WHFB and 40K, 40K is the faster paced, easier to understand game, and only getting one save helps that characteristic come true. Also, I fail to think of anything that could possibly cause Cover to cease to be a good thing. Plenty of things to ignore cover, but nothing that could possibly make it a bad thing.

@ Nurglitch: Never heard of Telion's Eye of Vengeance, what does it do?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306359.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2306359.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Thank you for contributing. The Instant Death/Eternal Warrior stuff is based on:

Nurglitch wrote:2. Flat rules fitted to the traditional Warhammer 40,000 curve: Examples include Preferred Enemy, Hit and Run, etc.

In the 4th edition, Preferred Enemy meant that a model had a flat 3+ to hit any unit that qualified as a preferred enemy. Likewise, a unit could Hit and Run at any time. In 5th edition preferred enemy confers a reroll instead of a flat threshold, and Hit and Run requires a characteristic test, specifically an Initiative test. Counter-Attack in 4th did not require a Leadership test, while in 5th edition it does.

You may also have noticed that the prevalence of Eternal Warrior has been scaled back now that Synapse no longer confers immunity to Instant Death. The conditions of the Instant Death rule likewise mean that some models have partial immunity to Instant Death thanks to their Toughness characteristic being 6+ so that only weapons that stipulate Instant Death as an effect of causing a wound can affect them. It seems that the roll of Instant Death is being brought back into the game, and consequently Eternal Warrior is being scaled back. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2307430.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2307430.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
ID on 2+? Re-rolls for EW? Highly unlikely. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2307703.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2307703.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
It has spawned too many questions and I believe the rule will go the way of the Dodo.



The same applies to the current rules for (Emergency) Disembarkation. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308627.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308627.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition CC with them.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308649.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308649.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308684.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308684.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Slarg232 wrote:

@ Nurglitch: Never heard of Telion's Eye of Vengeance, what does it do?


Sgt Telion (Space marine scout upgrade character) has a rule that allows the shooting player to allocate any wounds he inflicts. The result is that Sgt Telion can be used to snipe the special weapon or squad leader out of a target squad.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308741.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308741.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
To be honest I haven't paid that much attention to WFB lately. But I think I pointed out that I don't predict rerolls for Eternal Warrior, I predict a characteristic test.

Mind you, you haven't managed to offer any kind of argument beyond asserting your own doubt, so I guess we know what your opinion is worth in this case. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308760.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2308760.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition EW/ID (or anything else) are anything but blind guessing. Your claims of trend analysis aren't solid enough to warrant refutation.

As said before, this reads like a wishlist.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309286.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309286.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
I think I pointed out the trends I've seen in the transition from the 4th edition to 5th edition, given examples as evidence of those, and then hazarded some educated guesses. I'm not claiming to be scientific here. If they aren't solid enough for you, perhaps you'd like to specify what would be solid enough, given the information at hand.

Also, how does this read like a wishlist? Take the Epic Armageddon comments: Stuff like the wound allocation is lifted directly from that game, and given that GW got burned on radical change with 3rd edition it seems reasonable to hypothesize that they're pursuing a strategy of gradual change. Epic Armageddon is a great game and the fact that elements of it are finding their way in 40k suggests that others might as well. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309402.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309402.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW is going to nerf vehicles.

In 4th Edition vehicles were rarely used, unless you were Eldar or Tau. In 5th Edition everyone uses vehicles including Eldar and Tau (who's vehicles even got nerfed). I wouldn't be surprised if we saw the vehicle damage charts played with again possibly to allow destruction of vehicles on a Penetrating 4+ instead of 5+. Also I imagine Skimmers may get their 4+ cover for moving 12" instead of the way it is now with 24".]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309547.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309547.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309609.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309609.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
But with the DE codex having "Supersonic" (move cruising and fire all weapons), on many vehicles giving them the 4+ for moving 6"+ would make them almost impossible to kill.

I honestly don't know what to expect. I expect good things in this edition will suck and things that suck in this edition will be good. To boost sales. Look at Termagants as an example for Tyranids, as well as most Eldar stuff, and some Tau wargear. Note that I never played 4th, but this is from what I hear about a friend who studies older rulebooks.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309642.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2309642.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
sourclams wrote:Your claims of trend analysis aren't solid enough to warrant refutation.

What he said.

Anyway, practically every 5th edition army after Space Marines has some way to get around the very movement-limiting vehicle rules of the main rulebook. IG russes have lumbering behemoth, blood angels are fast, dark eldar have all sorts of shenanigans like supersonic, etc. I'm wondering if they will loosen up the movement/shooting restrictions in 6th.

Cover going to 5+ rather than 4+ would go a long way to make vehicles more vulnerable. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2310089.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2310089.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Make it much, MUCH harder to the point of almost impossibility, or just flat out impossible to get a 4+ cover save on a vehicle. Seriously it should not be able to shoot back at you period if it's getting a 4+ cover save as a vehicle there should be that much cover. Everything else give it a 5+ tops. Sorry but infantry is much, much better at ducking, dodging, weaving and sneaking into fox holes and behind trees to avoid incoming fire than a vehicle and something with an armor value does not need a cover save as well.

Further if a transport is destroyed it's occupants should not be able to assault or shoot the following turn. No actions allowed except movement and running. It's the height of infuriating to crack open a vehicle and then have the guys inside pile out in my face and whoop MY arse because I got that inconvenient box out of their way once it's served it's purpose of getting them all the way across the board.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2310603.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2310603.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Okay, I get that you disagree with my conclusions. I started this thread so that people could disagree. What I'm curious about it why people like you and sourclams feel that the trends I've identified are not the case. I know they might not be the case and don't claim to be making any kind of rigorous trend analysis. I'm curious about the 'why' of it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312004.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312004.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition inv save. I'd wager GW may be leaning that a 4+ cover save is too good and will reduce it to a 5+.

Looking at the Battle Missions book, the reserves roll will become more common. When I look at Cityfight, it appeared to be a testbed for 5th edition rules dealing with buildings/ruins. With this in mind, I think the Battle Missions book is the direction will be going towards with 6th ed missions.

The TLOS rules still don't work as they really aren't true LOS (casualties from models out of LOS, spotting an entire unit b/c you can see the foot of a single model, etc...) Definitely needs a reworking. From a gaming perspective, I liked the area terrain rules if used sparingly. It's a bit aggravating trying to hide a model, but your opponent can still see the model's hand that is held high above the terrain piece. I suppose I'm ok with some abstract LOS vs. TLOS in its current state.

IIRC, 3rd edition allowed you to shoot at units other than the closest, but they received a cover save. 4th replaced that ruling with Target Priority. 5th is back to cover saves. I'd prefer Target Priority. Cover is all too common this edition. Another alternative could be base sizes and possibly vehicles in relation to blocking LOS (similar to Warmachine).





]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312294.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312294.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Nurglitch wrote:Terminus:

Okay, I get that you disagree with my conclusions. I started this thread so that people could disagree. What I'm curious about it why people like you and sourclams feel that the trends I've identified are not the case. I know they might not be the case and don't claim to be making any kind of rigorous trend analysis. I'm curious about the 'why' of it.

I disagree because this combination of rules will basically extremely devalue multiple wounds (e.g. all characters) and FNP, both of which GW seems to be fond of lately. It just seems like too much of a change, with no indication from their most recent ruleset that the ID rules are changing in any way, much less in such a radical way. Your suggestion not only adds complexity (ID = 2xT is easier than ID = 2xT-1), but also slows the game with additional rolls (a whole lot more additional rolls). Plus, it's not really supported by the fluff. ID is something that basically gibs you. Plasma and autocannons (for example), have been described killing Space Marines in many fluff pieces, but it's nothing compared to taking a missile to the face or being vaporized by a melta/fusion weapon.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312345.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312345.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Or i guess ill be rebuilding a IG army for even more easymode..

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312393.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2312393.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition EW/ID. It's such a radical change that would completely alter a lot of unit interactions, such as Scatter Laser War Walkers vs. Nobz, Autocannons vs. Plague Marines, etc. Most importantly it would really hurt the vast majority of HQ choices out there, since you would be able to ID Eldar with Heavy bolters, Space Marines with Shuriken Cannons, and TMCs with lone meltaguns.

I don't disagree that the rule might change, but I think it will be more subtle.

One of the changes I do expect to see is a revamp of the vehicle move+fire rules. As some have said, the last several codices have seen a proliferation of rules like PotMS, Fast, Lumbering Behemoth, Supersonic, etc that allow vehicles to fire extra weapons. On the other hand though, because of all these new rules I don't think we'll see a flat, "vehicles can move and fire," but we might see an overall increase in vehicle shooting and mobility.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2313447.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2313447.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW released. Any rules nuggets that may have come from there?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2314514.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2314514.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
Non-walker/MC vehicles in squadrons moving at cruising speed can fire one extra weapon than normal (so russes could move while firing main gun and both sponsons, for example). Squadrons of walkers/MCs can run and then fire one weapon.

So if there is any trend we can point to in 40K, it's the relaxation of shooting restrictions on vehicles. Hopefully, their attempt to balance this out (undoubtedly by making the vehicles more vulnerable) won't be overboard as to render them useless (doubtful, vehicle kits are great for revenue).

It will be interesting if they incorporated the spearhead rules into the main game. Jack up the points level so everyone is fielding squadrons of vehicles. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315152.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315152.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition GW is sure to address sooner or later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think the weapon skill chart will see a change...the whole "your weapon skill is 10 and mine is 1 and I still hit you on a 3+" has been the source of much complaint. It will probably be more like the strenght-toughness chart.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315471.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315471.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition 40k experience", and there should be rules to keep things even but enhance the play experience.

I mean, think about it: would you take vehicles all of the time if you were able to RELIABLY place trenches in your deployment zone? Would your army list change if you could reliably deploy fixed anti-tank weapons? I know that if I could put down cheap lascannon artillery pieces and 3+ cover in my deployment zone, I'd certainly approach list building from a different angle... it could even make a static gunline viable again.

Things I feel confident will change with 6E:
1. Wound allocation (fixing mixed AP)
2. Cover saves (toning them down)
3. Vehicle squadron rules (tuning them up)
4. Insta-death (as has been noted, a complete mess)

A wildcard change would be rapid-fire guns, which I predict will get the ability to move and shoot full range again. This would counter mechanization to an extent.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315513.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315513.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition TWC and not kill a single one.

Just roll the saves and remove models. Roll on majority armor save.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315610.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315610.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
sourclams wrote:As said before, this reads like a wishlist.
1+
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315626.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315626.page GMT Re:Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
5th edition gives some control of casualties in the face of minor fire, but removes it in the face of overwhelming firepower. Some special rules allow specialists to picked out by targeting models instead of units. This promotes large complex units.

That's why I expect that GW will turn Sniper weapons into a type of weapon that can target models, not units. The complex wound allocation works to promote diversity within units and helps deal with the perennial problem of independent characters in squads.

Take a unit of ten Orks, including one Nob and one Big Shoota. A single round of eight wounds is not going to threaten the Nob or Big Shoota, the squad's heavy hitters. A round of ten wounds, and both have to take a saving throw. The same firepower that burns tanks, like Meltas, Lascannons, and Missiles, also tends to effective again multi-wound models.

If Eternal Warriors with multiple wounds suffered Instant Death only when they failed a Toughness test, they would have significant protection against extra opportunities to suffer Instant Death. Remember that, by my prediction, while Marneus Calgar may suffer Instant Death from a Shuriken Cannon, he suffers it on roll of 5 or 6 on 1D6.

Crunching the numbers though, I think I missed a couple of important things in my prediction: You know how some weapons are just too weak to harm some things? With a wound roll of N? Conversely a player has two opportunities to roll 6 on S v T before they are incapable of inflicting a wound (S = T+2, S = T+3). Changing Instant Death to S > T+2 (or 2+ to wound) does indeed go too far. After all, currently it's S = 2T (anywhere from S > T to S > T+4).

Currently:
T1 = S2+
T2 = S4+
T3 = S6+
T4 = S8+
T5 = S10
T6+ = N (partial immunity to Instant Death)

Previously Predicted Instant Death (S > T+2)
T1 = S3+
T2 = S4+
T3 = S5+
T4 = S6+
T5 = S7+
T6 = S8+
T7 = S9+
T8 = S10
T9+ = N (partial immunity to Instant Death)

Recalibrated Predicted Instant Death (S > T+3):
T1 = S4+
T2 = S5+
T3 = S6+
T4 = S7+
T5 = S8+
T6 = S9+
T7 = S10
T8 = N (partial immunity to Instant Death)

This makes T3 less vulnerable to Instant Death, T4 the same as always, T5 more vulnerable, and T6 now threatened. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315863.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2315863.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2317174.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2317174.page GMT Predicting Rules Changes in 6th Edition
In the last case, conferring a re-roll rather than a flat 3+ meant that attacks could be made more reliable according to WS. 5th edition Preferred Enemy really benefits models with better Weapon Skill as well as models with equal or less Weapon Skill. 4+ & 5+ rerolled are better than 3+ & 4+ to hit, respectively.

Ditto units with higher Leadership have more reliable Counter-Attack, and units with higher Initiative have more reliable Hit and Run.

Reliability is a big thing in 40,000. Differentiation of reliability is an even bigger thing. Adding characteristics tests to Universal Special Rules seemed to be a trend that was following this trend to 'Warhammerize' universal special rules. As classic Warhammer rules go, the To Hit and To Wound charts are classics (despite basically being modifiers in fancy dress), and the Reroll. One's a flat line and the other is a curve.

After all, WS, S & T determine the reliability of units in combat, and BS determines the reliability of units at hitting in shooting, and so on. Rerolls help to curve these flat lines determining reliability. Rules that give curves to general rules or universal special rules are good for adding 'flavour' to units. Think of re-rolls as the 0.5 effect, named after the 4+ Feel No Pain rule = half the wounds effected by Feel No Pain should fail to cause a casualty.

Ghazkull's Bionic Bonce rule is a wonderful example of the reroll effect despite not being a reroll, but an additional rule, a step up in reliability and potential. He has the universal special rule of Slow and Purposeful conferred by his Mega Armour. Previously in 4th his rule made no sense since Slow and Purposeful prevented a model from getting bonus attacks from charging, and Ghazkull's rule doubled the number of bonus attacks from charging. Well, it turned out that the rule made perfect sense from a 5th edition rule sense. It gives Ghazkull that special Orkish character of hitting like a freight train. Hitting last is fine: he's armed with a Power Klaw anyways.

Take Skilled Rider and Move Through Cover: a reroll and an extra die to a multi-die roll (which is like a reroll, but re-rolled twice without breaking the "No more rerolls than one" rule).

Fearless conferring No Retreat! wounds worked well when the number of wounds was a multiple of the difference in combat scores, rather than doubling down on existing casualties caused. But it was a great innovation in commonalizing Fearless and non-Fearless units, since before small units of Fearless troops could 'tarpit' stuff like Dreadnoughts and Wraithlords and such. It meant that Fearless units were no longer immune to the additional effects of losing combat.

That's why I expect something like a return to 4th edition style combat modifiers in 6th, heralded by stuff like Banners and Instruments of Chaos. 5th edition is more like a simplified engagement resolution for Epic Armageddon than it is a simplified assault resolution for 4th edition.

In fact the only reason that I can think of why the design team hadn't simply flipped the Epic Armageddon rules for 5th edition was the innate conservativism of gamers. People don't want their non-consumable products 'invalidated' by technological advances. The transition to 3rd edition Warhammer 40,000, and to Epic 40,000 showed how fans react to radical change.

Plus, why do it all at once when you know you have several editions to do it in? Isn't the business model set for the product to renew itself something like every five years? Getting it right the first time will only annoy people into quitting because the army optimized to the previous edition is no longer optimal. So GW spreads the hurt around, experiment with the loss leaders to see what might sell Space Marines, and they've found a way to sell the same game five times and give themself enough leeway to steer and correct as the project goes on. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2317403.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/338027/2317403.page GMT