PDA

View Full Version : Do you play older editions of WH40k?



Supremearchmarshal
03-02-2008, 18:57
Well the title says it all...
I occasionally play Rogue Trader for its greater depth, narrative elements and even the funky rules (e.g. Ork Kustom Weapons).

xibo
03-02-2008, 18:59
I occasionally play 2nd edition, for greater depth, narrative elements and even the fact the races are ballanced.

philbrad2
03-02-2008, 19:03
Me too. It was the first edition I played from start to end and I've loved it ever since.

PhilB
:chrome:

Bloodknight
03-02-2008, 19:13
A bit of 2nd edition, but usually 4th because 4th is less time consuming. If I really have time, a few friends and a full beer crate we give 2nd a go sometimes in rememberance of the time we started 40K. 3rd edition is not worth talking about and although I own the RT rules, I've never read them fully and cannot be bothered to.

@Xibo: no Tyranid or Eldar player in your group, I suppose...balanced armies were not exactly the strength of 2nd, especially the Tyranid codex is an overpowered pile of crap ;).

philbrad2
03-02-2008, 19:20
@Xibo: no Tyranid or Eldar player in your group, I suppose...balanced armies were not exactly the strength of 2nd, especially the Tyranid codex is an overpowered pile of crap ;).

I re-read the NId 2nd ed 'dex a few weeks back and had forgotten what rock hard the Nids were ... ahh Tyranid Attack I remember it well.

2nd ed armies were all about supercharged characters and uber-killy units, I remember Abaddon wading into combat with his Termi 'homies' and wiping out almost half an IG/SoB army on their own.

PhilB
:chrome:

SanguinaryDan
03-02-2008, 19:37
I own the others, I just don't use them as rulesets any more.

I'll happily admit to dragging them out and re-reading the fluff on a pretty regular basis.

grumpy old gamer
03-02-2008, 19:41
Now I will sound old but since me and my group are old and have a wide range of models the old Rogue Trader game is actually quite fun. We can actually field a force off one of the many tables now.
Still you can only play it as the occassional one off's. The greater variety of later editions does have it's attractions.

catbarf
03-02-2008, 20:51
I re-read the NId 2nd ed 'dex a few weeks back and had forgotten what rock hard the Nids were ... ahh Tyranid Attack I remember it well.

2nd ed armies were all about supercharged characters and uber-killy units, I remember Abaddon wading into combat with his Termi 'homies' and wiping out almost half an IG/SoB army on their own.

PhilB
:chrome:

I liked that. It embodied the spirit of 40k- ridiculous, overblown monstrosities and machines fighting it out, along with weird and wacky abilities and troops.

And hey, having armor modifiers instead of this stupid AP value is worth the entire edition on its own :D

PondaNagura
03-02-2008, 20:59
we mostly play 4th, since most people i know are tourney-goers and thus stay up to date on codices/rulebooks; but occasionally we'll bust out the old-school rules, or play things like spacehulk or gorkamorka.

The_Dragon_Rising
03-02-2008, 21:16
I play each edition as it comes along and abandon the old rules, i haven't used them since and have no intention to.

grumpy old gamer
03-02-2008, 21:21
I have to agree with Mr Catbarf - the two big changes that I have had difficulty coping with are rapid fire weapons - I just don't see the point of them I really don't - and the whole AP thing. I liked the S= - to save. It gave a random and fun element to it all. I think that I can see why they did it but I still don't like it

scarletsquig
03-02-2008, 22:11
2nd edition mechanics were good overall, it was the record-keeping and masses of cards and counters that slowed things down, along with the use of loads of different dice. Apart from situations like this:

"Erm, what's the armour penetration on a reaper autocannon again?"

*thumbs through book for a few minutes*

"Ah, D12+D8+2D4! Don't know how I managed to forget that."

"Right, now to use this thudd gun for the first time"

*stabs fingers on the pins holdng the 4-part movable template together*

"Ow!"

..the game was fine. :)

KidDiscordia
03-02-2008, 22:53
In some ways I miss the older rules. There was a lot more diversity. I miss the Thudd gun and the Graviton gun and the bow and arrow and grenades. 2nd Edition allowed you to fight battles against "native armies", while lope sided in most respects the ability to do so was there.

The things I disliked about 2nd edition was the the overpowered characters and the ability to hit someone a dozen times in one melee. Later additions did clean up combat system, which was a good thing. Too bad about movement though, I dislike the fact that everything mores at the same pace.

catbarf
03-02-2008, 23:42
2nd edition mechanics were good overall, it was the record-keeping and masses of cards and counters that slowed things down, along with the use of loads of different dice. Apart from situations like this:

"Erm, what's the armour penetration on a reaper autocannon again?"

*thumbs through book for a few minutes*

"Ah, D12+D8+2D4! Don't know how I managed to forget that."

"Right, now to use this thudd gun for the first time"

*stabs fingers on the pins holdng the 4-part movable template together*

"Ow!"

..the game was fine. :)

That, that whole thing you described there- that was the point. Deeeeeeetaiiiiiiil.

azimaith
03-02-2008, 23:45
It works fine for a skirmish or small squad based game, but when you move up to company level it gets kind of clunky.

Supremearchmarshal
04-02-2008, 13:19
That, that whole thing you described there- that was the point. Deeeeeeetaiiiiiiil.

Exactly! Though I prefer RT over 2nd edition for a few reasons:
a) less cards/counters, especially in the psychic phase
b) more customizability
c) overwatch is an optional rule (in some situations it's ok, but often it just made the game too static)

The_Outsider
04-02-2008, 13:53
4th edition for the win.

Its a playable, large scale wargame thats easy to play hard to master.

People often like the OTT stuff (ref 2nd ed) because its fun - but often leads to a game that is slowed to a crawl or unplayable.

As a wargame fitting in with its current background 4th ed is fine -a little rough around the edges but mostly there.

I have a very set view on this - IMO people who prefer 2nd ed are thsoe that have rose tinted glases or those that think 40k is tacticless because they play "lolz, lets just kill each other".

Paulie Walnut
04-02-2008, 13:56
And hey, having armor modifiers instead of this stupid AP value is worth the entire edition on its own :D

C'mon this system was created around Termies :cool:

I don't play the older Versions though i have all the Rule Books including RT. Honestly i think that 4th is pretty much the best as for playability. Except for the two or three Codizes that need to be redone, its pretty much balanced i think except for the Cheesy lists, but that's another story (that was told during RT, 2nd and 3rd as well).

Supremearchmarshal
04-02-2008, 14:19
4th edition for the win.

Its a playable, large scale wargame thats easy to play hard to master.

People often like the OTT stuff (ref 2nd ed) because its fun - but often leads to a game that is slowed to a crawl or unplayable.

As a wargame fitting in with its current background 4th ed is fine -a little rough around the edges but mostly there.

I have a very set view on this - IMO people who prefer 2nd ed are thsoe that have rose tinted glases or those that think 40k is tacticless because they play "lolz, lets just kill each other".

Not to go too far OT, but I'm inclined to disagree here - 4th edition is more like Magic: the Gathering in that the most important part of the game is army list selection. The rules themselves are often overly simplistic and illogical - inferior to many similar games like FoW.

Ironhand
04-02-2008, 14:24
I think there's been a steady improvement in each edition of the rules except 2nd, on which I completely agree with The_Outsider.

What I would like to see is a "skirmish" version of 40K scaled to a couple of squad-equivalents per side, maybe based on Necromunda and/or KillTeam that has a lot more detail but remains playable.

Imperialis_Dominatus
04-02-2008, 14:50
I came in in third, so I play 3.1- er I mean 4th edition rules.

Dominatrix
04-02-2008, 14:59
I never play older editions (although depending on what 5th edition turns out to be I might make an exception to this. :p). Every edition is arguably better than the one before it so I don't see the point. Or maybe not necessarily better but certainly faster to play and more streamlined.

bosstroll
04-02-2008, 15:35
Sometimes its just good to break out all the cards, counters, 15 gazzilion different blasts, etc and have a nice game of 2nd edition. The interested newbies gathering around is just a huge bonus.