PDA

View Full Version : Should the community develop the 8th Edition of 40k?



Kodos der Henker
18-04-2016, 23:56
There are a lot of people who are not happy with the current development and there are different possibilities to solve the current problems.
Some want to add restrictions or change some rules to get a more balanced gameplay.
Others want to wait because the next official edition will be better for sure.

Another possibility would be to form something like a rules committee and make the 8th edition a community based one instead of just adding minor tweaks or writing FAQ's for the current one.
(looking at how "the Ninth Age" next Edition Warhammer Fantasy rules are done)


PS: The question about "who is making it" is something different than "should it be done at all"

Theocracity
19-04-2016, 00:18
I don't see any reason not to try - and I'm sure many people already have done so.

I don't think it'll have the buy-in of Fantasy 9th edition unless something terrible happens, but if it's fun for a group to work on and play with l don't see why not.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I actually wouldn't mind noodling on the inverse of 8th edition - I'd like to see what would happen if we tried to import AoS style rules to 40k. Might as well see what happens.

Azazyll
19-04-2016, 02:09
I've often thought about this myself, and I think it's worth a shot. It might be difficult to work out in practice, but that's no reason not to consider the project.

Smooth Boy
19-04-2016, 02:50
Should they? Yes. Will they? Maybe. Many people have tried but you can't get enough players to adopt it until something like AoS happens and it's sink or swim. T9A seems to have gone very well thus far so I'd love a sister project.

Zustiur
19-04-2016, 02:54
Many people try. Myself included. What it needs to be successful is more player interest in the rules development forum. I keep having to post things in general discussion to have any hope of getting feedback.

sent via tapatalk

Smooth Boy
19-04-2016, 03:03
Many people try. Myself included. What it needs to be successful is more player interest in the rules development forum. I keep having to post things in general discussion to have any hope of getting feedback.

Maybe Age of Emperor wouldn't be such a bad thing, necessity is the mother of invention as they say.

Thirdeye
19-04-2016, 05:31
The will is there but its like hurding cats. Eveyone has their own ideas on what needs to be done and what direction we should go. Must people want to just go back to an earlier edition, with some tweeks. I say the system is rotten to the core and we need to do something completely different. We need something that simple, fast, and fun, but which still captures the richness, depth, and the diversity of the 40K universe. It can be done, easily, really. The hardest part is abandoning the old ways, having an open mind, and giving new ideas a fair consideration.

Snake Tortoise
19-04-2016, 08:33
The will is there but its like hurding cats. Eveyone has their own ideas on what needs to be done and what direction we should go. Must people want to just go back to an earlier edition, with some tweeks. I say the system is rotten to the core and we need to do something completely different. We need something that simple, fast, and fun, but which still captures the richness, depth, and the diversity of the 40K universe. It can be done, easily, really. The hardest part is abandoning the old ways, having an open mind, and giving new ideas a fair consideration.

I think until something like 40k of Sigmar happens this is going to stop any widespread adoption of a major new community ruleset

For my part I'm happy to play with ITC restrictions and FAQ's and if a time comes when GW shoot the golden goose I'll probably follow their (ITC's) lead because I think they've shown they can be trusted to handle the game well.

Latro_
19-04-2016, 09:05
Its a nice idea, would it ever grab much takeup... very very unlikely

Sureshot05
19-04-2016, 09:38
I think a community edition will only take off if the next edition of 40k is significantly worse* than the current edition. It took AoS to create the 9th age, and give Mantic a big boost. GW must be aware of this, and won't make the same mistake with their flagship.

*I am not saying that AoS is worse than 8ed warhammer here, I am simply stating that 9th age and the rise in Mantic (look at google trends) happened in direct response.

aprilmanha
19-04-2016, 10:15
It is a noble idea but there are a lot of other people out there working on similar concepts and community penetration of any of them in never very high.

As long as the developers are happy with it as a personal mental exercise it is a good project to work on and if you can make it more of your own system, that just happens to allow GW models to be used as well it can be something you can put your name on and be proud of it.

If you are just naming it W40K: Fan mode or something though, you can never really benefit from it though as much as a more original "Space Saga Extreme (tm)" With army rules for other game systems models as extra! (don't hate my names I'm no Namesmith :P)

Cheeslord
19-04-2016, 11:43
Problem is (unless you all know something I don't), GW has not abandoned 40k like they have WHFB, and given their tendency to keep their moves close to their chest it would be a shame if all that effort was gone to only for official 8th to pop out of the blue and invalidate all that work (or worse, split the community).

blackcherry
19-04-2016, 12:10
At the moment, the only traction you will likely get is if you run a large tournament (in which case you will get to modify certain rules and decide what can be used) or if GW puts the rules out to community, ala Specialist Games back in the day.

So unfortunately not - and it would be like herding cats anyway (see the 9th age forums at the moment at the army level). Everyone came into 40k at a different time and with different experiences and so has a different view over what would 'save' 40k. Just look at the split between competitive players and more casual players as an example of how heated and intractable people can get.

What may work though is getting the themes and rules you enjoy about 40k and using them to create another game. Playtest it in local shops and with friends and playtesters on the internet - I'm sure you will find something you like.

totgeboren
19-04-2016, 12:33
As long as the official GW rules are playable and supported things like these never take off. It requires either that GW simply quits supporting the game, like they did with for example BFG, or that they reinvent the game like they did with AoS.

And when it comes to the rules development forum, I have posted some stuff there, but the reason why it is so barren is that whatever conclusions and feedback you get, it still doesn't really matter. If you wanna try out some house rules, it's the people you play with you need to ask. What some random Joe on the web thinks doesn't really matter.
And the second problem is the large amount of badly thought-out rules suggestions like "I want my special Chapter Master to be really special, so I was thinking of giving him a Powerfist that strikes at I with the Instant Death special rule for +10 pts."
The good ideas tend to drown in all the bad ones, though I might regret saying that, since I haven't been to the rules development forum for years. It's the reason I stopped going there though. :p

Dark Elf
19-04-2016, 12:37
What actually hit fantasy the hardest was death of the playstyle. Units were no longer rank and file, most of the rules were scrapped. This is what gave rise to T9A. They preserved the playstyle, and balanced things out. So should community develop its own edition? If gw kills the playstyle then yes. But for some reason I don't think that whatever happenes after 40k endtimes will be as bad as AoS is.

duffybear1988
19-04-2016, 13:41
Roll back to 4th edition and bring the newer units into line. Lord of War are Apoc only and drop the stupid formations and unbound. Job done.

Ssilmath
19-04-2016, 15:39
I think the main reasons this isn't a good idea is that:
A) With no official stamp of legitimacy on it, you're not likely to get even a large minority to follow the fan rules and
B) Opinions on what constitutes a good game vary wildly. Case in point...


Roll back to 4th edition and bring the newer units into line. Lord of War are Apoc only and drop the stupid formations and unbound. Job done.

I personally think that 7th has far better mechanics than 4th, I love the idea of formations and see no reason why Lords of War shouldn't be allowable in normal games. Slightly tweaking the rules or bringing back concepts from 4th (like not allowing certain units below points thresholds) would probably benefit the game, but rolling back? Even if GW did that, I'd have a hard time accepting it.

Honestly, I don't think it's the edition or the core rules that are the problem at all. I think that a rewrite of codices from the ground up with an eye towards point rebalancing and adding points costs to formations (Or at least balancing out the bonuses between formations) is the better way to fix the issues with the game.

BramGaunt
19-04-2016, 16:14
Roll back to 4th edition and bring the newer units into line. Lord of War are Apoc only and drop the stupid formations and unbound. Job done.

I don'T think formations are a problem, I think formations for free are. If they come with a points value the upside is acceptable.

Comrade Penguin
19-04-2016, 16:25
Roll back to 4th edition and bring the newer units into line. Lord of War are Apoc only and drop the stupid formations and unbound. Job done.

You, my friend, are the person I want heading up GW rules development!

But you would never get the majority of players to agree on changes. I, for example, would outright prohibit all superheavies and formations from non-apocalypse games. This would understandably annoy quite a few players, especially those with knights.

It is GW's responsibility to create a ruleset that is fun for a majority of the players, and currently they are failing to do that.

toonboy78
19-04-2016, 16:53
It is GW's responsibility to create a ruleset that is fun for a majority of the players, and currently they are failing to do that.

can't gamers do this themselves?

how do we know they are failing the majority? is that the majority of your local community or world wide?

malisteen
19-04-2016, 18:18
You, my friend, are the person I want heading up GW rules development!

But you would never get the majority of players to agree on changes. I, for example, would outright prohibit all superheavies and formations from non-apocalypse games. This would understandably annoy quite a few players, especially those with knights.

It is GW's responsibility to create a ruleset that is fun for a majority of the players, and currently they are failing to do that.

Super heavies are cool models and people payed a lot of money for them. Instead of banning them to apocalypse, I'd rather see them brought into line along with everything else. Just make them big tanks or monstrous creatures with more hull points / wounds, get rid of the D weapon rules and re-stat their weapons accordingly, give them a fair points cost, and they can live in regular 40k along with everything else.

Same with fliers - don't remove them, just make them fast skimmers and price appropriately.

Kodos der Henker
19-04-2016, 18:56
@GW need to kill 40k first
I can only talk about the community here, but it doesn't need something from GW to get this done.
Pick Up games in local stores and clubs are X-Wing, tournaments are with WM/H, Events are with Flames of War, Saga, Frostgrave or Bolt Action.

There are some 30k players around who play a campaign, but for 40k if nothing happens there is no one really playing it any more (compared to having monthly tournaments or big events twice a year).
So waiting until the end to start a project won't work very well and would end as a rushed in version.


@Reach the majority of the players
This is a difficult task. While in modern times it should not be a problem to let everyone know about such a project everyone expects that no one will be interested.
Of course you can never make a game that everyone likes but there is the chance that all those who are not interested in the current unbalanced game give it a chance to have rules to play again.

The difference to a project like T9A would be that it is not addressed to those players who are happy with 40k 7th Edi but for those that did not like it and want something else (T9A is a project for a all those who liked 8th edition but cannot play it any more, while I have seen very view people get into T9A who did not like 8th Edition Warhammer).


@How the Rules should look like
If I talk about a new edition of 40k, I talk about a new edition and not a hot fix for another one.

GW can to so (or has it done from 3rd to 7th) but for a Community Edition it need to be a fixed game, based on the very core of the rules, take the best from 2nd to 7th and add good rules for stuff that is not really handled by existing ones (eg flyers).

(the reason written above, you will never get those who like and play the actual game into fan rules, so you need to offer a real alternative and something new for those who quit and/or don't like it any more. Offering something like a fixed past edition will maybe find its way to some players but most think that stuff from the past should stay there (while just adding elements from past rules is treated different)

Comrade Penguin
19-04-2016, 19:44
can't gamers do this themselves?

how do we know they are failing the majority? is that the majority of your local community or world wide?

Sure gamers could do that themselves. But we pay a lot of money for these miniatures and books. I expect a good game for my significant investment.

If other company's can make tight fun rules that appeal to many people (Xwing, warmahordes, KOW, etc), GW certainly can too.

No one knows whether 40k is successful and players are enjoying it since this information is not tracked. Its dead in my area, but I'm sure its thriving somewhere. I and many others are reporting that there are quite a few Xwing games going on...just saying.

Kodos der Henker
19-04-2016, 19:48
Sure gamers could do that themselves. But we pay a lot of money for these miniatures and books. I expect a good game for my significant investment.

True, but GW would tell you that your money for the models is only for those and the books are all about background stories, pictures and paint etc.

But we pay them for the rules so we can expect at least a good product. If we don't get it we stop buying them and this is what happens all around (while I was thinking about playing AoS because I like fantasy Skirmish games and had the models around, the books are not worth it for me and I got into A fantastic SAGA instead)