View Full Version : New edition of rules?

19-10-2006, 12:56
Am I correct that a new edition of the rules has been released in the last month? I looked through several pages of the forum but didn't see any threads about it at all.

What are people's impressions? Any comments?

19-10-2006, 13:09
I too share that impression. My rulebook is definetly of a newer make these days, with a different cover and ineterior layout. The rules have also changed somewhat, though I believe largely for the better.


19-10-2006, 14:41
Yes, by and large, a few simplifications have been introduced - no lapping etc, the pursuit and flee directions have been clarified, panic rules are streamlined to 6" and no psychology while in combat.
A few completely new rules: Free manouevres which is poorly thought of and badly phrased, buildings. shooting on/from hills (unsatisafactory rules)

And on the negative side:
Many previous contentious and debatable issues which appeared in forums have not been clarified e.g. Frenzy, Clipping and the free alignment and maximisation.
There are too many paragraphs which has not been lucid previously and still adopted in this edition.
New 'Edition' as in 'edited'.

19-10-2006, 15:06
The new (7th) edition came out around the 10th of September - there was quite a lot of threads about it around that time (especially about the rules changes) so if you look back enough you should find some threads with a good listing of the main rules changes.

20-10-2006, 13:22
Aha, thanks I found some older threads and I even went and bought the new rulebook today.

One more question I'd like to ask though: does anyone know what order the army books will be re-written in? Or at least which couple will be first?

20-10-2006, 13:29
You can find the information about the order of army books under the Fantasy Rumours I think.:)
Avian has many useful posts and they have been quite reliable.
Empire is next followed by VC.

20-10-2006, 14:00
Dwarfs was re-released with 7th ed in mind - won't be perfect though, as it was almost a year before 7th.

Orcs and Gobbos has just been done.

The rest, as DeathlessDraich says, are in the Rumours section.

20-10-2006, 15:07
Cool thanks guys.

Crazy Harborc
20-10-2006, 20:33
Ogre Kingdoms, the latest Dwarves armybook and the latest Wood Elves armybook are claimed by GW to be ready anduseable as 7th Edition armybooks. The Empire gets a new armybook right after the first of the year.

By the by, GW has made it clear that until a army has a new/7th Ed. version, their 6th editions one is to be used. No word as to whether that includes the 6th editions back/middle/special army lists of the 6th edition armies?

21-10-2006, 09:05
Thats very interesting CrazyHarborc.
Did they suggest how to resolve clashes/inconsistencies etc between 6th army books and 7th rules?

22-10-2006, 11:32
Read the army book specific rules from the point-of-view of a new player that has no knowledge of 6th edition.

The rules will usually work just fine, though in some cases they produce strange results (Beastman Raiders) or try to take advantage of rules that no longer exist (Skaven Weapon Teams).

Where you are unable to implement the rule it has ceased to apply.

It's worth noting that just because a special rule has ceased to apply to a unit, it doesn't mean that the unit is suddenly made vulnerable.

The fact that skirmishers can be march-blocked does not mean that they can never march; that skaven teams cannot rely on the proximity of their parent unit to protect them does not mean that your opponent can just casualy pick them up and remove them from the table.


Crazy Harborc
23-10-2006, 01:54
Thats very interesting CrazyHarborc.
Did they suggest how to resolve clashes/inconsistencies etc between 6th army books and 7th rules?

No they/GW didn't. I guess GW wants it done by devine edict(?) Well there is another choice.....only play armies that have 7th editions armybooks.:) OR.....common sense, good sportsmanship and a non-precedent setting die roll when all else fails.

Myself and my regular opponents are doing it just about the way T10 suggested.