Official WarSeer Warhammer 40,000 6th Edition discussion thread

[Theocracity]

I agree... unless they've figured out how to do a snap-fit Rhino. And they weren't that far off with that one plastic terrain piece.

"Welcome to 6th edition! Tired of the same-old transport spam of last edition? Time to shake up the game and try something new!"

^_^

"So the starter kit has a Rhino transport...."

-_-

Sarcasm aside, I don't think a Rhino would be likely for any starter kit. Dreads have a wow factor that brings in new players; transports would just be a way for players to keep all the shiny new infantry they just bought off the table.

[MajorWesJanson]

Dreads are also more iconic, and rules-wise, easier to teach in the starter since walker rules are a mix of vehicle rules for damage with infantry rules for movement. They are also relatively easy to make a snapfit, as Black Reach did it in 6 parts. A Chaos dreadnought would also have some appeal, as Chaos currently is still stuck with the old metal one. They could also put some weapons on it that are not in the likely multipart dread that will be with the book, like the Black Reach dread with the MM arm.

[Sureshot05]

That list with a Dread would be pretty balanced actually. Loyalists have more and better troops, but CSM have the "boss" monster on the table. I also hope it is missing the dread as it would make a great centerpiece to the starter set. Currently the space marine force sounds very well rounded, but lacks a truly outstanding table top model to catch the eye (bikes may do this). Similarly, the CSM suffer from the same problem. If they had the dread with that force you have the tables "large model" centerpiece.

I wonder more about the cultists. Whislt it is pretty certain they are in the box, they will be in demand with a lot of players. I predict a lot of starters being bought, and a lot of DA being sold off. Could be a good time to be a DA player. Though if they manage some Space hulk-esque level of detail on the Deathwing, I can see a lot of DA players starting up.

[Rick Blaine]

Currently the space marine force sounds very well rounded, but lacks a truly outstanding table top model to catch the eye (bikes may do this)

Especially if they're jetbikes...

[magnum12]

Interesting. It seems like time itself will slowly force me to have the entire Deathwing. My friend and I are already planning on purchasing two sets of this, and switching the parts in it. I think he is going to get the better deal. sounds like he is going to get about:

Cultists (10)
Possessed (5)
Chosen (5)
Sorcerer (1)

Based on those contents, I'd say Word Bearers. The two most likely legions to use cultists are Alpha Legion and WB. WB are also fond of using lots of demons in their armies.

[Theocracity]

Based on those contents, I'd say Word Bearers. The two most likely legions to use cultists are Alpha Legion and WB. WB are also fond of using lots of demons in their armies.

...or just a generic Chaos warband, as there's no reason those units have to be Legion specific.

[samiens]

In fact thematically tying them to fallen angels and adding a really strong narrative theme to the box- showcasing GWs 2 best attributes (models and ackground) seems pretty wise- the legion fluff has been marginalised (HH aside) for some time

[timdp]

As far as I can see, edition changes between 3rd and 5th have been far from sweeping. 2nd to 3rd was sweeping. If this PDF is true, that will be sweeping. Fiddling with the rules for assault and transports is what I'd call tweaking and falls within the model being put forward; ie one main set of rules altered occasionally with errata and eventually re-edited and re-released (what's that? A new edition?)

IMO, 3rd to 4th to 5th has been mildly evolutionary, whereas 2nd to 3th was a pretty much completely new game system. If the pdf is mostly true, I think it will be an evolution of the existing system, but a more extensive evolution than the 3rd/4th/5th changes. From my point of view the changes from 3rd edition (unplayable) to 5th edition represent a maturing of the ruleset (and rules design) towards a stable, viable game. If most of the stuff in the pdf (which deals with a LOT of the problems in 5th) shows up in 6th, it might even mature into a "well designed" rule set.

With a stable, mature rule set GW won't have to concentrate as much studio resource time on the (necessary) major revisions every five years. Pushing out major rule systems revisions out to eight or ten years will give the studio far more time to work on codex, supplement, background and universe development. In addition to quicker codex releases, this might allow the development of many of the elements that would probably not ever get fully developed under the current five year cycle: Adeptus Mechanicus, Dark Mechanicus, Explorator Corps, Rogue Traders, Great Crusade, Horus Heresy, Sisters of Battle, a more coherent Grey Knight vision, other races and who knows what else.

Most other game companies don't take 25 years to achieve a stable game system, but I have high hopes for 6th edition.

Tim

[Garanaul the Black]

Hm. Hastings mentioned a Chaos Dread, I believe. We'll have to see.

I was thinking the same thing. If I remember correctly, Hastings also mentioned new Raptor sculpts, so it looks like we have a pretty good idea as to what the first wave contains when the Codex drops.

G

[ForgottenLore]

Starter news I have heard from several places now:
DA:
Terminator Captain
5 Deathwing
Tac Squad
Ravenwing bikes (3 likely)

Do you have any information on how much DA iconography will be on these? Strictly speaking Macragge and Black Reach both had UMs in them, but the figs were generic enough to use in any chapter, I very much want to know if that will be the case this time.

[Maxis Lithium]

the 5 from the paint set have DA icons in releife on their shoulder. I expect enough iconography to make it clear they are DAs without them being better then the actual DA kit. Most likely DA iconography on the shoulders, perhaps on the bikes somewhere.

[Starchild]

10!!! cultists? The 'cannon-fodder' troops number 10? If this is true i'll be very disappointed. I was hoping for more like 20-30. 10 is such a small number for those kinds of troop. They should be swarming over the marines

I'd expect more than 10 cultists too but the mission book may allow the cultist unit(s) to reenter the table at full strength if they are broken or wiped out.

[Starchild]

Please pardon the double post.

IMO, 3rd to 4th to 5th has been mildly evolutionary, whereas 2nd to 3th was a pretty much completely new game system. If the pdf is mostly true, I think it will be an evolution of the existing system, but a more extensive evolution than the 3rd/4th/5th changes. From my point of view the changes from 3rd edition (unplayable) to 5th edition represent a maturing of the ruleset (and rules design) towards a stable, viable game. If most of the stuff in the pdf (which deals with a LOT of the problems in 5th) shows up in 6th, it might even mature into a "well designed" rule set.

With a stable, mature rule set GW won't have to concentrate as much studio resource time on the (necessary) major revisions every five years. Pushing out major rule systems revisions out to eight or ten years will give the studio far more time to work on codex, supplement, background and universe development. In addition to quicker codex releases, this might allow the development of many of the elements that would probably not ever get fully developed under the current five year cycle: Adeptus Mechanicus, Dark Mechanicus, Explorator Corps, Rogue Traders, Great Crusade, Horus Heresy, Sisters of Battle, a more coherent Grey Knight vision, other races and who knows what else.

Most other game companies don't take 25 years to achieve a stable game system, but I have high hopes for 6th edition.

Tim

As much as I want this to happen, I'm afraid the human tendancy toward stupidity will override much of the common sense that should have gone into the 40k rules. The past does not present a good precedent and the future doesn't seem that promising. Remember that the designers we love to hate have worked on the new edition and any wackiness you see in their codices will be carried over into the rulebook.

[MajorWesJanson]

Do you have any information on how much DA iconography will be on these? Strictly speaking Macragge and Black Reach both had UMs in them, but the figs were generic enough to use in any chapter, I very much want to know if that will be the case this time.

Not a clue. I have not seen the models. I'd expect mostly like the Paint set- sculpted shoulder icons on most of the models, but likely a more ornate captain.

I personally scrape off the Tac arrows from the Black Reach set, and will likely do the same for this new starter.

[Ebon]

GW have always insisted figures first books second. The rulesbooks are there to support / underpin the figures to help create a story around the figures. GW have consistently stated they are a miniature figure manufacturer and they want their figures to be the best. Their books are there to support this.

I remember Jervis saying this in one of his columns in WD and it never made sense to me. If collecting and painting the minis is the real hobby and the books are just there to support that, why are our minis in squads? People don't buy multiples of the same model (let alone HUNDREDS of the things) unless they're gaming with them. Dozens or hundreds of near-identical minis don't make sense if we're just mini collectors. My IG army includes about 150 near-identical minis. Buying them in that quantity doesn't make sense except to game with.

That's why I thought Jervis was wrong and that whole argument is (partly) wrong. Collecting minis in these kind of quantities only makes sense if you're gaming with them. I'm not saying Jervis or the argument is entirely wrong but the rules and minis have to drive one another, neither makes any sense when considered in a vacuum.

[BramGaunt]

It looks like it's getting hotter. The new WD apperantly has a big Questionmark (or something similar) on the last page that suggests something big in the next issue. I'll wager my new Thunderwolf-cavallery that we'll get Preorders in 4,5 weeks. That's also when we'll get solid content infos. Now, what better way to start the promotion for the new 40k Rulebook with some brand new flyer models through June while you try people to buy the new rulebook?

[Olith]

I remember Jervis saying this in one of his columns in WD and it never made sense to me. If collecting and painting the minis is the real hobby and the books are just there to support that, why are our minis in squads? People don't buy multiples of the same model (let alone HUNDREDS of the things) unless they're gaming with them. Dozens or hundreds of near-identical minis don't make sense if we're just mini collectors. My IG army includes about 150 near-identical minis. Buying them in that quantity doesn't make sense except to game with.

That's why I thought Jervis was wrong and that whole argument is (partly) wrong. Collecting minis in these kind of quantities only makes sense if you're gaming with them. I'm not saying Jervis or the argument is entirely wrong but the rules and minis have to drive one another, neither makes any sense when considered in a vacuum.

The focus is the miniatures. In order to get people to buy their miniatures one thing they do is provide game-systems to use them with. The game systems are focused on people buying a large number of models, horde armies or lots of good options so fill their collections. If you look at the companies that focus on games they do things quite differently. If GW's priority was games they wouldn't have pushed specialist games to the sidelines and would be continuing to develop new games often. Obviously its all integral now and GW need it all to stay as large as they are and probably wouldn't be this big if they just focused on good balanced games.

[Tinudar]

I’m just wondering if anyone has heard a rumor about creating charge reactions in 40k. I found it odd that in fantasy a Dwarf with a single shot black powder gun can fire when being charged but a Space Marine with a fully auto assault rifle cant

[Theocracity]

I’m just wondering if anyone has heard a rumor about creating charge reactions in 40k. I found it odd that in fantasy a Dwarf with a single shot black powder gun can fire when being charged but a Space Marine with a fully auto assault rifle cant

Forgeworld's Zone Mortalis rule set has an option for that. I'm not sure it would work for 40K in general - shooting armies already have enough advantages over assault armies.

But no, no one has any idea what specific rules will be in 6th beyond the controversial leaked / faked rules discussed in the other thread.

[Rogerio]

Excitement +1

This all sounds bloody lovely dosent it. I will definately be purchasing a starter set, be interesting to see if the new WD does actually have any teasers or clues for next month and if something big is on the way, i might actually buy my first WD for about 4 years.