PDA

View Full Version : Any Info on 7th Ed Warhammer?



Brandir
26-05-2005, 22:37
Before the old Portent went offline I remember briefly reading about the new edition of Warhammer. I understand it may be a 2006 release and that the present army books would remain valid.

However, I also heard that magic would be re-worked.

Anyone have any info on the next ed?

Crazy Harborc
27-05-2005, 00:19
Hello, hello, hello............I guess nobody has read/heard anything. The GW rumor spreaders are not ready yet I guess.

Lainer
27-05-2005, 00:20
I think most rumors are just speculations at the moment.

macbeth
27-05-2005, 05:52
All I think is that the transition between 6th and 7th will be smooth, just like between the 4th and the 5th, or between the 3rd and the 4th for 40k... All the army books will still be usable, I think

rkunisch
27-05-2005, 08:37
It would be a sensible assumption that it will be released in the before-Christmas slot in 2006. 40K had its relaunch 2004. This year it seems that LotR will be the one (Mines of Moria starter box already shown on official events). There was also the rumour that fantasy will feature the Battle of Karak Eight Peaks in the starter box. If this is true, we will see Dwarves and Goblins first.

Have fun,

Rolf.

NetGuru
27-05-2005, 08:40
As far as i know nothing solid has been said regarding 7th Edition, however i've heard that Dwarfs will be the first army to get a rework after 7th edition comes out (mainly due to the miniatures needing an update)

And i've also heard that GW are sending out rules to gaming clubs to test the new rules, and that Dwarfs and Skaven will be the armies involved in a 'Battle for McCragge' style started set.

But wheither this is pure speculation im not sure (well, the dwarfs being reworked after 7th edition seems pretty certain)

Brandir
27-05-2005, 08:42
I did hear that the High Elves would receive a re-work.

Griefbringer
27-05-2005, 09:10
I think that the late 2006 release should be a pretty safe guess for the new rulebook and a starter boxed set. It might be a bit early now to speculate on the details.

Brandir
27-05-2005, 11:59
Why too early to speculate? Speculation and rumours is what got Portent started!

Reabe
27-05-2005, 12:09
As far as i know nothing solid has been said regarding 7th Edition, however i've heard that Dwarfs will be the first army to get a rework after 7th edition comes out (mainly due to the miniatures needing an update)

And i've also heard that GW are sending out rules to gaming clubs to test the new rules, and that Dwarfs and Skaven will be the armies involved in a 'Battle for McCragge' style started set.

But wheither this is pure speculation im not sure (well, the dwarfs being reworked after 7th edition seems pretty certain)

I had heard it was Goblins who came with the Dwarfs, not Skaven.

Shoggoth
27-05-2005, 12:18
from Cavatore himself at the Italian GT in december 2004:

"Magic phase will be revised:we don't like the use the players do with low level mages,choosing them only to be "power dices generators" for high level spell caster.One thing we will introduce it's that any spell caster will use ONLY the dice it generates,not passing them to another spell caster.However spell caster could roll how much dice to cast a spell they could but any score of ONE will resoult in a miss cast.Making an example:a 2nd level spell caster use ONE dice to cast a spell.The spell will not work.But he could also use two power dice:if it scores two ONE the misscast will be more dangerous.If it will use 3 power dices and the resoult will be 3 ONE the misscast will be devastating.
So:if you want to cast a spell with an huge amout of dice you'll also put in danger your mage in a very bad way..."

Imbroglio
27-05-2005, 12:19
I wouldn't be surprised if GW wait longer than late 2006 for a release of Warhammer 7th Ed., because the rule set is fundamentally sound. Armies can be rebuilt and reworked within the current rules, because there is nothing particularly wrong with it.

A lot of stuff was fixed in the update to 6th, and we've seen no trial rule released like that seen in latter half of 3rd ed. 40K. I would expect these to come - however the rules in the major phases outside of majc are pretty much set in stone, and I don't see how they could be changed. Magic could be tweaked a little, but the basic foundations are there.

There would be no point releasing a drastically updated rule set, because it would probably be backward progress. Eventually they'll probably release a nice hard back book (with an index :D) and a beginner set.

I think they'll rework army books within the current system first though.

Regards,

-- Imbroglio

rkunisch
27-05-2005, 12:26
It was always said by the members of the Studio that when there is 7th edition it will be more like 6.5th edition. The same like 40k. All the army books can be used and the rules are just clarified and a little tweaked. I expect no mayor changes for 7th edition (apart from that hardback rulebook :p).

Have fun,

Rolf.

Xxcha
27-05-2005, 16:16
Surely it would be the armies the need the most work that will come with the army box. Model wize and rule wize.

The boyz
27-05-2005, 16:22
Yeah I couldnt see GW releasing a major boxed set for the new 7th edition when it comes out, I think they will just release a rule book and a starter boxed set.

rkunisch
27-05-2005, 16:31
Surely it would be the armies the need the most work that will come with the army box. Model wize and rule wize.
That would be a bad decision. First of all, there is quite a different opinions which army needs the most work. There are also sales arguments to be regarded. It does not make much sense to take two very special armies which would not sell well. As it is intended as a starter box, the armies included should be easy going and forgiving. That will keep new players interested. So, no, I am afraid the argument need the most work will certainly have near to no effect on the decision which armies will be included in the starter box.

Have fun,

Rolf.

Brandir
27-05-2005, 16:37
Which was the first army to have an army book afgter the sixth edition?

rkunisch
27-05-2005, 16:43
Which was the first army to have an army book afgter the sixth edition?
The Empire, followed by Orcs & Goblins and Dwarves.

Have fun,

Rolf.

Crazy Harborc
28-05-2005, 00:29
I seem to remember that when 4th was replaced by 5th and again when 6th came out there had been army books re-released and or released less than a year before the new editions were released. Major rules changes caused a need for new armybooks. The magic system for 5th required spending darn near $100(USA) for the magic suppliments needed to use magic....NOT minies just paper.

Frankly, with the slump in projected sales and now actual sales, I do expect that the suits will call for major rules/armybooks changes to generate a need for major spending by established and new GW fantasy players.

Griefbringer
28-05-2005, 14:13
That would be a bad decision. First of all, there is quite a different opinions which army needs the most work. There are also sales arguments to be regarded. It does not make much sense to take two very special armies which would not sell well. As it is intended as a starter box, the armies included should be easy going and forgiving. That will keep new players interested.

Well, in 40K every boxed set so far has featured Space Marines.

That said, whatever is in the starter set should give two relatively balanced forces - Dwarves and Goblins might not be the greatest choice, since the Goblins would need to hugely outnumber the Dwarves.

Gorbad Ironclaw
28-05-2005, 17:09
Considering dwarfs are supposedly getting a make over around Christmas/winter, I don't think they are going to feature in the starter set. I would think it would be something new to boost sales.


As for rules, should work with all the current army books, still, I would expect to see a reworked magic system, something done about movement(currently not very clear, and charging can be a minefield), weapons, fear and skirmishers at least. And hopefully some better terrain rules and scenario rules.

Cherrystone
28-05-2005, 18:36
I think several things need doing for the 7th edition; manoeuvres and movement need to be more flexiable adding more tactics to the movement phase, different charge bonuses, weapons need to be re-balanced especially great weapons, maybe a way for more models to fight in CC, shooting to be more effective considering the points you pay- shoot in 2 ranks if unit dosnt move possibly?, and of course the magic phase.

Crazy Harborc
28-05-2005, 20:52
Considering how popular discussing goblins is I'm surprised GW doesn't make them metal minies only.

IMHO, the suits at GW decided that more minies are needed in HtH heavy games than in shooting heavy games. GW's rules seem to be controlled by what will bring in more money. Playability takes a back seat to profit making rules.

NakedFisherman
28-05-2005, 21:08
I think several things need doing for the 7th edition; manoeuvres and movement need to be more flexiable adding more tactics to the movement phase, different charge bonuses, weapons need to be re-balanced especially great weapons, maybe a way for more models to fight in CC, shooting to be more effective considering the points you pay- shoot in 2 ranks if unit dosnt move possibly?, and of course the magic phase.

The movement phase is rock solid.

Shooting works just as it should.

Magic works well too, and I'm not even sure if they'll change that (Alessio's comment of 'power dice batteries' certainly doesn't mirror most of the stuff I see when I play).


Considering how popular discussing goblins is I'm surprised GW doesn't make them metal minies only.

IMHO, the suits at GW decided that more minies are needed in HtH heavy games than in shooting heavy games. GW's rules seem to be controlled by what will bring in more money. Playability takes a back seat to profit making rules.

Yes, and they are developing aliens who will take over the world. Evil Gav and all his money-making schemes! I bet he works on comission too! /sarcasm

The GW Studio and the suits are different entities. Better models and better rules sell more miniatures. People want to play a balanced game, not a game where one army wrecks everything else -- that just turns them off.

Yasmin
28-05-2005, 22:45
The movement phase is rock solid.

Shooting works just as it should.

Magic works well too, and I'm not even sure if they'll change that

Try reading countless topics on charging on warhammer.org.uk. I'm so confused now with charging rules, that I think I don't understand those rules at all.

Sooting - yeah right, take a look at bows, for example.

Magic - you tell me that scroll caddies are ok? That medium magic works?

Yeah right. We must be playing a different game.
Everytime I hear that this system works I think like this.

Sgt John Keel
28-05-2005, 23:14
It would be a sensible assumption that it will be released in the before-Christmas slot in 2006. 40K had its relaunch 2004. This year it seems that LotR will be the one (Mines of Moria starter box already shown on official events). There was also the rumour that fantasy will feature the Battle of Karak Eight Peaks in the starter box. If this is true, we will see Dwarves and Goblins first.

Have fun,

Rolf.

Wasn't Karak Eight-Peaks Goblins, Dwarf and Skaven?

Just some trivia; the release order of 6th ed. army books:

Ravening Hordes
Empire
Orcs & Goblins
Dwarfs
Vampire Counts
Dark Elves
High Elves
Skaven
Hordes of Chaos
Tomb Kings
Lizardmen
Beasts of Chaos
Kislev (?)
Bretonnia
Storm of Chaos
Ogre Kingdoms
Lustria
Wood Elves

I believe that's the correct order.

/Adrian

NakedFisherman
28-05-2005, 23:17
Try reading countless topics on charging on warhammer.org.uk. I'm so confused now with charging rules, that I think I don't understand those rules at all.

Sooting - yeah right, take a look at bows, for example.

Magic - you tell me that scroll caddies are ok? That medium magic works?

Yeah right. We must be playing a different game.
Everytime I hear that this system works I think like this.

The charging rules work fine. There's some iffy moments, but I think it's pretty impossible to eradicate those as they're apparent in almost every tabletop game in some form or another.

Bows work for what they are. The 'problem' with bows is that people use them and then complain that they can't kill knights.

Well, then stop shooting knights. That would be the logical solution. I don't think you'll wipe an enemy off the tabletop with bows, so why bother trying? It's like complaining about Clanrats not being able to kill Chaos Warriors.

Medium magic does work, and scroll caddies are nowhere near the necessity people make them out to be. I'd personally rather not hand my enemy VPs when he hits a T3 model twice. Some people would. It's their choice.

Lordmonkey
28-05-2005, 23:20
The GW Studio and the suits are different entities. Better models and better rules sell more miniatures. People want to play a balanced game, not a game where one army wrecks everything else -- that just turns them off.

Excepting Space Marines. Over 80% of all miniature sales for GW are *drumroll* Space Marines (I don't know if this includes Chaos, but i think it does).
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that GW intentionally support Space Marines over all others in terms of new rules, new unit types, etc published in White Dwarf, because this in turn generates them more money. With most armies, the devlopers will come up with a great idea, develop rules for it, then maybe make some miniatures for it to generate some income. For Space Marines things seem to work the other way around, which is why a lot of people feel Space Marines are unbalanced.

Cherrystone
28-05-2005, 23:48
Im sure the rules are fine but everything can be improved upon, i have modified the movement phase to allow more tactics and manoeuvres and by the amount of discussions on various boards there seems to the general consenses that combat weapons are not balanced and shooting is too in-effective for the points you pay ( i find that shooting in 2 ranks you atleast get what you payed for), i dont really have a problem with the magic phase my self but it also seems that many people (including the dev team) do, the one thing i would like to see change is the no brainer of upgrading your wizard from level1 to 2 and level 3 to 4.

skavenguy13
29-05-2005, 01:21
some stated there would be a new vampire bloodline. There are other threads about this in the rumours if you want to look.

NakedFisherman
29-05-2005, 02:19
Excepting Space Marines. Over 80% of all miniature sales for GW are *drumroll* Space Marines (I don't know if this includes Chaos, but i think it does).
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that GW intentionally support Space Marines over all others in terms of new rules, new unit types, etc published in White Dwarf, because this in turn generates them more money. With most armies, the devlopers will come up with a great idea, develop rules for it, then maybe make some miniatures for it to generate some income. For Space Marines things seem to work the other way around, which is why a lot of people feel Space Marines are unbalanced.

Yeah, I was waiting for the Space Marines rebuttal. I think the issue there is simply that they're easy to play, they're effective (some people believe overly), and there's tons of variants. Problem is, of course, that with all those variants it's Marines vs Marines vs Marines vs Marines vs Marines. You get the idea.

I think it has to do more with laziness than anything else. That and the fact that40K is now to the point where Space Marines are the protagonists of a story and everyone else is a bump in the road. Simply put, it's like playing a single-player RPG -- the main character is a Space Marine, and all those easy little blobs and things you fight along the way are the Xenos.

As for WHFB's weapon options, I generally find them to be worth about what the designers expected. Halberds and such work fine within the rules, but they aren't always the greatest choice in certain armies. For instance, with Skaven, Elves, and Chaos Warriors they aren't a bad choice at all -- especially since the champion becomes more powerful with one. Coupled with high initiative in those armies, they use the halberd both offensively (more wounds) which in turn makes them defensive as well (fewer enemy models fight back). Low initative troops are often better off with great weapons. There's always some middle ground too especially in the way of humans and other mid-initiative troops.

And Magic Levels aren't always a no-brainer. Power Dice are worth less than 35 points, so upgrading your wizard is a good chance the enemy gets more VPs and you get nothing (especially in the case of the 1st spells of lores being all that you want the wizard for).

Gorbad Ironclaw
29-05-2005, 05:53
The charging rules work fine. There's some iffy moments, but I think it's pretty impossible to eradicate those as they're apparent in almost every tabletop game in some form or another.

Sure it works, but there are a lot of room for improvement. Not radical changes, just clearer, simpler rules.

You don't really have to scratch very deep until you run into situations that is ambigious or unclear in the rules. But I'm confident it will get mostly sorted out.



Bows work for what they are. The 'problem' with bows is that people use them and then complain that they can't kill knights.

Sort of. Bows are clearly the worst missile weapon in the game at the moment. It's not so much that bows doesn't work, it's that it is so many points for a weapon that does so relativly little. It got neither punch, nor a high rate of fire. I don't think bows nessecarrily should be improved, but they are quite expensive for what they do.




Medium magic does work, and scroll caddies are nowhere near the necessity people make them out to be. I'd personally rather not hand my enemy VPs when he hits a T3 model twice. Some people would. It's their choice.

Again, it's an issue of cost effeciency, medium magic doesn't give you a very high return on your points, in fact in many games it have next to no effect at all. When you spend 300 odd points on a pair of mages with items, and then not actually ever get to cast any magic it doesn't seem like a very good option(and yes, I have have several games both with my Dark Elves and my Undeads where I didn't got of one single spell).
Hence the caddy that for much cheaper does the same job of providing defence and as an added bonus can hide in the far corner as he doesn't ever need to get anywhere near the battle.



It's not so much that the system doesn't work, it's that it could work so much better.

Il Magno
29-05-2005, 08:40
My desires for the next edition:

Movement phase: some adjustments and may be a little more clarification for the charges.
Shooting phase: please at least put the rules that archers, crossbowmens, and other shhoting units may fire in two ranks.
HtH, I think two hand weapons are too much effective. I would like to see some special rules for fighting formations (some ideas if you look at WAncient battles).
Magic: too much difference in having a low number of dices or a huge amount of them, I like Cavatore ideas.

I have heard that dwarf will take an update in miniatures in the next december-gennuary, for the release of a campaign supplement, but that for the next edition the box will contain dwarfs and gobbos......... :)
The ideas for Empire could be to do it more gothic and with more orientation to its religious cults, for vampires to give more differentation to the armies of the blood lines. (PURE RUMORS)

Cherrystone
29-05-2005, 10:07
Movement phase: some adjustments and may be a little more clarification for the charges.
Shooting phase: please at least put the rules that archers, crossbowmens, and other shhoting units may fire in two ranks.
HtH, I think two hand weapons are too much effective. I would like to see some special rules for fighting formations (some ideas if you look at WAncient battles).
Magic: too much difference in having a low number of dices or a huge amount of them, I like Cavatore ideas.


As a minimum for change i agree.
Halberds are just not worth it compared to great weapons especially for low initiative troops, maybe ive them armour peircing against cavalry or fight in 2 ranks with only the 1st rank getting the strengh bonus.

skavenguy13
29-05-2005, 11:12
I have heard that dwarf will take an update in miniatures in the next december-gennuary, for the release of a campaign supplement, but that for the next edition the box will contain dwarfs and gobbos......... :)


Well, most people say it's either gobbo or skaven, dwarfs seem to be more certain. I wondered if the Empire+Orcs box for 6th edition was to play some kind of scenario. Because this is not sure yet for 7th edition.

NakedFisherman
29-05-2005, 15:40
Sure it works, but there are a lot of room for improvement. Not radical changes, just clearer, simpler rules.

You don't really have to scratch very deep until you run into situations that is ambigious or unclear in the rules. But I'm confident it will get mostly sorted out.

Most of this is cleared up in the commentary articles on the UK website.




Sort of. Bows are clearly the worst missile weapon in the game at the moment. It's not so much that bows doesn't work, it's that it is so many points for a weapon that does so relativly little. It got neither punch, nor a high rate of fire. I don't think bows nessecarrily should be improved, but they are quite expensive for what they do.

I think the main thing is that people just want to sit their bowmen at the back of the board and plug away every turn. The ability to move and fire with a bow is a great ability that often I don't see utlilized anywhere near full effect. In the case of bows being overpriced, I find it's generally true only for High Elves. Dark Elves do fine with their repeater crossbows, and Arrer Boyz can't really get any cheaper without being a no-brainer.



Again, it's an issue of cost effeciency, medium magic doesn't give you a very high return on your points, in fact in many games it have next to no effect at all. When you spend 300 odd points on a pair of mages with items, and then not actually ever get to cast any magic it doesn't seem like a very good option(and yes, I have have several games both with my Dark Elves and my Undeads where I didn't got of one single spell).
Hence the caddy that for much cheaper does the same job of providing defence and as an added bonus can hide in the far corner as he doesn't ever need to get anywhere near the battle.

The caddies hiding in the corners are usually weeded out unless there's some particularly vile terrain keeping fast-movers, war machines, and spells from blasting them.

As for medium magic, if one player spends 300 points to cast spells and the other spends 300 points to defend himself against spells, I'd say the system we have works pretty well. Scroll caddies (to me at least) aren't as good as they're made out to be.

How many times do you see people max out nearly every character with magic items? I see people do it all the time. I has to do with laziness -- they'd rather slap two dispel scrolls on a Warlock Engineer than paint another unit of Skaven Slaves (and in some cases, do less than that!).


Shooting phase: please at least put the rules that archers, crossbowmens, and other shhoting units may fire in two ranks.
HtH, I think two hand weapons are too much effective. I would like to see some special rules for fighting formations (some ideas if you look at WAncient battles).


Shooting units aleady can fire in two ranks on hills and at large targets. Shooting is plenty effective without having it standard.

Great weapons aren't overly-effective. People have this tendency to see that their guy with a great weapon killed another enemy model per turn than with a halberd, but they fail to see their own models being killed due to their hero striking last.