PDA

View Full Version : Warhammer 9th edition



Rogue
06-07-2020, 01:59
So for those who are not in the know, there is a new edition that has dropped for Warhammer 40K. That's right folks, we are now in the 9th edition. As what they did the previous edition they have produced a free PDF of the rules that you can find here:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Lw4o3USx1R8sU7cQ.pdf

The new starter box set is going to be Space Marines of the Primaris variety(shocking I know) and Necrons. I have not fully read the rules so I am not going to comment on what I think about it.

Thingol of Iyaden
02-10-2020, 20:00
Thank you! Been tied up for a couple of years, now trying to catch up!

Rogue
06-10-2020, 23:11
You and me both actually. Now that I have some time to myself I can finally get some painting done, when I am not on places like warseer.

MadHatter
10-10-2020, 13:53
well then then i shall be three. I am not sure I like all the changes. Especially since without Initiative my weak Banshees no longer get to strike first. And i am not sure how effective they might be on the table top.

I see the marines now have primus and have all kinds of flying stuff now. I have not seen thier new codex so i do not have any real judgement. But from a glance it just screams to me; Power creep so marines are the most powerful thing now. play nothing else.

Rogue
01-12-2020, 22:44
It's worse than you think for the marines. Only if you play "Primaris" do you get all of the cool new toys. "Firstborn" Marines(the old marines that you know and love) seem to have frozen themselves in time at around the 7th edition. So they have a few flyers that were added to their list, but that is it. I have two chapters of old school marines, Crimson Fists and a homemade chapter that I am fleshing out. I for one won't be going the primaris route at all. Their models don't appeal to me, I don't like the story line of them, and I don't like what I have seen so far from them game-wise.

As far as the Banshee's I would wait until you get a codex out on the Eldar first. Primaris Marines were not the be-all end-all, and I doubt that they will continue to be as well.

I did get a chance to read the rules a few months ago, and the best way that I can describe it is "watered down." That can be a good thing in that you don't really need to remember much for the rules, but if you are looking for more detail in your game, then you may be disappointed. I would prefer to get a few games to pass final judgement, whenever that happens. :rolleyes:

MadHatter
19-12-2020, 22:40
I agree. I am not a fan of the new primaries marines. And have no plans to add them to my marine army. And if the firstborn go the way of tome kings then I will stop buying marines.

I am still learning the 9th edition game. But I would prefer to return to the old school rules. lol I am sure that is the feeling of all the old timers.

Rogue
21-12-2020, 14:15
Playing previous editions is gaining in popularity these days. I for one refuse to play AOS and will only play the 6th edition of WFB, with a very few amended rules from the 7th.(See the link to classichammer in my sig for more details) As far as a previous edition of 40K, I prefer the 5th edition with again a very few amended rules from the 6th. As stated earlier, I really do want to play a few games of the 9th before I completely write it off.

Thingol of Iyaden
22-12-2020, 14:42
The new blast rules appear to be the result of the Big Gun GW honcho's rolling too many ones, and not wanting to spend money manufactoring and stocking templates again.

Thingol of Iyaden
22-12-2020, 14:58
The 5 inch vertical unit coherency/ engagement range, sounds like a defense against striking scorpions, wraithblades materializing on the floor above your troops!

Thingol of Iyaden
22-12-2020, 15:06
Hey Rogue, I'm curious as to how you work with eldar using 5th edition rules?

Commissar von Toussaint
27-12-2020, 18:49
Thanks for the link!

I gave up being "current" years ago, but I'm interested to see the state of the game.

One thing that immediately stands out is GW's continued tension between trying to simplify the rules while maintaining massive unit types, all of which have to be differentiated in some way from each other.

It sounds like they are trying to keep the "generic special rule" thing going and apparently two wound troopers are now a thing. Huh.

I'm not sure what the point of the morale rules are, other than to inflict additional "kills." There doesn't appear to be a rally mechanic, which is sad because it was always fun to have a unit rout early and then do a timely rally to help save the game.

I guess this means I'm now officially seven editions behind the curve. I started with 2nd, did the upgrade to 3rd but burned out before it became 4th and went back to 2nd.

Think of all the money I saved in rule books over the years!

Thingol of Iyaden
28-12-2020, 12:27
As some one who has kept buying them. You have saved close to $900 USD. The "General special rule" has been replaced with "Key words" and Stratagems,

Thingol of Iyaden
28-12-2020, 12:44
As an example; the Dark Reaper exarch still has the "Crack shot" ability, but can replace it with one of six others ( add 6 inches to range for the unit's reaper launchers, or exarch can target a character, etc), or pay 1 command point for the stratagem and once per battle, exarch can "Fast shot", just like old times!

Commissar von Toussaint
28-12-2020, 21:26
As an example; the Dark Reaper exarch still has the "Crack shot" ability, but can replace it with one of six others ( add 6 inches to range for the unit's reaper launchers, or exarch can target a character, etc), or pay 1 command point for the stratagem and once per battle, exarch can "Fast shot", just like old times!

Here again we see the tension between GW's need to sell ever more models and the difficulty of keeping the rules from becoming too complex for anyone to know if they work (let alone balance properly).

Looking back at 3rd as it transitioned to 4th, that was definitely a factor in my dropping out. It was (and still is!) possible to have a very good grasp of all six armies of 2nd edition. I was able to keep up with 3rd, but the new armies (Dark Eldar, Tau, fleshed-out Necrons) plus the sub-armies for the old Chaos, Imperial and Marines, made it really difficult to keep up with what was going on.

I like the use of armor save modifiers, and the system as a whole seems more intuitive, but there still seems a lot of needless dice rolling. Why not just double Advance (i.e. "running") movement rates? Why not test for a squad (two dice, one time) and they either stay or run?

GW seems oddly addicted to compressing as many dice rolls into the game as possible and I'm not sure why. Random doesn't mean fair, it means randomly distributed unfairness.

Rogue
28-12-2020, 22:52
Hey Rogue, I'm curious as to how you work with eldar using 5th edition rules?

Perhaps we need to setup an thread on playing 40K in older editions. To answer your question, I really need to review the book and see what I would add or augment. One of the rules that would help from the 6th would be Overwatch. Outside of that, I really don't know as Eldar was not an army that I played in the 5th. If you have any other ideas, I am all ears.

On a different note, I live in NC which is too far for the usual game, but I do(or did) end up in your part of the world from time to time.

Thingol of Iyaden
30-12-2020, 10:54
Personally, feel that rolling dice for charge distance is done for two reasons: First, It panders to those who "test" their dice, and use only high rollers; Second, It keeps GW immune to copyright lawsuits. Otherwise it doesn't make any sense, but has persisted for so long.

Thingol of Iyaden
30-12-2020, 11:04
Sorry, coffee pot is still perking away, but yes a separate thread for an "Ideal" 9th or 10th rule set. Might be wise!

Thingol of Iyaden
30-12-2020, 11:25
I like being able to purchase/ outfit my troops to match their opponent (2nd ed.). The Force org chart in the big rulebook should only apply to space marines and IG, all others should have one tailored to them, and example would be the craft world eldar supplement for 3rd ed..

Thingol of Iyaden
30-12-2020, 11:53
If eldar are to remain IG equivalent then 4th edition's treatment of warlocks. Specifically, as you purchase a unit of guardians or support batteries. You have the option to upgrade the unit with a warlock (ie, the warlock is apart of the unit cost). Note: Due to the usual forgeworld/GW interactions the wraithseer is a warlock equivalent.

Thingol of Iyaden
30-12-2020, 12:52
6th edition's Autarch's weapon list needs a ranger long rifle added. After all the rangers have a phoenix lord even thou not "Aspect" warriors. Next, undoing the multi edition wrongs such as, returning Maugen Ra back to being a harlequin phoenix lord, giving dark reapers a phoenix lord with a 60 inch range launcher, exodites and harlequins need their heroes/ leaders.

Thingol of Iyaden
30-12-2020, 16:25
Rangers upgraded to pathfinder should be limited to 1/squad, "Kill" on 5-6 as opposed to 4-6, gain forward observer -2 to scatter roll (old), +2 to number of hits die per die (ie, 2d6+4 hits).

As I now have a garage to play in, March should bring warm enough temps to play, and over a month to recover from ostomey reversal surgery.

Commissar von Toussaint
30-12-2020, 19:35
I like being able to purchase/ outfit my troops to match their opponent (2nd ed.). The Force org chart in the big rulebook should only apply to space marines and IG, all others should have one tailored to them, and example would be the craft world eldar supplement for 3rd ed..

The org charts were a crutch to help with the inherent unit imbalances because the points system was broken. Maybe it still is, I don't know.

But your point is a good one and I liked the old narrative-driven style of gaming that was replaced by a more sterile "tournament prep" mentality.

Going to your previous post, GW will always roll dice whenever possible, and not only is it an annoying mechanic, it chews up time better spent actually playing the game.

Because it involves what seems like a trivial activity, it's easy to lose track of just home much time rolling dice can take, but I've seen a number of solutions to try to speed up dice-rolling and game play is measurably speeded up.

MadHatter
31-12-2020, 00:52
I left the game with the sixth edition. I am just getting back into the game with the ninth edition. while I would love to go back and play second or fourth editions, there are few players willing to do so.

Commissar von Toussaint
01-01-2021, 14:10
I left the game with the sixth edition. I am just getting back into the game with the ninth edition. while I would love to go back and play second or fourth editions, there are few players willing to do so.

I've found it depends on the presentation and circumstances. For example, it is possible to get new people directly into playing 2nd because its books are so available (along with the Battle Bible) and the entry cost is so much lower.

The chief difficulty in my area is the COVID restrictions. I don't mean the specific rules, but the fact that I live in a college town that is largely deserted and the gaming scene is dead.

Thingol of Iyaden
01-01-2021, 14:14
Happy New Year to All!

Throughly understand departing 6th ed after reading how all pistols were ruled (user str). If it had not been for escalation (and my owning a revenant). I really do miss the dangerous terrain rules.

Commissar von Toussaint
02-01-2021, 12:55
Happy New Year to All!

Throughly understand departing 6th ed after reading how all pistols were ruled (user str). If it had not been for escalation (and my owning a revenant). I really do miss the dangerous terrain rules.

It's interesting to note that while there was reference to terrain, no rules were quoted in that .pdf relating to game play effects.

Terrain is one area where GW has been all over the map (so to speak). In 2nd it was a must to avoid Western Desert-style tank duels dominating the game, but it got downplayed ever since. The whole armor save OR cover save thing was terrible.

Curious as to the system now. I like that armor saves mods came back, is it too much to ask for "to hit" modifiers as well?

Thingol of Iyaden
04-01-2021, 13:46
Mods to hit and saves has always been my favorite way to handle it. However this time around what GW holds as terrain is very different from the past. Rivers, woods, 1 inch tall hills equal zero effect on game play. "Real (GW) terrain has traits like defensible, breachable, scalable, light cover. The terrain cards actually fall into tactical terrain and terrain(for narrative play), both have picture, description, category (ie area terrain feature), traits (as mentioned earlier), with tactical having a point cost (example 40 terrain points), and ability(ies). So their are 2 cards for each terrain feature. If you spend 40 pts for tactical with ammo storage abilities: reroll "1"s to hit, and half the models of a unit can throw grenades in the shooting phase, but for narrative play. You get all the fore mentioned plus resupply (if your infantry owns the feature, one of your vehicles can reload and shoot a once a game weapon again like IG/space marine hunter-killer missile. As not all factions have one shot weapons and not having to pay points for....Egads!!!

Commissar von Toussaint
04-01-2021, 20:02
Mods to hit and saves has always been my favorite way to handle it.

Agreed. It should go without saying that modifiers work best because they scale probability better than either/or systems. They also capture the truth that a guy wearing power armor behind a stone wall benefits from both.


However this time around what GW holds as terrain is very different from the past. Rivers, woods, 1 inch tall hills equal zero effect on game play. "Real (GW) terrain has traits like defensible, breachable, scalable, light cover. The terrain cards actually fall into tactical terrain and terrain(for narrative play), both have picture, description, category (ie area terrain feature), traits (as mentioned earlier), with tactical having a point cost (example 40 terrain points), and ability(ies). So their are 2 cards for each terrain feature. If you spend 40 pts for tactical with ammo storage abilities: reroll "1"s to hit, and half the models of a unit can throw grenades in the shooting phase, but for narrative play. You get all the fore mentioned plus resupply (if your infantry owns the feature, one of your vehicles can reload and shoot a once a game weapon again like IG/space marine hunter-killer missile. As not all factions have one shot weapons and not having to pay points for....Egads!!!

GW seems to have a thing with weird terrain rules. The irony is that I got into 40k in large part because I loved the cluttered battlefields, particularly the hive city set-ups. The notion of having jump troops sweep along rooftops while tanks pound it out in the alleys below captivated me. In fact, it still does.

The open-field emphasis of 3/4 Edition was a big part of what drove me away. My cool urban nightmare terrain was basically useless. City Fight tried to fix it, but the notion of having to do a supplement for what I considered a core part the game just grated on me.

GW also has this weird notion of using terrain as a bargaining chip. How about setting up a battlefield that's fun to play over? The old "one guy sets up, the other picks which side he gets" works great in most applications. Paying points is just weird, and reminds me of the old Herohammer "competitive terrain placement" strategy advice. :rolleyes:

MadHatter
17-01-2021, 16:00
I hate the pay points for terrain. Use it for objective for the mission would have been a better idea. I agree modifiers for both hit and Armor Piercing should be part of the terrain features.

Cities of Death rules made the game so much better. I am still not a fan of the 9th edition rules. but my area is mostly hooked on playing the current rules.

Commissar von Toussaint
18-01-2021, 15:49
I hate the pay points for terrain. Use it for objective for the mission would have been a better idea. I agree modifiers for both hit and Armor Piercing should be part of the terrain features.

Cities of Death rules made the game so much better. I am still not a fan of the 9th edition rules. but my area is mostly hooked on playing the current rules.

There's a big difference between "sub-optimal" and "objectively awful."

You can tolerate and even enjoy some of the former but the latter is unplayable. Warhammer 5th Ed. in its final, ultra-cheesy, beard-wearing incarnation fell into the second category. I reached the point where I was turning down gaming invites because laundry was more enjoyable.

Similarly, 3/4 ed. 40k achieved a level of counter-intuitive tactics that made me loathe it.

If 9th ed. 40k reaches the same plateau that 6th edition Fantasy did - flawed, but workable - I can see people getting back into it, particularly if they've got usable armies on hand.

Thingol of Iyaden
30-01-2021, 14:17
My protest is the constant support given to IG/space marines via terrain. In my last post note the reuse of one shot weapons- the only weapon that fits in eldar/Harlequin use is a star bola. Which is used from a jetbike! Jetbike units can't sit for a turn to rearm, lest we forget the star bola is used up close & personnel. Please note not all xeno armies have one shot weapons, although the orks have several. It's annoying that most of the terrain pieces sold by GW (not to mention the the whole wall of martyrs series) benefit only one race (even if they 30 flavors).
GW has dabbled with the tau gunline and some (mostly forgeworld) stuff. However, as some one who has gamed the 1939-40 Russo-Finnish war and 1944-5 polish front negotiating over terrain features and their deployment is rather common. All races have a need for fortifications and terrain features that can compliment one another, or rather in a campaign setting fortifications will be sited in complimentary terrain features. Which is where part of GW's "narrative style" comes from.

Commissar von Toussaint
31-01-2021, 12:38
My protest is the constant support given to IG/space marines via terrain. In my last post note the reuse of one shot weapons- the only weapon that fits in eldar/Harlequin use is a star bola. Which is used from a jetbike! Jetbike units can't sit for a turn to rearm, lest we forget the star bola is used up close & personnel. Please note not all xeno armies have one shot weapons, although the orks have several. It's annoying that most of the terrain pieces sold by GW (not to mention the the whole wall of martyrs series) benefit only one race (even if they 30 flavors).

That's interesting. The old story was that GW's favorite army (or should I write "favourite"?) was whatever they were pushing that month. The Imperium always had a prime position of course because they fought all comers (including their own side), which is great for sales. Can't have everybody collecting Dark Eldar and then wondering why everything's a civil war all of a sudden.

But to your point, yes, GW picks winners and losers and always had. I recall during 5th Edition Fantasy Chaos Warriors could win the game before it actually started! (Old timers know I do not exaggerate.)

For veteran 40k players, each edition new edition brings up a series of questions:

Is the imbalance of the new game within tolerable limits? (A balanced game is out of the question with GW.)
How expensive are all the supplements to get a minimum amount of armies back into use?
How much retrofitting will existing armies need? How much will it cost?

Gen.Steiner
18-03-2021, 15:47
I've got my hands on the rulebook recently, and am blown away by the production values of it. I really like the look of the Crusade concept, and will probably pick up the Codexes (only) as they are released. I'm not hugely interested in the Warzone stuff, but as my most likely opponents are going to be playing 9th I reckon I'll be buying into it.

Still mostly playing 4th and 2nd edition though!

Rogue
18-03-2021, 20:04
I've got my hands on the rulebook recently, and am blown away by the production values of it. I really like the look of the Crusade concept, and will probably pick up the Codexes (only) as they are released. I'm not hugely interested in the Warzone stuff, but as my most likely opponents are going to be playing 9th I reckon I'll be buying into it.

Still mostly playing 4th and 2nd edition though!

How is that going for you? The 4th and 2nd edition is of some interest to me. I would be interested in a bat-rep should you get one up somewhere. My current preference is for 5th,(with some house rules) but that is more due to what I am familiar with as that is where I started.

Gen.Steiner
18-03-2021, 23:33
I had a game with my son the other day to introduce him to 4th and dust the cobwebs off me after a good long while of not really playing. 2nd is even more intermittent, but I've played 4th and 2nd more than I have 8th and certainly more than 9th! :biggrin:

Commissar von Toussaint
19-03-2021, 21:12
I had a game with my son the other day to introduce him to 4th and dust the cobwebs off me after a good long while of not really playing. 2nd is even more intermittent, but I've played 4th and 2nd more than I have 8th and certainly more than 9th! :biggrin:

I'd love to get a game in. Sadly, it's not likely for the foreseeable future.

MadHatter
24-03-2021, 15:13
I've got my hands on the rulebook recently, and am blown away by the production values of it. I really like the look of the Crusade concept, and will probably pick up the Codexes (only) as they are released. I'm not hugely interested in the Warzone stuff, but as my most likely opponents are going to be playing 9th I reckon I'll be buying into it.

Still mostly playing 4th and 2nd edition though!


Those are my preferred editions as well. 2nd maybe more nostalgia now. But I do remember having the most fun with those editions.