8th edition

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Calmsword
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1511

8th edition

Post#1 » Mar 22 2017 09:39

Hey everyone,

Been a busy night but I've got a heads up on the next edition. There have been rulebooks circulating for a few weeks now and while it's been tempting to say something it would have probably have been rendered speculatory, but; this evening at Adepticon GW is making official announcements:

(Deathguard are next and look sick... pun intended)

8th: the biggest change is probably the three different rule systems which incorporate tourney/matched play, open play and narrative play. There are benefits to 'themes' which translate into army bonuses (feels like the end of the more rigid codex system)

Movement values back

Morale from AoS is being ported

Every model has 'bespoke' rules- you only need to learn your models rules

Shooting and armor modifiers coming back(!!!)

Charging units will strike first.


More later.
~Good Hunting

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#2 » Mar 23 2017 01:27

Calmsword wrote:(Deathguard are next and look sick... pun intended)

OMG yes!

Calmsword wrote:Movement values back

Yes!

Calmsword wrote:Shooting and armor modifiers coming back(!!!)

Even more Yes!

Calmsword wrote:Charging units will strike first.

All the Yes!

Calmsword wrote:More later.

Please!


As someone who really enjoyed WHFB 7e and started with 40k only recently I'm really hyped about getting some of the WHFB 7e mechanics back....and as I've heard lately those used to be in 40k during 2e as well. :D

User avatar
Ohando
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 7
Contact:

Re: 8th edition

Post#3 » Mar 23 2017 11:23

Is anyone willing to explain what the old rules that are "coming back" means? I only played in the 7 edition and i feel i don't appreciate these leaks enough :?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#4 » Mar 23 2017 11:32

Ohando wrote:Is anyone willing to explain what the old rules that are "coming back" means? I only played in the 7 edition and i feel i don't appreciate these leaks enough :?


Well right now we have a binary system of "you get an armor save roll or you don't" due how AP works.
In fantasy it worked differently (and apparently in 40k 2e as well). There the armor save of the target got modified by the strength of the weapon/wielder. S4 = -1, S5 = -2 etc.
Now I doubt they'll do it the exact same way for 40k but they can easily do it via the AP value if they just mirror it (2 becoming 4 or 5 and so on).
Also in fantasy you used to be able to take your invul roll on top of the armor roll (no rumours about that for 40k 8e yet).
Also also cover wasn't a save but it modified your to-hit roll (also no rumour about that for 40k yet).

User avatar
Unicornsilovethem
Shas'Saal
Posts: 278

Re: 8th edition

Post#5 » Mar 23 2017 11:55

I hope we don't get the direct Str modifier to armor saves. I like that we can have relatively weak guns that penetrate armor and strong guns that don't. But the current AP system is way too all-or-nothing and the difference between AP2 and AP3 is immense. My pet band-aid that I've been meaning to try out is really simple, where if your AP is 1 too high it gives a -1 modifier. So AP3 still completely penetrates 3+ armor, and turns 2+ armor into 3+.

User avatar
Ohando
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 7
Contact:

Re: 8th edition

Post#6 » Mar 23 2017 01:36

Panzer wrote:
Ohando wrote:Is anyone willing to explain what the old rules that are "coming back" means? I only played in the 7 edition and i feel i don't appreciate these leaks enough :?


Well right now we have a binary system of "you get an armor save roll or you don't" due how AP works.
In fantasy it worked differently (and apparently in 40k 2e as well). There the armor save of the target got modified by the strength of the weapon/wielder. S4 = -1, S5 = -2 etc.
Now I doubt they'll do it the exact same way for 40k but they can easily do it via the AP value if they just mirror it (2 becoming 4 or 5 and so on).
Also in fantasy you used to be able to take your invul roll on top of the armor roll (no rumours about that for 40k 8e yet).
Also also cover wasn't a save but it modified your to-hit roll (also no rumour about that for 40k yet).



Ah, thanks Panzer. It would be coherant with their plans of "streamlining" the rules a bit, ap and str of a weapon rolled into one stat. And by "movement value back" the op means that infantry will no longer move 6 inches no matter what the unit, but more "agile" units will move faster (eldar infantry for example)?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#7 » Mar 23 2017 02:06

Well movementstat means just that. Getting a stat for movement back as there once was. Bikes for example would get a 12 and infantry a 6 with slow guys a 4 and so on. All representing inches of cores.


Also while doing the armor modifier together with the strength value would streamline things I really hope they don't do that.
Having an AP value for that opens so many more possibilities of diverse weaponry. There are things that shouldn't get streamlined. I also hope we will never ever adapt the AoS thing of having a fix to-hit and to-wound roll. The tables really aren't that hard to memorize once you understood the logic behind it.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 807

Re: 8th edition

Post#8 » Mar 23 2017 03:16

The way they word that change around movement stats - units having cool bespoke rules and you only need to learn the rules for your models - strongly points towards having full datasheets for each unit in the style of AoS.

Having spent some time with the different publishing method of AoS rules I think that is a good thing, although I do wonder how they will manage all the weapon/upgrade options for some units which could run on a bit (the sheet for the Crisis team could be more than a little lengthy).

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#9 » Mar 23 2017 03:21

nic wrote:The way they word that change around movement stats - units having cool bespoke rules and you only need to learn the rules for your models - strongly points towards having full datasheets for each unit in the style of AoS.

Having spent some time with the different publishing method of AoS rules I think that is a good thing, although I do wonder how they will manage all the weapon/upgrade options for some units which could run on a bit (the sheet for the Crisis team could be more than a little lengthy).

Imo that's a ridiculous utopic statement made by GW.
You will never be able to play the game properly by just knowing your unit and no other units rules. That'd be like playing blind. ^^

But I think I know what they actually mean with that. No rules for a whole kind of unit type/group/whatever but specific rules for each unit seperately listed on their datasheet so you don't have to look elsewhere for that unit rules.

User avatar
Calmsword
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1511

Re: 8th edition

Post#10 » Mar 23 2017 11:14

Yes that's what that means.

I asked more about this mechanic and it basically means you'll have more of a card or page for each unit that you have which will have all of it's rules (and what those rules mean/do/behave) in a single place.

More conversations indicate that there is going to be updates to codexes but rewrites will be on the way with a big push for the xenos factions after chaos is done (imperials have a few more as well) but that campaign books (which have been massively successful) will be the source of multiple updates for factions more often.

Finally- every single gun/type will have its own armor modifier. The example was boltgun: -1 armor save while a pulse weapon has none.
~Good Hunting

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#11 » Mar 24 2017 12:09

Damn Pulse weapons really have none? Didn't expect that. o_O
Here is hope that they finally turn Burst Cannons into a proper weapon though.

Edit: I guess that means the balance might change a lot. Let us hope to see scatter laser without any armor modifier as well and Grav getting good rules for once as well. ;)

User avatar
Calmsword
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1511

Re: 8th edition

Post#12 » Mar 24 2017 02:30

Remember it's still speculation at this point. They've dropped a few bombs and I bet are waiting to see how the community handles it.

I would imagine that strength modifiers would allow for variety amongst different weapon layouts that 'just' AP denies any kind of variety. With entire rules on cards/slates it also allows for individual units to have special rules within the confines of the codex. This, again, is me speculating but it might allow for a Hammerhead's burst cannons to have additional AP while a stealth squad doesn't.
~Good Hunting

User avatar
Vash
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 631

Re: 8th edition

Post#13 » Mar 24 2017 05:06

I played 2nd edition.
It was a far more fun game, but it had a huge drawback. It took forever to complete a game. There were tables for everything. It basically was a role-playing game with miniatures on a larger scale.
Terminator saves were 3+... on 2D6. That means you rolled to save for each terminator separately every single time.

Each weapon, as discussed, had their own modifiers and set strength values. This I loved. Opened up for more variety and terminators actually were good.
But, there was an additional stat. And that was "wounds". Each weapon caused different amount of wounds on the target (not unit).
An assault cannon did 1D8 wounds, if I remember correctly, for each unsaved wound.
This, I hope doesn't get back though. There were way to many dice rolls, and way to much to remember/looking up in tables.

As mentioned, cover saves where modifiers on the to hit roll. This I like more than the current version. On top of that you had short, and long range stats.
Usually short range gave a boost to your to hit modifier, and long range a negative modifier.
These were individual for each weapon, adding more complexity to the weapon profiles.

But as everything, those weapons and items you use the most, you learn by heart after a while. So while it seems overwhelming with many new profiles and stats. We will get a huge load of from "Universal special rules".

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#14 » Mar 24 2017 06:58

Vash wrote:I played 2nd edition.
It was a far more fun game, but it had a huge drawback. It took forever to complete a game.

So...like 7e? :D

To the other stuff you mentioned...well I wouldn't expect to get a straight 2e reboot. They are probably going with a mix of 7e, 2e and AoS and maybe something new as well.

Calmsword wrote:Remember it's still speculation at this point. They've dropped a few bombs and I bet are waiting to see how the community handles it.

I would imagine that strength modifiers would allow for variety amongst different weapon layouts that 'just' AP denies any kind of variety. With entire rules on cards/slates it also allows for individual units to have special rules within the confines of the codex. This, again, is me speculating but it might allow for a Hammerhead's burst cannons to have additional AP while a stealth squad doesn't.

Wait a sec. Speculation on your part or speculation on their part? o_O
The part about the modifier sounded like you were sure it'll be like that. :D

User avatar
Vash
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 631

Re: 8th edition

Post#15 » Mar 24 2017 07:42

Well I hope they don't do a reboot of 2nd ed. With kids of my own, I don't have time for a 6 hour battle :D
Simplified rules of 2nd ed mixed in with AoS/7th ed WH40k would be nice.

Armour saves on terminators is something I am interested in how they solve, if they are looking at modification system.
I would like to avoid 2D6 save for them. That would be horrible for the simplicity and speed of the game.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: 8th edition

Post#16 » Mar 24 2017 07:44

Vash wrote:Well I hope they don't do a reboot of 2nd ed. With kids of my own, I don't have time for a 6 hour battle :D
Simplified rules of 2nd ed mixed in with AoS/7th ed WH40k would be nice.

Armour saves on terminators is something I am interested in how they solve, if they are looking at modification system.
I would like to avoid 2D6 save for them. That would be horrible for the simplicity and speed of the game.

Yeah 2d6 would be HORRIBLE. Imagine having to take all those saves one by one after getting hit by a Firewarrior gunline etc.

They could give Terminator a 1+ safe or better and just say 1s always fail so they'd keep their 2+ armor even against weapons with small modifier.

Fokke
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 133

Re: 8th edition

Post#17 » Mar 24 2017 09:14

Meh 2nd didn't take forever to play if you knew the rules. 1500 points was a good sized game, I don't think I ever played more than 2k. My 1500 point list was like 17 models. My group had it down on average to an hour per 1k points. so two people playing 1k each the game might last 2 hours. But we knew our armies and the stats for our armies in our heads so it was pretty quick. I preferred to make my terminator Khorne terminators with twin lightning claws for the 2+ save on 2d6 and some other bonus I cant remember. Was totally hero-hammer, something I have gone polar opposite in the last decade. My commander then was a Nurgle level 4 psychker with terminator armor, a daemon sword for the +2 WS and parry, and a power fist for the wounds and neg armor modifiers, plus combat drugs and a displacer field. He won a game vs nids single handedly because the psychic phase was SOOOOO much more powerful. Plaguewind with irresistible force on the first turn turned about half his army into plague bearers. He was also 365 points. Won another game with the first shot of the game with a lowly autocannon guy. 2d6 wounds to a Hive Tyrant which only had I think 7 wounds :) And guys shot individually. If guys 1-3 shoot enemy a, but guy 4 can see him due to terrain, he shoots someone else even in a different squad.

I like most of the teased rules so far. Be interested to see what they do with the armor modifiers for out AP5 weapons. If we stick to the d6 system we have now I cant see our pulse weapons having better than a -1. Not complaining, still better vs marines than we have now. I see lasguns dropping to -0. I have hated the AP system since its inception and am glad to see it go. I think we need to get out of the limited d6 system and use varied dice again.
Hope I am not the only one that wants to see sustained fire dice make a comeback :)

Hoping FW is off its butt and is working on pdfs to bring its various armies and units in line with 8th so those of us with primarily FW armies wont be sitting there twiddling our thumbs while everyone else is playing. Its not like they didn't know it was coming.

Unfortunately I think releasing this info so far ahead is going to hurt sales badly. I know aside from maybe a crisis team I want to mess around with, I probably wont have any 40k purchases between now and 8ths release. Doubt that I am the only one.

User avatar
Jefffar
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 1019

Re: 8th edition

Post#18 » Mar 24 2017 09:38

Well, if AP 2 equivalent will still negate all armour saves, it would be. -5.

AP 3 then is -4. AP 4 is -3, AP 5 is -2 and AP 6 -1.

But it could just as easily be AP - and 6 are 0, AP 5 is -1, AP 4 is -2, AP 3 is -3 and so on.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest