6th Edition 40K Rules Leak

[DrLove42]

I know people say 8th wss bad, but from my perspective it seemed chock full of missions and good rules. With the exception of premeasuring its good from my perspective (a newbie to fantasy in 8th).

Even if this thing was covered in official gw stickers and jervis piped up in gws website and said yes its official i still wouldbt read it. i dont want to ruin the new book.

But could someone post some of the main points that'd be grand

[Entropic]

For example, all Fast Skimmers have nine special rules on pages 110, 41, 47 54, 64, 72, and 73. Really? So instead to turning to the Fast Skimmer section and reading what it does I have to go through eight more pages and remember what each ability does? Not only that some of the abilities have tiers (Fearless (2) for example) so you have to remember that as well.

This is common to all the special rules sections, every other special rule has 'see page ***'.

Have you seen the more recent codices they've put out? This wouldn't be the first time.

Someone said the document was dated May 2011, so if not a hoax it could be a very, very early, very, very rough draft. Playing devils advocate, I'm more inclined to think it a hoax.

This is believable, and about what I was thinking. I wouldn't call it a very rough draft, it's actually done up fairly well and looks like it's not too far from completion, but I did notice a number of errors, so I would assume that it hasn't gotten a final editor's pass yet. It's clearly been through a good deal of editing already though. The sheer work involved in this leads me to believe that this is accurate, though it might not be the final product. If it's a hoax, somebody has crazy amounts of free time on their hands.

Another thing, Veiled(3) involves calculating spotting distance (like Veil of Tears) by rollind 2D6 and multiplying by 1.5". To my knowledge GW have never had a rule involving calculating by 1.5 anything.

That stuck out to me too. Seems a poor choice, if this sticks.

If these rules are accurate then 6th is going from complicated to ridiculously convoluted.

I wouldn't say that. They're different, but after going over it all it doesn't seem too much more complicated than 5th, it's just complicated in different ways.

----

One thing that I noticed is that a lot of it is pretty similar to the rules dump about 6th that we got earlier. Not everything matches, but it's close enough that it's completely believable that both that dump and this leak were accurate, but seen at different times in development.

In the codex updates that was 'leaked' alongside it, they have Tau errata. Could somebody with the current codex check to see if things match up? I'm assuming that it does. If Tau does get released in the next couple months like it's rumored, that would indicate that this leak is a hoax or came from early in development, before Tau release plans were solidified. Necron errata is notably absent, which would suggest that when this was written the writer's didn't have access to the final version of the Necron codex. Again, could either mean early version, or hoax started months ago.

edit: Timestamp is May 17th & May 20th, so definitely earlier version. I think that might lend more credibility to the not-a-hoax theory, simply because I wouldn't expect a hoaxer to go through the trouble of faking a timestamp, even as easy as that is. What's the point, when a more recent timestamp doesn't mean a damn thing?

[Entropic]

I'm starting to grok the rules now as I continue to read and reread the rulebook. I'm starting to like the new ruleset and the implications of these changes, assuming this is a real leak.

Vehicles get a few nerfs and a few buffs, which overall is probably a wash, but the results I think make more sense.

I think I like these reserve rules better than the previously rumored ones - you can do it like in fifth, or do things to increase the chances of a critical unit coming in at the right time, and you also don't need to worry about units coming in too early. Whether it's overall better than fifth is still unclear - those eldar bikes that always get a last turn objective contest and can't be shot beforehand are going to be obnoxious. Outflanking got a slight nerf.

Deepstriking in general is less risky, which I like - you don't scatter at all if you deploy away from the enemy, and even if you mishap the unit is just stunned. Deepstriking assault units is viable now, even if still pretty dangerous (if you deepstrike close enough to assault, you scatter, and enemies get to take shots at you, but you can assault that turn).

First turn assaults are now possible with the faster units and correct deployment. Tyranid players are probably going to start running a lot more shrikes.

The Annihilation object is a lot less unbalanced. Kill points are based on point value ranges of the units, with some randomness to make it harder to min-max unit point values for this mission type. At higher point values, each army can be expected to be fielding roughly same number of kill points, regardless of how many units they drop on the table. A good deal for armies like Orks and Tyranids.

The evasion stat is an odd way to phrase the associated rules, but my guess is that this is really preparation for a future 7th edition, and it's done this way with the intention of giving GW time to add EV to everything's stat line.

One other thing that seems to suggest this is legit - some of the stratagems rules seem to be specifically engineered to increase sales of GW terrain. Speaking of stragems, I like the core idea, but not having a cap on first turn bidding seems like a bad idea. I'm hoping the final rules are more like what was rumored before - that both players are just given a number of stratagem points and bid from that pool, and use the rest.

Also liking the inclusion of Apocalypse rules in the main rulebook. I hope this will encourage GW and others to make Forgeworld units acceptable in general play. Honestly, the main thing stopping me from buying more forgeworld is the knowledge that I won't be allowed to play with those toys in most games.

[Entropic]

I'm starting to grok the rules now as I continue to read and reread the rulebook. I'm starting to like the new ruleset and the implications of these changes, assuming this is a real leak.

Vehicles get a few nerfs and a few buffs, which overall is probably a wash, but the results I think make more sense.

I think I like these reserve rules better than the previously rumored ones - you can do it like in fifth, or do things to increase the chances of a critical unit coming in at the right time, and you also don't need to worry about units coming in too early. Whether it's overall better than fifth is still unclear - those eldar bikes that always get a last turn objective contest and can't be shot beforehand are going to be obnoxious. Outflanking got a slight nerf.

Deepstriking in general is less risky, which I like - you don't scatter at all if you deploy away from the enemy, and even if you mishap the unit is just stunned. Deepstriking assault units is viable now, even if still pretty dangerous (if you deepstrike close enough to assault, you scatter, and enemies get to take shots at you, but you can assault that turn).

First turn assaults are now possible with the faster units and correct deployment. Tyranid players are probably going to start running a lot more shrikes.

The Annihilation object is a lot less unbalanced. Kill points are based on point value ranges of the units, with some randomness to make it harder to min-max unit point values for this mission type. At higher point values, each army can be expected to be fielding roughly same number of kill points, regardless of how many units they drop on the table. A good deal for armies like Orks and Tyranids.

The evasion stat is an odd way to phrase the associated rules, but my guess is that this is really preparation for a future 7th edition, and it's done this way with the intention of giving GW time to add EV to everything's stat line.

One other thing that seems to suggest this is legit - some of the stratagems rules seem to be specifically engineered to increase sales of GW terrain. Speaking of stragems, I like the core idea, but not having a cap on first turn bidding seems like a bad idea. I'm hoping the final rules are more like what was rumored before - that both players are just given a number of stratagem points and bid from that pool, and use the rest.

Also liking the inclusion of Apocalypse rules in the main rulebook. I hope this will encourage GW and others to make Forgeworld units acceptable in general play. Honestly, the main thing stopping me from buying more forgeworld is the knowledge that I won't be allowed to play with those toys in most games.

[deadmanwade]

Having quickly scanned the document, it does look like a very rough draft. More than a few typos and some obviously convoluted rules and layouts. Now, since I am assuming that rulebooks dont spring fully formed from the minds of the writers and instead go through numerous revisions and extensive playtesting (despite what frothing internet users may say), it is entirely possible that a great deal of it will be changed, amended or even just deleted in the final version.
Assuming that it must be a hoax because the rules are poorly laid out is just as invalid an argument as claiming it must be legit because the page layout is the same as current 40k rulebooks. Drafts do get edited and rewritten before going to print and internet trolls can copy fonts and styles if they try. It is impossible to confirm it either way without GW officially doing so. Even if they claim it is not official, there is every possibility that they could be lying.
I think it is best to assume that it might be legit but whether or not it bears any resemblance to the final product is anybody's guess, so it is pointless getting all excited over it or ranting about how it totally nerfs your army or whatever. For the time being it is just an interesting diversion in our otherwise normal 5th edition lives.

[Capn Stoogey]

Forgive my ignorance but why is there no linkage allowed? Is it a "cover you arse in case GW get nasty" type thing?

[Strangleweb]

Interestingly, while being dated back in May, it contains references to the Necron's Eternity Gate special rule.

If this were a hoax, it's either been edited recently, or been done by someone with early sight of the Necron book.

I think it is likely to be an initial GW draft, or perhaps an idea. How much this correlates to the final 6th Edition rules remains to be seen. I remember something similar to this happening with 5th Edition, and the document was about 65% accurate.

Only time will tell...

[MarneusCalgar]

Well, I am tending to be on these like St Thomas...

Until I see it REALLY on a reliable GW source, won´t believe it...

No one can assure if this is not a joke or a hard work coming from a fanboy group...

So I will have a good amount of salt

[harveydent]

i agree with eldargal's first post. the sheer number of special rules that seem to be cross-referenced throughout the text are ridiculous.

the organization of this leaked rulebook is pretty bad. it's completely discombobulated, and even worse than some of the older whfb rulebooks.

i like the turn-by-turn accumulation of points for scoring. i also think that the new to-hit/to-wound charts look like they would work. the turn sequence change seems like it would work, as do the wound allocation rule changes.

but i cannot imagine sitting there with my ***** up my *** waiting for my opponent to try to remember what each of his dozen movement/assault/shooting special rules options are every phase, OR what special rules can or can't be used while utilizing those options. that part is completely effed up, and i would never play 40k if it were all implemented that way.

i just cannot believe that gw would make you remember lists of loaded keywords in conjunction with other lists of loaded keywords and expect you to cross-reference them ever phase. if this seems like a difficult task for ME, and i'm a veteran player, i cannot imagine a newb trying to figure it all out.

[Latro_]

as i said on bloodofkittens comments

This all sounds good but then think about one small application:
Run = x2 movement.
Fleet = +2m
Assault = x2 movement.
Means an entire ork army when they call the waaaaarrgghh can all charge 18″...

And they would of been getting there every turn before that at 12" a turn. So assuming 12" deployment they will be 42" onto the board by turn 2...



Then again they cant fire and rapid fire/blast looks more effective so maybe its balanced but you would have ONE turn to shoot at them before they easily hit your lines enmass (if they go first)

perhaps this is their counter to so much mech lol. In fact reading it further, according to this ground vehicles and infantry move at the same speed . So just hide ye bezerkers behind your rhino

Edit: omg i cant add up its 16" so 40" onto the board not 42" still beats the best possible you can get atm which is 42 if you roll 2 6's