BoLS Lounge : Wargames, Warhammer & Miniatures Forum
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 81

Thread: 40k 6th Edition

  1. #11
    Abbess Sanctorum
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,714

    Default

    Right, rather than focus on the rulebook they should pump out more codices :P
    The mouth of the Emperor shall meditate wisdom; from His tongue shall speak judgment

  2. #12
    Brother-Captain
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    IA, USA
    Posts
    1,403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissia View Post
    Right, rather than focus on the rulebook they should pump out more codices :P

    Agreed!
    DWs: Prussains. KoW: Elves WM: Khador WHFB: Dwarves WH40: IG, SM
    Games-workshop: changing the rules one new codex/army book at a time.

  3. #13
    Abbess Sanctorum
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,714

    Default

    After they get all the other codices out, I'd like to see a Lost and the Damned codex, focusing on mutants, apostates, assaulty GEQ, psykers, and so on. You know, the REAL army of chaos, none of this marine bullcrap.
    The mouth of the Emperor shall meditate wisdom; from His tongue shall speak judgment

  4. #14
    Brother-Captain
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    IA, USA
    Posts
    1,403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissia View Post
    After they get all the other codices out, I'd like to see a Lost and the Damned codex, focusing on mutants, apostates, assaulty GEQ, psykers, and so on. You know, the REAL army of chaos, none of this marine bullcrap.
    I've often wondered about that. I've got a guy in my club who's a chaos nut, but doesn't think CSM are the 'core' of the chaos taint. So he's building a trator guard army - throwing bits from his CSM army in, adding a few mutant bits, painted them with a blood red theme - I think it'll look real neat, and it beats the 'traitor guard' option/list in the witchhunters/greyknights book. But I really don' think they'll (gw) ever to it.
    Last edited by Lord Azaghul; 11-25-2009 at 08:39 AM.
    DWs: Prussains. KoW: Elves WM: Khador WHFB: Dwarves WH40: IG, SM
    Games-workshop: changing the rules one new codex/army book at a time.

  5. #15
    Abbess Sanctorum
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,714

    Default

    CSM haven't been the main army of chaos since the Horus Heresy, just like loyalist SMs haven't been the main army of the Imperium since the Horus Heresy. CSMs are so far from being the main army of chaos that it's almost laughable that someone would suggest that.
    The mouth of the Emperor shall meditate wisdom; from His tongue shall speak judgment

  6. #16

    Default

    I for one am very happy with 5th edition, a nice improvement from 4th. I'm really not sure what I would change tho. We've got a great edition on our hands here lets not jinx it! haha But with current GW trends I would imagine we could expect a new edition of 40k in 2012.
    letsagetabitarockin!

  7. #17
    Brother-Sergeant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    84

    Default

    I love 5th Edition, but a few changes I would make to the rule system (codex changes notwithstanding):

    1> Allow ANYONE to choose to break from combat in a panic. Getting caught up by an Ironclad or Soulgrinder that you CANNOT hurt and waiting to die is the stupidest thing ever.

    2> Leadership penalties from massive shooting casaulties.

    3> Fearless counting as Stubborn in Close Combat.

    4> A revised Sweeping Advance that does not kill an entire fleeing unit necessarily. Perhaps inflict casualties equal to the base number of Attacks the chasing unit has? That way a single marine cannot chase down and kill eleven Fire Warriors on a single Initiative roll?

    5> Adding a "0 = no effect" to the Vehicle Damage Table, making it less likely to constantly glance the shooting away from vehicles.

    6> Make Assaulting into cover more difficult on the chargers; perhaps -1 to hit or even -1 attack? There are so many frag grenades (or eq.) out there, it rarely matters.

    Those are my ideas!

    -Bry

  8. #18
    The Dark Mechanic
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Satellite of Love, MD
    Posts
    1,121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike X View Post
    Year or two? So far, the 40K rule books have come every 4-6 years. Fifth edition has only been out since... what, 2008? We've got years to go...
    And none of us want to think about 6th edition yet... that's such a damn downer.
    I'll second that emotion. 5th Edition has only been around for about 16 months. It's got a lot of life left in it and I am not inclined to think about the next version for at least a couple more years.
    See my latest eBay auctions at http://shop.ebay.com/zigra/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1

  9. #19
    Chaplain
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Victory Points replace Killpoints

    Objective mission draws broken by victory points standard, or prevent "any unit" from contesting

    Remove wound allocation; I understand the point, but it allows too many tricks and slows the game down; let people allocate wounds after failed saves. It should never render a squad "safer" to fire a few pistols at it in addition to those flame templates.

    Give vehicles damage points ... wound equivalents ... to solve the problem of vehicle randomness and monstrous creature vs. vehicle imbalance issues

    Everything else is working pretty fine. I have no idea what one poster meant going after improved ram/tankshock ... this edition is mech-encouraging enough as it is. No need to go even more in that direction.


    Also, while I think it's much "Cooler," I would get rid of TLOS. Terrain levels were much simpler, and generated far less argument. You're behind that building? Can't see you, k, move along.

    Lots of positives in 5th edition, just some tweaks to get it up to a better and more balanced place.

  10. #20
    Brother-Captain
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    IA, USA
    Posts
    1,403

    Default

    TLOS: I actually really like true line of sight. I think it leads to far less arguments. A player just squats down - looks from behind the models head...yup I can see you. This allows for a must more dynamic table to be fielded.
    DWs: Prussains. KoW: Elves WM: Khador WHFB: Dwarves WH40: IG, SM
    Games-workshop: changing the rules one new codex/army book at a time.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •