Topic: Interesting rumor

[Crimsonsphinx]

Which it isnt

Id still remove random charge ranges and probably bin off armour values.  Theres far too much confusion on what is a monster creature and what is a vehicular walker.  Oh and pick spells.  Random spells is always terrible.

Other than that 6th is spot on.

[FR1DAY]

 Youd get rid of the whole vehicle penetration rule mechanic?

[PhillyT]

40K radio is saying that this is 7th edition, but I don't buy it.  But they have a good track record!

[Mathi Alfblut]

Well, you have been sceptical to other things GW lately ad been forced to take it back, Phil. Hence why I think we really have 7th ed coming in. I were considering getting Stronghold assault, but now I do not know. Best to wait and see I think.

Remember, GW wants to spring suprises these days and keep a total lid on anything. What better way to prevent people from preparing, considering etc if you land the 7th ed 2 years ahead of schedule! And maybe they, for some reason, want to phase the releases of 40K and fantasy?

The books mentioned, well it may be that the profiles will not be in the rulebook, just the rules. So you would still need those books to use it fully but even if you do not have their profiles you wiill know the rules about facing them in battle.

Or, GW may have decided to cash in extra by selling the supplements despite making an early suprise release. After all, those who bought the supplements would still have to buy the rulebook. More money to GW and their books are not useless, the are filled with high value pretty pictures!
It makes good sense for a buisness who wants their customers to spend more money.

And maybe there is a need to show an increase in profit and fast. Well, what could have more potential to increase profit than the release of a new ed of 40K?

[PhillyT]

There are conflicting rumors about whether this is really a new edition or an update, with good sources for both.

I think this will be more like 3rd to 4th than 4th to 5th or 5th to 6th.  Just tweaks.  Confusion over numbers just seems likely.

[Crimsonsphinx]

Youd get rid of the whole vehicle penetration rule mechanic?

Get rid of it yes.  Just give vehicles wounds and armour saves.  Would make the game a lot quicker and easier to play.

OR actually have consistency between what is a monster and what is a walker.  Because at the moment there are a lot of nonsensical units.

Eg Warwalker.  Man driving a walking robot = vehicle.   Dreadknight.  Man driving a walking robot = monster.
Dreadnaught.  Dead person piloting a suit of armour = vehicle.  Wraithlord. Dead person piloting a suit of armour = monster.

WHY!?

[rufus sparkfire]

I agree, crimson!

Also allow heavier weapons to cause multiple wounds.

[Sig]

I like the AV system, but I agree that Walkers are somewhat redundant and used confusingly. I'd scrap the Walker class of vehicle and just convert all current walkers to MCs.

[Aldaris]

That might be a good solution actually. Leave AV to vehicles, and get rid of walkers in favour of MCs. There is no consistency in the classification as of now, and being an MC is just straight up better in every respect.

[PhillyT]

I agree, the biggest issue right now is the silly way they just pick and chose what is a walker and what is a monster.

That being said, that is going to happen much later if ever.  If this is truly an incremental update (which everyone is saying() they aren't about to invalidate the recent books.

I love the AV system.  I think it is fine.