Subscribe Us

header ads

7th Edition Information: There is No Time For Peace


Above is the poster that is coming in the next White Dwarf and that are already being shown at GW store locations. The picture above was revealed on facebook for the Liverpool GW Store. Not only that but we are now getting some reports on the contents of the book from more than one person.


Here is a link to the facebook page for Liverpool where the image was revealed.
https://www.facebook.com/GWLiverpool

The information below must be taken as rumor, since we just cannot verify that these are from official sources. It looks very much like we will be calling this 6.5. Just to understand where these are coming from, GW managers have been in meetings in the UK, and this is where I am assuming that the information is being spread from. Hard to tell at this moment though, and the next few weeks will show us more of what is coming.

via an source over on Talkwargaming- Thanks for the heads up Zion
The new rulebook is not a 7th edition of the game, but a re-issue of  6th edition which has the FAQs incorporated in it, and some minor tweaks  across the board. Some of you may remember when they did something  similar during 3rd edition, where they totally overhauled the assault  phase, but the edition itself was left alone from that point. Same idea  here-- they're folding in the changes in Stronghold Assault into the  main rulebook, and quantifying superheavy units and D weapons in the  main rules. But that's about it. 

via an anonymous source here at Faeit 212
My brother just got in from GW and the manager said the rulebooks were just getting errata tweaks put in them and would be re-released alongside something else. So just a 6.5 rather than a 7th edition



Could the "something else" from the second source be the black box Eldar and IG that we have been talking about?

Post a Comment

68 Comments

  1. This is sure to annoy the tournament crowd who are already working themselves into a lather that this new release will change everything they don't like and fix all their perceived problems.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't really think it will. Apart from some people who have too high hopes, most of us do not really trust GW to fix anything anymore. So tournament people will just calmy check what's new, readjust the armies as needed and keep playing.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, or regular gamers who want some of the brokenness fixed...

      Delete
    3. Fine, 'readers of BoLS' then.

      Delete
    4. Truthfully, if it were a complete overhaul, then some folks would be screaming (bleating?) "MONEY GRAB!" as they will if it's not a complete overhaul.

      Delete
    5. LOL!! THIS! I couldn't agree more! BOLS seems to be publishing wish lists for a new book, I never really thought they would change anything this soon... It takes a lot longer than 2 years for them to make a brand new edition!

      GW just wants to make everyone understand that their rules expansions are legitimate rules for playing their game, that's all I expected them to do.

      Delete
    6. The 'tournament crowd' hasn't really been interested in having GW 'fix the problems' for a while. It's been an assumption that the crowd would do the 'fixing'.

      Delete
    7. BOLS's articles have been pretty lame recently

      Delete
    8. I think Hudson nailed it. We're going to see tears no matter what.

      Delete
    9. What, precisely are these 'broken rules' you discuss? What is it you don't like?

      A lot of people bleat and whine but when asked they just want to well, bleat. What precisely are these rules?

      Delete
    10. 2++ re-rollables, Prescience and it's accessibility to some armies and not others, Battle Brothers being able to give each other bonuses and transferable special rules from Characters or aura effects. I think they're the biggest beefs.

      Delete
    11. Honestly, the only changes I think we need to make the game more varied are...

      1. Remove First Blood.
      2. Change 'Ignores Cover' to a reduction of cover saves (ie, turns a 3+ cover save to a 5+ or a 5+ to no cover) instead of removing it completely.

      That's it. It'll stop all the complaints about transports and all the complaints about Heldrakes and all the complaints about some weapons being overpowered.

      Delete
  2. Maybe to encourage digital purchase if current editions get a free update. Which should definitely be in order. I think I will be purchasing the digital version next update/edition regardless of rumors or date. I would also be interested in a pocket book alongside a starter kit like many others I'm sure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm with you. Digital is often cheaper, and carrying a tablet is a lot lighter than carrying around that huge book. Navigating can be faster too...

      Delete
    2. One benefit of those digital editions...they hyperlink all the weapons/specs. So if you are looking at a unit page, and it says "fearless, or shred, etc" if you click on them, it brings up the USR right there. No need to go searching for them.

      Delete
    3. The hyperlinks and such are only for the iPad version, btw. We common schlubs who use a Kindle get to make bookmarks and jump around using the index.

      Delete
    4. Well at least you can print out pages on the epub versions to use as reference. (some consolidation at least)

      Delete
    5. I love how people bitch about more expensive IPad having better features....

      Delete
  3. Pretty much what I expected. Not a massive overhaul, more of a 6.1 update to tidy, clarify & improve.

    Just picked up the last two WDs from my local GW and issue 12 shows a squad of Blood Angels backed up by a Leman Russ and a Chimera. An indication?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. im sure you can do that now with bloodangels, just take a Leman russ HQ and a troop in a chimera as alies. done.

      Delete
    2. That cover is just a pointer to the "Armies of the Imperium" article.

      Delete
    3. If you wonna be really silly, use the armored battalion army list from FW, have a lemon HQ, and a lemon squad troop :P

      Delete
    4. True, true. But why BA and IG?

      We have Blood Angels starter rumours, a new AM/IG codex, a new BRB being promoted with an IG unit, GW always including Astartes in their starter box and now a WD cover with both the consistent intro-army (Marines) and the alleged new one (Guard).

      It shows that someone at GW HQ is thinking along similar lines; they could've fielded any combination of Imperial units that have been updated recently to push sales but instead they're photographing the two that have been rumoured for the new starter...

      Delete
    5. I completely agree, Mauler. I thought they were using a different red recipe on them as well. Could you tell with the WD in hand if the red looks different at all? I don't think it's a coincidence, though.

      Delete
    6. Mauler, for any number of reasons, BA look cool? they are one of the more awesome Adeptus Astartes chapters? the balance of colour in the picture was more appealing with the splash of red?

      Delete
    7. Alternatively, someone just happened to have BA on hand, as opposed to any other chapter?

      I would love for my Angels to get something soon, but I am not quite willing to grasp at what could very easily be mere coincidence.

      Delete
    8. I would love to think that GW has their marketing crap together, if nothing else. Working in advertising, I can tell you that any company doing this sort of work is making deliberate choices every step of the way. Maybe someone just had some BA sitting around, but I seriously doubt that a company as large as GW has a lazy creative department. All the lazy folks are writing rules and NOT play testing, right? The photos and videos are always top-notch.

      Delete
    9. If I'm not mistaken that issue also has pictures of Steel Legion with Black Templars and Grey Knights with Cadians and a Knight Titan. It may not be the cover but their still in there. I think its just a Coincidence.
      I also thought Orks are going to be the next codex out and in the Starter. In the new issue theres even one of the WD team talking about how he just finally got around to painting his Ghazhghul model.

      Delete
  4. I'm really hoping they change the Battle Brothers rules. That alone would solve a whole heap of trouble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or nerf divination, as most of the allied shenanigans are to abuse divination in armies that don't have their own (or not as cheap)

      Or both if we are really lucky

      Delete
    2. They would have solved a world of problems if they just applied the same restrictions that they did in the Space Wolves FAQ: Logan Grimnar's handing out USR's only applies to Codex: SW models, likewise with the Wolf Priest's Oath of War.

      Delete
    3. Most codices have that restriction regarding special rules, so im not sure what your getting at. Logan can still had out a USR to a sw model that can then be joined to a battle brother anyway.

      Delete
    4. A specific example would be the Baron gifting Stealth and Hit and Run to a Seer Council.

      Delete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Interesting, I've just been told by an employee that the psychic cards have been thrown away and not just sent back. If this is just an update to include some errata's then I don't see the point in destroying what would otherwise still be relevant products.

    ReplyDelete
  7. " they're folding in the changes in Stronghold Assault into the main rulebook, and quantifying superheavy units and D weapons in the main rules."

    So basically theyre taking all of the worst things they've done this year and fold it into a book that we really don't want. They just keep digging themselves deeper dont they?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know, I've had super heavies on the table in the last two games and in both cases they caused their user to get his arse stomped. The cost combined with the VP per SP, Warlord chart, and even the +1 to start first is pretty close to balancing them as a general rule. That all said the D weapon chart is legitimately a little too much. Though less than half of the vehicles in Escalation have them available to begin with, count ImpKnights and it is half.

      Delete
    2. Dosnt make them the worst things GW released in the last year. But hey its GW, if they ever did start listening to customers they would just go about it in the worst way possible... like bugging game stores to listen in on peoples conversations.

      Delete
    3. for all we know this will also change D weapons slightly. that said the problem isn't D weapons so much as D BLAST weapons

      Delete
    4. Less concerned about the small/large blasts, not *too* much scarier than a S10 AP1. The Hellstorm flames the crons have in Esc are bollix.

      The D weapons do need changed, as they are quite a bit much at the moment. Honestly they need to be S10 the 'destroyer' special rule just needs to be auto penetrate on a 2+ & Instant Death.

      Delete
    5. Kind of hard to listen to the customer when the customer is some angry people shouting completely different things.

      Delete
    6. I quite like melee d weapons, but ranged d plus huge movement plus the transcendent cyan is just silly. Imperial knights and stompas and baneblade tanks are great examples of how super heavies can fit in. Fairly costed, effective and not auto win buttons.

      Delete
    7. Ytook: not remotely. It is as easy as pulling the earplugs out and not yelling "LALALALALALALALALA" at them.

      Delete
    8. if they done a survey to gather what we'd like to see change etc then they could easily make the changes we want to see.

      Delete
  8. So a few added rules from the escalation etc and now we pay for FAQ's? This feels like a wonderful scam to keep writing bad rules so players pay for FAQ's that they knew were bad in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. eh if they needed to do a new printing of it anyway why not take the time to do so?

      Delete
    2. Better have GW printing updated 6th edition book than printing 6th edition with errors.

      Delete
  9. While it's fun to speculate, let's just wait a few weeks before celebrating or jumping off buildings. A completely new version of the rules was never a realistic possibility. Fixing the glaring errors in the existing 6th edition is. So calling it 6.5, 6.1, 6.6.3.2.1.7, etc - I don't care. What's IMO encouraging is a growing population of individuals with reasonable fixes appearing on these websites. So if GW doesn't do the job, it seems we as a group are becoming mature enough to handle it objectively.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think its called Warhammer 40k v3.4 :D

      I don't care, I'm only interested in smaller levels like Inquisimunda, Kill Team Heralds of Ruins and KillZone Survival.

      Delete
    2. Which are IMHO the best community alternatives rules.

      Delete
  10. So basically they found a way to make everyone buy the stronghold assault and escalation rules at least once, if not twice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. If all it does is add the rules in then you don't have to buy it twice.

      Delete
    3. Has as been anticipated by others, this might be the basic rules for super heavy or buildings and their weapons but not the detailed units/buildings themselves.

      Delete
    4. unless Ytook you already DID buy it


      note: i didn't buy it

      Delete
    5. Xeno, he's saying that if the new book(s) really does turn out to be identical to the books you already own, then clearly you won't have to buy the new book(s).

      Delete
  11. I hope that the "tweaks" they make are actually substantive.

    Something along the lines of fixing skyfire/interceptor.

    ReplyDelete
  12. for the last god dam time it is not 7th !!! its an update to make escalation and strong hold assault as well as fix the probs with the new rules added in 6th so this is 6.5 ed not 7th no new starter set just a new rule book(coming form the mouth of a GW manager)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My GW manager said the exact opposite - can I go round acting like I know it all because of that?

      Delete
    2. I see what you did there...

      Delete
  13. I wish people would settle down... they arent trying to trick you or force you to buy a bunch of the same things twice. I would bet money that this isnt for gamers to replace their brbs. Keep your book and an updated faqs and eratta. This is to make sure new players are buying complete and correct rules rather then selling someone a set of rules that has completely wrong info in it in some places.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if they make available, for free, a document detailing the changes between 6th and Not 7th edition, I'll believe you.

      Delete
  14. For those arguing if this is 7 or 6.5 ... If we have to PAY for a new RULEBOOK ... it's a new EDITION ... you can call it version 1000, or version 2 if you want ... it's still a new edition of the game rules.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Just to note the 40k rulebook has also been pulled from iTunes...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it's a revised edition, they could have "revised" the edition.

      Delete
  16. tournament organisers need to play to the core rules.
    to modify or ban codexs is match fixing.
    TOs can only go so far.
    Im surprised with the amount of time and effort put into peoples armies that no one has thought of litigation.
    hopefully this release sorts it out.

    ReplyDelete