8th Edition Rumours

[MoGuy]

I thought it would be nice to have a thread where we can compile all the rumours regarding 8th edition. This thread is also meant for discussion. I know, there is nothing concrete out there and some of you might say "Why even talk about this?". But I would like to hear your thoughts on some of those rumours and on how these changes might affect certain units.

 

Once 8th edition drops (rumours say July/June) this thread can be used to list the actual changes.

 

If you post rumours here, it would be great if you could link the source etc.

 

I'll start with the stuff I've heard so far:

 

The most reliable source is coming directly from GW. Over at Adepticon they talked about some of the possible changes. Those are:

 

3 Ways to play

 

Pretty much the same as in AoS. Very appreciated, as this gives every group of players something they like, be it "play what you want", narrative games or tournament style.

 

Army selection

 

Again, something we see in AoS. You will be rewarded for playing a "pure" army. For example if you only play Thousand Sons without any Daemon allies etc you will get something called "Command Points". We don't know how these work right now but GW hinted that they might allow for some re-rolls and fluffly bonuses that add to your army's characteristics.

 

Movement

 

The movement value returns! 

 

Shooting

 

Armour save modifiers return. Instead of getting the full save until it is beaten, weapons will modify the save. At miniwargaming they also talked about how cover saves might not be a thing anymore. Instead cover might reduce the BS, just like it does in the new Armageddon game.

 

Combat

 

He who charges gets to swing first. This will boost combat oriented armies. At BOLS they also talk about that you might be able to charge out of transport vehicles that aren't assault vehicles. So you could charge out of a Rhino. 

 

Morale

 

GW wants LD to actually matter again. Right now almost no army cares about morale as everything is fearless, has LD 10 or ignores it in some other way. So out with the old, in with the new. Much like in AoS you will just roll a D6 and add the number of casualties your unit suffered. If the total outnumbers the LD value, you lose that many additional models as the shamefully flee the battlefield.

 

 

Some more rumours from BOLS:

 

Warscrolls

 

Codices might be a thing of the past. Instead, we get warscrolls like in AoS. It would be sad to see the books go since I like the artworks and fluff texts but from a business point of view the warscrolls would be easier to manage. GW would be able to update units etc much faster and we would get them for free. I would expect GW to also release "Battletomes" like we know from AoS. These would compile the warscrolls for your army into one book and would be something like a Codex 2.0.

 

Templates

 

Templates are gone, instead they just do a random amout of hits/wounds. 

 

AV

 

Vehicles lose their armour values and instead gain a lot of wounds. Heavier weapons would strip more wounds etc.

 

 

 

 

[Panzer]

We already have such a thread tho (and the last three rumours you listed aren't even from BoLS).

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/332723-8th-edition-rumors/

 

 

But sure we could discuss what these changes mean for CSM here.

I for one am looking forward to drive my Rhinos with Noise Marines into the enemy lines (possibly with tank shock even? :D ) and then next turn disembark, shoot with the Doom Siren and charge the enemy (considering the turn order stays the same....but I kinda expect that we have to announce assaults in the movementphase again).

[MoGuy]

 

 

(and the last three rumours you listed aren't even from BoLS

 

Which is irrelevant as long as it doesn't change the quote of the original source. :P

 

Anyway, yes I am aware that there are already threads about 8th Edition rumours. I just wanted to have one specifically for CSM. For example the possible changes to charges could make Warp Talons viable again! :D This would also buff the Maulerfiend, along with it possible losing its AV and gaining wounds, which could make it a lot more survivable (depends on how anti-tank weapons work out).

 

Tabletop Tactics talks about possible changes to deepstriking here. Instead of just scattering we might be able to just place the models where we want as long as they are at least 9" away from any enemy models. This would also help us a lot, since CSM don't have Drop Pods so at least being able to pinpoint where our DS units show up would be neat. 

[Damo1701]

Unfortunately, the rumours are very discouraging. Sure, I'm just getting a Tsons force built/painted, but far too many of those proposed rules take the feel of the game away, and are open to far more abuse than they solve.

 

Low leadership, high body count armies are going to fade away, like Orks/Nids unless there is a method to ignore the AoS rules.

 

Vehicles are not creatures. Remove hull points and glancing hits, and they become viable again.

 

Chargers striking first is plain wrong. It makes initiative a redundant stat, and makes some armies lose their flavour. I mean, think, your CSM squad being charged by a mod of orks aren't just gonna stand there and take it. They'll open fire (unless SnP) the bring either bolt gun or CCW to bear and begin hacking. Once they have hacked, those irks get a turn at hacking because they've caught up with things. Similarly, CSM would not get the drop in CC against Eldar.

 

If you want the Assault out of a vehicle, take a landraider or two. That's what Assault vehicles are for. Otherwise, it makes no sense to have added that rule, and stopped assaulting out of vehicles in the first place. Look at the (possible) differences between something like a humvee and a beach landing boat. One you can run right off into whatever :cuss storm is waiting, the other you have to get out of and find out what's going on. (In this example, assume the Beach landing boat is enclosed and on wheels with a tv hooked up to an external camera).

 

Army Selection, don't we already have benefits for using a fluff-based decurion? Over, say, a basic CAD?

[the jeske]

If Ld becomes important NL rules [if they get transfered in to 8th ed] will become more fun to play. With the AV to wounds shift. Everything we have and do not use [unless forced] becomes better. Ranging from tanks and transports other marines have, to fiends and defilers becoming good[if GW doesn't go to crazy with their point costs]. Maybe even the drake could be viable.

[Sonoftherubric21]

I think the changes being talked about are *overall* good. Cautiously optimistic. 

It will really revitalize the game in some areas. 7th is such a badly written bloated mess of a game (I still enjoy it mind, it just takes away from enjoyment a little) 

 

The "assault out of all vehicles" may be like in 5th! where if the rhino or transport DID NOT the troops disembarking may assault after. 

 

Army selection is "whatever" at this point anywho! so any way they structure that will be fine as long as the competitive section (much like AOS) lays out "this is exactly how you do it, heres the structure"

 

 

If Ld becomes important NL rules [if they get transfered in to 8th ed] will become more fun to play. With the AV to wounds shift. Everything we have and do not use [unless forced] becomes better. Ranging from tanks and transports other marines have, to fiends and defilers becoming good[if GW doesn't go to crazy with their point costs]. Maybe even the drake could be viable.

 

1000x This.  Fiend and Defilers will be (at least at a cursory glance) buffed by this new system. 

And Any LD effecting based army (Dark Eldar, Night Lords, Death Jesters) would probably benefit from a rules change that may actually make Fear or what not a useful ability to have.  

 

 

Unfortunately, the rumours are very discouraging. Sure, I'm just getting a Tsons force built/painted, but far too many of those proposed rules take the feel of the game away, and are open to far more abuse than they solve.

Low leadership, high body count armies are going to fade away, like Orks/Nids unless there is a method to ignore the AoS rules.

 

 

1) Welcome to the Brotherhood of Dust!!!  Glad to add another to the coven ;-) 

 

2) ....Wut?  

 

The new ruleset implied (to my eyes at least) that a High body count army will be *BETTER* then previously, one due to assault rules, and two because of rending causing higher casualty rates.

 

By a large margin actually, depending of course on how the remainder of the rules are handled and how various rules (mob rule, LD for guard through commissars, and Nid Hive Mind) are all played out.... this could very easily make all those armies far better, or at least bring the weaker ones (Nid/ork) up to snuff, to say nothing of them caring less regarding the "rending" system as they already have more bodies and low saves. 

 

the "wounds" mechanic I think is fine, Its basically hull points anywho. 

[Sonoftherubric21]

Random aside for Thousand Sons players and purists such as myself;  (in 40k ;-) 

 

Ap3 weapons translate as -3 in rending usually, as its ap 5 is -1, ap 4 is -2, ap 3 is -2. (assuming the same conventions as Armageddon or 2nd edition I believe) 

So if we keep our "Inferno bolts" and they do the same thing......our bolters will be damn DANGEROUS!!!! 

 

Terminators, marines, and everything else with any kind of armor save...better fear us. :p 

[Panzer]

Random aside for Thousand Sons players and purists such as myself; (in 40k ;-)

Ap3 weapons translate as -3 in rending usually, as its ap 5 is -1, ap 4 is -2, ap 3 is -2. (assuming the same conventions as Armageddon or 2nd edition I believe)

So if we keep our "Inferno bolts" and they do the same thing......our bolters will be damn DANGEROUS!!!!

Terminators, marines, and everything else with any kind of armor save...better fear us.

It can be very different tho. For example Tau Pulse Carbines and Pulse Rifles are -2 (AP5), Ion Rifles are -3 (AP4) and Rail Rifles are -3(AP1).

I'd expect a good amount of profiles to change to be honest.

[the jeske]

the thing is. if you get rid of AP, you suddenly have the option to play around with weapon stats. The old tau str 5 gun can stay str5 and have a -2 mod, but the small pathfinder gun can shot more offten [making it an actual weapon you want to use, and the decision to use markers or something else an important one]. The breacher one could be something realy powerful [aka high str big mod], the tau plasma could be more like the multi laser is now[as in it has more shots then plasma guns and a smaller save mod]. you could even  go realy go crazy and make chaos and loyalist plasma different, like it was in 2ed[won't happen, but it would be cool].

[Khornestar]

I love the sound of the proposed changes. The ones GW have provided sound great to me, and I'm gonna wait until they give us more information before really deciding how they will affect the game. I bet 8th ed is gonna be pretty sweet. I'm looking forward to it, as is my Khornate horde.

[MoGuy]

 

 

Low leadership, high body count armies are going to fade away, like Orks/Nids unless there is a method to ignore the AoS rules. 

 

I'm pretty sure that they will change the stats. Looking at AoS, Orks are a very strong faction. In 40K they suck so much because they are an assault army that sucks at melee. Boys etc. that charge almost always have to take the swings of their targets first before they can actually swing. So if they now get the charge and can swing first they will be much better! 

[Scammel]

Orks didn't get to swing first in 5th, and they were in contention for the strongest army throughout much of it. Orks are great in melee, the more salient issue is that melee overall has been pretty awful since 6th.

[the jeske]

Because of cheap multi wound nobz that had to suffer 6-8 wounds before actualy losing a model. Paladins later were the same.

[Zodd1888]

Random aside for Thousand Sons players and purists such as myself; (in 40k ;-)

 

Ap3 weapons translate as -3 in rending usually, as its ap 5 is -1, ap 4 is -2, ap 3 is -2. (assuming the same conventions as Armageddon or 2nd edition I believe)

 

So if we keep our "Inferno bolts" and they do the same thing......our bolters will be damn DANGEROUS!!!!

 

Terminators, marines, and everything else with any kind of armor save...better fear us. :p

Honestly I just hope the bolts become Rending -2 like a standard bolter, but always wound on 6 so TSons have built in anti-tank.

 

-3 rending would be pretty sweet though!

[Sonoftherubric21]

Random aside for Thousand Sons players and purists such as myself; (in 40k ;-)

Ap3 weapons translate as -3 in rending usually, as its ap 5 is -1, ap 4 is -2, ap 3 is -2. (assuming the same conventions as Armageddon or 2nd edition I believe)

So if we keep our "Inferno bolts" and they do the same thing......our bolters will be damn DANGEROUS!!!!

Terminators, marines, and everything else with any kind of armor save...better fear us.

It can be very different tho. For example Tau Pulse Carbines and Pulse Rifles are -2 (AP5), Ion Rifles are -3 (AP4) and Rail Rifles are -3(AP1).

I'd expect a good amount of profiles to change to be honest.

Thing is; Inferno bolts IN shadow war are -3 rending. (ap 3) At least in the little kill-team chaos profile any Tzeentch model with an inferno bolt gets -3 rend.

Theres hope! lol.

[Lord Abaia]

Shadow War weapon stats and marks of chaos might be an indication of what is coming for CSM in 8th.

 

MoK going to +1A would be nice. MoT being a 5++ would be a pretty solid improvement for the units you normally don't want to take it on, but as is it would be redundant on units with TDA or the daemon USR (assuming TDA and daemon USR still give a 5++ in 8th). MoN didn't need a change. But +1I for MoS would be pretty lackluster if the charger gets to attack first. Maybe MoS will grant Always Strikes First (like you know we are going to see sooner or later)

 

Also when chainaxes get a rend value that will be a pretty big deal.

[DominikB]

I just feel rend will make the game go too quickly. Suddenly you're losing 2x the marines from Bolter fire :/ same with DP, nearly 3 wounds on average from bolter fire (assuming -2 rend)

[Lord Abaia]

I'm pretty sure bolters will only be -1 rend. That's what they are in Shadow Wars and that's what they were in 2e. I don't have my book yet but I'm 99% sure you only add additional rend for Strength over S3 in close combat.

[Midnightmare]

Also when chainaxes get a rend value that will be a pretty big deal.

*gives respectful nod to the five(!) boxes of FW Chainaxes sitting waiting for a home in bitz box*

 

"Soon my pretties...."

[MoK]

All my Worldeaters have chainaxes. For once they will be worth the extra cost.

[Panzer]

I just feel rend will make the game go too quickly. Suddenly you're losing 2x the marines from Bolter fire :/ same with DP, nearly 3 wounds on average from bolter fire (assuming -2 rend)

That's only when assuming everything else stays the way it is lol.

I fully expect cover to modify the to-hit roll etc.

 

Also faster games is a good thing...7th edition games take way too long. :D

[Lord Kallozar]

I'm just hoping that it doesn't go the full AOS route and everything gets messed up fluffwose and game wise :(

[Panzer]

I'm just hoping that it doesn't go the full AOS route and everything gets messed up fluffwose and game wise

They already said multiple times they won't do that.

[Khornestar]

Everyone on the forum is allowed to say that one time (official B&C rule, check the rules). :D

 

Who's gonna say it next?

[Cheex]

It sounds like they're taking elements of AoS and are transplanting them onto 40k, which I am totally fine with.