How Do You Think They'll Do It?

[DrBored]

So, looking at my Codices, the Supplements and Data Slates... I can't help but wonder... How WOULD GW update to 7th edition?

I'm curious about this because of the interesting path that GW has set upon. There's moving Codices to hardback... creating supplements and data slates.. and now including mini-dexes for individual models...

If they updated to 7th, a full and expansive update, this summer, then... they're leaving a bunch of Codices with softback quite a ways behind, right?

They've added so much! Rules for snapshot and overwatch, rules that affect those rules, and warlord traits and all that.. So you would think it's safe to assume that a lot of those new functions are here to stay, right? You would think that GW would see the boost they gave to shooty units (I mean, there'd be an uptick of sales of shooty units over assaulty units overall across the new Codices) and the typical stereotype is that GW nerfs what has sold and then buffs what hasn't sold well, so could 7th edition be the edition that assault becomes king, despite things like overwatch and random charge distances?

Just curious. Lots of USR's that would need to be tweaked carefully to prevent something from breaking, especially with all the new rules for allies and supplements!

Alternatively...

GW could just keep this edition going with various fixes into the future. It'd be like.. 6.2, and then 6.3...

I dunno. I'm rambling. What do you think? What are your concerns?

[Defenestratus]

GW uses a very "keyword" type of ruleset.

You can change the rules without changing the names of them. You can change how those rules are executed. You can change all kinds of things and still make the supporting literature make sense. They did the same thing since 3rd edition really so its not like its going to be a huge issue IMO.

[Mr Mystery]

6th Edition is pretty cohesive, in terms of USR.

That done, it's a lot easier to update the central rules, as they'll impact each army in the same manner. Gone are the days of the same rule name having different wordings across a bunch of books.

[Gleipnir]

If they were a little less general with some of their basic rules terminology, and more specific in all their special rules, it would not require much change for existing hardback codex. My chief concern with an updated 7th edition is whether the remaining army material is already far enough along in the development process to take any changes into account. I'd like to hope it is since we are only looking at Necrons/Grey Knights/Dark Eldar and an odd Space Marine chapter yet to be released after this year if projections are true.

Allies are definitely a nebulous mess that is only getting messier as time goes by, the narrative player in me enjoys it but it is messy from a rules/balance perspective.

I'd like to see Vehicles earn back a little more viability(there is a reason new models that previously might have been walkers are all Monstrous Creatures now) The ease of glancing them to death is the primary factor.(My gaming group already uses a workable house rule that eliminates the sticks and stones death to tanks)

[DrBored]

If they were a little less general with some of their basic rules terminology, and more specific in all their special rules, it would not require much change for existing hardback codex. My chief concern with an updated 7th edition is whether the remaining army material is already far enough along in the development process to take any changes into account. I'd like to hope it is since we are only looking at Necrons/Grey Knights/Dark Eldar and an odd Space Marine chapter yet to be released after this year if projections are true.

Allies are definitely a nebulous mess that is only getting messier as time goes by, the narrative player in me enjoys it but it is messy from a rules/balance perspective.

I'd like to see Vehicles earn back a little more viability(there is a reason new models that previously might have been walkers are all Monstrous Creatures now) The ease of glancing them to death is the primary factor.(My gaming group already uses a workable house rule that eliminates the sticks and stones death to tanks)

I'd love to know what the specifics are on the rule you guys use in-house. I might have to suggest that to my casual group so we can start using rhinos and dreadnoughts again :P

[DarkLink]

The core of 6th isn't that bad. It just needs to be written more clearly in some areas, with a few tweaks here or there, like fixing the inane wound allocation/LOS rules. But most of the balance problems are with codices. Rewrite everything that Phil Kelly's done, and we'd be mostly good.

[DrBored]

The core of 6th isn't that bad. It just needs to be written more clearly in some areas, with a few tweaks here or there, like fixing the inane wound allocation/LOS rules. But most of the balance problems are with codices. Rewrite everything that Phil Kelly's done, and we'd be mostly good.

Wow, a year ago you would have been ousted out the door for being a heretic to the Church of Kelly, hahaha!

[Gleipnir]

I'd love to know what the specifics are on the rule you guys use in-house. I might have to suggest that to my casual group so we can start using rhinos and dreadnoughts again :P

Nothing overly complicated, firm believer in the less is more or baby strep approach to house rule changes.

We basically permit vehicles that suffer a glancing hits as a result of an Armor Penetration to roll an Armor saving throw for glancing hits based off of the AP of the attack like any saving throw you choose the best of your options(Armor/Cover/Invulnerable and roll once) Glancing Hits that result from effects outside of armor penetration rolls are not eligible for an armor save(ie Gauss, Haywire, Gets Hot, Dangerous Terrain etc..)

AP 1 no save
AP 2 6+
AP 3 5+
AP 4 4+
AP 5 3+
AP 6 2+
AP - 2+

[SquigBrain]

Well, the ork codex is still working (more or less) after two edition changes. It certainly *can* be done, but there will always be winners and losers.

What I'd personally like to see is a return to the old rules for LOS, I think it would make maneuver and tactics more important than they are now.