40K RUMORS: The New Edition Latest


Here is the latest set of info on what to expect from  Warhammer 40,000’s next edition… and when.



Industry insiders tell BoLS:

  • A Warscroll such as the Stardrake is said to illustrate several new unit layout and big picture rules mechanics making their way to 40k.
  • The new release will follow the standard GW rollout with at least three different versions, boxed set, rulebook, and others.
  • There will be changes to some core mechanics such as S vs T which have been static for several editions.
  • Again, look for a Q2 2017 release window.
  • The new edition is shaping up as a larger shakeup to the game than we have seen in several editions, but is NOT aiming for an Age of Sigmar simplification of the rules.


Previous Warhammer 40,000 Rumors 8-15-2016

  • Look for the new edition of the Grimdark  to show up in Q2 2017.
  • The new edition is slated for arrival before summer of next year.
  • It will be a streamlined edition
  • Look for changes tailored to make the current game more accessable for new players.
  • Look for limited design elements to migrate from Age of Sigmar to the new edition.
  • This will NOT mean the Sigmarification of 40K, only a carefully selected set of rules organization decisions to make learning and playing much easier than things are now.



~I’ll let you figure out exactly what that could mean – of what parts that warscroll you think are headed for the Grimdark.

  • Jared Swenson

    Oh man, I really hope this is true. The game needs a major shakeup and streamlining. There are a lot of good things they did with AoS that I feel 40k could benefit from. I know it’s not going full aosification, but I can only hope for a good chunk of it going that way.

    • Paul Sr.

      Sounds awful, S v T is one of the most solid mechanics in 40k. So many things need attention before that.

      • Djbz

        Agreed, of all things in 40K that is the one that should be let alone,

      • Keaton

        Not really. The strength of everything is a lot higher than it ought to be. It’s just too easy to wound.

        • Djbz

          That’s a problem with the access to high strength weapons and the range of toughness of models (Virtually every monstrous creature being T6 for example, regardless of how tough it is described.)

          The mechanic itself is fine

          • ZeeLobby

            This. It’s the fact that every SM can run around with a melta gun these days. And because of the sheer number giant apocalypse sized models, they need to…

      • Thorolf

        Out of everything which they could improve, S v T is actually something that’s fine.

        To actually improve it, it would need a MAJOR overhaul to offer more differentiation.

        I’d rather see:
        Simultaneous turns (move away from first turn/last turn advantages and shooty/combat army dynamics)
        Meaningful morale (getting rid of save or suck morale, have it more nuanced to damage the unit variably)
        Strip away all the annoying time wasting per unit rolls like run distance rolls, mysterious objective rolls etc
        A move away from save-or-suck mechanics where possible, this is currently present in 2d6 charge distance, certain saves. More room for dynamic damage and interaction is essential.
        Better interaction between big awesome table piece units like tanks and giant walkers and regular infantry rather than them basically being in different battlefields.
        Streamlining army building, less reliance on specific formations and more reliance on building synergies between units rather than arbitrary special rules which are either ‘on’ or ‘off’.

        What I’m asking for would require a re-do of all the codices as well. I’ts a big ask but 40k is just so dated in terms of game design and a AoS refresh is only a small step in what will amount to be a long but ultimately worthwhile journey.

        • Zethnar

          They should just write a Gates of Antares sourcebook with all their armies in it.

          • dreamwarder


          • Fernando Lanas

            Seems like a solid idea 😀

      • Moke

        I disagree. I think it’s completely unnecessary. I’ve been playing X-Wing recently. There’s no wounding mechanic in that game at all. If you can hit, it’s assumed you’ve done damage. It makes the game way more streamlined and less random.

        • manouel35

          exactly dude

        • Aezeal

          There should at least be some form of NOT having wound, AS and some special save after that and then a different system for armor.
          People playing 40K who mind rolling dice are just not playing the right game.. but limiting it a bit would be nice.
          Personally I like the AoS system too btw.

          • vlad78

            Alternate activation of units or go home. If you really want to make the game better, start to change what makes it so bad.

            I really don’t think AOS has much in store to help make 40k a good game, a couple of ideas here and there but that’s about all of it.

          • Karru

            I have NEVER seen I-go-You-go as a problem before 6th and 7th when Cover was basically removed from the game. During those days, you’d actually sometimes want to go second since you could get better shots.

          • vlad78

            Perfectly understandable given that GW has never been able to provide a good 40k ruleset and has stopped caring about improving it since quite a lot of editions and only wanted to change the rules to sell different types of units.

            You lack perspective imho. (no offense)

            40k plays like 18th or 19th century gun lines with muskets. Thinking a wargame with modern or futuristic firearms tanks, hovercrafts, aircrafts and so on would allow a side to use all its units and fire all it weapons before its opponent can move and react is totally ludicrous. Most 40k rules stem from the yougoIgo principle trying to mitigate the insane advantage given by the initiative . Reserve rolls, scouts, nightfights .. all are meant to allow the side going second not to lose outright the battle and to play around 40k structural weaknesses. And all of this is stupid as those rules should allow the player to use realistic tactics and not gamey tricks to win the day.

            yougoIgo was designed to keep the game simple enough to allow kids to play. Nothing more, nothing less.
            Now it is totally obsolete and only players and GW conservatism make them reject the notion of alternate activation.

            But believe me it is a far better system, it allows a more realistic gameplay, with it you really feel in control of a real army and the way you have to move your units becomes far more logical, the tactical depth of the game becomes much deeper.

            And the best part lies with the fact you don’t even have to change so many rules. When you change the way turn mechanics plays out, suddenly reserve are not just meant to protect your troops during the first turn, they are what they should always have been, they let you have a unit enter from another place than your side, first turn charge ceases to be a stupid thing since your opponent or you have the opportunity to react.
            You can do some feints, you can actually trick you opponent more easily, movements and the order of activation have to be logical and offer quite a lot more possibilities.

            The old overwatch rule can return.
            Drop pod armies stop being boring.
            Balance is better served (though i have no doubt the system can be abused again) because tactics become really important. With alternate activations, you can’t win a game just by showing up a much better list. It rewards the better player more than the actual system. I talk from experience. It will not remove balance issues but it will improve the situation.

            And last but not least, alternate activation allows faster games and much more lively ones.

            But GW being GW, i have no doubt yougoigo will stay, first because as I said it is kiddy friendly. Furthermore GW quickly lost any ambition to deliver a real wargame. 40k 8th edition will be as bad as all previous editions, 40k will correct some minor problems and create greater ones before the total AOSsification which will eventually come if their sales keep falling. But I’m surely just a bitter old grognard.

          • Mira Bella

            Coudn’t agree more.

          • Guido Hockmann

            Agreed! I’ve been playing 40K games with alternating activation and a 1500 point limit and it’s great fun.

          • ZeeLobby

            Give this man a cookie!

          • Laurence J Sinclair

            Wasn’t one of the reasons for Andy Chambers leaving GW to write Starship Troopers that they wouldn’t allow him to shake up the structure of the game so much by introducing alternating unit activation?

          • Karru

            I still believe that the Alternating Activation would actually increase the length of the game even more, since you have to consider every single move a lot more than you’d have to consider in the current setting.

            The You-go-I-go system works, as long as the rules allow it to work and don’t encourage the current meta. In 5th edition, I saw countless unique lists, from melee hordes to gunlines and never did I see a game that ended on Turn 2, unless the other player just quit or did something very dumb.

            You seem to forget that there is a ton of strategy behind the system. If I’m going first, I want to deploy all my units in a way that they can shoot at as many enemies that they can, but they should still remain in cover just in case. If I’m going second, I hide my units behind cover or place them in reserve so I can get nice amount of damage on the enemy if he decides to move his forces.

            You seem to think that reserves are just meant for protection, nothing else. This is definitely not the case. I use reserves to outflank my enemy, Deep Striking or using the actual Outflank rule. I can also use them as a defence against enemy Deep Strikers or Outflanking units. It’s just the case of actually learning to use them in more ways other than just as a protection or one-hit kill unit.

            6th and 7th edition made the game nigh unplayable and the You-go-I-go system worse. Cover is basically non-existent, Assaulting and Transports means nothing and there is no such thing as a “limit” any more. There is no point in making a balanced list with multiple different units when you can just CAD spam cheap Troops and use all your points on the elite units that just obliterate everything.

            5th edition had a ton more strategy behind it. You had to make sure your Troops stayed alive so you invested more on them than you do now. They weren’t just mandatory choices to get more “elite” units. You also didn’t have super units that could wipe entire units in a single turn and weapons that basically ignored every save known to man. People keep saying it was “boring” to do lists back then and I just can’t disagree more. Since you had so much limitation for your army, you had to figure out what to do with them. You had to find synergy between units. You had to learn your army’s strength and weaknesses, you couldn’t just ally them away. You had to find the perfect balance between Scoring units and fire power. You had to make sure you can move around the board. The list goes on and on.

            Also, first rule of Warhammer 40K. Never expect realism in this game. Ever. We have flying shoes and Santa Sled running around, this game is not meant to be realistic and simulate it.

          • vlad78

            I never said there wasn’t strategies used in this game, I’m saying they are mainly focusing on allowing the player who lost the initiative to survive the first turn and begin to play.
            Everything else are attempts from GW to make the game fun to play DESPITE yougoIgo.

            Actually alternate activation is faster. I tried up to 3000 pts. The only thing I couldn’t experiment was how it would work on an apocalypse size battle. Some members of our group didn’t want to try it out during our annual apocalypse game.

            5th was in my opinion the less atrocious ruleset, but the codicies ruined it quite fast.

            GW said never to expect any kind of realism. We’re no sheeps.

          • Wojciech Łagosz

            I’m experimenting with activation system they have in Bolt Action. My and my friend played a small game of 750pts band it was very exiting. Some rules needed tweaking (ex. pinning, reserves, Ld checks) but it was much more fun then being shot to ribbons in turn one. Still not figured out the “magic” phase.

          • vlad78

            We took the simplest path. Pool of psy points are rolled at the beginning of the turn. Each psyker can only use his powers while activated. Everything else stays the same.

        • zeno666

          Sorry, GW don’t do less random 😉

          • euansmith

            On a 1-2 they do less random, on a 3-4 the do more random, on a 5-6 re-roll on this table.

      • Jared Swenson

        But you see, in Age of Sigmar they got rid of the SvT table and it actually works. They way they did it is they rolled strength into damage (weapons deal a set amount of wounds with each successful attack) and they rolled toughness into wounds, where instead of having really tough single wound models, now it’s a model with something like 5 or more wounds. It still works out. The to-hit and to-wound are parts standardizes to reflect the skill and weapon deadliness of the attacker. Tiny little grots are still only able to barely do 1 wound to anything, and big strong heroes are still able to take out swathes of grots in single swings. I was resistant at first too of removing tables from fantasy, but right now I think it works really well when you realize that strength and toughness didn’t go anywhere, they just got incorporated.

        • Karru

          My only problem I saw with AoS is the fact that everything is basically just wet paper. There doesn’t seem to be such thing as a “tough unit”. Since everything wounds and hits on a fixed roll, you just stack bonus attacks for one or two units and just watch as the enemy melts, no matter what it is. Big Monster? No problem when I have 50+ attacks. An elite unit surrounding a character? Same deal. It makes no difference if those stacked units are fighting Grots or Giants, both die due to the opponent not being able to effect the result in any meaningful way.

          I watched the AoS Tournament that GW livestreamed and my god was it “boring” to watch. It was either one army just standing on their end of the table and waiting for the other to get into charge range or the rare case where both sides would actually move. Then who ever got into CC first melted the other most of the time. You’d see 30+ models disappear at once. The SvT is an amazing system to this very day, since it gives much needed individuality to units. My Strength 3 Grots can’t bring down a Wraithlord, no matter how many there are. In AoS terms? Just bring 30 of the buggers for less points and see the Wraithlord melt before it can even swing.

          What I’m getting at is the fact that my unit of 20 Guardsmen shouldn’t be able to bring down a Titan with their flashlights, which is something that would be possible with AoS system, since there is no such thing as “unable to wound”.

          • Nick Davidson

            The whole point in AoS is synergy though, it’s not individual units its combinations of units.

          • Karru

            Which removes the individuality completely for me. That is why I play 40k and used to play Fantasy. All my units feel unique and I model/paint them accordingly. In AoS this is not the case. As a game it’s nice, but from the collecting, painting and modelling standpoint, it’s not. That’s why I wish we never see something like that happening in 40k.

        • Slite

          I like the more wounds on models thing, but removing S v T mechanic really irked me.

          I feel like when a model hits and wounds on a set value based solely on the model and not the opponent, it takes away from the “My Guy vs Your Guy”. Without comparative stats, a model feels like its attacking a training dummy instead.

      • eehaze

        Destroyer and Graviton weapons are broken mostly because they ignore toughness values and saves. Poison is more balanced because it rarely allows a model to ignore saves.

      • Matt Mo

        I can’t upvote this enough… I was hoping for more clean up regarding USRs and unit types, maybe the clunkiness of assaults and challenges or the psychic phase.

        The one thing I didn’t want was for them to start messing with stat lines and how they interact with each other. All that is pretty simple imo… What’s confusing is all the other stuff. Consider me skeptical at this point.

    • Fernando Lanas

      I think it really shows how bad is GW at making rules when AoS is seen as a vast improvement over 40K XD

  • Latro_the_Zombie

    Can’t see how they can get out of the mess of books and rules the game currently has without doing a total reset which will literally enrage everyone…

    The broken stuff is hardcoded now into supplements and codex books…

    • Keaton

      Everyone is already engraged, all of the time. Par for the course there.

      • Thomson

        Wow, you just stated THE truth of the internets in one sentence!

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      Changing Battle Brothers would fix a lot.

      • They just need to add one more chart… there would be the allies chart and then there should be the Imperial Allies Chart. Space Wolves and Dark Angels would be Desperate Allies, or Space Marines and Inquisition would be Allies of Convenience depending on which chapter tactics you had.

        For all that great Imperial intrigue we read about… we never really see it on the table. Just the great big Imperial super friend fest.

        • knightsanguis

          Having DA and SWs as desperate allies makes no sense. They have no problem working together for the good of the Imperium, they just share a fierce rivalry. They even respect each other to a certain degree.

          If we had an allies chart that accurately portrayed relations, just about all Chaos factions would have difficulty working alongside each other due to the sheer lack of trust (and for good reason). And Chaos are already nerfed enough, they don’t need another. one.

          • Keaton

            In lore, currently, they are bombarding Fenris. It’s more than a “fierce rivalry”.

            But yeah, they should not all be battle brothers. They don’t load up imperial guard in land raiders or drop pods. Allies of convenience is exactly what they are. They fight together when it’s convenient for the good of the Imperium.

            That’s basically why allies became so broken.

          • knightsanguis

            I agree that using different transports is a bit of a problem, but tbh I think each faction should have their own transports anyway, for example the fact that AdMech don’t even have anything of the sort is bloody ridiculous.

        • euansmith

          I guess all that bad blood gets sidelined once the shooting starts. You know what they say, “The Enemy of my enemy’s enemy’s enemy is my enemy’s friend.”

          • knightsanguis

            Which is exactly why despite hating the alien so much, Imperial forces have no problem fighting alongside them when Chaos comes knocking on their doors.

          • grim_dork

            “. . . of my brother’s enemy’s friend.” You forgot that part.

          • Matt Mo

            I did read that somewhere once

  • Heinz Fiction

    So in short: they sigmarize the game but don’t call it that way?

    • Kritarion

      Diet Sigmarification? I can get behind that.

      • vlad78

        It depends. Taste it before deciding if it’s worth.

        • Kritarion

          If just the rules and not the fluff, I already know the taste, and I like it.

          • Ben Martin

            It’s probably gonna be mainly rules, but the fluff will move forward. Not rebuilt, from the ashes like AoS, but things like the return of the Eldar Gods, the destruction of Commeragh, the Black Crusade, Octarian War etc.

          • Kritarion

            Progress from Geedub? Colour me shocked.

          • Ben Martin

            I mean, technically we have been having progress lately, what with the Deathwatch v. Eldar box set, and there is zero denying that they are setting something up.

  • Squeeker

    Hope they return it to a game of one army against another rather than this miss mash of units from all over the place.

    • Adrien Fowl

      My mind is all over the place when I try to recall all those meaningless rules and dice rolls we have to carry out every time we want to play a game.

      • euansmith

        If they do datascrolls for units in an AoS style, at least your special rules will all be in one, easily accessible place.

        • vlad78

          Perhaps the only advantage it will bring.

  • Ross Allan

    All they need to do, for me….

    1. Bit of a tidy up. Things are quite sprawling. Not so bad for sad acts like me with a completest streak, as I’m bound to have the right book somewhere (still a pain to find the right formation etc)

    2. Do bring over Monstrous Creature rules from Age of Sigmar. It’s always been a bugbear since 3rd Ed that, for instance, a Dreadnought gets progressively messed up over the game, but a Wraithlord (or equivalent ) keeps on keeping on at full efficiency until it’s dropped – which unlike the Dreadnought, is a minimum of three shots. Dreads and vehicles can be scragged with just one.

    3. Formal ‘threat’ levels, akin to how Cityfight used to be. For sake of demonstration, let’s use Alpha, Gamma and Omega. Alpha? FoC only. Gamma? FoC and formations allowed. Omega? FoC, Formations, Lords of War and Unbound. Will help to drive home the ‘stop taking the beat stick every time you no-fun Nigel’ ethos of the game, or at least let your opponent know what to bet against.

    • Inian

      Number 1 I am all for. It sucks having to own 5+ books to play an army. Plus a lot of special rules are close enough that they could be replaced by one rule.

      2. I think the opposite should be done instead, make vechicles more like MC’s. That way you reduce book keeping. Also remove the one-shot chance (also remove instant death and “remove model” rules) so that things with multiple wounds/hull points actually get to use them.

      3. FoC means different things for different armies though, some only have CaD, others have Decurion and so forth. Personally I am very happy we have moved away from CaD since I thought it was very unfluffy and lent to boring army lists. But all books need proper detachments instead. I do get what you are trying to say though, but it requires more work than your suggestion.

      • Ross Allan

        Fair enough 🙂
        Oh, and….
        4. Please do something about Psychic defences. Some of those powers are a right pain to deal with. For instance, Invisibility. Not sure what needs doing like, but something. For that one? Perhaps just adds to the enemy’s range, and grants Shrouding/Stealth. Pokey, but not ‘no-fun Nigel’ pokey.

        • Inian

          Psychic powers are a mess, warlord traits too but less obvious at a glance. They need to be completely changed.

        • euansmith

          Maybe “Enhanced Senses” could work versus Invisibility instead of just in Night Fighting?

          • Ross Allan

            Just don’t make it 6’s to hit. It’s too much of a no-brainer to go for. Which is much the same issue 6, 7 and 8th Ed Warhammer had – if you could take Heavens, you took Heavens. Re-rolls and horrendous direct damage spells up the wazoo. Others were too situational.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            yep lore of beasts for the maybe possible first turn charge?

    • Adrien Fowl

      I hadn’t thought about those three levels of threat until I read your statement. I do like that idea. I can’t see myself playing Omega, but I guess the option is there for anyone to pick it up.

      They could also include the three ways to play that are in the General’s Handbook for AoS.

      • Ross Allan

        In theory, it just allows players to agree in a fuss-free manner. Agree time, location, points limit and ‘Threat Level’.
        Stores could then offer their own Threat Level default for pick up games (so Alpha except by prior agreement with your opponent). Just makes it a bit more gentlemanly, and offers a formal structure.

        • euansmith

          Examples of narrative missions would be a great inclusion in the BRB, so you could roll up some asymmetric encounter rather than always playing even match ups.

  • Dan

    Personally I really, really hope they don’t pull an ‘Age of Sigmar’ with 40k.

    • Nathaniel Wright

      I’m pretty sure -they- hope they won’t pull an Age of Sigmar with 40k.

      • Commissar Molotov

        I hope you’re right.

    • Parthis

      Personally, i’d wholly accept AoS’ rules for 40K.

      • jeff white

        you wanna buy some armies?

        • kloosterboer

          cheap, I’m guessing. Better than setting them on fire.

    • Ross Allan

      As a system, it’s got a lot going for it. Ultimately, fixed to hit isn’t far off what 40k has now anyway. Majority of units can’t increase their BS or WS – and as both are most commonly seen around 3/4/5, why not just replace with 5+/4+/3+?
      Definitely needs to adopt the Warscroll thing as well – especially if they give those away free (certainly hasn’t hurt AoS any, and it helps lower the necessary overhead to get into the game). Free rules, and everything you need for that unit on it’s scroll? That’s incredibly useful.

      • knightsanguis

        Indeed it is. It’s amazing how easier and faster it is to look up a particular unit’s rules when everything you need to know is on one page and you don’t need to constantly flick between two rulebooks to find what you need.

        • Ross Allan

          And if they can adapt and adopt the AoS app, so much the better. All your chosen rules in a single place, including Mission and Time of War etc. Luvverly.

      • euansmith

        A four page BRB for 40k would be great 😀 No shooting out of combat, though; and only shooting in to combat for “evil” factions (that is “evil” by 40k standards), with any misses turning in to hits on friendly combatants.

      • jeff white

        warscrolls? seriously? how did rpg miniature wargaming reach massive scales only to forget the rpg, the wargaming, and end up a collectible board game for kids with warscroll-capable attention spans?

  • Anggul

    40k needs to take some stuff from AoS. It shouldn’t be so easy to make a unit nigh invincible, and mortal wounds are a great idea to stop such things.

    • Aezeal

      limiting saves and invulnerable saves would be highest on my list.

      • Ross Allan

        Biggest issue for me is how easy it is to keep characters alive. Not so in AoS, where the best they can hope for is to physically hide behind other models, or to get +1 armour from being behind stuff.
        Makes the strategic dismantling of deathstars far easier, and thus less of a chore.

        • euansmith

          “Where is our mighty leader?”

          “He is over there, behind that unit of cannon fodder.”

          “I still can’t see him?”

          “There, in the bush on the hill! You can see the blood red sky reflecting off his blade.”

          “Oh, right, I can see him now! Hurrah for our mighty leader! His inspiring presence is a beacon to us all!” 😉

      • Anggul

        Rather than limiting the saves themselves, they should remove all of the ridiculous buffs available. Grimoire, veil of time and numerous other increases and re-rolls are only ever going to create silly invincible units. You need to remove them, not change the baseline.

        Changing the baseline instead of the isolated offenders gave us the stupidly convoluted and un-fluffy psychic phase. They should have stuck to simple warp charge expenditure and a Ld test. The number of powers being cast wasn’t the problem, the problem was the powers themselves like invisibility, protect, summoning etc. By changing all psykers they made all powers harder including the mediocre ones instead of targetting the handful of offenders.

        Change the few broken powers and gear, not the baseline usage rules, that just screws over everything else in the category that isn’t broken.

        • Sabre Du Blade

          The LD test is especially good for Invis, just make it so they have to take the test on 3D6.

          • Anggul

            No, see this is the problem. Just get rid of stupid, fun-killing rubbish like invisibility entirely. It’s so game-breaking and fun-killing that it just shouldn’t be there in the first place. By requiring a test on 3D6 you’re only creating two outcomes: 1) It’s too hard to cast and people’s psykers are less effective for rolling it or 2) They do manage to cast it and it’s still ruining the game by making stuff too hard to hurt.

            Judt drop it from the game in its current form. Either replace it or nerf it to be reasonable.

    • Adrien Fowl

      Mortal wounds could be a solution against über powered deathstars.

      • euansmith

        AoS Rending is cool too; a real jump back to the old 2nd Edition save modifiers.

        • jeff white

          just update second edition, add kill team-amunda rules for leveling up narrative play on small tables. but if they push 40k onto “warscrolls” i may feel triggered and in need of a safe place.

      • So, like sD?

  • 2DSick Wargaming

    It’s in an unfortunate state. As much as I love the lore and the core mechanic of the game, it’s become bloated with content never intended for an infantry scale D6 system.

    Don’t get me wrong, content is a good thing but what I’m looking at is the inclusion of super heavies, flyers, nemesis style armies that were once the remit of Epic, a system designed purely for warfare of that type and scale! The fact is, 40k was never designed for it and much of this new content has been shoehorned in and the answer to balancing it has been lackadaisical (ateast that’s how it appears from street level). Answering balance with yet more imbalance. Unbound. Multiple formations and detachments with minimal restriction.

    Even D10, I feel is too small a scale for the shear range on show. From solid slug pistols right up to titan killers…. Even D20 looks impractical!

    You can do all thing poorly or a few thing well and this is prime example.
    Back in the day of specialist games, there was no need for this insane cross over. You could battle space ships in orbit before sending waves of tanks against armies of titans and then engage in more intimate battles for vital objectives or inserting a specialist strike team into the heart of the enemy….

    Battlefleet gothic
    Killteams (the original, objective based game with patrolling enemies and bosses)
    Hell… Even necromunda and inquisitor could be used as plot devices in a campaign….

    I can’t forsee a ‘new edition’ with the same quality of rules and disregard for basic balance addressing that. I can only see it falling deeper down the rabbit hole.

    They’ve done good job of masking financial shortfalls with huge cost cutting measures (which should have resulted in significant financial gains) but once all the chaff is gone and their admin and processes are as lean as can be, either a plateau will be reached or the cracks will start to show.

    This kind of discussion needs beer in a glass mug, a comfy sofa and an open fire…. God I miss my old regular haunt! 🙃

  • MarcoT

    Most changes AoS made to Fantasy were ’40k-ing’, so even if they go fully AoS with 40k it will never be the shakeup it was for fantasy.

    The things that do stand out I’d welcome; initiative, dice-rolls without tables, better morale rules, simplified magic, etc.

    • euansmith

      I really like the Hero phase in AoS. It gets so much stuff out of the way at the start of your turn and allows for heroes to act as cool support models rather than just big beatsticks.

      • bobrunnicles

        ^^^ This 🙂

  • Adam Upson

    I hope they clarify some of the rules on cover and terrain better in the new edition. It’s definitely the biggest part of a social game that leaves me and my opponent both shrugging are shoulders.

  • Krizzab

    this sounds me, all ppl enraged but first day buy :D.

  • Wayne Molina

    In all honesty they need to do a full-on hard reset I think the game is way too bloated with way too many things and such a varying power level based on seemingly random stuff. I played an introductory game yesterday to actually see for myself keep in mind that the last time I played was in 3rd Edition so around 2000. We used one of those Maelstrom of War missions and my opponent was able to score on his turn for basically doing nothing but having guys on his end of the board, where I was nowhere near, controlling objectives. It did not seem very fun not because of anything he did but just because you’re able to score points without trying just because you got lucky. The game itself felt very clunky and cumbersome and took about twice as long as a 1000-point game should have. Also just little things that seemed weird to me having played age of Sigmar now like being able to guarantee getting off assault.

    Couple that with including tons of things that really don’t belong in what was originally a company sized game, going from the Third Edition reboot not the original intent comma and if you ask me the game is a complete mess. But that is my opinion having actually tried it now.

  • Byungwook Kim

    A Warscroll such as the Stardrake is said to illustrate several new unit layout and big picture rules mechanics making their way to 40k.

    What? Does this mean AoS stardrakes are getting 40k rules??

    • Nathaniel Wright

      Just the format is something we can probably expect, not that we’ll be getting stardrakes in 40k.

  • markdawg

    86 the dreadful IGOUGO and all the special rules bloat.

  • Mr.Fister

    Keep the fluff of 40k and give only the rules the AoS treatment. Some people argue that simple rules lead to simple and boring games but this is not true. Compare Chess and Go. In Chess every single figure has special rules – in Go those stones can’t even move. The rules in Go are simple but the game is complex.

    • Adrien Fowl

      I couldn’t agree more with you, lad.

    • Karru

      Only problem here is the fact that those games are boring when you have multiple factions. The simplification boils the game to chess as you mentioned. In this case it means that it matter about as much as it does in chess if I play Sigmarines or Chaos. It’s basically the choice between White or Black. No major difference present.

      • Mr.Fister

        I do not want to make all units the same, but is it really necessary that every model has 3+ special rules…as aways the answer lies in the middle…

        • Karru

          Like in AoS? People seem to forget that almost all units in AoS have their own unique rules and most scrolls include 2-3 special rules just for the single unit. On top of that they have tons of synergy combos depending on the keywords they have.

          This is something that is good in AoS. My only problem is with things like SvT getting removed and streamlining things like WS/BS. Those remove individuality hard.

    • jeff white

      go sux. it is boring. but, surpisingly easy to paint.

  • Defenestratus

    Leave my 40k alone GW!

    • Goran Halužan

      Don’t worry, after they fix the ruleset, Eldar will probably still be on top.. GW loves their Eldar. 😉

      • Ross Allan

        Guess you missed the decade or so of Eldar players demanding Rending on everything :p

        • Goran Halužan

          I don’t recall Eldar players ever “demanding rending on everything.”
          When the new bladestorm rule came out, eldar players just happily emraced it…

          • euansmith

            Do you remember Following Fire on Shuriken Catapults? Those darn guns just didn’t stop shooting until everything was dead.

        • Defenestratus

          The only thing i demanded on shuriken weapons was a useful range. 12″ is not at all worth while. My Vampire has a longer wingspan than a guardian can shoot.

          When we got bladestorm I was like “eh, shred would have been better but I’ll take it”

      • Defenestratus

        My 4th edition Eldar codex begs to differ. You know, the one we were stuck with for 8 years I think and never even got an update for 5th edition?

        2004 – 2012?

        • Goran Halužan

          Yeah I remember being regularly squashed by Space Wolves then. But I was thinking of 6th ed codex onwards (not even counting the older ones).
          But jokes aside, I really do think 40k needs a rules “reset” because the current messy rules really got out of hand.. This and the imbalance between armies dispersed my playing group a few years ago, and since then we’re just hoping to see some drastic changes so we can get into it again.

    • euansmith

      No worries, you’ll be able to keeping on playing with 7th Edition, or go over to playing 8th Age 40k 😉

      • jeff white

        41st K!

  • Tati

    they should just go back to how second ed did with the toughness vs Strength, modifies for saves vs weapons,

    • jeff white

      yes they should

  • SupPupPup

    Move forward the fluff. Burn the rules.

  • Death Company Andro

    Seriously the to hit table for CC needs a major shake up. It is ridiculous that a WS5 guy hits a WS2 guy on a 3+ and the WS2 guy hits him back on a 4+. Also bring back pistols having their str and AP in CC. And WTF is a chainsword no more effective in CC than a stick?

  • Largie

    In my opinion, they need to reduce the amount of pointless rolls and rolls before you start a game. Rolls before a game start:
    How table is split
    Table sides
    Warlord traits
    Physic powers
    Seize the initiative
    Army specific (DE combat drugs, demonic gifts, chaos boon table ect.)
    Objectives deployment

    Pointless rules:
    Soul blaze – roll to see if flame goes out, roll to see how many hits, roll to wound, roll to save, roll feel no pain?, roll for random model dies (which rarely happens)

    Ork mob rule – roll on mob table, re roll with banner, roll to see how many hits, roll to wound, roll to save

    Dangerous terrain

    Gets hot

    Most of these rarely make a difference in the game (they can sometimes) but they can be simplified or changed.
    E.g. Dangerous terrain, roll one dice less for distance and -3 to charge?

    Gets hot, no feel no pain saves

    Mob rule, fearless if over 10 models (from old codex)

    Soul blaze, counts as moving through dangerous or no armour saves

    Basically if there’s a special rule make it mean something instead of most people forgetting it and not caring as it doesn’t do anything anyway.

    • Djbz

      Soul blaze is hilariously useless.
      I don’t think it’s ever killed anything in any game I’ve seen or played….

      • car_tag

        It’s killed a guardsman in one of my games.

    • jeff white

      gets hot needs to stay.

  • frankelee

    A new set of snap-fit space marines!

    • euansmith

      Smashing! Maybe some new snap-fit Orkz too. Shoota Boyz this time would be cool.

    • Sabre Du Blade

      I’d love some Snap-fit Hormagaunts for my nephew.
      But that’d never happen, right GW?
      Cuz Tyranids are the bad guys GW?
      Right? RIGHT?!

  • Pocketfulofgeek

    I personally hope we see the death of vehicle armour values. Now that vehicles effectively have wounds there’s almost nothing you couldn’t do with Toughness that you can currently do with AV.

    It’s just a layer of rules the game could easily live without that new players then wouldn’t have to learn.

  • Adrien Fowl

    I think I haven’t been so excited about a new edition in my 16 years as a hobbyist.

    I have given up playing W40k and I am waiting for a new edition to bring some order to this mess our beloved game has turned into.

    Nowadays I play AoS and I think they could really bring some of those concepts into W40k. The most important thing, in my opinion, are the warscrolls (which include all the rules and avoid having to look’em up in the BRB) and key words.

    Apart from that, there are a ton of useless rolls that could be just taken away and the game system wouldn’t suffer from them anymore.

  • Nyyppä

    We can only hope. Maybe the game will be playable again.

  • If they can cut out the rules bloat so that I don’ thav eto spend every game with my nose in the book trying to remember what special rule goes where that will help.

    Though my biggest complaint about 40k is how skewed the balance is and how GW fails to properly point cost anything.

  • Karru

    Here is what I’d like to see and definitely don’t want to see.

    What I want:

    Return of CAD. Basically make it so list building is actually a thing and people need to figure out synergies between units. Not just cherry pick the best unit and CAD/formation spam to win.

    Assault armies would be nice to see as well. Remove the 2D6 roll, make it 6″-12″ again and return the ability to assault after disembarking from a transport that hasn’t moved. Also, allow disembarking after 12″ movement, at least for Fast Transports.

    Troops as the mainstay of the army. They should be the core, backbone of your army, not just a mandatory choice that you have to take so you can spam CAD. Basically make them be the only unit able to score objectives.

    Streamline and balance Psychic Powers. The current system is unbalanced as heck and there is no reason to take different psychic lores outside Divination/Telepathy/Biomancy. Also, spam to win is the name of the game here once again, due to the RNG aspect and the need for Invisibility.

    Removal of around 80%-90% of special rules from the main book and do the AoS. All units have their own special rules on their sheets, this way we can make sure that rule stacking isn’t a thing any more.

    Remove Ignore Cover Save. Enough said.

    No Battle Brothers. As far as I am concerned they can just remove allies altogether, but I know this will never happen.

    What I definitely don’t want to see:

    Removal of AV or SvT. These are one of the core aspects of 40k. They can make Walkers monsters for all I care, but I don’t want to see my Leman Russ dying to frontal Bolter fire or mass Autocannons. I have also seen the lack of individuality that comes from the lack of SvT. It doesn’t matter if I’m firing towards a Gretchin or a Wraithknight, both are wounded the exact same way.

    Too much streamlining. If they go even half way with the “sigmarisation” of 40k, it will suffer the same fate as Fantasy did. It will die and stop being 40k.

    More supplements and focus on “Decurions” and formations. This will once again increase the power gap and ruin the game for older books even more.

    • euansmith

      Limiting Obj Sec to troops used to give them a real job to do.

      • Karru

        Even then, people usually just ignored them in favour of spamming more heavier units that could just blow away the opponents Ob. sec. units.

        • euansmith

          Kings of War has a system where you need to take blocks of rank and file troops in order to unlock Heroes, Monsters and Warmachines. It doesn’t hurt that the rank and file units are useful in themselves.

          • Karru

            That would be one way to do it, but as you pointed out, Rank and File troops are useful in their own way and the need to automatically replace them with more “elite” units isn’t there.

  • Defenestratus

    While we’re wishlisting here:

    Fix the WS table. A WS3 should be hitting WS4 on a 5+ not a 4. A WS2 model shouldn’t even be able to land a strike on a WS5 or more model.

    Bring back speed to-hit modifiers – get rid of cover saves/jinks as a mechanic. Make fast armies actually move instead of sitting still and “jinking” in place.

    Along those lines – bring back movement rates. Why does a stupid plodding terminator move at the same speed as a howling banshee or a genestealer. Makess no sense. When you change movement rates, you can change the way charges work. Keep that element of randomness, just make it M + D6 so that there is a mechanic to make sure you do always get that charge off. It would get rid of most of the peksy movement special rules that we all love to hate.

    Get rid of the CAD altogether. Each faction should have its own unique method of building a list. CAD is just bland and boring and I’d rather play dominos than try to make a list these days with a CAD.

    Oh and get rid of allies – full stop. No battle brothers, no convenience, just no allies whatsoever. The only allies that can be taken would be the units from the supplemental books and then only for their relevant faction. For example, a Knight could only join a Space Marine or IG army. Thats it. No stupid Knights joining Necrons or any dumb crap like that. No inquisitors joining Eldar. What kind of pathetic nonsense is that?

  • MightyOrang

    Given the major corrective surgery that they’ve had to do for AOS, I’m not sure that should be held up as a positive template to shoot for. And if you’re telling me this early that it won’t get the AOS treatment, that suggests you already did it.

  • Talos2

    The S and T mechanic is a far better one than the ridiculous AoS alternative, it just needs spreading out. It needs to be possible for bigger and more realistic variations. Orks should not be the same strength as a guardsman for example. I’d change most stats to out of 20 instead of 10. It would remove the need for unbalance able rules to compensate for fluff descriptions

  • Commissar Molotov

    Dammit. Just when I go all-in on 40K with the Genestealer Cult, they go and turn it into AoS in Space.

    • Unconfirmed rummors from an “industry insider” whou could just be any bored person making things up, untill then remember the sky isnt falling and its just a game

      • Commissar Molotov

        The sad truth is, I don’t trust GW not to totally screw this whole thing up AoS-style.

    • Donald Lindsey

      It’ll be a shame to see you go.

  • Orodruin

    Perhaps it’s due to my being a jaded CSM player, but the rules are really my least concern with the game right now. I suppose they’re famous last words, but I can’t really see how the game could get any worse. As long as the unit options I have don’t disappear from the game, I don’t really care what happens to the rules.

  • jeff white

    warscrolls? seriously?

  • darkconsecrator
  • Adam Richard Corrigan

    Change BS to plain to hit values 3+, 4+ etc.
    Change from alternate turn to unit activation based on Initiative. Remove Instant death and other rules like that.
    Give vehicles wounds and no damage chart to simplify.
    Nurf invisibility to -2 to hit rolls while template ignore it because logic. Again for logic no SHW or GC can be pinned by something that can’t damage it but in return give all SHW, GC and Tank weapons a minimum range as well as a -1 to hit small targets with their giant cumbersome weapons in combat.
    Cut down the number of special rules and remove all rerolls.
    Make charge/run distances fixed per unit rather than random.
    Cut down on the number of random elements in the game, make it more about tactics than luck.
    Include datasheets with models.
    Make each person have a core army from one faction that must be a minimum of 75% of its points to avoid stupid combo’s just for the best rules, bring the fluff back into the game.

  • Peripheral

    The “To Hit” and then “To Wound” and then “Save” mechanic exists simply to spread out the probability. Its a work around of the limitations of a d6 system.

    It also exists as a substitute for calculating a long list of modifiers.

  • Iconoc1ast

    i am so glad that i have held off from buying any new rulebooks.

  • Xodis

    Im sure there is a lot of simplifying and streamlining that 40K can take from AoS and benefit from.
    I think SvT can be rebalanced (to really help weapons stand out instead of the current trend) but going the AoS route and dropping it completely would be wrong.

  • Agent OfBolas

    when I see such bullsh^t as “There will be changes to some core mechanics such as S vs T which have been static for several editions.” all I can see is Age Of Sigmar 40k…

    And this would be death of this game.

    This element of WH40k shouldn’t be touched at all. There are tons of other topics to be used to make game simpler and more pleasurable to play.

    • SupPupPup

      I play both games quite regularly, and I don’t feel there is a difference in gameplay having a static number to hit vs SvT.

      What is so crucial about it?

      • euansmith

        I’m thinking that Strength vs Toughness could be amalgamated in to the Saving Throw to drop an entire round of die rolls from the game. 🙂

        • SupPupPup

          Its the matrices that I find annoying. Everyone complains about gretchin punching a dreadnaught, but how many times do you really see that.

          Its usually 3s and 3s or 4s and 4s, with maybe the occasional 6 thrown in.

          • TenDM

            The only ways your tiny weak unit is going to beat my big tough unit is if my unit is either A) nearly dead already, B) ignoring your unit and thus letting it kill me, or C) facing an overwhelming volume of weak units.
            To me that makes more sense than having creatures be totally, unconditionally impervious against some low strength stuff. I mean 40k has these situations where 1,000 Guardsmen can’t even scratch a model with only one wound remaining.

      • Agent OfBolas

        everything. Seriously.

        When they remove S&T for such bullcrap as in AoS, I’m out from 40k. Same my friends. AoS system of hitting/wounding is a nightmare, illogical and … dumb.

        • SupPupPup

          Could you explain a bit more?

          • Agent OfBolas

            it’s totally not OK for me that your soldier can hit and wound a peasant and 10000 year old Daemon Prince with the same score … I can’t get over it. It’s just dumb for me.

  • Donald Lindsey

    Oh my God, the sky is falling…the sky is falling! Oh wait…not enough real info to start that…

  • Zreat mi Legenderi

    And the “wishlists” concerning rules will start to be published for thousands pretendig to be “true” all over teh internet in 3… 2… 1…

  • Andrew Long

    From reading that is sounds like GW doth protest too much, methinks as far as AoS-ing 40k goes. Its the ol’ bait and switch – ‘Yes It will be streamlined, it will have warscrolls, but it’s not AoS, we swear.’

    Seems from these rumours that Age of Grimdark is exactly the plan. And if you look at it now, I think AoS is near as complex as 40k, however near the only difference is that rules/missions/fluff/compositions etc are not buried in a BRB, but instead within the army book and the unit’s warscroll. The other big difference is that you don’t have an infantry/vehicle gap where each have their own rules system – a massive cause of imbalance.

    If it’s a question of rules layout, I believe AoS smashes 40k out of the park. If it’s a question of returning the fun back into 40k, they could do worse than base the new version off AoS. I hope we end up with a 10-20 page rulebook and it’s the codexes that have the core rules for the army and have factions akin to AoS. These ally tables, decurions, formations, supplements are ruining 40k as it stands. It’s such a chore.

    We should remember that 40k current edition is basically the fourth version of 3rd edition. We pretty much loved the simplification of 3rd over 2nd, and likewise over Rogue Trader before that.

  • car_tag

    One thing I’d like to see them implement from AoS is the Keyword system. Right now for Chaos there is nothing in the rules specifying what a “daemon engine” is. Fluff wise there is, just not in rules.

    For example: In the KDK book we have “War Engine” as an aux choice. Why not specify that you can bring one KHORNE DAEMON ENGINE as an aux choice? This way FW models can be implemented seamlessly into existing GW formations. Simplify SM and all its flavors into one overall faction, like Order is in AoS, with units being able to take keywords for the factions they can be brought in for alliance bonuses. It could easily be done and implemented very well.

  • GiftoftheMagi

    GW these days seems a bit more aware of their customer base than in previous versions. I do believe that not only would making 40K into AoS would be an incredibly stupid decision, but they know it too. AoS only worked at first because the player base was so low to start with an it took quite a few hits before finally admitting they needed better rules and putting out their Big Book.

    Now 40K is far more popular and wide-spread, so doing a complete dump of their storyline and rules would be corporate suicide. It would kill such a massive amount of the fanbase and appeal (no matter what you did) that you could pretty much hand the keys over to Privateer or Mantic. However, currently 40K is a bloated mess of extra codexes, datasheets and rules/power creep, to the point that players barely know anything about the game beyond their one current army. It’s just too expensive to keep up.

    I do feel that it needs a huge clean up, a design fix and MAYBE a bit of progression. Unlike AoS, you simply cannot just end the galaxy and move on. Players WILL dump your game. But you CAN move the timeline along a bit more. Playing in an Age where some of the Primarchs, Daemon Princes and old Gods are now walking about COULD be pretty cool and introduce a more epic level to game play. I personally would love to see my Eldar get Isha and Ynneah into the game. Also cut back and merge all these extra rules, and organize the stat boards into one sheet for easier reference. SOME of the AoS ideas are good.

    Overall…GW needs to be very, very careful. They simply cannot flub this one up.

  • TenDM

    Apparently 40k End Times/Sigmarfication/8th Edition has been 6-9 months away since the day AoS launched. It’s going to take a lot more than things anybody could guess to convince me this is ‘insider information’ is any more legit than the rest. I mean can you imagine them possibly releasing 8th edition without trying to streamline?

    Personally I think Games Workshop are too afraid of Age of Sigmar’s backlash to release a new edition any time soon, regardless of whether they’re actually planning to go down the Sigmafication path. Age of Sigmar didn’t just upset people it hit GW hard enough to break their barrier. They were a company that shrugged off fan outrage without batting an eye for decades, yet Age of Sigmar was enough to convince them they have to get their act together.
    Not everything they’ve done has been perfect but pretty much everything since Age of Sigmar’s launch has had an element of community pleasing intent. They’ve clearly had the ‘everyone hates us, we need to get our reputation out of the gutter and make sure this doesn’t happen again’ meeting. From the General’s Handbook to Genestealer Cults they’re trying to push good news.

    If I had to guess I’d say they’re just going to ignore the problems with 7th while focusing on repairing the damage to their reputation via crowd pleaser releases and specialist games. I mean the slightest hint of Sigmafication in 8th Edition will have the
    potential to cause them a whole bunch of trouble they don’t want, so why they risk it with 8th Edition when they can just re-release Necromunda? They can risk massive backlash when the community reacts poorly to a font that’s a little too Sigmar-ish, or they can release plastic Sisters of Battle to thunderous applause.

  • Peter Ebdon

    Quickest way to make 40K more readily available to new players is look at the pricing of the models – Assault squad of 5 or Devastators=$70, got to be joking and Marneus with honour guard=$102, bloody glad I got it 12 months ago.

  • Graeme Donaldson

    I really hope it doesn’t play anything like AoS. That game and it’s warscroll style are so complicated with every unit having a different wording of the same style rules that just causes argument and constant reference of the app/book/PDF depending on which version of the unit you’re using. 40k is much more solid with its “This weapon has Rending, this model has Feel no Pain” mechanics with them all described in one centralised place rather than AoS’s frustrating “this unit has a champion which means X, this other unit in the same army has a champion which means Y, while this other unit gets an extra attack on 6s if it’s within 6″ of a hero but on 5s if it has more than Q models, while this other unit gets an extra attack on 6s but gets an extra attack if it’s within range of a unit with the Z keyword” etc. Just have a rule called “Extra Attack” which is in a main rulebook and never changes between different units, so much simpler and fun to play. Seriously once you get over the initial speedbump of learning 40k it is so much easier and fun to play then AoS which starts at a fast speed and stays at that speed and just gets slower as armies get bigger and more diverse and then becomes boring to play.

    • Graeme Donaldson

      Argh and the “this unit always hits/wounds on 4+ or 3+” is really annoying, AoS should switch back to a WS v WS and S v T style system for combat so that it actually means something having better troops fighting lesser troops, paying loads of points to have a big unit charge into combat only to not hit anything because they’re on 4+s against anything from Archaon to Zombies is very frustrating.