Horus Heresy New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[Mogger351]

37 minutes ago, Stitch5000 said:

The thing is, event games aren't the sum total of Heresy gaming and even then, events use their own processes that include a lot of exceptions to rules anyway. 

It's just a bad rule that adds little for a lot of potential headache. Most people will ignore it to a large degree, it can simply go imo.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

15 hours ago, BitsHammer said:

New duel is live: https://youtube.com/shorts/112GBA2TJn0?si=AmQHCDN0zN0cYyZx

Where is the ring girl?

[Mogger351]

1 hour ago, Hathor42 said:

the mechanicus don't want to play the new status effect game.

Might be a lifeline that pulls me back

[Xenith]

17 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

No, it is insane if you consider events of blind games. You're encouraged to take your whole collection, find opponent, pick mission, draft list, then play the game. That's a lot of absurdity you have to rationalise around, because as you say, no sane person will follow it without prior communication.

 

It will never play out like you fear it will. Event organisers have house-ruled GW games forever, this will be no different. An in-advance mission pack would do it. In the current edition you require very different armies if you are playing, say, rulebook vs Cthonia missions. Most events say which mission pack you will be using. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

Hey they fixed anti grav so they can move over enemy units! And heavy doesn't invalidate blast/template weapons, something I'm very happy to see. 

[Marshal Rohr]

Maybe I’m just drinking the cool-aid but I feel like the unit types are an improvement over 2.0. I am a little worried Veletaris with axes will be too slow to do anything offensive which feels counter intuitive to them being “pioneers” without an assault transport coming to solar, but we will see. 

[Cleon]

On 6/26/2025 at 5:29 AM, Nephaston said:

I'd argue the 30k approach to sprue layout is superior, even when going for a more streamlined faction lineup, 

Having built one of each of those dreads the could've all just shared the same body cutting it down from eight body sprues across 4 dreads to just two, while the third sprue in each kit could've been for just the weapons.

Same with the infantry; Intercessors, Hellblasters, Assault Intercessors, Infernus', and Desolators could have all been the same 5 to 10-man body kit, with the weapons sequestered on their own sprues, so you'd still have the same number of units and kits, but save massively on sprue production and storage. Could even include the veteran units like Sternguard, Bladeguard, and Company Heroes, but there I feel a dedicated 5-man sprue of distinctly veteran sculpts would have been justifiable.

 

And while I remain a massive 40k consoomer, 30k wins outright in regards to sprue planning and layout.

I have to put a counter viewpoint - the 30k layout restricts all the marines to the same 5 poses, whereas the 40k set up gives you different stances across the different unit types of the same armour.

[roryokane]

1 minute ago, Cleon said:

I have to put a counter viewpoint - the 30k layout restricts all the marines to the same 5 poses, whereas the 40k set up gives you different stances across the different unit types of the same armour.

Or we go back to 40k Firstborn style where everything is cross compatible and you can functionally pose models as you see fit with basically unlimited combinations of legs/arms/torsos/backpacks/helmets/pauldrons?

[Cleon]

9 minutes ago, roryokane said:

Or we go back to 40k Firstborn style where everything is cross compatible and you can functionally pose models as you see fit with basically unlimited combinations of legs/arms/torsos/backpacks/helmets/pauldrons?

I mean ideally yes.... but If I had to choose one current path or the other an entire legion of Marines in five stances would be my least favourite option.

Edited 7 hours ago by Cleon

[Matcap86]

10 minutes ago, Cleon said:

I mean ideally yes.... but If I had to choose one current path or the other an entire legion of Marines in five stances would be my least favourite option.

 

Yeah even just mirroring the bodies would add a giant amount of variation to the look and feel of an army. 

[Astartes Consul]

PDF rules for the Taratula have just dropped - https://assets.warhammer-community.com/eng_jun25_thehorusheresy_additionalrules_tarantula-nq1r50lr4a-ec6sail0d9.pdf

 

Obviously it's in the current edition rules, so will only be valid for a month or so. But can't imagine the firing modes / reaction rules will change that much?

 

Interestingly, they're TROOPS now.

Edited 6 hours ago by Astartes Consul

[Marshal Rohr]

If Tarantulas can only react in 3.0 with a limit on reactions they might as well go ahead and recycle those kits. A shame since Owen did such a great job. 

[roryokane]

27 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

If Tarantulas can only react in 3.0 with a limit on reactions they might as well go ahead and recycle those kits. A shame since Owen did such a great job. 

I suspect they will make an exception, as with the advanced reaction for 2.0, or they'll simply allow them to shoot in the controlling player's turn.

[HeinzD]

16 hours ago, Marshal Loss said:

Glad that we're finally getting rules articles on the different factions next week. 

  

 

Looks like they've homogenised Lucius' weapons with the Fulgrim Transfigured/Angron Transfigured treatment ('Blades of Lucius'). Not a huge fan of that. 

What dont you like about it? Personally I dont mind it, i like it even, with multiple weapons there often is just the overall better option, especially in case of lucius it was just silly that Nineteen was just so much better then the Blade of the Laer. Also, i think it gives it more the feeling like he is fighting with both swords at the same time, instead of just fighting with one and having the other one just for show, lol

[BitsHammer]

Traitor fluff article: https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/w3jmtzfv/traitor-lore-how-the-trap-was-set/

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Petitioner's City]

15 hours ago, Petitioner's City said:

 

I would suggest borrowing some of necromunda's well established tools for drawing your 'force' from your larger list - I sketched this up tonight after being very inspired by the step 2 possibilities.

 

This hopefully would be very narrative and get away from the often deathmatch-esque games we play at heresy events? 

 

Thank you for being positive about them - not sure my friends appreciate them!

[Xirix]

Sentry Guns as Troops huh? Interesting. Stuff like that makes me pine for the old Siege Dreadnought list.

[Lord Abaia]

The rules look really interesting as an alternative evolution of 7th (compared to the route 8th+ editions of 40K went). Does anyone who played 2nd, or is more up to date on the rules leaks know if they got rid of one of my most hated aspects of 7th, the harsh restrictions on when and who you are allowed to charge? I found it absolutely silly that in 7th Ed 40K a unit like Raptors was able to take rapid-fire plasma guns which would lock them out of charging if they fired them. Or similarly if you shot a unit with assault weapons that initial target unit was the only unit you were able to charge. Restrictions like those and the excesses of the formation  system really soured me on 7th, but if those are gone, I'd be a lot more interested in AoD.

[Stitch5000]

7 minutes ago, Lord Abaia said:

The rules look really interesting as an alternative evolution of 7th (compared to the route 8th+ editions of 40K went). Does anyone who played 2nd, or is more up to date on the rules leaks know if they got rid of one of my most hated aspects of 7th, the harsh restrictions on when and who you are allowed to charge? I found it absolutely silly that in 7th Ed 40K a unit like Raptors was able to take rapid-fire plasma guns which would lock them out of charging if they fired them. Or similarly if you shot a unit with assault weapons that initial target unit was the only unit you were able to charge. Restrictions like those and the excesses of the formation  system really soured me on 7th, but if those are gone, I'd be a lot more interested in AoD.

From what I have seen, those restrictions are largely gone. 

[Redcomet]

5 hours ago, Deus_Ex_Machina said:

Where is the ring girl?

Or ring boy. Gotta be something for everyone 

[Ripper.McGuirl]

11 hours ago, Urauloth said:

Ok well now I'm interested. Honestly I think it's a tragedy we don't have a Heresy-era skirmish game already.

I agree. The Tactical Strike rules in the Black Book were fun as hell, even if totally out of whack, balance wise. So far this edition looks like you could *very* easily use the 6th/7th ed Kill Team rules or a version of the current Necromunda rules.

I will definitely be all over it.

[Marshal Rohr]

21 minutes ago, Ripper.McGuirl said:

I agree. The Tactical Strike rules in the Black Book were fun as hell, even if totally out of whack, balance wise. So far this edition looks like you could *very* easily use the 6th/7th ed Kill Team rules or a version of the current Necromunda rules.

I will definitely be all over it.

The mission rules and army restrictions imply they are attempting to put downward pressure on the idea the Heresy requires large armies. It will be very difficult to run big armies with low ppm, which will push players to do high ppm/fewer unit style armies. 
 

Solar as an example, assuming WarCom was right about Tercios/Squadrons/Talons going away. 
 

Prime Detachment - Legate-Marshal, 4 Tactical Command Sections will give you access to 4 guaranteed Lasrifle Sections. So if your army was two full strength Tercios of 60 in 1st/2nd you used two slots. Now you need to use your entire Prime Detachment and a Tactical Support detachment to get 6 Lasrifle Sections. So a Solar Army essentially starts the game down an Auxiliary Detachment and Command Slot just to get six squads. If you used Veletarii as Troops in 1st, which was pretty common, you’re blowing a lot of detachments to get Shock Assault/Pioneers or whatever they end up being. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Marshal Rohr

[Gorgoff]

1 hour ago, Lord Abaia said:

The rules look really interesting as an alternative evolution of 7th (compared to the route 8th+ editions of 40K went). Does anyone who played 2nd, or is more up to date on the rules leaks know if they got rid of one of my most hated aspects of 7th, the harsh restrictions on when and who you are allowed to charge? I found it absolutely silly that in 7th Ed 40K a unit like Raptors was able to take rapid-fire plasma guns which would lock them out of charging if they fired them. Or similarly if you shot a unit with assault weapons that initial target unit was the only unit you were able to charge. Restrictions like those and the excesses of the formation  system really soured me on 7th, but if those are gone, I'd be a lot more interested in AoD.

You still have to charge the unit you shot but rapid fire is gone. Bolters for example have now two shots every time you shoot them no mstter st what range and it will be the same for plasma guns hopefully. 

But you can't shoot those and charge because now you only can shoot assault weapons before you charge and so fsr only things like bolt pistols have assault. It isn't a regular dhooting phase either.

Basically what happens is that you move and then declare a charge.

Depending on your movement soeed pkus initiave the unit moves a certain amount of inches towards the enemy.

 

For movement 7 and Ini4 it is three inches. If that is enough to reach the enemy you have successfully charged and no reaction can be made.

If that doesn't is enough you are allowed to shoot those assault weapons and the enemy can do overwatch. After that you role 2d6 (not sure on this one) and take the highes role and hopefully get into close Combat this way. 

[Stitch5000]

19 minutes ago, Gorgoff said:

You still have to charge the unit you shot

Where did you see that?

[Xenith]

3 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

If Tarantulas can only react in 3.0 with a limit on reactions they might as well go ahead and recycle those kits. A shame since Owen did such a great job. 

 

It's an advanced reaction, and for free, each turn. Though ultimately, 215 points for 6 twin linked, immobile volkite culverins isnt great when you get can 5 for 150 as a HSS.