Horus Heresy New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[Astartes Consul]

1 hour ago, Mandragola said:

I’ve reviewed the Talons PDF. They keep changing it though, so I’ll go back in and make some updates later. 
 

Here it is for now: https://www.goonhammer.com/first-look-talons-of-the-emperor-in-horus-heresy-third-edition/

Thanks for this. Out of interest, and to fuel my hatred, what do you mean by they keep changing it?

[Mandragola]

4 minutes ago, Astartes Consul said:

Thanks for this. Out of interest, and to fuel my hatred, what do you mean by they keep changing it?

Small stuff. The first version had no Anathema special rule, though the Sisters and Culexus said they had it. And now the Vindicare’s gun has been changed. It’s not FP 0 with heavy FP any more. I thought that was cool. 
 

 

Edit: it might have just been one change. Without tracked changes I didn’t spot the Vindicare change. 

Edited Friday at 08:17 PM by Mandragola

[MARK0SIAN]

I’m hoping they change it to put Hetaeron guard back in! I spent ages on those models :(

[Nephaston]

1 minute ago, MARK0SIAN said:

I’m hoping they change it to put Hetaeron guard back in! I spent ages on those models :(

Maybe when they get models, until then it's the Legacy bench.

[Lord Marshal]

27 minutes ago, 1ncarnadine said:

The Talons PDF rules only covers the existing miniatures, which tracks with a lot of how this is being handled.

 

I think something that needs to be brought up re: the Talons is the GW policy that ranges should not share models. It leaves the Talons in a particularly weird place, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Custodes range(s) contributed significantly to that policy being put down in the first place. Because FW developed the miniatures, originally in resin but moved immediately to plastic for general release. Then those plastics became a big seller for 40k. 

 

So if the Talons Liber is delayed, it might be because they're planning to more firmly split the 30k and 40k ranges and release more plastics for 30k at that time. Possibly in an army set like the Solar Aux and Mechanicum? Which may (or may not) include an expansion to the range of the SoS. Or that may come later in Journals, at this rate. 

 

I definitely didn't expect the non-FW Assassins to have survived into 3rd.

[MARK0SIAN]

7 minutes ago, Nephaston said:

Maybe when they get models, until then it's the Legacy bench.

Sadly, they didn’t even make the list of legacy units so it looks like they’re just gone. 
 

The contempt GW has for their own players seems to have reached spiteful levels at this point.

[Nephaston]

12 minutes ago, MARK0SIAN said:

Sadly, they didn’t even make the list of legacy units so it looks like they’re just gone. 
 

The contempt GW has for their own players seems to have reached spiteful levels at this point.

That might just be down to the article not including them in the summary. And judging by the frequent edits of todays PDF I wouldn't be surprised to see them added even if the initial upload doesn't include them.

It will all be fixed and good by (INSERT NEXT DEADLINE HERE).

[Gorgoff]

2 hours ago, Lord Marshal said:

 

I definitely didn't expect the non-FW Assassins to have survived into 3rd.

I have to say the assassins are way better and overall more delightful and very on track narrative wise. I like their rules very much. 

 

So it was a mistake.

Pathetic. 

Doesn't they let someone who plays the armies re-read their army lists before they give it to the printers? 

 

Alas it is nice that the option is still in which raises the question what the tartaros entry in the legacies will include they announced? 

Edited Friday at 10:50 PM by Gorgoff

[Captain Idaho]

2 hours ago, Matcap86 said:

 

So that's good right? GW listens to their customers and tries to adjust according to feedback? 

 

Sure; perfect round 1 would be nice, but I rather have a reacting company than one that just stonewalls for a year or 5. (Which we've also seen in the past.)

 

Oh fixing problems is great. Releasing a broken product that requires fixing BEFORE it was released is incompetent though, because the product shouldn't be broken before release.

 

I do agree I prefer them reacting positively, but does it bode well for the product if it is so wrong before it was even released?

 

Ah like I said; I'll buy in IF they fix the mess that is:

 

1) Terrain rules blocking line of sight AND charging despite being in them together!

 

2) Legacies being sufficient (I am optimistic that has been rectified yes)

 

3) The Legions rules need a total overhaul. A "faction Legacies" would assuage the issues here.

 

4) Additional 2 turns. 4 turns, in a game where hiding in terrain you can't be charged as you're outside LoS and there's reactions to move you out of melee range too? Come on man!

 

Sure, I'm one person. But so is each of the community who are unhappy with these rules. And one times a million+ is still a million+.

 

(And no I'm not putting numbers down, I'm illustrating that there's a substantial community around who AREN'T happy)

[Spagunk]

1 hour ago, Gorgoff said:

...

So it was a mistake.

Pathetic. 

Doesn't they let someone whonplays the armies reread their army lists before they give it to the printers? 

 

Alas it is nice that the option is still in ehich raises the question what the tartaros entry in the legacies will include they announced? 

We simply have no proof whether or not the intention for power fists were there or if this was a knee-jerk reaction to social media outrage. So technically correct that it was a mistake but no clue if this because of they didn't expect a strong response or because they forgot the power fists weren't attached to the lightning claw.
 

[Captain Idaho]

Ah it's pretty obvious that Terminators get power fists. That's been their thing since a million years ago.

[Gorgoff]

39 minutes ago, Spagunk said:

We simply have no proof whether or not the intention for power fists were there or if this was a knee-jerk reaction to social media outrage. So technically correct that it was a mistake but no clue if this because of they didn't expect a strong response or because they forgot the power fists weren't attached to the lightning claw.
 

Yes absolutely. 

We will only know if GW releases a new Tartaros set without the option for power fists. ;)

But it could really just be an editing error. We possible will never know. 

Maybe they really wanted to remove the option to give Tartaros a different role on the battlefield and the huge backlash made them act. Which also would be nice, because it would show that it actually helps if enough of us tells them off.

 

1 hour ago, Captain Idaho said:

[Snip]

 

4) Additional 2 turns. 4 turns, in a game where hiding in terrain you can't be charged as you're outside LoS and there's reactions to move you out of melee range too? Come on man!

 

I agree to most of it but may add that we already play with 4 turns over a year know and I really like that because 

A it makes people move out of their deployment zone quickly and

B most games are basically over around 3-4th turn anyway so I don't see the benefit of having to play two additional turns. 

I'd say that a good mix would be preferable instead. More different missions, some with 4 turns, some with 5 or six and some with random game length. 

Some of you may remember older editions of 40k were they gave us a whole bunch of different missions to play with and not only three. 

I miss that. 

[MagicHat]

4 hours ago, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf said:

Hummm.  I still don't understand this

"Page 212 – Psychic Weapons
Change the first sentence of the second paragraph to read:
‘A Model must have the Psyker Trait in order to make attacks with a Psychic Weapon.’ "

"Q: Are a Psychic Weapon and a Weapon with the Psychic

Trait the same thing?

A: No."

 

So,Gal Vorbak can attack.Their weapons are still marked with "Psychic" trait and they aren't Psykers. Which or what is the touch here I'm missing here?

 

Psychic weapon is using the warp to attack someone, you have to be a psyker to do so.

Weapon with Psychic trait is a physical weapon that is attuned to the warp.

 

From the Anathema special rule:

"Models with this Special Rule ignore all Damage inflicted by Psychic Weapons, Psychic Powers, Psychic Reactions or Perils of the Warp"

Can't throw mind bullets at Sisters. However, there is also this passage:

"Additionally, Wound Tests made for Weapons with the Psychic or Immaterial Trait that target any Unit that includes only Models with this Special Rule that have an unmodified result of 1, 2, 3 or 4 are never successful"

But you can hit them with a psychicly attuned stick, it just wont hurt as badly as it usually does.

 

Gal Vorbak aren't psykers, but they don't use a psychic weapon, so they can attack with their claws with the Psychic trait. Probably should have named the trait [Force] would have removed a lot of confusion.

I am sure I misspelled some words, my apologies.

[Pacific81]

5 hours ago, Matcap86 said:

 

So that's good right? GW listens to their customers and tries to adjust according to feedback? 

 

Sure; perfect round 1 would be nice, but I rather have a reacting company than one that just stonewalls for a year or 5. (Which we've also seen in the past.)

This is true, but the other side of this is actually playtesting a product so you're not having to release an FAQ on day one, as though its a video game.

Like pretty much any other game you could care to mention manages, most of which have a tiny fraction of GW's resources.

[Captain Idaho]

1 hour ago, Gorgoff said:

I agree to most of it but may add that we already play with 4 turns over a year know and I really like that because 

A it makes people move out of their deployment zone quickly and

B most games are basically over around 3-4th turn anyway so I don't see the benefit of having to play two additional turns. 

I'd say that a good mix would be preferable instead. More different missions, some with 4 turns, some with 5 or six and some with random game length. 

Some of you may remember older editions of 40k were they gave us a whole bunch of different missions to play with and not only three. 

I miss that. 

 

Oh totally agree. I meant in the current, 3.0 HH rules it's just not what we want to have 4 turns because the game is already limiting to specific methods of play substantially. Sorry wasn't clear.

Edited yesterday at 12:23 AM by Captain Idaho

[Brofist]

Looks like the FAQ settles the questions about fliers and board edges

[BitsHammer]

11 hours ago, Redcomet said:

Support your FLGS. A single box sold will make their day

Honestly why I am going through my FLGS who is only doing 10% (general discount, not Saturnine specific) over ordering it online from places offering a steeper cut.

 

They have been putting in real work to support Warhammer so I want to support them.

 

10 hours ago, Astartes Consul said:

Interesting to see this, given the slight lack of battle reports on Warhammer TV...

 

 

 

Maybe this is an attempt to get more eyes on the edition instead of paywalling the game.

[Knightsword]

How long after the box release does it normally take for Heresy stuff to get an individual release?

[Xenith]

Mk 2 and the rulebook are available right now. The new stuff will probably be 2-3 months to allow people time to buy the big box. 

[Doghouse]

I ordered some of the MK II marines to play around with Great Crusade era but will be holding off on the rest. I'm taking a wait and see approach, if HH3 works out I may dip my toe but I'm reluctant at them because as much as it pains me GW is just a product treadmill these days. 

 

I am looking forward to the Legacy and Blackshield PDFs and will decide when the picture is clearer I think.

[Mr Farson]

1 hour ago, Knightsword said:

How long after the box release does it normally take for Heresy stuff to get an individual release?

 

The termie praetor has already been seen in the wild as a boxed kit, you'll probably be able to get the remainder by end of august

[Sky Potato]

What a damp squib of an edition launch. Nothing on WarCom, nothing on YouTube. No Day One release of legends. No fanfare.

 

Compared to the launch of Leviathan - https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/4OAFR8uP/leviathan-launch-party-join-us-for-a-day-of-hobby-tips-live-battles-and-more/

[Matcap86]

39 minutes ago, Sky Potato said:

What a damp squib of an edition launch. Nothing on WarCom, nothing on YouTube. No Day One release of legends. No fanfare.

 

Compared to the launch of Leviathan - https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/4OAFR8uP/leviathan-launch-party-join-us-for-a-day-of-hobby-tips-live-battles-and-more/

 

Well there's something on warcom https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/x0zklar7/take-the-dropsite-massacre-into-your-own-hands-with-a-free-mission-and-three-battle-reports/

 

The mission from the isstvann journal tactica for free.

[Sky Potato]

That’s from yesterday though.

 

Nothing on release day yet.

[Matcap86]

Think they spent all their marketing space on the Horus hearsay stuff and the dropsite preview.