New Warhammer 40,000 Edition announced!

[TheArtilleryman]

In before “And there it is”

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/ctdexme4/warhammer-40000-the-new-edition-is-revealed-at-adepticon-preview-2026/

Show us the minis already!!!!!!

[redmapa]

Honestly this all sounds really fun, I haven't had time to play 10th but its not like the rules for terrain or missions made me feel like I was missing something in fact I thought the edition itself felt incomplete with barely any rules for terrain or the Warlord keyword doing nothing, they put all the flavor in the detachment system to make it more appealing so all these changes are right up my alley with terrain becoming more meaningful and units gaining more options in how they play.

 

James Workshop you bastard, Im in!

[Captain Idaho]

Yay for bloat -

 

 

So much for a fresh start. Colour me uninterested for an entire edition.

[TheArtilleryman]

15 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

Yay for bloat -

 

 

So much for a fresh start. Colour me uninterested for an entire edition.

I disagree - we only just had a “fresh start” with 10th. Last thing I want is for everything to be invalidated again.

[Captain Idaho]

I'd agree if the game wasn't terrible.

 

Subjective? Well that label can go in all directions.

[Son of Rawl]

This feels like 10.5 rather than a full edition. 

[Mogger351]

After watching the stream the revolution on objectives seems to be "behold, no longer stand on random circle, nay, stand on random printed card rectangle!" - unimpressed.

[Osteoclast]

4 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

After watching the stream the revolution on objectives seems to be "behold, no longer stand on random circle, nay, stand on random printed card rectangle!" - unimpressed.

Only if you’re lazy and don’t use physical terrain. Which admittedly is apparently an issue with certain tournaments based on a recent video I saw. But that’s a pre-existing issue. 
 

Quite excited for the new edition rules myself. 

[Mogger351]

3 minutes ago, Osteoclast said:

Only if you’re lazy and don’t use physical terrain. Which admittedly is apparently an issue with certain tournaments based on a recent video I saw. But that’s a pre-existing issue. 
 

Quite excited for the new edition rules myself. 

I don't see how it's any different than saying "stick terrain around the circle". I can only assume there are official GW onjecrive pieces, which in turn is a bit scummy to force 1st party objective terrain. Seems a no win situation.

[Evil Eye]

From what I've seen, it sounds like the rules are actually, dare I say it, slightly improved compared to 10th. However, at the same time 10th is such an absolute dumpster fire that anything using it as a core is going to be sub-par at best.

[Joe]

Watching the competitive community collectively pitch a temper tantrum over L-shaped ruins being taken out behind the shed - not to mention the melee and hidden changes - has made my morning.

[Exarch Telepse-Ehto]

Only one stratagem per unit per turn?! Well finally, some good news. L-shaped ruins no longer being the default terrain feature?! I don’t believe it. 70 new detachments!? Well at least 40% of them will go to space marines so not really much for my Eldar there. No more immersion-breaking mouse pads in my tabletop strategy game? Honestly no clue how to feel about that. 
 

I do think they could have went further with the stratagem thing. One per army per turn would have been better but I will accept this  decision. 

[ThePenitentOne]

Multiple detachments is interesting. I think they'll be like Combat Patrol Detachments- each giving only two enhancements and three strats, so that when they combine, you get the equivalent of a full detachment (4/6). What I wonder is whether or not the unit will have to choose which set of small detachment rules it uses, or whether all units will be able to use both. I suspect the former.

 

This has the potential to improve allied forces that already exist- Inquisition + Imperium force, GSC + Brood Brothers, CSM + Daemons, Tau + Kroot.

 

Silver lining... Because as I wrote last night, the whole "Narrative and Matched are the same" vibe makes me think Crusade is gone, which is devastating. The removal of Spec Ops from Kill Team destroyed that game for me, and I suspect that was a test run of progression removal.

[FarFromSam]

Now that they say it, objective markers made no sense, and should always have been connected to a piece of terrain.   It was a hold over from older tournament formats when everyone was able to throw down 40mm base since every table had different terrain.  The game is going towards a sterile, symmetrical system and this is a great standardization for tournament play.  Good catch GW. 

 

They have a chance to add in narration and improve tournament format at the same time.  I hope they take it. 

[Vassakov]

We really don't have enough to be able to form a solid view on anything yet. The pearl-clutching and sky-is-falling takes never fail to amuse me. We're on the 11th version of this for 40k, you'd think people would learn. 

 

The big thing is that the existing Codicies and therefore framework of the game will be broadly intact, as will how models and suchforth work. I'd expect to see most of the balance changes folded in, such as the mess that Dev Wounds now is. Instead, it looks like the changes will be focused on the rules which govern interactions, rather than the core interactions themselves. Some of them seem good, some of them are a little concerning and most are "sounds interesting but I really need to know the detail before I can form a proper judgement, rather than wildly speculating about how this is the worst thing since Calgar got a Tactical Rock." 

 

An iterative edition. Remains to be seen if "this edition could have been a dataslate" or not. 

[Orange Knight]

It sounds like a slight improvement over 10th in some ways. Especially the objectives. 

Mixing multiple detachments sounds horrific. This is even more min-maxing of rules. Before, you made a decision that boosts units in a certain way that might not be good for other options, and now you don't even have to make that compromise. 

This detachment bloat is honestly so tedious, and we're starting with a lot of baggage from the previous edition. I am trying to introduce some new friends to 40k, but 11th is not the fresh start I was hoping to hook them in with, and will carry over a lot of mess from 10th. 
 

"Hey, are you a new player? Tell me, newbie, which of the following SEVENTY detachments would you like to run your army under? Also, to get the most from your units you need to combine multiple detachments!" 

 

One personal disappointment is that the rules in 10th are pretty boring and homogenous and 11th will, as a result of being a direct continuation of 10th, remain as a pretty boring and homogenous game. 

Missions need a shake up, let's wait and see about those.

Edited March 26 by Orange Knight

[DemonGSides]

44 minutes ago, Vassakov said:

The pearl-clutching and sky-is-falling takes never fail to amuse me. We're on the 11th version of this for 40k, you'd think people would learn. 

In the grim dark future, there is only overreactions. 

[Irate Khornate]

Oh joy.... another round of bloat. Color me surprised. 

 

Par for the course at this point.

[Flaherty]

I'm hyped for a new edition, but terribly disappointed in the cinematic.

 

The 9th edition trailer set the bar so high. It painted the setting perfectly. The casting, starting with a human POV character, moving up to a SoB, and then revealing the Space Marines as saviors midway helped ground people new to the universe. The V/O did such a great job of establishing the tone – Humans are religious zealots in the far future, with access to some forms of magic or supernatural aid, facing off against evils across the universe, fighting for humanity's survival. There was nothing about Necrons in the script. Nothing about specific primarchs. It was humanity vs. everything else in an all-out struggle for survival. It's the kind of video you could show to someone and instantly pique their interest. 

The last couple of trailers have awkwardly shoehorned the launch box's name into the trailer. References to specific characters that pre-suppose familiarity with lore. The trailers for 10th and 11th are fine, but feel more like cutscene fan service than hype reels for new players. 

 

 

[ZeroWolf]

I think the 10th trailer sold the setting quite well actually, as well as the reality that the imperium was facing (even if not reflected in the narrative focuses that followed). It basically said that for every victory the imperium got, it suffered more defeats. The 11th trailer just looks like the orks are having a fun time, which is probably fitting as they are the happiest 40k race.

[Orange Knight]

I actually really like the new trailer, and I really enjoyed the Yarrick reveal trailer as well.

They don't feel quite as epic as seeing Miracles from the Emperor or a Primarch narrating a cross-planetary campaign, but it's a great showcase of the hell-hole that is Armageddon and the vast resources expended to keep it.

[Crimson Longinus]

 

I'm cautiously optimistic. Most of the changes seem positive and I think it is a good sign that they want to bring more narrative into the game and make it more immersive. 

 

Combining detachments has a risk of being bloaty, but it allows more flexibility and will probably make armies with a wider mix of units more viable, so that is nice. I hope this also means that they are bringing back proper allying, as mixed detachment could support that. 

[Dr. Clock]

Honestly the mission system is the most exciting... I do like the idea that different detachments try to achieve different things, and it's a good way to connect 'army theme' to the actual game. I wonder if this will mean secondaries are far less emphasized, or even just gone. It's funny that the mission pathing in tournaments will be unnecessary since presumably opponents need to be known before defining primaries, and indeed most games may have asymmetrical objectives based on detachments.

 

4 hours ago, Irate Khornate said:

another round of bloat

I do appreciate this take, but it also seems like it's going to be at least somewhat optional and narrow bloat, less around the mechanics in-game (which they've indicated they're trying to tighten not bloat) and more around defining the armies, battlefields and missions. I'm here for that kind of bloat tbh, because missions have felt very symmetrical for a while now, army construction is quite predictable and boring, and I do miss some of the fun of trying to fit units in to multiple detachments as part of developing army theme and narrative. The 'take whatever you want' dynamic has shaken things up for the better in how I build armies for sure, and it sounds like that's still an option, but I usually build and think of my armies in a minimum of two 'sections' with different roles. My Storm Lords would love the option to pump a proper 30-40man Battleline detachment out alongside the fast movers, and my Salamanders have always been 'Mechanized PLUS Dreadnoughts' but also sometimes 'PLUS Terminators'. Indeed, lots of us have railed against the preponderance of keyword-focused detachments effectively feeling good only when three-quarters or more of your army is built from the correct quarter of possible choices in your codex. 

 

5 hours ago, Exarch Telepse-Ehto said:

70 new detachments!?

New and updated, implies some number will be replacements of existing ones. I'm guessing the actual number of new ones will be low.

 

Currently there are 35 distinct factions listed on the webstore (Notably Red Corsairs have their own line now!). So I'd predict that the 70 will be 2 for each of those lines, and any new ones may just be for factions without two as the starting point. Edit to qualify - I forgot that they did announce some new ones like the T'au stealth and WE engine theme, so it does look like there may indeed be a good few new ones sprinkled around.

 

Anyway, just a few more months of waiting I guess. In the main I'm just kinda relieved that it's not an Index edition. 

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

 

Edited March 26 by Dr. Clock

[01RTB01]

Battleline noise marines encouraging me to build and paint that 4th squad. Here's hoping.

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Yay for bloat -

 

 

So much for a fresh start. Colour me uninterested for an entire edition.

One of the major complaints for the last decade or so is that the editions are refreshed too quickly and leads us to buy new books. 

 

I'd rather they tighten the rules currently so people that got suckered into buying codices have less regret.