Get A Look At The Core Rules & Primaris Stats For Warhammer 40,000
May 27, 2017 by brennon
Games Workshop has been sharing a lot of information recently about Warhammer 40,000. To begin with we got a look at some of the statistics for the Captain & Inceptor Squad for the Primaris Space Marines...
We got to look at the power house that was the Captain in Gravis Armour. He can deal with the enemy both at range and up close and personal.
I really like the way they're working in his hero ability to effect the warriors around him. We also got to see the Inceptor Squad which are the Primaris replacement for the Assault Squad we know and love.
While I'm still in the mindset that the models should be firmly rooted to the ground, they do seem like a great unit to chuck into the mix. They are also wearing the Gravis armour and work as a good front line force.
Full Rules Leak
As well as what you see here the full Core Rules got leaked online via Grot Orderly. You can flick through the pages and find out more about the phases of the game and some of the rules for building forces too.
Make sure to give them a read and start planning out your armies.
Are you liking the new look for Warhammer 40,000?
"As well as what you see here the full Core Rules got leaked online via Grot Orderly..."
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)
Movement 10″ eh? That’s really fast for infantry unit.
They are jumptroops so 10 inches is actually slower than the 7th edition rules.
Oh right, those are jumptroops. My bad. Then again names for these guys and they regular infantry are rather similar.
so they’re constantly jumping around instead of moving ?
That’s a bit odd.
It makes them more like standard infantry with a high movement speed and an odd deployment rule.
I think having a ‘jump assault charge’ and regular movement would make them more interesting.
Guess that is a sacrifice to this new deity of slimming down rules. And then there are the lables.
Seems not unlikely that ‘keywords’ as ‘jump pack’ and ‘fly’ would indeed still trigger effects within the general rules, like ignoring certain restrictions, granting or prohibiting options or so on.
On a glance to the narrative side of this they might be considered speeding around at a certain hight instead of only rocket jumps.
From a mechanics point of view it does make sense to replace a weird jump mechanic with straight forward movement.
OTOH the jump attack was a key defining feature of these troops and now all that’s left is a 1/6 chance of an insta kill against weak troops.
btw : if you’ve ever played any fps on-line then you’ve seen these troops already. 😉
There’s people hopping like friggin’ bunnies everywhere.
Units with FLY can disengage from combat and still shoot… and since the Inceptors have Assault weapons, they can also Advance and still shoot (at penalty).
Given that they carry 2 assault bolsters each, they’re better off not charging at all – 6 Attacks at 2+/S5/AP-1 is better than 2 attacks at S4/AP0. If they do get charged, overwatch, then on next turn jump away and shoot.
You’re not obliged to move the whole 10″. The movement stat is a limit, not a target 😉
Seems like clean, no nonsense units with no potions.
Why isn’t the “shall know no fear” rule not explained on the card, but the rest are ?
That’s not consistent.
I think that ‘And They Shall Know No Fear’ is a general rule applicable to a wide range of troops, whereas ‘Crashing Charge’ and ‘Meteroic Descent’ are specific rules applicable only to the Interceptor Squad. None-the-less, i think that it would have been better to explain all the abilities ( special rules ) on the unit card regardless of whether or not they are general or specific, otherwise i think it defeats the purpose of having a unit card with this kind of information on it. I realise that if a unit has a lot of abilities then space might… Read more »
I’d add that any unit with too many abilities is a sign the game is missing something …
I liked how Flames of War 4th edition does it : any rules that affect the stats of the unit are already factored into the stats on the card.
This would mean that “no fear” rule is already factored into their morale/leadership statistic …
Unless it is situational, i,e. They only get a bonus in certain situations. Or it may be that it doesn’t affect a stat directly and gives them a different advantage by allowing a reroll or something like that
I would expect Any ability that grants a permanent bonus to a stat will already be included in the stat lines. Abilities will be situational making different troops good in different situations, which all helps add tactical depth to the game
It looks like a solid set of rules. The rebalancing of the armies is the only thing still outstanding, and many stores will have previews of the indices next weekend.
ill wait for the whole rule set first.
Death guard leaked too but hey lets all talk special marines so gw dont slap us about with c&d’s when we inevitably blether on about nothing we understand
Yep that makes sense to me
BoW have covered several GW leaks over the last few months. And I haven’t hear them mention a C&D order since I joined the site.
As of late GW have just taken leaks in their stride and worked with it.
I was talking to a store manager yesterday and he said that the new approach is to just roll with the leaks and quite often leak stuff themselves
I’m firmly of the opinion GW themselves are putting a lot of this stuff out there for people to find, while generally losing the kirby-era policy of clamping down on everything.
In the case of GW, Loose Lips probably sells a lot more models.
I am really liking the new edition. I am a casual, fluff driven gamer, so my games will be of the bring what you have type, making it easy to work a narrative in and around them. Over the next few weeks, i will be sitting down with friends and probably crafting lists from the power points on the datasheets for my army. Once we have the BRB and our armies Index book, it will fall into place quickly enough. Getting the Codex will hinge on what’s left out of the Imperial Index books.
……I have a bit of a guilty confession……I am actually slightly excited about this new version of 40k ……..I think I need to go have a shower I feel dirty.
(and the ghosts of my former 40K army “the short fat blokes” are death staring me for my lack of fidelity….. I’m sorry … I’m so, so sorry)
I hear you.
I’m not sure if I ought to buy this new thing myself given what they did to our lovely height challenged brethren.
But those new space marines do look sweet.
But you can make them proud should you get back into 8th @beardragon14 .
I am having read the items very tempted, Ork article is to blame. However the leaked rules while showing a lot of what too me are the plus points, also show in a few areas where some poor description and definition shows up, cover in particular. Now the advanced rules section might clear this up, but I just wish they would put a few examples in, add a few pages and give better clarity. Overall I am probably waivering on the side of getting it, the box is very shiny, but I just wish they would really polish their rules.
I know what you mean @dags . But my initial feeling for 8th is a lot more hopeful than it was for the entire length of 7th.
@kantor72 I gave up early 6th, didn’t get hardly games time for a bit and frankly there were better games to occupy my limited time at that point, then the quick turnaround of rules I decided it wasn’t worth reinvesting given lack of frequent play. When gaming time increased I grabbed stealer cult book and looked at a few rules for current armies, the whole thing was a mess of army building and scattered rules so I shelved the idea. 8th seems like a good jumping on point, However, I am still not 100% sold and unsure if it will… Read more »
I bumbled through 6th, just gradually feeling worse about playing 40k 🙁 . When i read 7th, i knew it was’nt for me, facing Daemon Farm was not something i wanted to do and the multiple books ( sometimes ) needed was another black mark. All of the teasers for 8th have increased my hope of getting back into what was my first love in the wargaming hobby.
I think we’re missing too much info as even the leak doesn’t show all of the pages.
Then again … this is GW and when all is said and done 40k hasn’t changed *that* much.
The one thing I’m missing is a good set of tutorials or anything that would help a total newbie get into this game.
There is the complete lack of terrain which any good starter set has these days.
As a result it will be hard to explain anything related to cover mechanics with just the material in the boxed set.
If they take any cues from Dark vengeance, Black Reach, and Battle for Macragge, there will be a set of included scenarios that walk you through each of the main rules phases.
“Then again … this is GW and when all is said and done 40k hasn’t changed *that* much.”
Indeed. I’ve seen every edition change bar one for WFB and 40K and this seems to me like a regular edition change rather than anything new. It’s a testament to the goodwill that GW have generated by acting like every other major games company that 8th ed is generating such excitement. That more recent edition changes have had just minor tweaks may also add to the feeling that 8th is something a bit more new.
That sounds very much like Heresy @redben, anything less that a gushing GW fan boy post in the affirmative will see you trolled and taunted by the faithful. LOL 🙂
To be fair to GW : they’d be damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
Perhaps with 9th edition they dare go that one step further ?
Because it’s not like they are worried about their fans having to buy everything from scratch again.
It sucks because the competition is getting better after every iteration and I’d really would like to see GW evolve their systems to modern standards.
Even D&D managed to make that happen …
It wasn’t my intention to be unfair to GW. It was more about the reception to what they’re doing rather than what they’re doing. I don’t recall a similar level of excitement to 7th or 6th, or the sense that something new was coming with the new edition. That there were incremental changes in those editions may be part of it, but I think it’s more to do with this being the first new edition of 40K by the *new* GW, and that they’re actually building up excitement for it by marketing the release like a modern company rather than… Read more »
@ultramarine40 You don’t have to like the game, and nobody minds folk saying they don’t like it, just don’t be a douche about it. For such a large entity, GW are coming on leaps and bounds compared to their actions over the previous decade. They are engaging with the community, whether their customers or vendors. They are actively encouraging YouTube channels outside of their own. They are playtesting their rules in conjunction with major tournament organisers and they are actively listening to outside opinion on their rules. I had thought BoW members had got past the “I’m salty because GW… Read more »
I’ve used ‘new’ for 8th ed, and ‘modern’ for the company. By the latter I mean they’ve abandoned their long-standing approach to marketing their products, which used to work very well, in favour of a one closer to those of their competitors. By the former I mean it in the sense of something which is recognisably a new game, rather than a regular edition change. What we’ve seen so far suggests tweaks to the existing rules, rather than an attempt to rebuild the rules from the ground up.
I’m not sure I entirely agree that this isn’t a new game, depending on how you define new. It seems to be quite a different Beast to 7th edition with lots of mechanics changing. In fact all of the main dice mechanisms seem to be totally different to 7th edition and the only thing that seems to remain the same is that it uses D6 So in that respect I think 8th Edition is far more than just a few tweaks to the rules. So in that respect I think it can be considered a new game. However, almost all… Read more »
I’ve gotta agree with @onlyonepinman here @redben . 8th looks to be the same sort of system-wide change to the core 40k mechanics as 3rd was to 2nd. Think about it, you could (more or less) take any Codex from the last 17 years and play it using the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th edition rulesets as the core mechanics have not changed overly much, just the dressing. It does speak to the goodwill GW have amassed recently though that folks have not been bemoaning (or at least not too loudly) the requirement to purchase one of the Indexes… Read more »
I wouldn’t class any of the edition changes of WFB or 40K as new games. They all take the preceding editions and change some things up. AoS is a recognisably different game to WFB whose mechanics were built from the ground up, even if they recall WFB in some respects. I don’t see the relationship of 8th to any previous edition of 40K as being a ground-up rebuild of the rules as per AoS. I would certainly agree that the previous few editions of 40K offered pretty minor tweaks and that these are of a greater magnitude, but nothing to… Read more »
And to give some more context from where I’m coming from, I’ve played every edition of WFB plus AoS. The first editions all had pretty major changes, 4th to 5th had minor tweaks, 5th to 6th has some significant changes, then thru 8th it had more minor tweaks. With possible exception of 1st, which in retrospect feels a bit like a proto-WFB, all the editions, no matter the extent of the changes, were all recognisably the same game. Much in the manner of D&D over its edition changes. The changes across the previous few editions of 40K are very minor,… Read more »
AoS, on the other hand, is a new game in comparison to WFB. Just by removing the rank & file alone you have a different game that you play differently to any edition of WFB.
Some of the many things in 8th that are very different to 7th: The way units are selected for your army (FoCs) Unit movement Unit stats (WS/BS) Morale Armour Penetration Weapon profiles / types Template use Target Priority Vehicle / Large Monster stats Universal special rules gone Learning curve New miniatures New storyline There are loads more but either way, IMO aside from WHF being ranked units, this is not far off as big a change as WHF->AoS. The dice are the same, as is the overall theme. Pretty much everything else is different in some way. Yes, it still… Read more »
I’m not saying they should re-write it. This isn’t passing judgement on what GW should have done with 8th ed and no criticism of any GW’s choices with 8th ed is implied. I respectfully disagree that the changes from 7th to 8th are of greater magnitude than the removal of rank & file in the transition from WFB to AoS. Even if nothing else changed, and it did, that on its own makes for a fundamentally different game, and one which is justified in being called a new game, separate from any edition of WFB. The change from 7th to… Read more »
Though again, no criticism is implied nor suggestion that GW should be doing something other than they’re doing.
@brennon “Are you liking the new look for Warhammer 40,000?
++++Incoming Vox+++++++ ……………………….Radio silence………………….
End of Transmission… … … …
I still can’t get past the fact that they are making larger marines.. for me space marines were always the epitome of 40k armies (I’m a tragic Eldar player).. but now they are saying that the super solider are being supplemented by some super super soldiers?! Crazy
On the rules, the game needs a rules refresh. Personally I don’t think it can get any worse, so any changes are an upside. 🙂
I think the rules haven’t matched the fluff since before 1st edition.
So instead of making sure the fluff matched the rules they’ve gone and created a version that manages to make the original looke even more pathetic.
@wtungsten a lot of people are focusing on the story of the new marines, I think the only reason they are a thing lorewise is GW wanted to do new marine models, but not make players feel the current range is being invalidated. They could of just gone new models, and they are True scale, this way it allows both in an army, but their marketting has gotten savy enough to now that would be dowsing the internet in petrol and throwing in a match. Do I expect all future marine releases to be Primaris, yep Over time will the… Read more »
I am excited by 8th, maybe it is the “new” marketing strategy (which is, lets face it, just marketing) or maybe it is that 30 years of 40K made the game seem samey every edition. This feels fresher. I am disappointed they couldn’t come up with a more innovative system, even down to going d8, to give more variety. But hey-ho, I am excited enough that 200 marines and 26 vehicles are on my painting table being re-based as we speak, ready for 8th. The Primaris thing is a pain and is clearly an attempt to sell even more space… Read more »
I was at Warhammer Fest yesterday and got to play 2 demo games using parts of the new starter box. I was very impressed by how slick the game felt and we were pretty comfortable playing within a few minutes and only had to clarify a couple of the rules written on the dataslates. My first impressions are as follows: – Very slick, plays in a similar style to AoS but keeps the 40k grittier feel. – Simplified ruleset balanced out by the depth of additional rules on the dataslates. I think that this is where the beauty of this… Read more »
It’s not unusual for the starter box armies to have balance issues against issues, so in the context of the full range it may well be more balanced.
What I would like to see is the Designers notes at the start of the rules.
The ones that explain what the dev team identified as the areas for concern , and how and why they addressed them .
This would show GW plc had changed and was focusing on game play issues.
From what I have seen the new rules , some of the underlying issues of the core rules have not been addressed.
Most other game systems have the rules completely sorted out by 3rd or 4th ed.