Horus Heresy 3rd Edition Round Table
All of us here at the Wrong Side of the Maelstrom enjoy playing Warhammer 30k. Alys has been playing since HH 1.0, with their dope Raven Guard. Ian recently got bitten by the Heresy bug and has been working on Salamanders. As for me, HH 2.0 has been my most played table top game for the last two or so years – mainly with my Night Lords, but sometimes the forges of Stygies open up and the Taghmata walks.
So when the very on the nose GW rumour website (https://thehorushearsay.com/) appeared online, we decided to put together a small round table. Now it should be stated, we wrote this BEFORE last weeks reveal stream….. sooooooo some of our points may be a tad outdated. But without further adu!
With the drip feed of rumours (see: red herrings) at TheHorusHearsay.com, it seems like a new edition of the Horus Heresy, Age of Darkness is around the corner. How do you feel in general about a new edition of 30k? Excited? Too soon? Necessary?
Alys: Personally I think it’s necessary. 2nd edition had some great ideas, but I think some of them were implemented in an odd way, resulting in some rather glaring issues in gameplay. Reactions, especially Interceptor, I think need to be addressed, as well as the practice of taking all your saves on a Sergeant with Artificer Armor.
Ian: I definitely agree there are glaring issues that need to be fixed, but as someone who JUST finished building his 3k army, feels too early. I’m also not a fan of the 3 year edition cycle and disappointed Heresy is falling into it.
Jeff: Pretty much the same feelings as Alys. I love playing Heresy (and it’s become the game I’ve easily played the most of since 2.0 came out). I don’t think the game needs a rules overhaul but it definitely needs some cleanup/ pass over. Reactions, Artificer Armour, Dreadnoughts, some of the general balance of non-marine armies, etc.
As for the 3 year cycle. We’ll see how it turns out (or if it really does go down that quicker rules turn around). As long as the core mechanics remain somewhat unchanged, the game maintains its customization options, and it doesn’t become 9th/ 10th edition 40k with a Heresy skin, I’ll be happy. But the game really just needs an extensive FAQ in my mind (which I’m surprised we never got over the last 3 years).
Which rules do you want to see changed? Are there specific mechanics you’d like to see introduced?
Alys: I AM MANIFESTING ALTERNATING ACTIVATIONS IN THIS GAME.
Ian: I’d like to see reactions more in line with the Zone Mortalis ones: keep reaction fire to snap shots, especially. And please, please be able to charge things you don’t shoot at, that’s one of my bigger hang ups with Heresy.
Jeff: Yeah, being able to charge other targets would be fantastic. It really can lead to some weird interactions. I’d also like to see changes to reactions as a whole, and deepstrike mishaps. In the right situations rolling a disordered deepstrike assault can outright lose you a game (I had a game against a Blood Angels player whose right of war allowed all his models to deepstrike. They came down disordered, and I could place them all in the most inconvenient places – which basically meant I won the game off the one roll).
What do you hope stays the same? Are there rules changes you don’t want? Is there something you’d like to see removed?
Alys: I think the Universal Special Rules really need to stay condensed to one book. It’s a real pain to have to refer to 2-3 different large tomes in order to keep track of them. That said, I like the idea of armor values on vehicles. It promotes a specific loadout for units and models to be able to deal with them, and gives a more simulation-y vibe to the game.
Ian: Yeah, USRs could definitely be condensed (do we really need Rending and Breaching?). I was getting bent out of shape the other day about different legion-specific units get advantages (i.e. why do Justerean retinues get Legion Standards but not Firedrakes?), but after thinking about it longer, those little differences give the game more granularity, even if every legion isn’t perfectly balanced.
Jeff: 100% better record keeping of USRs is a must. Like Alys, keeping vehicle armour (and weapon orientations on vehicles) are important to me. That’s one of the things I miss most in the current editions of 40k. I’d also really like the game to keep Initiative for combat – as I like the situations it creates, and that it allows for additional weapons balance beyond tuning strength/AP/ points cost. For those that don’t know, there are rules (Reach(x) that allow a weapon to strike at a higher initiative level, and others like Unwieldy that mean you will strike in the last initiative level).
What is a new army you’d like to see supported with a plastic range?
Alys: I’d love to see more incorporation of some of the 40k Skitarii stuff to increase the variety of the Mechanicum – a lot of it is focused on the Legio Cybernetica and it’d be neat to see some diversity there.
Ian: Dark Mechanicum as a distinct army could introduce some really weird stuff to the game. The list could crossover with some loyalist units, but splashing in distinctly evil cyborgs would be awesome.
Jeff: Both of you speak my language. Seeing Skitarii brought into 30k would be really fun. But my heart wants Dark Mechanicum. And honestly, with the Legion Imperialis model releases earlier this year, I think they’ll come out eventually.
Are there specific campaigns, warzones, or stories you’d like to see covered in a black book?
Alys: Holding out for a Siege of Terra book.
Ian: I liked how they fleshed out some more obscure stuff in 2nd ed (thinking of how they did the Siege of Cthonia) and would love to see more of that. Also, I always thought the Battle of Kalium Gate from The Path of Heaven was cool: do that, GW!.
Jeff: Siege of Terra would be cool. I’d like more on the Schism of Mars (especially after how little of that book focused on the Mechanicum :P). If GW ever wanted to add Xenos factions, the civil war on Stygies and the intervention of the Aeldari would also be cool.
What do you think would make the game more accessible to new players? If you don’t play 30k, what would you like to see that would make the game more enticing?
Alys: I think that the rules being based on the 3rd-7th edition ruleset makes it inherently more complex than it needs to be. This decision seems to be simply to appeal to nostalgia, and doesn’t really serve well to onboard new players. Updating to something a bit more modern would do a lot for the game.
Ian: I’d like to see smaller game formats get official support. “Centurion”-style play seems to have a lot of traction online, would be nice if GW embraces something similar.
Jeff: +1 to emphasis on small points games also being viable. ZM is good for it, but having a “combat patrol” sized game modes that don’t take place in a unique battleground (or being t fan made) would be useful. Especially if it imposes some harsher limits like no vehicles with an combined armour value higher than 33, or limiting Artificer Armour and dreadnoughts.
What new models would you like to see released in 3rd ed? Are there specific units you’d like to see come out in plastic?
Alys: Raven Guard Praetor, pls. We’ve been very good and hardly thrown any rocks or told any swears.
Ian: Would love to see legion-specific units in plastic, though not sure how likely that is. Otherwise, Mk. 5 armour is pretty cool.
Jeff: Definitely more legion specific units (especially for those that don’t really have any). Also would love to see the Arlatex automata finally get a 28mm model!!
What do you think of the new big box?
Alys: I was not expecting plastic Mk2, as I thought that the focus seemed to be on the Late Heresy, building up to the Siege of Terra. I’m happy to be wrong about that. And by the gods, I didn’t think they could do it, but they made Saturnine Terminators look good.
Ian: The leaked images aren’t grabbing me, but the official stuff may bring me round on Saturnine. That big AA gun will be awesome for narrative games though.
Jeff: I’ve never been a huge fan of Mk2 marines, and I think that the Saturnine terminators kinda look goofy from the angles shown. But I think they might look better with some different weapon options that aren’t big megaman plasma blasters. The most surprising model I think is that turret thing. I don’t really picture static defenses as being a typical Marine tactic (outside of the Iron Warriors).
What are you most excited for with 3rd ed? Any final thoughts on the new edition?
Alys: ALTERNATING. ACTIVATIONS. Also please help out Drop Pod armies, Interceptor is starving my Ravens. 🙁
Ian: Personally, I didn’t play a ton of 2nd ed, but it really grabbed me in the last few games, so I’m hoping they just tighten up a few things and stay the course. Also looking forward to lots of Salamanders content with them being front and centre in the starter set.
Jeff: I’m excited for a new edition. Like with any new edition, figuring out fun new interactions and army lists is one of my favourite parts. Also seeing what new unit entries may show up in what I assume will be new Army List books – for new conversion material.