Thread 96147320

>What this thread is for:
/tg/ gets shit done again and is creating a “Battle Bible” (Ala 2nd edition) for 4th edition Warhammer 40k.
>What this thread isn’t for:
Alternative ideas for what 4th edition could include, such as alternating activations, new unit ports, etc. This is a Stage 4 process and so there's plenty of time for that later on.
Don't engage edition warriors, trolls and rule revisionists. We're trying to keep it tight; mannered and objective focused.

BATTLE PLAN:
Stage 1:Finish revising and formatting the SRD.
Stage 2:Compile all GW official erratas into the SRD.
Stage 3: Condense all the codices into up to date SRD. - pending
Stage 4: Make a Hobby Enthusiast supplement for the SRD.
Stage 4: Make an Optional Rules supplement for the SRD.

HOW TO HELP:

> Help to update the SRD:
1. Check the latest 4th Ed. SRD here:
v0.98A: drive. google .com/file/d/1KwK1cKvi6J-_38eTp5YRXbzWJvYtmJhA (remove spaces)

Changelog: drive.google.com/file/d/1yLBkFdcigJMjE7s3i8nzuanSt11uTbh52.

Look for any typo, errors, missing rules or dense writing style.
Make sure your recommendation wasn't already posted here:
drive. google. com/file/d/1xP-gIraW1DThssvvtE58YeTd3yDxwyzp/ (remove any space)
Leave your recommendation on the SRD pdf directly by leaving a comment in google drive

- Servo-Gifted anons:
> Get on the Github: github. com/pepsi41999/4ebattlebible.git

- Holo-Gifted anons:
> Get in touch with Inkwash anon >>95934508

RESSOURCES:
Original 4th Ed. Rulebook:
mega. nz/folder/1DMxURza#iLn0OuQ8AVGl4XJvU8J4Ig

FAQs & Erratas :
mega. nz/folder/p95WHYiY#2TZFnrI1vbRtjRSQLWNuYg

3rd/4th era trove:
mega. nz/folder/p95WHYiY#2TZFnrI1vbRtjRSQLWNuYg/folder/pxhlwZZS

4th edition compilation by anon:
mega. nz/folder/PEcnVC5Y#BGZlNvCNOoC2_ZFdw_5KoA

>All codices are claimed and are being worked on, and are being archived as they are posted. we will format and proofread these after the core is done.
>current pending codices: Tau, Daemonhunters, Witch hunters, imperial guard
>IF you can no longer commit to finishing your codex, due to life getting in the way or whatever, please inform the thread so someone else can take up the mantle.

Current transcribed codex data is here: https://mega .nz/folder/5SxSAbTK#xTn9hz0PGp1_kMYT0SZXuA

NuSRD anon here, still away for holiday but keeping an eye on the threads. You guys are doing awesome, the Codices keep pilling up.

TauAnon here - I've been a lazy motherfucker, but I am scratching away at the Tau dex.

Am I right in thinking the Kroot Merc list will be separate, and I shouldn't include it in here?

>>96147320 (OP)
Where to find Battle Bible Codices?

>>96147826
I don’t think any are done yet? We are still transcribing them

>>96148134
Ah okay, sorry, my mistake

>>96148212
the rough versions of the ones done so far are here:

https://mega .nz/folder/5SxSAbTK#xTn9hz0PGp1_kMYT0SZXuA

>>96148413
Thanks a ton for the link anon.

>>96147329
Should be 4e catachans. It's the third edition codex updated for 4th ed and the 3.5 guard codex.
The biggest difference I noticed when I was skimming through is that you can't take them in codex guard armies anymore, but that was FAQd out with the 3.5 codex anyway.

Last thread people made me aware that Prohammer is a thing. It looks neat. Has anyone here played it? Battle Reports are basically impossible to find of it, I found like one 1hour video with triple digit views and that's it.

>>96149695
What's prohammer?

Should I remake this thread with a proper subject and somewhat related image?

>>96149840
>Should I remake this thread with a proper subject and somewhat related image?

Image is perfect, no changes. You could do a title if you want, but not needed IMO.

Here's a picture from a 4 way 4th edition King of the Hill game that some friends and I played. We got the rules from a WD, but changed it to a random player going first every turn.

Game is fun. We had some open areas, but area terrain like forests also creates a lot of good no-shooting areas. In some ways you need less terrain because of no true LOS.

>>96139630
Fixed and updated, thank you.

>>96148659
Not being an IG player myself, this was something i was not aware of

To the Anon transcribing the imperial guard, here is a copy of codex catachans to use from 4th edition, i checked the publication date and it is 2005, so definitely before the cutoff. please alter the existing data using this.
https://mega .nz/file/FfQBHbJQ#9caHqyixTyiIkkdkprj4YOuzCDR9gwrzmIIB3K2TKv4

>>96149695
I have. It’s actually my buddies and I’s preferred system over anything else. 4E is too vanilla and limited for our tastes and GW just cranked the retard level further and further for 5th and beyond, so Prohammer provides a nice alternative.
The biggest flaw with it is allowing any codex from 3rd to 7th to be used. It tries its best to roll back the biggest excesses of 6th-7th in terms of special rules (it overrides them with universal special rules found in the core rulebook) and outright deletes unique formations from the game. But it has no means to solve the point cost power creep and you can still definitely tell how different the game plays just based on the codexes used. That’s why we stick to 3rd to 4th edition codexes up to Tau and why I’m so thrilled with the work the thread has done in compiling all the information into one place. It’s a huge help.

I should also mention that the Prohammer creator *did* try his hand at developing a couple of codices for it. He did an okay job with Nids (he just backported a bunch of stuff into their 4E book) but he attempted it with Votann and that book just demonstrates why anything after 8th can never be allowed lol.
>>96149789
5th Edition core rules fork, generally emphasizing additional simulationist elements to the gameplay without compromising the core of what 40k is.
You can read the guy’s entire design philosophy here
https://www. dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/796101.page

>>96149789
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/796101.page

>ProHammer Classic is an attempt to build a unified ruleset that unites the best of 3rd through 7th edition, utilizing 5th edition as the starting point. In addition to integrating and refining rules from across editions, new rules unique to ProHammer are incorporated where it creates deeper and richer gameplay, making this “classic” 40k the best game it can be.

Pic summarizes the broad-strokes changes

>Thats a lot of words, just give me a one sentence summary
4e meets 5e plus changes to make the game gooder

>>96151868
>>96149789
>>96149695
This is not a prohammer thread, despite some similarities. Different project. going into stuff like this was one of the reasons fourk got derailed last year. Please make a different thread if you wish to discuss it

>>96153957
Didn't mean to interrupt your dead thread here officer
Lmao

>>96154060
>dead thread
>a group of anons successfully collaborated to create a rulebook and almost all of the codices are finished

There's nothing wrong with talking about prohammer or fourk or whatever offshoot, but please realize that the only reason we've been able to make as much progress as we have is because we've just been laser focused on getting what has been published into an easier to read format.

Think of this project as the foundation for anything else you'd like to run. But houserules and homebrew are not the goal of the 4th Battle Bible project.

>>96151836
Personally, I think it's kind of an impossibility to *backport* Votann, because there's nothing to backport *to*. You're essentially having to scratchrule the LoV in an era where they didn't exist, and if you want the faction to fit the spirit of 3/4, then the end result simply isn't going to be the LoV you'd started with.

>>96154291
most newer units could be given stats within the confines of the 4th edition system without too much difficulty aside from the point cost and adjusting to fit the era.

Personally, I don't think the Leagues have a place in 40K, let alone older editions of 40K.
I get that you might want to be gunning for inclusivity for the betterment of all, but I feel as though the Leagues are at odds with the spirit of 40K and bending over backwards to include them in this project would be a detriment. But that's just me.

>>96154738
What about them makes you feel like they're at odds with the spirit of 40k?

>>96155085
Their technology which is so hyper advanced is also aged and defunct. They clone with reckless abandon. They flirt with AI when that was previously the Tau's conceit. Their aesthetic is generic space dwarf when their Necromunda Squad counterparts are excellent. Even their newest hero is just a "I survived the Nids" when that was Calgar's claim to fame having lost all four limbs to the beast.
They just feel antithetical to good 40K in my eyes.

>>96154654
I think he more means that LoV are emblematic of the modern GW design philosophy at all levels - rules, fluff, aesthetic - and in order to create a version of them that feels right in the context of 4th you'd have to butcher all of those aspects so much they wouldn't be recognisable anymore. 4th is still the era where "Dark Age STCs" are exemplified by the Rhino and other commonplace/shared vehicles, rather than being a completely distinct NASApunk-cum-mecha anime design language. Maybe DAoT tech really did look like that, but it doesn't belong *in* 40K, the age of farm equipment turned into tanks & mechs and cavalry charges with actual literal horses.

Besides we already know what "4th edition LoV" ie Squats updated for that era's design philosophies would have looked like: the Demiurg.

>>96153957
Anon asked a question and I replied. It was like 5 posts, calm down

>>96155534
there was a lot of posting about it last thread as well. No disparaging people from talking about it, I just don't want to distract this thread from its purpose by talking about an entirely separate project.

>>96155473
>Demiurg
NTA, but are there any official artworks for their appearance?

>>96147747
Take your time anon, it's Summer and we all deserve a break. Pretty sure Kroot should be in tho.

>>96155734
i think Battlefleet Gothic Armada has some basic, remarkably dull ship designs.

>>96156241
That's all? Grim.

>>96155734
There was a single concept sketch by Jes, you can see it on the 1d6chan article for them.

Ink wash anon here. Inks haven’t arrived yet but I got myself some proper white primer so I’ll be doing that for the mechanicus gw bases and for some em4 minis. The diy ink wash page I have in my head should have example pictures of the ink wash on a base and on a model. In this case em4 bulk plastic dwarves.

>>96156394
Huh, can't find it. Thanks anyway.

>>96156418
That's some really good news. Say sorry to the Canadian post! You guys are always sorry anyway.

>>96156418
>em4 bulk plastic dwarves.

Godspeed, anons working on this project. You are doing the Emperor's work.
A few friends asked me to show them 40k, and I want to try using 4th ed, space marines vs orks. Would 1000 points be small enough to not be overwhelming but have enough room to show off some of each army's special toys?

>>96156531
1k is good for showing them the game without it taking forever, if you're just showing it to them you don't want to take 3+ hours to do it.

>>96156531
Give them a taste of the game through 4th Editions Combat Patrol. Page 182 of the Rulebook.
Armies are no larger than 400pts
Minimum Requirement is One Troop choice.
HQ are optional. No named characters, no 2+ saves, no more than two wounds per model, no vehicles with a total armour greater than 33, no Ordinance and played on a 4x4 space.

My brother and I play Combat Patrol all the time and it's a fast/fun way to get your 40K fix. Especially good for intro games.

>>96156610
>>96156879
Thank you fellas, I'll try a combat patrol first to see if they're interested before a bigger game. I'll try to get pics of the game this weekend to share.

>>96156438
>type "demiurg 1d6chan" into search
>first result

>>96156531
Ime 650 is the right into game but you have to cheat a little bit with unit size minimums sometimes, like 3 terminators instead of 5. A 1000 point game should take about 3.5 - 4 hours, longer if you are teaching. Also don’t have them list build. You should do that for them. Heck I don’t even bother with points normally except to double check roughly that the cools models I pull out are about equal.

Also we forgot to link the last thread >>96069168

>>96151868
>5th ed as a basis
Doesn't take rocket appliances to know this would end up poorly.

>>96160899
Was it 5th that had the wound spread? As a result you had annoying things like the ork nob biker squads that could spread the damage across the entire squad.
So in order to remove 1 model from a squad of 10 models with 2 wounds you need to make 11 wounds before a single model got removed.

>>96161099
yep

>>96158267
My bad I was looking at Votanni stuff

>>96157094
Have fun homie.

>>96160899
>Doesn't take rocket appliances to know this would end up poorly.

You know, it's kind of funny. I grew up playing 5th, but reading back on it now, 4th edition is so much better. It's just that my friends and I screwed up a bunch of 4th edition rules so it wasn't as good as it should have been.
5th was the beginning of the end.

Can someone explain to me why 4th edition is so much better regarded than 5th? I love 5th.

>>96161999
The quick an dirty is that about 75% of the differences favor 4th ed. keeping in mind that fundamentally the editions are rather similar so many of these differences may be or seem minor but they can add up. Some examples being:
>combat resolution mechanics
>mixed saves/complex units rules
>area terrain rules
But there are some things 5th does better too such as defensive weapons are now s4 and below instead of s6 or less.
Of course there are some things many people don’t agree about. I think the very best parts of 5th Ed are the blast, running, and rapid fire changes. But there is another anon here who hates them and spergs out anyone someone mentions them.

>>96161099
I believe Prohammer has actually removed that

>>96163171
>Running
>Rapid Fire changes
What happened here?

>>96164374
>4th ed
You can’t run by default. Units with fleet can run. You can fleet and charge.
Rapid fire is 1 shot half range if you move.
>5th Ed
Everyone can run. Fleet let’s run and and charge.
Rapid fire can shoot twice half range even if you move.
>6th ed
All units can run. You cannot run and charge. Fleet let’s you reroll runs and charges.
Rapid fire is always twice half range or once max range, movement has nothing to do with it.

6th ed has the best rapid fire rules.

>>96164664
>even if you move
It doesn't explicitly say that, are you sure that's how it works?
>Fire twice at up to 12", or remain stationary and fire once up to maximum weapon range

>>96164713
You are right! I mixed up 3rd and 4th ed (which is the same as 5th Ed actually now that I double check). In 3rd you cannot shoot twice at 12” if you move.

My last error is that it’s not half range until 6th Ed, it’s once at max range, or twice at 12” no matter what (so fuck tau lol).

>>96163171
Dunno if I'd go so far as to sperg out about it, but I sincerely do dislike the running changes. Devalues Fleet, devalues transports, reduces the need to plan ahead, and minimises what was a pretty significant differentiator in an edition with no Move stat.

>>96165521
I like it because of the adds tactical flexibility to the turns and helps reduce the need for critically perfect deploymen; losing before the game even starts cause of a bad deployment is second only to losing in the list building phase in terms of not the most fun. But more so that I think running makes infantry move at a more appropriate speed for the table size and turn quantity. It’s weird to think that a unit, who may have wanted to stand still to shoot their heavy weapon once can’t move half the length of the board by the time the game ends.

And thematically I like the abstraction that a standard move is the speed at which a unit can move and properly operate their guns, as in a careful advance rather than an all out sprint.

But also transports are so powerful id settle for runs just to make them worse. Full mech was just the dominant way for so long.

>>96154091
It took you tremoring housebound shits two months to copy+paste a couple of pdfs. "Create a rulebook" lol lol la mayo.

so for the sake of The Battlebible. it is only stitching 4e and 3e together, fifth edition is being left out in its entierty yeah? so I cant pimp out my knobs or have ALL THE CHAOS DEMON characters for a Demons of Chaos army?

>>96165521
So you played a gunline army and one of your friends played Tyranids. Gotcha.

>>96167339
Nta but as a kid I played tau and my friend played nids. We could not figure out how he was supposed to ever win, and I mean like we sat down together poured over the codex and tried to come up with a viable list. Maybe it had to do with that we played on an 8’ ping pong table and couldn’t read lol. But in fairness I never beat my brothers eldar a single time. 4th ed tau blew chunks they are so bad. Praise Jeremy for finally making fusion guns range 18. Curse Jeremy for making railguns strength 8….

>>96167406
I would guess you lacked two things:

- enough cover save-granting terrain
- any LoS-blocking terrain

>>96167439
Even with plenty of terrain (lincoln logs, wooden blocks, train track stuff) but a carnifex moving 6” a turn takes like 8 turns to cross that much dead zone lol. We just didn’t follow the rules cause no one ever bothered to read that part of the rule book, it was all word to mouth cause we were dumb kids.

>>96167339
Actually I played Blood Angels in 2nd and Black Templars, Catachans, Eldar, and Inquisition in 3rd & 4th. I just like my games to require me to think for more than ten seconds about how to win instead of lining everything up and zerging mindlessly right into the middle of the table to moshpit like a dumbass.

>>96167192
I strongly disagree, deployment is distinct from listbuilding as it's part of the actual game on the tabletop and it should impact your chances of victory. As to choosing to shoot vs being able to traverse the whole table - yeah that's the point? Not being able to run creates tradeoffs that you have to plan around; you can gain firepower at the expense of maneuver, you can gain maneuver at the expense of points(transports) and risk(your transports might get blown up with your dudes inside), or you can compartmentalize your approach and take units focused on firepower and units focused on maneuver(cavalry, fleet).

And I don't know what your meta was like but 4th was absolutely not a "powerful transports" edition. Rhinorush was a 3rd strategy and only seemed "dominant" because of how common Marines are. 4th made that less prevalent and also toned down stuff like Falcons and Waveserpents, in fact I think the only really "transport focused" memelist was Tau leaning into Fish of Fury and Tau were hardly that common. Transports weren't "meta" again until the middle of 5th when the tournament stankmonsters realized how much more resilient mech armies were and started using Leafblower Guard and the like.

>>96168649
I like your explanation for why running shouldn't be a thing. You've convinced me.

>>96169190
Sir, this is an internet, we serve snarky bile here.

>>96164774
>so fuck tau lo
All you needed to say homie!

>>96168649
Like I said a difference in opinion. I think that infantry’s movement speed of 6” does not best suit the scale or board size. You do not like how it makes them faster. Nothing I or you can say to change each other’s mind. I think we have repeated the same talking points every thread.
But your points are wrong and mine are right aye lmao got heem.

My meta was “if you don’t put your entire army in transports then Tiberius is going to Fear of the Dark them off the table on turn one” :(

>>96167406
>We could not figure out how he was supposed to ever win, and I mean like we sat down together poured over the codex and tried to come up with a viable list.

If you want to play them "competitively", you either go heavy monstrous creatures with a lot of shooting, or you do a lot of genestealers. Most of the time against Eldar and Tau and whatnot, you need more of the monstrous creature shooting.

Carnifexes are best played with the VC/Strangle setup. I also recommend the biomorph that gives them an additional wound for 15 points. IIRC 163 points has them at BS3 with enhanced senses, 5 wounds, 2 str10 shots, and a str8 large blast.

Railguns, lascannons, plasma, etc feels less bad when you had the 5th wound and if you're in ruins or other decent cover you're getting a 4+ save

Melee carnifexes are best played cheap, if taken at all. I tend to play pretty casually so sometimes I run a suped up melee carnifex with all the fixings like regen, tusked, etc.

Now granted if you're playing on a ping pong table then yeah basically nothing a cc opponent can do.

>>96170865
Oh, you're a Specialcharacterfag, that explains a lot.

Got three more books on the mail today. My 3E collection is almost complete now. Thought you might get a kick out of it.

>>96170991
So as kids we always played with 12” deployments, no matter what instead of playing with a 24” dead zone like you are supposed to. And we always played with all the good tall ruin terrain in the deployment zones. My brothers Neil tan dark reaper troop choices always just outranked and gunned down all my tau.

>>96171095
Dude I was like 11 years old ease up.

>>96172664
Are those the translations that had the distances in centimeters?

>>96172664
All I can think about looking at that is everyone behaving like the Spanish Buzz scene from Toy Story 3.

>>96172664
I will henceforth and forevermore refer to my friend's Necrons as "Necrones" in the most stereotypically offensive Danny Trejo impression I can pull off. He's of Mexican extraction and not a fag so he'll probably piss himself laughing. I did get a kick out of your collection thanks anon.

>>96172664
>El Primaris De Abominación
>Del Legiones De Squates Atrocidad
>De Espacio Yiffs Del Marines Chapter
Damn bean goblins don't pull any punches

>>96172664
>COMBATEEEEEE UUUURBANOOOOOOOOOOO

>>96147329
Did we take into UK retarded actions? I really hope non of the anons working on this are from the UK and affected by this

>>96175101
TauAnon here. I'll just have to use a VPN I guess.

>>96175232
You can't post from them chief. Assuming that isn't a troll, we'll be able to view the site through a VPN but the captcha shits itself and won't load with every VPN I've tried.

>>96175842
tested out of curiosity, captcha loads but doesnt post. guess its over for us yookay anons

>>96175842
>>96175888

TauAnon again. Yep I was having the same problem desu. I was hoping that I might be able to find a way around it, but perhaps not. And I just tried again, and couldn't get it to work.

Welp, guess I'm no longer TauAnon then - no point me doing it if I'm never gonna be able to post what I've done.

Anyone else want to take over the mantle?

Also, while I am still able to post - does anyone want to have a game of 4th on Tabletop Simulator? I am fucking hankering for a game, but there is no one in my area who plays.

>>96173309
The 40K books published on Spain until 2010 or so had all measures converted to the metric system, same with WHFB, LOTR, Necromunda... I think GW did the same with the french, german and italian books. But the actual measurements are the same. The only weird change is when you have to randomize measurements, like when fleeing or when running with fleet. There it gets wonky, because 2D6'' doesn't have the same distribution as 5D6 cm. But if everyone uses the same translation then it doesn't matter much.

Actually I also own the spanish translation of Rogue Trader, and in that book all measurements are "converted" to metric using 1'' = 2 cm, which basically cuts all measurements by 1/3.

>>96174515
I don't get what you're trying to say here.

>>96168649
>transports aren't meta in 4th
Also anon, a lot of armies cant just stick anything and everything in a vehicle. Orks as an example, they cant just stick guys in trukks, there are limitations on how many vehicles you can deploy and what kind. There were special army lists that could allow you to mobilize armies thst were otherwise immobile, but this is what made them unique. It was the exception and not the rule, it was soulful rather than meta.

>>96170865
Anon, i don't understand how running would some how help your hypothetical. I can just shove my ultramarines and tiberious in drop pods. Youre still losing dudes to the table edge run rule or not.

>>96176083
In my country we had the rules in spanish and english so we had both system coexisting.
It was fun little mess.
Never really understood why the changed the measurements to metric when every single measuring tool we have came with both systems

>>96176008
>Anyone else want to take over the mantle?
Chaos anon here, I'll do it.

>>96175101
Aw shit were gonna take a bad hit from this.

>>96147320 (OP)
Inkwash anon here. I'm also sad that were gonna lose our Brit-posters.
The inks finally arrived. I use black to darken washes, and Daler Rowney black inks seem way more darkening than Liquitex.
So I'll be spending a lot of time and tissue paper on the ceramic tile making test ink mixes.

Does anyone have an actual link to the Exile of the Bongs post? Because the jannies keep deleting images of it and I'm starting to dare to hope it's some black-as-bog bloody Irisher trying to mess with us.

>>96178293
Google tg archive
First link
Search the thread.
> https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/

>>96176161
Oh it wasn’t, I was just regaling the tale of my childhood tau getting buttfucked by exactly that, Tiberius in a drop pod cause it’s funny and I wanted to lighten the mood. The only defense was to put every single unit in a transport. But I picked that story as sort of a sideways jibe at how the other anon said transports are bad.

If you want another example in favor of running, and admittedly I don’t really want to keep arguing about because like I said, you literally cannot change my mind and I literally cannot change his, I would point to how 5th Ed, the edition that notably added running, was nicknamed the rhino rush razorback parking lot edition. Transports were so good and got cheaper too I think (unless you are tau then you get the most expensive and worst transport In the game cause lol fuck me). But maybe that’s not even really and argument for running so much as it’s pointing out that transports were just undercoated for their value?

I like running. I like scattering blast templates, and I like 6th Ed rapid fire rules. Simple as.

So let’s argue about something else. Defensive weapons should not go up to s6. It’s totally rediculous to include heavy bolsters and star cannons as defensive weapons. 5e changed defensive weapons to s4 which much better suits the image of like a BAR mounted to a tank pintle.

>>96178395
No not the bait thread, the actual supposed post by 4chan saying this is happening.

Hello anons, I'm watching this project with interest. Question though, just out of interest, what influenced the decision to go for a SRD and not some sort of lightweight app like tow.whfb.app?

>>96167406
>we played on an 8’ ping pong table
ah, those were the days

>>96179430
I personally know how to make a document. i don't know anything about making an app.

>>96179430
Nigger I'm a grog do I look like I know how to program an app?

>>96179430
Get thee hence, spawn of the pit, thou devilish techno-sorcery shall gain no purchase here.

>>96179430
I don't think anybody here knows how to code even if a gun was held to the head.
We must resort to archaic means like pen and paper in these parts.
Rip Battlescribe.

So is brexit happening, or was it a meme?

>>96147320 (OP)
Is the main head of this project a Brit? Are we fucked?

Fuck it:
Roll call. Who's gonna still be here after Bongs go bye-bye?
I know inkwashanon is Canadian so he might still be here to continue the tradition of books having hobby sections.

>>96179430
Don’t know how, and would prefer a pdf than any app truth be told. List building with pen and paper is so relaxing.

>>96181031
Github anon here

>>96181031
I'm the anon who did the nids codex, still here

So it's 1pm on the 26th, it was horseshit.

>>96179900
>>96180144
>>96180217
>>96180449
>>96181868
Cheers lads, I guess I thought there would be more of a crossover between warhammer grogs and software developers. I am firmly in that crossover and would love to give making a searchable rules app a go, but it's a much bigger undertaking than it probably looks and sadly time does not permit at the moment. Maybe later this year.
Like I say though it was just out of curiosity, I think the srd is looking great so far. Really appreciate your work.

>>96181868
>would prefer a pdf than any app truth be told. List building with pen and paper is so relaxing.
Since 2007 I've used excel of all things for all my list building, but I still enjoy poring over the old codices to do so rather than using one of the apps that lays out the choices and points for you, so I completely get the sentiment friend.

>>96181031
NuSR anon here. Not working actively on it right now due to Holidays but I'm not a prisonner of his majesty so no pressure on my side.

>>96183174
A big part of this project is just getting all the stuff into plain text. After which it shouldn’t be too hard to go in that direction later on if someone has the wherewithal ?

Inkwashanon here.
Doing some more tests. Just to let you guys know and for something for me to remember is that most artist ink producing companies seem to mark the opacity of their inks.
For instance when it comes to black ink, Daler Rowney is opaque. And Liquitex is semi-opaque.
>pic related
Now this can be a good thing if you think that DR's black ink is too darkening then liquitex's black ink might be better.
Or really any black ink from an acrylic ink company that says that their ink is semi-opaque.
I made a strong-tone looking ink by mixing liquitex black ink with DR's burnt umber. I think strong tone was meant to mimic devlan mud which I think was from the era.
>>96182050
>>96182391
Let's hope the head of this project will still be here.

>>96185172
What's lightfastness?

We're past the deadline(midnight the 25th) in every possible timezone now so either the site has been hacked again or it was just a troll. Pretty sure 4chan as a legal enitity doesn't exist in a meaningful way anywhere that would let the UK sue them or enforce any fines levied by a UK regulator or court, so we'll probably have to wait to be free of our addiction to this hellsite until someone reports them, they tell the UK to fuck off, and the UK ban the url like they do torrent sites.

>>96185441
Resistance to UV fading the colour over time.

>>96185172
As long as you stick with the matte medium and flow aid water mix things should be fine.
It is the ink part where experimentation room is located.

>>96181031
Ork anon here. This doc is written in freedom language, armor not armour saves. No fear of losing me unless we lose the site to payment processors blocking it.


On another note, I have finally played 4th for the first time in many years. The mission was Recon, and it was a great time, orks had a solid victory against the space wolves, I was able to block them from the deployment zone with heavy DAKKA and a tarpit of Boyz. The dice were on fire, but strategy also played a part. For the anon who had less luck than I did when they played against marines; yes, normal Boyz vs marines are not much more than a speedbump. I lost a full unit of 30 and only took out 3 of his blood claws in 3 turns of combat (granted they were shoota Boyz in close combat). If you're fighting marines, you've got to make up for that difference in power by staying in open-topped vehicles, and shooting the everliving shit out of any on-foot unit. Point that front armor to them so they can't hit back unless they have something heavy. Prioritize your targets and hit the stuff that'll cause the most problems first (in my case, it was a unit of long claws on a roof. I was able to wipe them out with a battlewagon filled with flashgitz)

photoshopbong here, no VPN so not sure how although I left the tab open. It feels like they changed the locks while im still inside robbing the place.

>>96189093
I can see ya anon. They might not have banned it because a) they don't associate 4chan with porn, b) the reveal that a lot of mods and nannies have .edu and .gov emails supports this whole place is a psyop and they prefer us here or c) the don't care.

We'll see, but it's good to have you here for now at least

>>96185172
Made two ink washes.
One is a black wash being 10 daler rowney drops to keep the wash soft bodied for my goals.
And the other one is 18 drops of daler rowney sepia and 2 drops of daler rowney black ink, and it looks like Devlan Mud which I've seen being compared to ArmyPainter's strong tone.

I think the rule of thumb for making softbodied acrylics is "20 drops or less" here.

>>96191853
Forgot to add to the post.
I appreciate feedback.

>>96191853
>Devlan Mud
Hnnnnngggg muh nostalgia

>>96192102
I was serious when I said that strong tone might be a mimic of devlan mud.

>>96192142
oh shit for real? I just ordered a bottle yesterday thinking it was just a generic brownish wash.

>>96192418
It would seem so but those were the old recipe washes.
I think you should be alright though.

bump

So are our Brit contributors still here or what?

The Perfidious Albion is standing strong. We'll have to send our best champions on this crusade.

>>96192702
Looks absolutely identical to me.

Working on designing a unit entry parser in python and associated *slightly* formatted but otherwise plaintext information storage format that will be as flexible as I can think of without it adding more work than just typing shit out the hard way.

Right now Im working out all the pieces that need to be kept track of. I have the idea to completely remove any latex from the backend so that maybe an appdev could take this info and format it into an wiki or something.

>>96199022
While I'm not confident enough with my experiences of the 3/4 era to contribute, I am still able to post. Personally, I don't expect this whole thing to last beyond the year at max.

>>96201700
T-Thanks for not giving up on us Senpai!

NRAnon here
Should be FINALLY getting down to the Feral Orks now that I'm done with my cleanup detour
Lootas were fucking torture to get working right

The Brit purge really fucked things up for us didn't it?

>>96208223
I think the brit bong be gone was a hoax? Googling it gives no results.

>>96208434
No, it's real
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/24/what-are-the-new-uk-online-safety-rules-and-how-will-they-be-enforced
>Companies within the scope of the act must introduce safety measures to protect children from harmful content. This means all pornography sites must have in place rigorous age-checking procedures. Ofcom, the UK communications regulator and the act’s enforcer, found that 8% of children aged eight to 14 had visited an online pornography site or app over a month-long period.
>Social media platforms and large search engines must also prevent children from accessing pornography and material that promotes or encourages suicide, self-harm and eating disorders. This has to be kept off children’s feeds entirely. Hundreds of companies are affected by the rules.

>>96208223
most everyone working on it is not from there. for me Its just a slow week for me finishing daemonhunters as work takes priority and the heat is absolutely draining. Not sure about the other codex anons, iIts possible some might require restarts if the people working on them are cut off.

If anyone working on a codex currenly can reply and give an update, it would be appreciated

>>96208983
Jesus christ on a bicycle, that's not what he's talking about. There was a troll image being posted that purported to be an actual statement *from 4chan* that they *definitely would* be closing off access to the UK - several days ago. I'm still here. We're all still here. It was clearly bullshit. Can we move the fuck on please.

>>96209697
My bad, carry on and think of England then.

>>96209652
WHanon here, still alive

>>96154738
How would Leagues not fit? They don't have flyers or super heavies

>>96212709
Half their range is just trash looking (and not the space nasa half). They pollute the game.

It’s too bad GW chicken ed out and didn’t follow through with their originally idea (the one the first posted on warcom) about the votan being a bunch of fucked up muted descendants of bioengineered purpose built wage slaves. A bunch of phenotypically different dudes could actually be cool, like the kroot mercenary list.

>>96212709
I think they just won't.

>>96212709
They simply have no place in Warhammer.

>>96212709
Tonally, thematically, and aesthetically they aren't "4th-y" enough. This is something a lot of people writing for existing IPs just don't comprehend for some reason, especially older ones: if you're adding to a thing that already exists, what you add shouldn't feel like it was added, it should feel like it was always there - a new person exposed to the work for the first time shouldn't ideally be able to pick out your addition from the rest if told additions were made.

Everything about LoV *squeals* modern GW, if you changed them enough to "fit" 4th you'd be as well starting from scratch. For my personal headcanon I just ended up locking "proper" Squats away in the galactic core; they settled there in the DAoT, got trapped inside by Shit Happening during the Age of Strife, started to colonise outside it again as Strife ended, then encountered the Imperium and some dickhead from the Mechanicum basically yelled MINE and started a Compliance war that had the deep core Squats say Fuck That Then and seal up the stable routes they'd used to get out. The few leftovers from the colonies accepted Compliance at the barrel of a gun and became second class citizens in the Imperium.

Lets you chuck in the odd Squat character or do a retro-style Squat Mercs army without having to deal with all the bullshit.

>>96213298
>>96213363
>>96213506
>>96213751
So model aesthetics autism, I thought you had legitimate gripes about the units being hard to port rules-wise. Good to know

>>96213906
>I thought you had legitimate gripes about the units being hard to port rules-wise
That too. Their rules are at odds with 4th sensibilities and just because "that would make them special" doesn't mean they should be included.

>>96213943
>Their rules are at odds with 4th sensibilities
How so? That was what I was trying to ask with my original question, should have been more specific

>>96214290
Big on Judgement Tokens and Mortal Wounds are what pop out from the top of my head.

>>96214290
I think part of that gameplay wise, is that they dilute the game a bit. The fact that Tau have Str 5 guns on their basic infantry is actually a really big deal in 4th, no one else has that and it's actually meaningful. If you have Kin Warriors running around with their high Str high AP Ion Blasters, I think it would mess with the game balance, which I think is in quite a good state at the exact time we've chosen to focus on.

I personally don't have as much of an aesthetic issue with them, I don't think they're that far out of the pale from 4th. Or at least I haven't seen a good argument about this.

Lore-wise, they're kinda shit. Like, go read their 1d6chan article. They hunt Tyranids, mine suns, and Necrons are scared of them. Like, fuck off, that just reeks of modern GW's ass writing, and also "we need to make this new race relevant in the lore".

>>96214894
>that just reeks of modern GW's ass writing
NTA but it really does. That being said, I dig this piece of art, it just doesn't feel like something from 40K at all. It's like a micro Galactus.

>>96214918
Demiurg are supposed to be Votan and their ships do not share the visual design.
It is clear that guys who made the modern space dwarf didn't think about what already existed and rush the connection between the Leagues and the Demiurg

>>96215065
I friggin LOVE the look of Demiurg ships. It's a shame there's no common through line in the design of the Leagues.

>>96213906
If you seriously consider basic principles of working with existing IP to be "autism" this place is not for you, you already have a perfect game that is, literally, made for you: 10th 40K. How about you fuck off back there and leave us in peace.

>>96213906
Porting is easy. But a huge part of the appeal of a older version is the walled garden. I don’t want shit in the sand pit cause I play in the sand pit and I do not care that little Timmy is sad he cannot shit in the sand pit. Hope that helps.

>backport 10th votann
zzz

>upgrade 1e Squats to 3e
real shit

>>96172664
Yo tengo el de Cazadores de Brujas de camino y el OMD 2001 en casa (foto)
>>96173309
They do, but I've never had issues with it. The implementation of the metric system and the spanish translation is a fondly remembered aspect for the spanish grog community.
"Mad Dok" doesn't mean shit here. "Matazanoz Loko" is pure soul.

>>96218846
Wouldn't 2e be a better baseline? And I know there's some 3e fanrules for them somewhere.

>>96220819

hah I didnt know there was any 2e stats desu, I thought they were a RT only deal. It was more of a shitpost, despite the fact I do own some metal squats I doubt there would be any actual demand for them.

>>96220258
all those translations are horrible, they often get the rules wrong

>>96221817
Never had a problem with them

>>96147320 (OP)
Just out of curiosity: Why was the 4th edition chosen for this? Why not the 3rd, 5th or 6th?
Are there any plans to do this for the other classic editions too? Or is the goal to combine all classic editions into one big best of in the end?

This seems like a decent place to ask.
What would be a good infantry focused list for 5th edition Imperial Guard.
Minimal tanks, not many walkers, I just want bodies. For example I WILL be including conscripts.

>>96223695
Ill give the quick rundown assuming you never touched any of those editions.

Resetting the system is a new thing, where upon release of the new edition all old material becomes invalidated. That’s not how it used to work, you would just keep using your old codex even if it was 5 years out of date until a new one came along. This is because all the editions from 3 to 7th all have largely the same core mechanics which are (like 90+%) compatible with one another.

With that said, 4th edition is recognized as the shifting point where the original dreamers and old guard at GW were replaced by new designers who started to change the game. Sometimes for better, but most times for worse. For instance 4th and 5th are very similar. You could take any two codecies from either edition and play with either rule set and most people probably won’t be able to tell you which you are playing. But under the hood the changes, albeit small, mostly favor 4th ed. 4th ed is basically 3.5 ed that’s why mostly no one ever suggests using the 3rd ed rule book over 4th ed.

It is ironic that the man who has the nickname “The Crudmeister” who is renowned as writing some of the worst material every for 40k, is now the lead game designer for 10th.

The idea behind this project is to capture and preserve the 2006 experience. Probably cause that’s when we were all in middle and highschool.

>>96223701
Playing 5th Ed guard and having a good time is an easy task. Just follow these rules.
>no artillery except the griffon is allowed
>tank squadrons are not allowed
>dont take more vet/chimera hotboxes than you have infantry platoons.
That’s pretty much it actually. Follow that and you can have some great games with your friends.

>>96223701
full infantry platoons plus SWS and HWS support also veterans get bad rep because mechanized/vendetta list but they get a lot of options and doctrines.

>>96221817
They are slightly different and they used centimeters instead of inches.
Which resulted in different ranges and averages.
Nothing terrible but in an event the FAQ and Errats where not always up to date so it was kind of annoying specially when in my case my country used both English and Spanish rules because GW just sent whatever the fuck they wanted.
One time they sent a box of nothing but ethereal and krootox. Only two guys played Tau at the time in the entire country.

>>96223824
>>96225884
Lots'a dudes it is then.

>>96221612
It's in the codex imperialis and the codex army lists.

Are we including
>>96231937
>>96231940
?

Would a repo for New Recruit be in the cards with this project? They have one for 3rd edition, but I agree with the majority in this thread that 4th was the sweet spot.

>>96237071

I suppose it depends on whether anyone is capable enough to do it. The vast majority has been collating text by enthusiastic and well meaning but tech-challenged anons. No criticism there, I think everyone would agree with that.

>>96147320 (OP)
bumps for the bump bump!

>>96237071
I've been working on one off of the 3e data

>>96227228
That sounds more like a distribution problem than a translation one tbqh

>>96240722
Cool. A lot of people will appreciate it I'm sure.

>>96240947
The faq and erratas? Spanish version hardly had those so in events when people show up to play we soon discovered that the English and Spanish version had slightly different rules.

BUMP

I want to get into 4th, do I have to use the old 25mm base size?

>>96246151
Nope. 32 is fine. For your primaris shaped marines. If you have the older tactical marines (or want to use the new HH models) I readily recommend the 28.5mm, even old marine models had their feet hang off the edge of 25mm.

>>96246151
do not let base sizes rule your gaming sphere.

>>96245308
nothing to be scared of. slow week, nuSRD anon is on holiday, haven't heard the status of tau or IG anon's codex, they might be cut off due to the brit purge, so we may need to have someone else pick those up if they don't have the ability to send them.

witch hunters anon is still here, i'm doing daemonhunters and they are going slow for me as this has just been a busy week and i'm trying to keep away from the computer since i work on one all week and my eyes hurt. that and the draining heat are keeping me from being more productive. we made great progress recently so it's not a big deal if we lose steam for a bit and come back on when conditions are better. considering we're on page 8 we'll likely want to bake a new thread soon.

>>96245308

>BROTHER, GET THE BRICKS

>>96249729
fuck that's a throwback

>>96234891
Too Marine centric for the SRD but maybe for the SM codex?

>>96249628
DE Anon here. I'm considering potentially taking over for IG, but seeing at how absolutely massive the workload is, I'm willing to wait a little longer before committing to anything just in case the original anon's just been swamped with other stuff to focus on this.

>>96249628
I believe ChaosAnon said they would take over from TauAnon.

Think the op forgetting to put a subject has been a wrench in this project’s gears running smoothly?

>>96255424
Yep, but I said this when I thought the brits were about to be exiled from here. I will take it if Tau anon says he can't do it.

>>96255630
Nah it's just holiday. We're stronger than ever with a good looking SRD, a handful of Codices and Inkwashanon turning into a mad wizard.

Hi! I'm one of the Anons that was working on this project when it started. I would have liked to keep working on this, but Studying and a holiday with my mates kept me from doing that. Regardless, I'm really happy to see that it's still going on.
Since you're working on the Codexes, I guess that the Rulebook and the Errata are done. Am I right?
I there's anything I can help with I'll be more than happy to contribute. Are there any free codexes? If all the major factions are being worked on, I can do some of the minor ones, like Assassins or Catachans.

>>96220258
In my country some translations are cooler than the original names:
-Bolter becomes "Requiem"
-The Lamenters become "I Prefici" (A Prefica is a woman that's specialized in mourning the dead. Prefici is the masculine plural version)
And for a special mention, Grething become "Kakkole", IE "Boogas"

>>96147320 (OP)
I'm was never a big fan of 4e 40k, but I'm happy you mad lot are getting it done and keeping the spark and love for 40k alive.
If only there were more people like you guys around.
Go-, er, Emperor bless!

>>96264137
Italian? Glad to see others also enjoying their translations. We never deviated from the original names too much, but Coteaz was originally named "Díaz de Torquemada".
I remember there was a lot of backlash around 6th (or was it 7th) because the translation was dropped and we had to start using the english names (probably because of copyright faggotry). While I don't have anything positive to say about Nu40K, they actually went back to translating names in 9th and it's as good as ever. I still like Kill Team, so I get to enjoy it there (kudos for actually making the obvious joke and renaming Bolt Revolvers to "Rebóltvers")

>>96264622
Yeah, you got it right.
I'm sad at the lack of translations in modern 40k too. At the end of 9th they began re-translating the names in Italian too. Usually they're not that great: for every "Falcidiatori", which sounds reasonably cool, you get 2 or 3 "Guardia del Lupo Capo Guerriero", which is borderline grammatically incorrect, Google Translate-tier shit.

>>96246151
AFAIK it's in the main rulebook, although it could have also been somewhere else (like Rogue Trader tournament rules at the time): you have to use the base size the model came with as the MINIMUM, but there's no maximum base size for models. Like you can put your Mega Nobz on Dreadnought bases, but not 25mm bases.

>>96263588
rulebook is not quite there, needs some more edits and to include example pics and errata, nuSRDanon is on vacation so we got busy with the codexes in the meantime we did a lot so far and only have a few left that are currently claimed. if you could take a look at the current rules, leave some feedback on google drive, that would be helpful. commenting the errata to be added would also help

Made a red and a turquoise wash.
First time that liquitex’s semi opaque black ink made a difference because whenever I tried to darken the red wash with daler rowney it would darken it too much as daler rowney’s black ink is opaque.

I got a bit of the Daemonhunters armory and psychic powers done tonight. Will see what more i can do in the near future.

>>96265567
Ok, I'll be doing that then.

Scouts look pretty cool with Arbites helmets.

>>96270246
Full pic

>>96258903
OG TauAnon here. Looks like I can still post.

After I thought I wasn't going to be able to post, I kind of stopped paying as much attention to this, and got wrapped up in other projects. So I'm a bit busy now.

I'm unlikely to get any more done on the Tau dex. Here's what I've done so far:

https ://wormhole. app/ 1zRqqN#DoXfEtvseqd5egs-AneKoQ

The link will expire in 24 hours.

Does anyone want to take it over?

>>96270274
No worries, I'll take it.

>>96270250
>Crimson Fists
FUCKING KINOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>96270250
>empty banner poles

>>96147320 (OP)
Nothing to add to this but another cool picture by Kopinski that was in the 4th Ed rulebook

>>96273481
Wait, I've seen this somewhere else in a higher resolution and in colour.

>>96273812
I mean, if you can find and send it that'll be badass.

>>96205984
And that's Eldar & Harlequins down
The time has come to tackle The Big One

Made the mistake of going to the catalog. Apparently in the other thread about alternative 40K rulesets people are out there seething their nuts off over this compilation project. Did you guys know you are hipster zoomers who don't know how to play games?

>>96277975
>Did you guys know you are hipster zoomers who don't know how to play games?
lol, the absolute state

>>96277975
>Made the mistake of going to the catalog
That's okay OP forgot to put the subject in and I think were a little lagging behind because of it.
>Apparently in the other thread about alternative 40K rulesets
Good. I'm sincerely glad that people are trying to oil their creative cogs to create things because of how GW is starting to get known as the runt of the wargaming litter when it comes to miniature wargaming rules quality at the moment.
>people are out there seething their nuts off over this compilation project
I think there is genuine collective board PTSD over the /fourk/ fiasco. It was after all a waste of a good name and potential that went up in smoke quickly. So it is understandable.
>Did you guys know you are hipster zoomers who don't know how to play games?
Everybody in this hobby to an extent is a hipster.
And quite frankly I think we've reached a point where it is hipster now to want a more complex version of 40k as GW keeps chasing the simplification of rules to make the game easier to learn and pick up. In my opinion, a balance needs to be struck between simplification and complication to make a wargame interesting. Instead of just throwing all the chips down at the altar of simplification.
And there's nothing inherently wrong with being born on a certain year where the generation gets a lot of flak. As long as the bad types get filtered out and the good ones stay then things should be fine.
As for who don't know how to play games, that's debatable. I have no doubts that a lot of eighth edition fresh blood that have stuck around are now looking at the older editions for their 40k fix due to how 10th is being handled.

>>96277975
Oh yeah?
>>96239307
>It's fucking nutso that you simps keep calling that a "project" when it's literally just ctrl-z'ing the rules from one edition
>>96243183
>Oh it's far worse than ctrl-z, they're trying to paraphrase rules and failing due to elementary school level reading comprehension and having never actually played old/middlehammer and not understanding the gaming conventions and design ethos of the time. It's sad to watch, really.
>>96262135
>I understand the paraphrasing, the problem is the retards on that project can't read and don't know how to play the game, so they rewrite them wrong. It's just hipster zoomers on a retro fad because it's hot on youtube, not grogs trying to teach an excellent game to new people.

Fsugoi.

>>96277975
Pretty solid post in there telling off 2W Marinefags

>>96278025
>Everybody in this hobby to an extent is a hipster.
Rope.

dont bring the shitflinging in here, just ignore and carry on.

>>96277975
Yeah, I'm a '98 zoomer who took a liking to 4th edition. If that bothers them it's their problem.

>>96176083
In Italy we always only had inches.
And guess what?
If you wanted a measuring tape with inches and feet, the only place to find it was the old Games Workshop™ store.

Growing up I wasn't even sure these were real measurements from another country, at the beginning I believed these were custom GW measuring units made just for the game so that you couldn't just use a ruler.

There was an appendix in the rulebook about playing with metric, it was a few lines of text just saying "just convert one inch to two centimeters if you have to"

>>96273812
>>96276758
don't think i've ever seen a color version, but this is higher res at least.

>>96277538
Okay so it says units can be led by an Aspiring Champion but not whether he's added onto the unit or replaces a guy

>>96281586
It does say in the Chosen entry that a dude is upgraded.
Also, the champion cost is listed as a + value, so upgrade.

>>96277975
Do they know that the rules compilation effort is like the first actual step before modifying a system, right? How exactly do they think that people like Net Epic Armageddon or Warmaster Revolution have done it?

>>96277538
The Chaos rules are missing the Chaos Cultists from Chapter Approved 2001, it would be cool if you added them. Otherwise, how would my Iron Warriors be able to field their cannon fodder?

I added the FAQs as Drive comments to the Rulebook SRD. Some of them arent really necessary, but I added them anyways.

Played my first game of 4th last week, it was indeed great! I started playing in 5th right when Black Reach launched and I've always remembered that era fondly, but 4th seems even better.

Anything I can do to help with the SRD project? I've got a copy of Codex Armageddon if that hasn't been transcribed yet, or just review/edit, or whatever is needed.

Is the new Grey Knights combat patrol useful for 4th? A hero, 10 troop, 5 Terminators and a venerable dread

>>96286587
Yeah, it gives you a good foundation for an army and It filles up all the mandatory slots. If you run the the 10 Grey Knights as 2 5-men squads, it's about 850 points, give or take depending on the Wargear you choose.

Tau and Kroot done
gofile io/d/nEVOh3

>>96290018
Yippee!

>>96289713
Baller, I'll pick it up then.

>>96291279
One thing to keep in mind is that pure Grey Knights are really weak in 4th. due to their lack of anti-tank weaponry. Like the only ways to get lascannons are on dreadnoughts, Landraiders, Razorbacks and gun servitors. You can get meltaguns and combi-meltas on Stormtroopers and Inquisitors, but both of those are better off with plasmaguns and psycannons (respectively).

>>96292125
Yeah, but you don't need that many anti-tank options. A Dreadnought (that's a strong anti-tank in melee too) a land raider and some third unit with anti-tank capabilities should do the job

>>96292125
>Grey Knights are really weak in 4th
That's okay, my buddy and I only play for fun, we couldn't care less about what's good and what's not. It's all just for shits and giggles.

Today I played a 1500 game of 3rd ed, Tyranids vs Eldar. I won (something rare nowadays), my Eldar made minced meat of all enemies and captured the objective. Pretty fun!

>>96285589
Black Reach was my first entry point as a customer, but I had played 40K before then with other peoples miniatures. Glad you're enjoying 4th edition though!

>>96293095
>Tyranids vs Eldar.
>I won
Nice one, I haven't played Eldar in 4th yet, but I did play them recently in 10th's Combat Patrol and they were a lot of fun.
I'll definitely have to make up some 4th lists and get some games in.

Btw I had a discussion with my friends about how the Biting Blade works for the Eldar Striking Scorpion exarchs in 3rd ed. My opinion is that it allows me to do additional wounds when rolling to wound, and my opponent can then roll to save. My friends say that it let's me roll to wound again once he has rolled for saves, only if if the opponent fails to save the initial wound. Any veteran player can resolve this?

>>96293118
>Black Reach was my first entry point as a customer, but I had played 40K before then with other peoples miniatures. Glad you're enjoying 4th edition though!

I love that Black Reach set. I know it's nostalgia, but I will forever love that damn set! 4th kicks ass.

The Emperor Protects.

gofile(DOT)io/d/JgC8ec

>>96293118
4th ed Eldar are pretty good from what I remember. 3rd are better because of the sheer ridiculous power of Starcannons, but they're still great.

>>96294584
You're fucking awesome, man.

>>96147329
I was thinking about transcribing some of the more obscure lists, namely the Feral Orks from Chapter Approved, the Genestealer Cults from Citadel Journal n°40 and the Movie Marines.

>>96292872
If you're playing the average 1500~1850 point game that was normal at the time, a Land Raider is going to eat up a lot of points. They're 250 before getting any upgrades, which is like 1/5th. of your army. Dreadnoughts with Lascannon + Missile Launcher are still really good for their points, though.

>>96293043
It's not so much about being OP as much as it is non-games that happen because the Grey Knight player had all their anti-tank weapons blown up early on and now there's a Hammerhead or Leman Russ running amok and operating with impunity. Unless your opponent is playing pure infantry or using only lightly armored vehicles like Killa Kans and Rhinos, you need some way of interacting with their armor. It's not fun for either player if there's no way to interact and is something you might discuss with your opponent beforehand. Especially since mech armies were easy to build.

>>96293275
Check the Eldar FAQs or Chapter Approved. It's been a hot minute since I've seen Striking Scorpions as Fire Dragons, Banshees, and Harlequins were more popular. I think it works in a similar fashion with better wording in the 4th. Edition codex? Not sure.

>>96294664
Other way around lol. 3rd. Edition Eldar are good, 4th. Edition are one of the best armies in the game because Falcons become nigh unkillable with the ability to move fast and still fire their Star Cannons because of the defensive weaponry rule introduced in 4th. In 3rd., they can move and only fire one Star Cannon. In 4th., they can move and fire both their Shuriken Cannon and Star Cannon. Can come damn close to wiping out a unit a turn, even against Space Marines.

>>96295718
>Other way around
Ah my bad. I just recall the Saim-hann armies that consisted of like 12 Vypers with Starcannons on each of them and people complaining about them.

Played yesterday 1500 pts marines vs marines.

> Some notes on the SRD;

Make the vehicle damage table more notorious, maybe a different color or highlight it. It gets used A LOT and it needs to be quickly findable and readable.

The most crucial diagram needed are Sizes for Terrain. And some sort of running community base on what makes terrain sizes easy.

1 Wall
2 Ruins, Bunkers, Forests
3 Buildings with more than 2 stories

Area terrain is super important and you need to include a LOS diagram that shows that a unit may not be visible within terrain from a certain angle but visible from another because it would be less than 6 inches into the terrain.

Put a VERY CLEAR VERY OBVIOUS example of initiative and assaults, terrain and Frag grenades. There were 4 games going and people had to read the rules on initiative order with terrain and grenades in all of them.

Put extra examples on Regrouping and Consolidations, this is very important because a lot of people play Space Marines and And They Shall Know No Fear is a Universal Special Rule. This should be covered in the Space Marine Codex as well. This rule is quite encompasing and Marines are played by newer players, so it's important they understand it. Also they are the most important and numerous faction.

> Change the core SRD and Put Rending as a Universal Special Rule

>>96294061
I actually bought a brand new in box set a couple of years ago, it now sits safely in storage awaiting the day my brother and I decide to relive the past.

>>96297176
>Make the vehicle damage table more notorious, maybe a different color or highlight it. It gets used A LOT and it needs to be quickly findable and readable.
Newb here, are you telling me that this attempt at a battle bible doesn't have a quick reference page with all the important tables and info briefs on it?

>>96297581
not yet, but that is why the thread is testing it and providing feedback my duder

>>96297710
I would have thought a quick reference sheet would have been one of the first things hammered out.

>>96295718
>Falcons
An anon posted here, many years ago, saying that he asked Phil Kelly about 4th edition Falcons at a GW event. Apparently Kelly simply didn't realize how invincible they were. Significantly harder to kill than a Monolith. Guy just flubbed the math.

>>96147329
Haven't been actively contributing to the threads but periodically poke in and check on the progress you good folks are up to. I have a similar question as the Catachan anon - why does this use the 3rd edition Ork rules when there is a 4th edition Ork codex? I get that the 4e Ork book functionally was the 5th edition one, but it was still written to work in 4th edition while the Ork one is 1.5 editions removed.

>>96298146
>the 4e Ork book functionally was the 5th edition one, but it was still written to work in 4th edition
Because the latter part of this statement doesn't offset the former. Books that are written with the upcoming edition in mind are almost always problems for the edition they're nominally part of, and that's especially true in a scenario like this one where you're mixing books from across two editions - let's say we put the cutoff at the end of 4th rather than when they started writing books with one eye on 5th; what happens to the remaining armies stuck with 3rd codexes? They're not playing against enemies that are, functionally, two editions ahead of them. Not to mention that the later 4th 'dexes have more in line with the design philosophy of 5th than they do late 3rd/early 4th, and they're less compatible/incompatible with the supplementary material available for the 3rd books(which are included in this project, and largely deal with any deficiencies you might find by comparing just the two codexes directly).

tldr - it causes more problems than it solves, is why.

>>96302408
*they're now playing

Fucksake I need coffee.

>>96298146
also, the 3rd edition ork codex is both more flavourful and better balanced.

I love the 4th ed ork codex, its the army I started playing the game with. But it really is basically a 5th edition codex, the powerscale really starts to increase massively, with shit like full units of burnas, nob bikers etc etc.

Like, nobz aren't even a proper unit in the 3rd ed book, they can only be taken as bodyguards for a warboss. The 3rd ed codex equivalent of nob squads is Skarboyz, who are just regular boyz with Str 4.

Also, the 4th ed codex added Furious Charge across the army, which is cool, but I think kind of throws off the balance of the game a bit. It's meaningful in the 3.5 era that most things are Str 3.

>>96302408
>>96303834
No offense but that all sounds like shit you need to kill your personal feelings on for a project like this. I thought the whole point was to make a more readable, complete and coherent collection of the rules for 4th edition? You're not doing that if you're deliberately overlooking rules produced specifically for the edition you're attempting to compile. That's how you get /fourk/.

>>96304296
This shit was already settled weeks/months ago. You don't get to come in now and decide it's wrong.

I'm >>96172664, today I got the last two codexes for a full set (other than Assassins, but I don't care that much about that one since the rules were reprinted in the Witch and Demon Hunters books). In my next book hunt I'll try to get the Index Astartes volumes.

>>96304296
The point of this project was stated from the beginning: to make a compilation of the 3.5/4th ed stuff up to 2004, before the change in codex design philosophy of 4th ed, since most anons agreed that the 3.5 codexes (and the early 4th ed ones followed the same style) were the best, but the 4th ed basic rules were cleaner than the 3.5.

For those that want a pure 3.5 ruleset (my personal preference), the 3ed 40K facebook group has a document that compiles the basic rules with the experimental assault, transport and vehicle rules in a single pdf (40K A-Palooza), and another guy is doing a 3ed battle bible similar to the /bible/ project.

If you want to use the 4ed codexes like Orks, Eldar and Dark Angels, instead of derailing this project I recommend you to write your own compilation of the 4th ed codexes outside of the scope of /bible/. There's no need for competition between the various editions, WHFB has rule apps for multiple editions with no fuss.

Seems inevitable that if there is to be a definitive, standalone 4th edition, that there will have to be some balancing and tweaking to level out the power creep inherent in the newest codices vs the oldest. The 3rd Edition Orks codex is not likely to stand up well against the 4th Edition Space Marine or Eldar codices without a little boost here and there.

>>96304905
We're using the 3rd edition Eldar codex. Also, the 4th edition Marine codex seems to be pretty well balanaced.

>>96304799
Alright, it's been a minute but I do recall the verbiage from the first threads about a specific year date for a perceived shift in rules writing style in codexes mid-4th. That's on me for getting it twisted in my memory. If the intention was never to just objectively compile and edit for clarity and comprehension all 4th edition material, as it clearly was, I've got no business telling you guys to be objective about something that is subjective taste from the start.

>>96304905
Abandon the idea of a "definitive" 4th edition ruleset if you are not going to be objective and are not going to respect the process of iteration and release the original writers went through. I do not mean to invalidate this project or any other project with my argument save for any that claim to be an objective, definitive version while playing tastemaker on what and what not to include.

>>96297176
>I agree the 4th ed style of separating our half the usr because they are “weapon” rules is incredibly irritating that they are not all in one place.

>>96304296
No offense but nobody cares what you think so jog on.

>>96303834
While it's beyond the scope of this thread, I agree with that the 3rd edition ork codex is better, as flawed as it is, I dislike the changes to burna boyz, tankbustaz and lootas, making them into ork aspect warriors. Some weapons also lost their edge, burnas rolled 2d6 for armor penetration and kannon's rolled as ordnance. Some changes like making boyz cheaper, nobz an elite choice and better shootas were improvements. I also think the HQ choices in the 4th edition were a bit more sensible.

>>96304296
>That's how you get /fourk/.
/fourk/'s only good thing was reminding us what not to do when projects like this are being made.

The battleplan in the OP is what needs to be stuck to.

>>96305189
First off I'd like to point out that "4th with (mostly) 3rd edition codexes" has been considered a high point of the game for over a decade at this point and isn't anything new here.

>perceived shift in rules writing style
From the eldar codex onwards:
Army lists are split into two, with one half containing rules and the other points and options.
The armoury is gone and characters are limited to what their unit entry permits.
Special characters are included in the main army list and treated as normal HQ choices.
All army-wide options and alternative lists are gone or gated behind special characters.
All of this coincides with White Dwarf axing Chapter Approved and becoming a glorified advertising leaflet.

>original writers
Andy Chambers was the lead designer of 40k for 2nd until 4th. He left before 4th edition released (https://web.archive.org/web/20040823062012/http://forums.specialist-games.com/epic40k/forum_b/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2010) and his last rules credit is the 4e tyranid codex.
Rick Priestly was around until after 5th came out, but as far as I'm aware he wasn't majorly involved in 40k anymore.

Made a green and purple wash.
Green is liquitex sap green at fifteen drops and five drops of daler rowney black

Purple is 15 drops of liquitex dioxazine purple and five drops of daler rowney black.

>>96312833
Forgot to add. I’m going through some airbrush troubles. I need to find the time to one day deep clean the whole thing. I plan on it.

>>96312839
>I’m going through some airbrush troubles.
The whole reason I stopped using mine.

>>96312839
Check the gaskets. Depending on the cleaners you use, they tend to erode and/or disintegrate entirely.

>>96313953
That might be my problem.
I’ll still try to deep clean my airbrush as I feel like I need to do that anyways. And I ordered some parts anyways so there’s that.

One thing is I’m letting my job exhaust me out for the past couple of months so I need to force myself to do this.

A flesh wash and a sepia wash will probably be the most difficult mixes I’ll be making. Mostly because the matte medium slightly lightens the color of the washes and I also have to be careful not to make just another brown wash.
But I bought an extra flow aid and matte medium bottle for the experimentation to continue so I should be able to figure it all out.

Pic related are the wash colors I want to cover.

>>96181031
>Is the main head of this project a Brit?
Why should it matter? Is 4ching actually detecting VPNs?

>>96317074

no

>>96292125
Where can you find rules for DeathWatch and Grey Knights in 4th Edition?

Also don't both factions get access to all the SM vehicles in Imperial Armor?

>>96321721
Neither is a proper full faction.
Grey Knights is part of the Daemonhunters army, you can just not take any non-GK units.
Deathwatch are allies or upgrade for normal marines only, the rules were in one of the chapter approved's. Again it's technically possible to make a SM army with only DW-compatible units, but that pretty much requires leaving 3/4th of your options off the table.

>>96322582
What are you not able to bring? Command Squads? Terminators? Vehicles? I figured all the Imperial Armor Vehicles for SMs can come along on any Space Marine List

Question for Lost and the Damned. Does the Arch-Heretic get to choose a Book/Legion benefit from the Chaos Space Marine codex since they say to use the Lieutenant/Sorcerer entry from that codex for him? Would the Aspiring Champions HQ option get it also?

The FAQ mentions that Book/Legion benefits can affect LatD units since they're considered Chaos units too (the cited example being Demagogue from a Word Bearer) so the Book/Legion benefit must be able to apply somehow, but it seems odd to me that the only way to get Legion options would be through the allied CSM, as if the Arch-Heretic and Aspiring Champions didn't come from a Legion themselves, but I can't find it explicitly saying it applies through them. Thoughts?

>>96324818
I think it makes sense for the few marines you can choose to be able to belong to a legion, but like with many things you'd have to ask for your opponent's permission.

>>96324870
The reason I ask is if the Iron Warriors benefit would let me take a Basilisk without the LatD option's requirement of the Traitor troop tax.

>>96324876
Well'I wouldn't let you take the benefits that the legions give you for listbuilding, since your army is not a chaos space marines one

>>96324909
You wouldn't allow an Alpha Legion-led LatD army to include Cultists they have from the CSM codex? Even if it seems highly appropriate?

>>96324953
Nta but this issue seems to fully fall within what your opponent/playgroup would let you get away with.
Going with the IW example again, I would let you use the Basilisk since L&D has close ties to IG via the Traitor Guard link, so the extra tank actually feels fitting. On the other hand, Obliterators wouldn't feel "correct" since those are Marines after all.

>>96325143
>Nta but this issue seems to fully fall within what your opponent/playgroup would let you get away with.
Yeah no, I accept that's the likely case, but I searched a while to even find a discussion on it and couldn't, so I thought I'd at least spark up the conversation.

>>96324953
That's a much more nuanced situation

>this issue seems to fully fall within what your opponent/playgroup would let you get away with.
Yeah, for basically everything about this discussion, this is the answer.

>>96324002
Grey Knights aren't marines, mechanically, so they don't get any of their IA units.
As for Deathwatch, you only get:
>commander
>chaplain
>librarian
>command squad
>term command squad
>veteran squad
>DW kill team
Of course, you could just paint your whole space marines as Deathwatch and play them as a regular marine army, only upgrading the compatible units if you wish.

up

>>96223695
Combining classic editions has been done in ProHammer Classic: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/796101.page

>>96147320 (OP)
How far are we so far in things coming along?

>>96332393
Beyond what's on the second post, we finished the first draft of Tau, Kroot, Chaos Marines, Lost and the Damned, Renegades and Heretics and all the Guard lists.

Right now I'm working on the Genestealer Cults list from Citadel Journal 40, the Feral Orks from White Dwarf and Movie Marines.

>>96332393
>>96332464
After all the codexes are done we need to kickstart the revision process, so that we can fix any oversight or missing thing. For exemple, the Chaos Marines list is missing the Chaos Cultists from Chapter Approved.

>>96295718
There is a key part you are missing that, that since we are using the 4th ed rulebook with s6 defensive weapons the 3 shot starcannons from the 3rd ed codex are just disgustingly good compared to the 2 shot ones of 4th ed. This wouldn't get fixed until 5th ed properly set defensive weapons at s4.

>>96294584
blessed

>>96334241
In my last game (Biel-Tan vs Tyranids, 3rd ed) a Wave Serpent with twin-linked starcannons transporting ten Fire Dragons basically deleted all of my opponent's monstrous creatures while losing only one guy. Eldar flyers and starcannons are no joke, no vehicle, monster or MSU short of a Necron monolith will survive a minced meat machine that moves 12'' by turn and shoots a barrage of starcannon fire followed by ten meltaguns in the face.

>>96334409
My brother played biel tan as a kid and he won every single game vs my tau. Fucking dark reapers are so broken. But also tau were just trash tier until 6th ed.

>>96332466
>For exemple, the Chaos Marines list is missing the Chaos Cultists from Chapter Approved.
Sorry, could you provide me a link to this chapter approved? I didn't know it existed and my brother would be thrilled to learn he could bring Chaos Cultists in 4th edition

>>96334791
It's in Chapter Approved 2001.

>>96334791
Furthermore, the Chaos codex we use lets Alpha Legion armies have "veteran" cultists with decent stats and special abilities

>>96334935
>>96334947
Isn't this for 3rd edition though?

>>96335014
The Chaos Space Marine and Eye of Terror codexes used by the battle bible are also from 3rd ed. According to >>96147329 Chapter Approved is part of the project.

>>96335029
Oh I thought this was just for 4th edition stuff.

>>96335037
Old editions didn't work like current ones, old codexes were still valid until a new one was published it. Dark Eldar and Necrones used the same codex until 5th ed, for example.

>>96335056
How can it be called a battle bible for 4th if it's mostly using 3rd content?

>>96334935
>>96335029
Chapter approved 2001 should be superseded (aka not included) as the csm book has a publication date from 2002?

That said they bothered to include this clause but didnt say anything about chapter approved.

>>96335075
It uses the 4th ed rulebook, and a codex publication cutoff date of 2006. The thing about 40k is that since its a rolling release, when it comes time they start working on the design for the next edition it becomes clear that books made in the later half of the edition are meant for the next one. In this reguard a "complete" experience is almost always better to be made with the first half of an edition and the last half of the one prior; you get a more cohesive design that way.

I think we set the 4th ed tau re-up (which is so minior it could have been a hotfix) as the cutoff point.

>>96335117
Seems odd, but I have faith that wiser anons than I know what they're doing.

>>96335097
If you guys choose to ignore Index Astartes and Chapter Approved because much of what was there was consolidated in Chaos 3.5 and 4E Space Marines, that's ok. After all there were tons of material published in White Dwarf that was latter superseded by codexes. But the supplementary stuff is one of the coolers aspects of early 00s 40K IMO, and is harder to find than the codexes, thus benefiting more from the battle bible concept than the basic army lists.

In any case, perhaps it would be best to finish the codexes and Cityfight first, and once they have been completed, seeing what stuff from Chapter Approved, Index Astartes and Imperial Armour can be included.

Can I get a QRD on Cityfight?

>>96186767
>normal Boyz vs marines are not much more than a speedbump.
pts for pts Boyz absolutely smoke marines in close combat. You have to field choppas.

>If you're fighting marines, you've got to make up for that difference in power by staying in open-topped vehicles
Absolutely not anon. Shoota boyz are a rally point for your slugga boyz, they need to be on foot to do that. You only want to take shootas after you've taken two units of choppas.

Also what open top vehicle are you putting them in?? Trukks? Are you wasting a battle wagon on them? Either option is a waste.

>I lost a full unit of 30 and only took out 3 of his blood claws in 3 turns of combat
You made the mistake of getting a ranged support unit into CC with melee specialists.

> Prioritize your targets and hit the stuff that'll cause the most problems first
Yes, I would add that you want to hit it with anything and everything youve got. Don't just send one or two rokkits or shootas at it, but dump everything you have at it until it's gone.

>>96335452
Basically rules for densely packed urban environments.

Since we’re closing in on bump limit let’s make the new thread at page 10 and hopefully with a subject.

>>96340144
Make the thread yourself then

>>96341070
Never actually made many threads through the phone but I can try.

New

>>96343477

>>96343477

>>96343477