Core Rules now in White Dwarf

[Oppenheimer]

When 3e rolled out they discontinued the warscroll battalions from prior books. Instead they added the new core battalions. I had thought they were simplifying things, but then the white dwarf issue came out for Sons of Behemat where they brought in new Core Battalions just for them for matched play. Since then they have also released new battalions and allegiance abilities for 3e for Slaves to Darkness, Seraphon and this upcoming one will be Cities of Sigmar. I don't understand how they would even work in a tournament setting. You'd have to bring your White Dwarf for the other person to be able to see what abilities you're referencing?

On top of this you can't buy digital copies of White Dwarf anymore, you can only get the physical copies and maybe some through the new Warhammer+ app. I used to buy digital copies of books that had a small rule update (like the Broken Realms books) and then just print the page that had the update and slide it into my battletome.

I think this is a terrible precedent. It's not like it's just a few extra rules for Warhammer Quest anymore but it's both core tournament rules and you can't get them digitally anymore. What do other people think?

 

[Grave Tacticus]

It seems like GW is headed right back to consumer unfriendly territory, with no signs of stopping.

 

[Danceman]

Everything seem to be done to funnel you into W+ and I'm not doing it. Service has way too little content and the apps (including the 40k one) has not impressed me.

Like Grave Tacticus says, GW has managed to go one step forwards (digital service) and two steps backwards (anti-consumerism and making it somehow less accessible than before).

Weirdly, they've also released updates for 40k (the data slate) on the community page complete with rules changes and points updates for over-performing armies. GW sending mixed signals.

 

[Unas the slayer]

Weirdly, they've also released updates for 40k (the data slate) on the community page complete with rules changes and points updates for over-performing armies. GW sending mixed signals.

I don’t see mixed signals... the update for 40k is basically a big faq / errata. They have always been for free as they should, as a fix is something i am not "forced" to buy, and this could bring unpleasant discussion, while a faq available for everyone sets a common field and you must adhere to it.
On the contrary, if you wanna buffs or more options for your army, you have to pay (see white dwarfs if Seraphon players want to unlock mount traits, or all the various additional books as malign sorcery or psychic awakening).

The survey for 40k was mostly a marketing move... the real GW is the usual giant rabid collector of money behind W+ and all similar related approaches. Make no mistake about it.

 

[Danceman]

I don’t see mixed signals... the update for 40k is basically a big faq / errata. They have always been for free as they should, as a fix is something i am not "forced" to buy, and this could bring unpleasant discussion, while a faq available for everyone sets a common field and you must adhere to it.
On the contrary, if you wanna buffs or more options for your army, you have to pay (see white dwarfs if Seraphon players want to unlock mount traits, or all the various additional books as malign sorcery or psychic awakening).

The survey for 40k was mostly a marketing move... the real GW is the usual giant rabid collector of money behind W+ and all similar related approaches. Make no mistake about it.

I did not expect them to implement these kind of changes though. Previously it has mostly been done to curb overpowered armies but in this one Guard, CSM, and Necron got some well deserved love. While I'm still critical (and remain firm in my boycott of GW products) of what they're doing with W+ I think it very important to highlight the good bits too. What the survey leads to remain to be seen yet I'm somewhat hopeful its existence indicate that some people with influence at GW understands there are issues.

 

[Unas the slayer]

I did not expect them to implement these kind of changes though. Previously it has mostly been done to curb overpowered armies but in this one Guard, CSM, and Necron got some well deserved love. While I'm still critical (and remain firm in my boycott of GW products) of what they're doing with W+ I think it very important to highlight the good bits too. What the survey leads to remain to be seen yet I'm somewhat hopeful its existence indicate that some people with influence at GW understands there are issues.

You have a point.
Nonetheless it's a pity they didn't took a further step: chaos marines are still stuck with their pityful single wound...

 

[Oppenheimer]

I don’t see mixed signals... the update for 40k is basically a big faq / errata. They have always been for free as they should, as a fix is something i am not "forced" to buy, and this could bring unpleasant discussion, while a faq available for everyone sets a common field and you must adhere to it.
On the contrary, if you wanna buffs or more options for your army, you have to pay (see white dwarfs if Seraphon players want to unlock mount traits, or all the various additional books as malign sorcery or psychic awakening).

The survey for 40k was mostly a marketing move... the real GW is the usual giant rabid collector of money behind W+ and all similar related approaches. Make no mistake about it.

I totally agree that it's W+ that's driving these terrible decisions. But, I'm going to quibble over you saying that it's just extra options. My major problem is that it feels like core things that an army should have in 3e. I wouldn't have a huge problem if it was some optional thing, like rules for a Warcry army to use in AoS. But actually changing allegiance abilities and that kind of thing really seems like they should either be putting it in an FAQ or just releasing a new battletome. They could even have just sold a big update book like they did for the Grand Alliances back in 1e or put it all in the General's Handbook for last year like they used to put the allegiance abilities for armies that hadn't had a battletome yet. White Dwarf is just the worst place to put them. It's something that isn't even available after that one month. GW stores throw out their old copies.

 

[Unas the slayer]

I totally agree that it's W+ that's driving these terrible decisions. But, I'm going to quibble over you saying that it's just extra options. My major problem is that it feels like core things that an army should have in 3e. I wouldn't have a huge problem if it was some optional thing, like rules for a Warcry army to use in AoS. But actually changing allegiance abilities and that kind of thing really seems like they should either be putting it in an FAQ or just releasing a new battletome. They could even have just sold a big update book like they did for the Grand Alliances back in 1e or put it all in the General's Handbook for last year like they used to put the allegiance abilities for armies that hadn't had a battletome yet. White Dwarf is just the worst place to put them. It's something that isn't even available after that one month. GW stores throw out their old copies.

Well, yes... "extra options" doesn't give the idea. All of these are things that by right should belong in a battletome / codex..But nope, imperial guards players needed to buy a whole book of psychic awakening just to have 3 crunch pages containing the rules for tank aces... a truly vital tool for the army, placed in a narrative book that by logic should give only tools for narrative campaigns in that sector.


But at least it was a book.
Now Seraphon players must pick White Dwarf (a very weird source, as you've said), to have access to battallions and mount traits, which are among the very basic features of an army.

It's ridiculous.

But Seraphon players were in a so desperate need of mont traits that even this was welcome.

 

[The Sun King]

I'm quite happy with my subscription to Warhammer+. I've no quarrel with paying for continual content.

 

[Oppenheimer]

I'm quite happy with my subscription to Warhammer+. I've no quarrel with paying for continual content.

Are all White Dwarf's immediately unlocked when they are released there? My concern is that I won't get the rules right away and also that I will never actually have a copy of them that I can keep forever if the app ever gets discontinued (like the Warhammer Quest app did).

 

[The Sun King]

Yeah, I haven't encountered any delay so far. True, you don't get the digital content for posterity, in that case you still have to buy physical copies - but then again, I prefer the digital world (even though I'm a bibliophile) because Battletomes become outdated so fast.