Help support TMP

"40K, Which Edition?" Topic

36 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Warhammer 40K Message Board

Action Log

18 Aug 2016 10:59 a.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Removed from SF Discussion board
  • Removed from TMP Poll Suggestions board
  • Crossposted to Warhammer 40K board

Areas of Interest

Science Fiction

1,286 hits since 11 Feb 2016
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo miniMo Supporting Member of TMP11 Feb 2016 9:21 p.m. PST

Which edition of Warhammer 40K do you prefer?

Rogue Trader (1987)
Second Edition (1993)
Third Edition (1998)
Fourth Edition (2004)
Fifth Edition (2008)
Sixth Edition (2012)
Seventh Edition (2014)
None of the above

Personal logo miniMo Supporting Member of TMP11 Feb 2016 9:43 p.m. PST

Rogue Trader for me.

kallman11 Feb 2016 9:57 p.m. PST

At this point and time None of the above. While I loved Rogue Trader I actually have a copy and it would be a clunky game now by today's standards. I think the last edition I played and thought was more or less balanced was 4th. Still have lots of the models and enjoyed the background but finding like minded players who are in for the fun are hard to find. I just find other rule systems to use my figures now like Tomorrow's War.

Ivan DBA11 Feb 2016 10:14 p.m. PST

Rogue Trader. It's not clunky if you play it as intended, with just a couple squads per side.

vdal181211 Feb 2016 10:22 p.m. PST

Rogue Trader

Weasel11 Feb 2016 10:39 p.m. PST

A mix of Rogue Trader and 2nd.

Coyotepunc and Hatshepsuut11 Feb 2016 11:25 p.m. PST

Rogue Trader.

Prince Rupert of the Rhine11 Feb 2016 11:35 p.m. PST

Rogue trader for skirmish (it's basically Necromunda on steroids) and 4/5th edition for mass battle games (before the overwhelming urge in 40k became fielding titans and super heavy tanks).

KTravlos12 Feb 2016 1:06 a.m. PST

3rd Edition. All army lists in the rule book.

chuck05 Fezian12 Feb 2016 4:31 a.m. PST

Nostalgia says Rogue Trader. However I really enjoyed the third and fourth editions.

Visceral Impact Studios12 Feb 2016 5:46 a.m. PST

Ivan DBA is correct about Rogue Trader. I was playing it fresh out of college and had little money. My friend and I had many entertaining battles with just a couple of squads and a heavy weapon or dreadnought per side. To this day I can recall events from those games as they had a cinematic quality to them.

Later editions became less about tactics and story and more about selling mass quantities of figures. Like so many games today tied to specific models, game design is driven by a desire to sell more figures rather than providing a player with a satisfying playing experience at the lowest possible cost. This is true for scifi as well as historical games.

Mute Bystander12 Feb 2016 6:56 a.m. PST

Never played this series of rules.

jpattern212 Feb 2016 6:56 a.m. PST

Rogue Trader here, too.

Pictors Studio12 Feb 2016 6:57 a.m. PST

Third edition.

Visceral Impact Studios, GW seems to have gone the opposite direction on that with Age of Sigmar. The rules are story driven and don't require a lot of figures to play.

Wackmole9 Supporting Member of TMP12 Feb 2016 7:01 a.m. PST

2nd edition

Personal logo HistoriFigs Supporting Member of TMP12 Feb 2016 7:23 a.m. PST

Rogue Trader

thorr66612 Feb 2016 7:33 a.m. PST


Garand12 Feb 2016 7:45 a.m. PST

I would prefer a mix of 3rd ed and the latest ed, for the better psychic phase. Dislike hull points.


nazrat12 Feb 2016 8:53 a.m. PST

I liked Third about the best and had the most fun with it. But I play… NO MORE!! (Sorry, I'm reading old Fantastic Four comics right now)

Pizzagrenadier12 Feb 2016 8:55 a.m. PST

I think the only thing that makes Rogue Trader a fun system to play is a mix of rose colored glasses of nostalgia and the popular distaste for what GW has become. Seriously, it's a terrible system. Don't get me wrong. I had some great games with it and it's how I got into gaming. But I'd rather do my taxes than play that system.

I like 2nd, but even that had some serious problems.

3rd is the sweet spot of playability I think. It's up to you to add flavor and cinematic appeal by use of clever scenarios and cool forces.

My two contrarian cents.

Personal logo 28mm Fanatik Supporting Member of TMP12 Feb 2016 9:24 a.m. PST

Second, but I must admit the current 7th is growing on me with its "Decurion" detachments making for endless possibilities.

nazrat12 Feb 2016 11:03 a.m. PST

PizzaGren-- I agree completely. I have never been able to figure the love for RT. It was an awful system and we only stuck with it because it was all there was (as far as we knew). Later editions made the game actually fun to play, warts and all. 8)=

Pizzagrenadier12 Feb 2016 11:31 a.m. PST

Naz: remember paying movement for turning? All those similar and largely useless stats…

People loved it back then because we confused detail and complexity with realism.

I do have to admit though that the scenario generators and ideas in that book have helped retain its value as a wargaming book :)

Personal logo etotheipi Sponsoring Member of TMP12 Feb 2016 11:51 a.m. PST

Space Hulk, original edition

21eRegt12 Feb 2016 12:19 p.m. PST

Never touch the stuff.

Visceral Impact Studios12 Feb 2016 1:51 p.m. PST


NOBODY confused detail with realism when you're dealing with Space Orks and Zoats! :-)

It was more detailed hut the scope was comensurate with the level of detail. If you only have 10 to 20 guys on the table throwing frags is ok with me. Once you try putting 60 to 100 then you need some more abstraction.

Even 20 was a lot for me as a poor fresh out. Running Space Marine squads in fire teams of 5 worked and fit our budgets and the level of detail.

Weasel12 Feb 2016 3:35 p.m. PST

I've run rogue trader for people who never played before and they still had a good time.

Besides, its a modular system. Use the Battle Manual and its a more detailed version of 2nd edition.

Really though, it's a gaming style. A way of going about things. You could play a "rogue trader" style battle using any edition.. it's just that people don't.
Once you start showing them those army lists, they shut down :)

The big issues are:

Grenades are wonky and slow. Replace with the Battle Manual version.

Vehicle rules work but are very deadly. Replace with the version in the Compendium.

Close combat is ass. Replace with Battle Manual version.

Sargonarhes12 Feb 2016 6:14 p.m. PST

2nd edition was best edition.

They're on 7th already?

Lion in the Stars12 Feb 2016 7:07 p.m. PST

For a couple platoons per side, I really like 4th edition.

I own RT, and it wouldn't be too bad to break out and play some OldHammer sometime. But the group plays Infinity, which scratches the same itch.

Zephyr112 Feb 2016 9:43 p.m. PST

RT, and 2nd (which fleshed out the armies, fluff, and models…)

David Johansen14 Feb 2016 8:04 p.m. PST

I like 3e though it had many faults, my tanks can't move and fire? REALLY?

Anyhow, I'd lean towards Rogue Trader + Compendium though I think the Compendium vehicle rules put power fields on too many things for too few points.

Capt Flash24 Feb 2016 6:40 p.m. PST

We have been enjoying 1page40k lately… Yeah, I know, not what the OP was asking about… 😎

Tiny Legions25 Feb 2016 7:02 p.m. PST

For those who are into some of the middle editions I have a website that tries to support the 3rd 4th and 5th editions. The website is:

I encourage all to check it out if you feel inclined. WFB is currently big now, but I am trying to grow a following for 40K.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP07 Mar 2016 6:27 p.m. PST

Rogue Trader or 2nd Edition

It started to go downhill with 3rd and on.

ScottWashburn Sponsoring Member of TMP09 Mar 2016 10:35 a.m. PST

2nd Edition! I loved that. Never played again after 3rd came out :(

Mattw338509 Mar 2016 1:05 p.m. PST

While I don't play anymore. My favorite was 3rd edition.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.