I like things that are built to last. I don't concede to planned obsolescence (one of the many, many reasons I run Linux), and I don't like overhauls for the sake of just producing something new. And that's why the new edition of Warhammer 40,000, called the 11th edition by everyone but Games Workshop (because editions don't matter), is a refreshing update. Games Workshop isn't calling it edition 10.5 (because they don't officially use edition numbers) but now that the "new" rules are out, it's pretty clear that this update is a refresh rather than a reinvention. You don't need all new datasheets or new army books, or honestly even a new rulebook. You can keep on playing Warhammer 40,000 with just a few adjustments to how some rules work, and many of those changes are probably the way you've already doing as a house rule anyway. This is exactly the kind of update to a game system I like to see, because it demonstrates confidence in the system, and it gives me confidence that the game designers have actually been playing the game. Anybody can reinvent a game, and in fact it's easier than maintenance because you never have to create anything good enough to last for more than, in this case, 3 years. Refinement is something designers do when a game system is actually good.
The new rules are now available for download from Warhammer Community, and while they've literally been re-written they're also barely different from 10th edition rules. The meaningful changes are clarifications or adjustments to existing rules, or else ways to make a rule conform to what players were doing anyway.
Wargames are often more about objectives ("capture the flag" or "get to the opposite edge of the board") than they are about killing the other army. Removing enemy soldiers usually makes it easier for you to achieve your objective, but in the end it's usually the objective that counts the most. In 10th edition 40k, objectives were meta game elements. The mission map told you what location (in inches from the sides or the centre of the map) on the battlefield counted as objectives, and you dutifully placed a coin or some other token on your tabletop. That was the objective.
Obviously in-world, the army general isn't telling his troops to go stand by that gigantic Warhammer™ Collector Coin, so you had to imagine phrases like "hold that position" or "defend that location." It's not for soldiers to ask for reasons, so if they're told to go to a specific location on the map and defend it with their very lives, that's good enough.
In my games, I often used terrain pieces as objectives. I crafted a big computer terminal out of a matchbox and some spare model parts, and painted some crates red or blue, and used those as objective markers. Conveniently, that's basically how 11th edition defines objectives. Instead of coins on your tabletop, you can buy or craft regions of terrain to represent the objectives.
You can move through friendly units now, as long as you don't end your turn on top of a friendly model.
This is a nice feature, and seems pretty believable in all but a few edge cases. Usually, people can squeeze by other people. A lot of silly immersion-breaking moments used to happen when players felt obligated to stop playing and puzzle over whether a guardsman could take 2 seconds to step out of the way so a marine could walk by.
I never counted rotations anyway, but now you can rotate a model during its movement phase for free.
One of my favourite tactics in my home games was to string a unit out across the battlefield. I kept each model within 1 inch of the next model, so it wasn't cheating. It was arguably playing dirty, and I kinda knew it, but the rules didn't disallow it.
A model now maintains coherency by being within 2 inches from another model in that unit, and within 9" of all other models in that unit.
Warhammer 40,000 uses dice pools for rolling, but the rules were written as if you were rolling individually for each model. That's a reasonable way to express a rule, because what's true for a single roll is also true when you roll alike tests together. In fact, the 10th edition rulebook clearly defined a way to roll several attacks, optionally, at the same time. Personally, I've only ever witnessed players rolling alike tests together as one big dice pool.
The 11th edition rules assume you're rolling all attack dice for a specific kind of weapon as a pool of dice. When you're the one being attacked, you must indicate which models in the targeted unit have been hit. Each failed save gets assigned to the models you've indicated, beginning with the lowest rolls. This is super elegant but, again, is something that I think most people did anyway. When a unit takes a hit, I'm absolutely gonna say that a lowly foot soldier throws himself into the line of fire for the chance to become a martyr by saving the life of his brave commander. Because the alternative is for my big powerful character model to take damage, and that doesn't sound strategically sound.
I didn't love morale in Warhammer 40,000. I think Middle-earth does it much better.
It is changing for 11th edition, though. Now when a unit in your army gains the battle-shocked condition, it's persistent until that unit passes a battle-shock test during your Command phase. I think that's going to make the battle-shock condition potentially a lot more powerful, and I can already see how debilitating my Genestealer Cults Magus, or any number of Tyranid effects, will become using 11th edition rules.
This is one of the rules that excites, and terrifies, me the most.
I think I still prefer Horus Heresy charges to 40k charges, even with the 11th edition revision of the rule. Here's how they all compare:
It's intriguing, and believable, to allow for a new target. However, I feel like there are lots of times when what I want to charge is the only thing I can charge, or need to charge. I don't imagine I'll feel like a unit's short-term objective is going to suddenly change based on convenience. I could be wrong, but basically I think I still prefer Horus Heresy charges, and frankly I'll probably steal that rule for my 40k games.
A successful charge also grants your unit Fights First (and I mean, really really Fights First, even before a unit with Fights First.)
Melee in 11th edition is a little more fluid than in 10th edition. The new fight sequence seems to have been designed to keep as many soldiers engaged as possible, which feels very believable. It always felt strange when you moved a unit into melee, but had a few stragglers lagging behind and therefore left out of the fight. It didn't break immersion outright, because you could just remind yourself that it takes time to cover distance, and at the freeze-frame moment that you start rolling for melee attacks, some soldiers are still running into the fray. But just as often, you're looking at the battlefield wondering why those two soldiers in the back couldn't have just stepped forward really quick to get included in the mutual slaughter.
In 11th edition, your troops pile in BEFORE the attacks start. That's 3 inches of "free" movement to ensure that once you're in melee, you have somebody to smack.
After the fighting's done, your troops consolidate to ensure everyone's got somebody to smack next turn.
In some roleplaying games, this kind of thing can discourage movement, but I think in a wargame you've got enough options, enough cannon fodder, and enough calculated risks to get locked into close-quarters combat while also having the freedom to move out of it if you absolutely have to. I think the 11th edition change seems like a pretty elegant improvement.
To make melee even deadlier, there's the new keyword Cleave, which is basically Blast but for melee. It grants you an additional attack dice for every 5 models in your target unit, so you're likely to deal more damage, which means your opponent has more wounds to distribute. You can imagine doing a Cleave attack against a group of soldiers and clearing out 2 or 3 of them all at once.
It's also worth noting that engagement range is now 2 inches instead of just 1 inch, which means fights can break out from twice the previous distance.
Standard benefit of caver now imposes a -1 BS to anyone targeting you. I'm pretty sure that's how I've been playing it anyway, so oops.
Higher ground now grants +1 BS to you when you shoot from a position that's 3" or more above your target. This is nice, and it's something that I often wanted to grant anyway, but rarely felt it fair to suddenly decide on mid-way through a game. I love that this a rule now.
You can't use the same stratagem more than once in any one phase. This rarely comes up for me, with the possible exception of grenades and command re-rolls.
A model leading a unit now retains the bonus features granted to that unit, even after the unit is destroyed.
This one is interesting to me, because I thought it was very intentional that a leader model got debuffed once its entire unit was destroyed. I guess losing all your meat shields is disadvantage enough.
I haven't played with this rule yet, but I like the feel of it. I want my character models to be just a little over-powered, because it feels bad when they're not. How it'll actually play out, I don't know.
When you bring in a unit from Reserves, they only have to be 8 inches from an enemy rather than 9 inches.
When a model flies, drop 2 inches from its move attribute.
I play fast and loose with flying and falling, because it's science fantasy and the rule of cool is important to the genre. This rule, however, seems very simple and I think I like it.
After 3 years, throwing out the old game and re-writing it from the ground up is not reasonable. That's been the Games Workshop pattern, and it may well be in the future again, but in 2026 at least there's been a reprieve. The rules are the same but for a few meaningful improvements and a few minor adjustments. It's left me very pleased with the state of the game. Edition updates don't effect me much, because most of the 40k I play are home games with friends or solo games, but I'm a fan of the fictional universe and the game, so I don't mind having a continued excuse to engage with it. I'm happy to stick with an old edition, but if staying on an old edition means the stuff Games Workshop is producing is no longer relevant for my gaming table, then eventually my gaming table becomes a closed circuit.
With the 11th edition updates, I can stay on the 40k train for another 3 years, and that's kind of nice because changing trains can sometimes take effort. And anyway, this kind of update matches up nicely with my personal design philosophy. Refining a game so its rules align with how people have demonstrably been playing it is reasonable and rational, and more importantly it's responsible stewardship. This is exactly the kind of update I want.
All images in this post copyright Games Workshop.