PDA

View Full Version : WH 40k or Fantasy?



Kabal of The Ordo Mallius
25-01-2008, 01:05
I have played warhammer 40k for about a year and a bit now. I play Dark Eldar and Space Marines. I am getting a bit bored of the game and am eagerly awaiting 5th edition. Anyways, if I were to start fantasy which army should I choose? Could you relate the armies in a way I could understand like,
Tau = Dwarves, or something? A basic rundown on the strengths of each race would be appreciated too. I don't want to buy a lot of fantasy to find i dont like the army. I already know I don't want Orcs, Ogres, or Skaven. I am thinking about Vampire Counts because they look cool; though i don't know what kind of an army they are.

Baltar
25-01-2008, 01:20
Well, if you want to use equivalency -

Empire = Imperial Guard, Space Marines
Orcs = Orks (shocker I know)
High Elves = Eldar
Wood Elves = Ranger Eldar
Dark Elves = Dark Eldar
Necrons = Tomb Kings or Vampire Counts
Hordes of Chaos = Chaos Space Marines

Tyranids and Tau don't really have Fantasy equivalents.

But, that is just background, its doesn't mean that they generally play like that sort of faction.

What play style do you like?

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
25-01-2008, 01:21
VCounts currently have one of the best lores in the game. They can be really strong magically and Vampire Counts are as badass as chaos lords. Vampire Lords even more so.

However, VC has really weak troops in contrast to the awesome characters. Skeletons and zombies are weak but cheap and you can make more of them during the game. Grave Guard and Black Knights have killing blow and decent stats so their quite useful.

Besides, Vampires are getting a new book in March so you might want to wait until then to start a VC army.

Khorghan
25-01-2008, 01:49
deamons = deamons

SilentTempest
25-01-2008, 02:07
I might just clarify that unlike 40K with its space marines, Fantasy doesn't really have a 'favourite son" as such. By that, I mean an army that gets more attention than everything else put together.

Empire = (More like IG than Marines) All-rounders. They aren't truly exceptional at anything, but they can do everything to a reasonable degree (shooting, magic, close combat, maneuvering...) If anything, they're regarded as having good warmachines and good value Knights.

Beasts of Chaos - (???) I don't know much about these apart from that a major feature of their army is Beast Herds, which are able to appear unexpectedly on table edges thanks to their "Ambush" rule.

Dark Elves - (Dark Eldar) Mobility-based. Regarded as a bit of a veteran's army at the moment, as they're considered by many to be underpowered right now. Getting a new book near the end of 2008.

Dwarves - (??? Almost like Plague marines for resilience) Slow, but absolutely rock solid. Great leadership, so they'll hold fast even if they lose combat, and 1v1 a dwarf block will beat most things. Flipside is that the can potentially get outmaneuvered by any other army. Quite often rely on bunching up in a corner to avoid exposing their flanks and getting outmaneuvered, and using shooting to force opponents to come to them. Great, reliable warmachines.

Dogs of War - (???)Doesn't have a proper book at the moment. They're mercenaries that CAN be fielded as an army, but you can also just take a unit from their PDF "book" and use it in your normal army.

Bretonnia - (Closest thing to Space Marines, although I'll be shot by many Bret players for saying it;)) Knights. Very, very good knights. Can take peasants too, but many people choose to go all Knights (although many others insist that a balanced Knights/foot peasants list is better). Unfortunately regarded by some people as a cheesy list because of the notion that they are just a point-and-click army not requiring much tactical finesse.

High Elves - (Eldar) Small, elite, quite hurty. People are b*tching and moaning about them all getting Always Strikes First in their latest incarnation (In Fantasy, it's important that normally chargers always get to strike first. Imagine if your Dark Eldar struck AFTER things in combat, and that's basically what High Elves do to some of the more fragile races).

Hordes of Chaos - (CSM) Expensive Knights and troops that are quite hurty, and some cheaper fodder troops. Also include daemons. No ranged power apart from magic. Chosen Khornate Chaos Knights are regarded as the single hardest hitting unit in the game.

Lizardmen - (???) A great variety of unit types, from light skirmishing Skinks to rock solid blocks of troops (Saurus). They have one of the best mage characters in the game, which frequently gets used at higher points games by many players as a major feature of the army. Good leadership.

Ogre Kingdoms - (???) Small units of big, fast-moving hurty beasts, backed up by big units of fodder. Regarded as quite hard to win with, and considered by others to be an affront to Warhammer as the book apparently rewrote a lot of warhammer history.

Orcs and Goblins - (Orks) One of the most diverse armies, up there with Empire. Lots of different unit types. Can be unpredictable at times, with units occasionally rushing forward or standing and doing nothing at inopportune time, or at the perfect time to catch your opponent off-guard. Considered very humourous/amusing, and rarely played by guys who just wanna win (at least in my experience, O&G players play them for love of the army's character).

Skaven - Huge hordes of ratmen. Disease, pestilence, black magic, no care for life. These guys can shoot their own troops if it means they might hit the enemy, their cowardly leaders can lead from the back of units (all other army leaders must lead from the front to gain anything from it). Wierd techno-rats with laser cannons and machineguns (seriously!), others with big mutated beasts, more that are obsessed with disease and decay (Nurgle rats, kind of), and assassin rats.

Tomb Kings - (Necrons) Very, very reliable, and very reliant on magic. Undead means they'll never run from combat, but take extra wound's (Think of the Fearless rules in 40k) Again, considered a bit of a veteran's army. Rely on characters, as if you kill their main Wizard, the army starts to crumble. (If that happens, you'll probably lose). Magic phase can leave opponents bewildered as to how they're supposed to stop all that (Answer being you've just gotta stop the RIGHT bits, cos you can't stop it all). Egyptian-based in fluff, and pretty much all skeletons.

Vampire Counts - Think Dracula, but then a few other styles of vampire too. Armies consist of things like zombies and skeletons, banshees that can scream and pop people's brains, ravenous wolves and bats. Again, if your character dies, the army crumbles. New book coming in the next few months.

Wood Elves - Fastest/most maneuverable race in the game. Very lightly armoured elves. Also have Forest spirits (the trees fight for them!) which are quite tough. Some people don't like playing them because the Wood Elves won't just engage them, rather they'll skirt around the edges, shooting, weakening the enemy, before charging in to finish them off.

The most basic differences between 40K and Fantasy is that movement makes a lot of difference. You can run around behind an enemy's line, and be an inch away, and there'll be little they can do if you know what you're doing (likewise though, they can do it to you, depending what army each of you are playing). Armies have different movement rates, and can move double speed if they choose to forgo things like shooting or delicate maneuvering.

The other big thing is Combat Resolution. Units get points towards combat resolution just for having ranks in the blocks, or having more guys, or a banner-bearer. Making this work for you (and negating it for your opponent) is a serious consideration. It makes the difference between winning and losing.

Finally, Leadership is a bigger issue. Especially with the way 40K is going, nothing ever runs away in that game. In Fantasy, Ld 7 is considered average, and generally if you're taking leadership tests, there'll often be negative modifiers assocated with that, so you WILL get plenty of units running. There are also rules whereby one panicing unit can spread panic in others, and there are stories of oor Leadership armies like Goblins and Skaven having one panicing unit result in most of their army running off the board.

Hopefully that's helped a little bit. The last thing I'll say though, is that if you think Vampires are cool, then go Vampires. Pick your army based on what's cool and what models you like, because any army is capable of winning in this game. WFB is more cerebral than 40K, and a good player can win even with an "inferior" army and army list. For every story of "Man, I just can't beat Wood Elves with my Empire", there's another of "You have problems? My Empire absolutely murders Wood Elves!". (Substitute armies as appropriate :P)

Caboose123
25-01-2008, 17:25
I will do the same thing as tempest, and comment about the races...

Empire- More like space marines, they are the "all rounders" can do everything, but rarely is it the best at anything in particular. They have cheap hard hitting units in knights (like assault marines?) but if bogged down, quickly get killed. They have decent artillery and shooting, but in fantasy shooting is very static, and they will also die in combat.

Beasts of chaos- Maybe they could be compared with Nids, they have an unusual fighting style, with skirmishers that rank up (you dont need to know the details, it basically allows them to move through terrain, which other units are bad at). Their troops are cheap enough, and pack some punch, they have cheaper units in the hounds, and monster equivalents in shaggoths, chariots, minotaurs and trolls. This list can be incororated into Hordes of Chaos

Hordes of Chaos- CSM, khorne maybe? they have no shooting whatsoever, (1 expensive and quite literally rare choice, released in the storm of chaos campaign), they have expensive troops that pack a great deal of punch. No matter what kind of combat never count these guys out. Their chosen are almost unstoppable in a head-to-head fight, but, these guys are expensive, and have some of the smalles armies in fantasy.

Lizardmen- (Nids???) They have an unusual army list, they have troops that can compare to the hordes of chaos in saurus, or flimsy, short range shooters in skinks. They have Monnsters galore which is why i compared them to nids. With flying terradons (Pterodactyls lookalikes), Stegadon (Stegasaurus) and the fearsome Carnosaur (T-rex) they are all ridden. The Carnosaur is a fearsome mount for your character, slightly worse than a dragon. The stegadon had about 5 skinks on top, and a great bow, their only long range shooting, it does extra damage on the charge (as do chariots) and is tough to kill, easier t make flee however. Terradons are light flying units that pose a threat to archers and cannons. They also have the most potent magic user in the game in the slann priest, but he costs a bunch.

High Elves- Eldar, They have strong magic, shooting and combat, and specialise in each one. They can do everything very well, but could do badly attempting everything in one list, as they are very expensive, and are easy to kill (the highest T for an elf is 3). You should have a bloody game with your opponent, losing many guys, but inflicting damage as well. They compete in every aspect of the game.

Dark Elves- These guys need a book/update, so i would compare these guys to dark eldar. They have shooting magic and combat, but specialise in combat. Their magic is short range and generally encourages the army to advance. Their shooting is decent, but could have problems competing with other armies'. They are expensive, and raher easy to kill, being elves. For combat they have knights that, like lizardmen, ride on lizard beasts that are quite fearsome. Overall, like dark eldar these guys could pose a problem, you would need experience and skill at playing fantasy, so i would stay away from them

Wood Elves- Opposites of dark elves, could be compared to tau, IG... They have strong shooting, in the shape of their archers. They specialise in moving through woodscape, which is an advantage that should never be overlooked. They have strong magic which shouldnt be overlooked. They are frail and battles could be a rush to kill your opponent! However they use tree spirits such as dryads and treemen (these are harder to kill than your average elf). Dryads are powerful skirmishers, and treemen are monstrosities in combat. People may disagree but i feel they do very well at shooting. They can compete in all phases however like all elves.

TK- Last person compared them to necrons, that may be accurate, or not. They have skeleton troops (which are fairly cheap...expensive for ability i would say), and they can keep repairing their units and bringing them back to squad size. They have special units like necrons however with ushabti, which are walking statues, the Screaming skull catapult the casket of controversy (i mean souls... :p) and the bone giant. Bone giants are wildly regarded as being not worth their points, but can do spectacular if your rolling is up to scratch... The Casket is a devastating piece, with the strongest spell in the game, but its static (works on every enemy that sees it) and can be dispelled (rule for the magic phase, spells can be dispelled, its really only important to know that they will stop this.) The screaming skull catapult is a strong stone thrower, that cause chaos in their lines. The main feature of TKs though, is their unrelenting magic phase, they should get some spells through. Their spells mainbly effect your own units, but have short range. Also if your heirophant (main priest) dies, your army starts to crumble, its not automatic loss, but will probably result in defeat if that happens.

Vampire Counts- Won't say anything about them, they are being re-released in about a month. Their main features are probably like TKs, they can raise zombies, to join pre-existing ones or create new ones to rise from the ground! If their general is killed, unlike the tomb kings, will result in an automatic defeat, as your army dies extremly quickly to what is know as crumbling. I would wait to see what these guys are like though in a month...

Dwarves- Space Marine gunline? They are tough, and very hard to kill. They will almost never flee, and more importantly have (one of?) the best shooting phase in the game. They have rune empowered heroes and artiller; cannons, stone thrower, and bolt thrower to name a few. They are slow, and static "come and get me" armies are common. They have the lowest movement in the game (in warhammer things have a Movement value rather than just be bundled into some generic category). They have 1 major weakness, no magic whatsoever, though they are naturally resistant to magic themselves.

Skaven (Rat-men)- Orks. When they work they can be devastating, when they dont, they can be hilarious, even you will find yourself laughing at the spectacular show they produce. They have 2 main builds, they are the arguably best horde army in the game, and can have 100s of guys. Or a twinned magic shooting army, Their magic and shooting are bother very effective when they work. Their cannon, the warp lightning cannon has a Str of 2,4,6,8,10, orsomething has gone wrong fired in a straight line 5D6" away, IIRC. They are the only race able to fire into combat, in fact relish the chance to take out their enemies as well as their hated comrades :D. They have low Ld, boosted by numbers, like orks, but they will have trouble holding in a prolonged combat.

Orks-Orks This is a no brainer. Orks are similar to their 40k counterparts, but with exceptions. Goblins are good, they can effectivly do horde armies, and all-goblin armies do exist and somtimes work! Goblins are split into 3, forest, night, and common, night goblins are the most cowardly, but have fanatics, which are hidden in their units and spin out when an enemy comes close. They do massive damage but are uncontrollable... Forest appear with the spider riders, which are faster than the orks usual mounts. Orks use boars, Forest goblins use spiders, and common goblins use wolves. Orks have devastating magic if used right, their lords are true monsters (like Vampire counts and chaos ones...) and their shooting is... it comes in large amounts, just like 40k orks. Throw enough mud at a wall. Still i have never heard of a shooting O&G list. Orks come in many sizes and shapes, there are black orks, who are the elites, the normal orks, and the savage orks, also elite orks.

Ogre Kingdoms- Dark Eldar? They rely on a blunt run forward and hit things with your club approach. They are fast, they are strong, they are tough, they are few. They come with gnoblar slaves/allies who are a mere 2 points (I think, maybe 3...) and units are often compared to an ogre, or 2... The gnoblars have a role in the army, some would say they're not vital however. Ogres have little shooting (pun intended) with short range gnoblars throwing sharp stuff which is completly worthless, and a scraplauncher, a massive beast mounted catapult. Ogre magic is wierd, their spells often inflict wounds on the ogres (who each have 3) or the butcher (ogre magic user). They are a blunt army, but may need practice, as a unit of ogres charging is devastating, but if facinf a strong foe, will need clever use to get past.

Dogs of War- I dont know who they resemle. They are an old army (as in the last one to get written about), not the oldest. They are an unusual twist on the normal human list. They are an army of fortune, with a paymaster (who carries the money... into battle) being the general and the battle standard bearer (in fantasy most amries can have a BSB, it helps you hold if beaten in combat) They utilise dogs of war, hireable units, as well as a standard army list. They use halfling archers and the dreaded "pot" which is a halfling chef lobbing burning stew over the enemy...They have ogres, they have knights, they have almost everything. They have the best spearmen in the game, with pikeman shining through (pikemen fight in 4 ranks and get bonuses against cavalry and chariots when charged, it all means their solid troops) They have skirmishing duelists with pistols. They are a wierd little known or played of army, they could be an interesting experience. (they have no army book however, and are in a warhammer annual)

Chaos Dwarves- LatD+CSM, another wierd little known of army (honestly i know little, even where to find their rules) They are the race with the oldest most recent stuff written about them. I have heard they are terrible foes, and can be overpowered. Their shooting is wierd with Str based on ranks or something, and they have powerful war machine(s). Their magic could best be classed as normal. They use slave races or something, and an army could have hobogoblins, dwarves, bull centaurs and some orks. I know very little on them however, and you shouldnt really take my word on them...

Brettonia- Eldar. They are an essentially all knight army. They have a few peasants as archers and to man their sole war machine the trebuchet. Their amries offer a painting challenge, and their knights are varied and interesting. They take Vows for their knights granting protection. Their magic usually consists of a mage with defensive items. Their knights have a special formation; the lance formation which helps them in combat. They have Pegasus knights, knights on horses with wings, Questing knights, and of course the devastating grail knights. Many regard the army as cheesy, but thats a little too juvenile for my liking. IMHO, having an army made up of nothing but knights could be a challenge.


That... was not brief. I tried to include the main general things about the army (in an impartial manner, i hope i achieved that and didnt take anything for granted...), as well as their main units. I may be short in some areas. Its difficult to compare them to 40k. If going to fantasy buy the rulebook first. Its a bit more in-depth in terms of movement and combat, and looks a lot more confusing, but its not, trust me. You should get a feel for the rules, and the armies. The most important thing is that magic and shooting is seperate, where as in 40k, magic would mainly be shooting based, or not relevent at all.

Anyway, good luck with fantasy, and as Tempest said, you should take an army that appeals to you, that you could imagine yourself using.

tanglethorn
25-01-2008, 19:58
I play both systems and I have to say that I agree with Tempest's post a lot.

Empire is redefined more like IG and Brettonia is more like Space Marines.

I think it's important to not just compare the different armies to their 40 parts.

The the benefits of Fantasy vs 40k is in the actual game mechanics/Strategy and the difference in each game's player base.

Fantasy tends to more more Strategy centric and relies more on maneuvering and the LD stat when compared to 40k.

One factor that a lot of people tend to forget is that Characters (Lords, Heroes, Mages, etc...) tend to be a lot more customizable and powerful compared to 40k. In fantasy it's almost possible for a properly geared lord to single handedly charge a unit and watch them lose combat and flee. Even more so if the Lord is attached to a unit. (Typically its a bad idea to leave a Lord unattached to a unit since there are no longer any rules against targetting him with ranged weapons and warmachines.

If you want a recommendation for a good starter army I would list the below. Whatever you do start small, like around 500-1000 points just to see if you like the army's playstyle:

Dwarves - Easy to learn and pick up. Since there is no magic phase, it's one less turn you have to deal with and you will pick up the game that much quicker. Very resilient troops allow for a forgiving army when tactical mistakes are made. Be wary of Fear causing units that could cause an Auto-Break (mandatory fleeing if you lose combat). Dwarves are known for having strong character options and high leadership and good armor saves.

Lizardmen - (My current favorite) - They tend to have a little bit of everything and more! Weak, but fast and cheap Skinks make great distractions, but can still pack a punch due to their ranged poison weapons. Watch out for their low Leadership. Saurus are the next upgrade of core troops that are a little more on the elite side (cost is double that of a skink). They move a little slower than skinks, but are pretty strong in CC. Good Leadership is boosted due to the Coldblooded LM special rule. Lizardmen can opt to have one of the strongest magic options in the game if they want to dump a lot of points into a Slann Mage. I dont have enough room to go on about Lizardmen, but they do have a lot of options when it comes to Monsters as well. Easy to paint army if you are confident with Drybushing

Brettonia - I'm going to recommend them based on what a lot of players tend to say. An army with great armor saves tends to be more forgiving when tactical errors are made. Knights move fast, hit hard and have great armor saves. Their magic is a little on the weak/defensive side, but it's still a good low model count army to start with if you are just getting into the game.

The above 3 are known for players just getting into Fantasy. By no means feel that these are the ones you have to choose, but keep in mind some of the other armies have a lot of exceptions/special rules that can take away from the core mechanics of the game.

Sure Vampire Counts sounds cool, but IMHO you need to have a very firm grasp on rank/file, the Fantasy Magic system and how Fear works in order to be successful. It takes a certain finesse, but if you tend to pick up rules and strategies fast, then you could do well off the bat (no pun intended)

Orcs and Goblins are too unpredictable. They look fun on paper, but for a beginner you will be frustrated in regards to how much they lose vs win. The current Orcs and Goblins book was recently rewritten and in my opinion there is a lot of errata that still needs to be addressed. Certain units got hit hard and others got somewhat of a boost when it was apparent nether adjustment was needed in the first place. Animosity can make certain scenarios complicated given the fact it can really mess with your strategy and create a lot of grey areas in the rules (in game arguments). In most books it's fairly easy to understand the intent of the developer, but not so much with some of the rules in the new OnG book.

Anyway, I hope this helps.

right eye
25-01-2008, 21:15
I got a question also about the 40k fantasy difference, is the combat alot different in 40k due to the fact that there inst much rank and file guys? or do they all just fight like skirmishers

SilentTempest
26-01-2008, 12:20
@ Tanglethorn's post:

Tanglethorn gives a good description of the armies, and it's true that the races he mentions are probably some of the more forgiving ones, that don't require quite as much tactical finesse.

However, I can't agree with his urging the original poster away from Vampire Counts, if that's what appeals to the OP. You have to pick something that just sings to you, that you think is just plain cool, rather than trying to logically sift through everyone's opinions about what the "right" army is for you. The "right" army is almost always the one that draws you to the game in the first place. I learned that one the hard way.

It MAY be true that Vampires are a little harder to play than, say, Dwarves. But you'll have more fun playing with the army you're keen on, even if you lose your first few games, rather than picking an army that is the "sensible" choice, walking all over people with it, but not really caring. Whatever army you play, if you put some thought into your games, you'll do okay. Pick the cool one!

@ right eye's post:
In 40k all units basically move as skirmishers. In combat, IIRC, the only combat res is basically counting up the number of kills you inflict on the other side. Winner is the side that does fewer kills. Leadership is modified ONLY by how much the losing unit is outnumbered. (IMHO, it's a very simplistic system, which is part of the reason I've moved to Fantasy)

intellectawe
26-01-2008, 13:20
A lot of very fair comparisons, but one in particular strikes me as odd.

Dark Eldar are NOT Dark Elves when you are comparing armies based on Game Play alone.

Dark Eldar are actually like Tomb Kings.


Since you play Dark Eldar, then you will appreciate Tomb Kings.

Tomb Kings can be mounted on Chariots as a core troop choice. Almost no other army can do this. This is akin to mounting your Warriors and Wyches in Raiders.

Tomb Kings can also achive the vaulted and rare ( in Fantasy ) first turn charge, much like Dark Eldar can. Tomb Kings use Magic, and unlike every other army out there, TK magic is Reliable. You use their Magic to move your units a second time during a turn, thus, allowing your Chariots a first turn charge.

TK units are Fragile, like DE in a way. TK have 'deep striking units' like DE have called Tomb Scorpions which are considered to be one of the best special units in the entire game.

The only simularities Tomb Kings share with Necrons is the Look. But Vampire Counts play closer to Necrons than TK do because Vampire Counts can raise more dead than TK can.

So if you want an unappreciated, powerful army that has it's strengths underestimated because the army is rarely played, usually by veteran players, Tomb Kings fit the bill as Fantasy's Dark Eldar army.

AllisterCaine
26-01-2008, 20:11
Just keep on repeating to yourself "Leadership is important, leadership is important, leadership..." and you should be fine.

Id personally say dark eldar are more like wood elves.

combat in 40k is like i punch you and you punch back and wed just do it again the next turn because combat resolution is like nonexistant and everyone has like ld 10.

thomas2
27-01-2008, 13:46
As AllisterCaine said in 40K combat they just hit each other thanks to leadership and lack of Combat resolution. No armies have to really worry about running from combat, Tau and Guard die too quickly to run, Chaos and Grey Knights are mainly fearless, Marines, Eldar and Necrons have good leadership, while 'nids have synapse that i think makes them fearless or something.

FurryMiguell
27-01-2008, 15:15
Ok, I'll try adding more mighty generals to the forces of evil (moahahah, in a spooky way):
Hordes of Chaos! Mighty hind kicking warriors in huge armour with mega axes! They got awesome lords, cool daemons and the nasty cannon of theirs, above all!

Skaven are way cool though, cause of their funny looking shapes, intresting background, and nasty machinery. also, the greyseers are cool!

My best choise though, the Dark Elves. They are dark, evil and ready to kill. waht more could you want!? They are way cooler than other elves, and all knows regular humies is no fun :)

Oh, and dont forget VC, with their cool vampires and zombies!

Cheers:D

intellectawe
27-01-2008, 15:19
Well, I can easily say that combat in Fantasy is equally boring.

Have a block of models with a static 5 Combat Resolution? All you have to do is beat that. Nothing more intellectual about about that at all.

Also, games in Fantasy are the same every single time. There are no scenarios at all, well, none that even compare to 40k's scenarios. Terrain in Fantasy is virtually pointless, as 95% of all units in the game avoid terrain. Want to use terrain? You must be playing wood elves, and, um, thats it. People complain that 40k is boring. Well, I find most of them just play Cleanse, and never touch other scenarios. In Fantasy, all you have is cleanse.

Don't let the players here lure you in with Rose Tinted Glasses. You should here all sides of the story.

What about 40k are you bored with? Maybe if you tell me I can help you with Fantasy better.

happy_doctor
27-01-2008, 15:44
Well, you might want to check the "new player's guide" over at the warseer front page. It gives a basic rundown of all the available warhammer fantasy factions.

http://warseer.com/warhammer_fantasy_armies_overview

FurryMiguell
28-01-2008, 07:27
go with Warhammer! Much more fun. I mostly think so cause I'm a huuuge fantasy geek, and i only have s smal spacemarine force compared to the thousands of Fantasy miniatures in my armies (though i do not doubt the Sm force would wipe their hinds with my fantasy models:p)

Cheers:D

Goruax
28-01-2008, 12:26
Also, games in Fantasy are the same every single time. There are no scenarios at all, well, none that even compare to 40k's scenarios. Terrain in Fantasy is virtually pointless, as 95% of all units in the game avoid terrain. Want to use terrain? You must be playing wood elves, and, um, thats it. People complain that 40k is boring. Well, I find most of them just play Cleanse, and never touch other scenarios. In Fantasy, all you have is cleanse.

You have to seriously reconsider the effect terrain has on a Fantasy game, since you're obviously missing the point.
Terrain has a huge effect on the game:
"Oh look, there's a huge clump of trees in our way!"
"Erm, let's walk through it and spend 500 turns in there not doing anything except wasting our general's pocketbook!"
"Great idea chief!"

You deliberately avoid terrain because it slows you down, or use it to anchor your flank because the enemy will not be able to/have difficulty moving through it to get to you.
As for scenarios, that depends on the players - some like simple pitched battles, others prefer story driven, objective based games.
Hell, 40K is the same; some prefer beating the living s***e out of each other whereas others love a breakout.


Don't let the players here lure you in with Rose Tinted Glasses. You should here all sides of the story.

He had already said;

Anyways, if I were to start fantasy which army should I choose?

We're not trying to lure him away from 40k, because he'd already decided he might want to try fantasy. 40K and Fantasy can live together in harmony ;)

Jack of Blades
28-01-2008, 13:32
40K and Fantasy can live together in harmony ;)

*Tears the neck off another 40k player*
... Sorry? :rolleyes:

kaulem
28-01-2008, 14:01
I've been playing 40K and Fantasy for about 15 years and I must say that I much prefer the 'game' of Fantasy even though I much prefer the 'Fluf' and model range of 40K.

IMHO, the game mechanics of Fantasy are much more centered on the strategic movement of your units which lead to very interesting battles when you are fighting a skilled opponent.

IMO, 40K does'nt offer that.


As for your starting army... Look at the figs and choose the army that you love.

kaulem
28-01-2008, 14:03
Also, WHY Can't I flee from a charge of Khorne Beserkers in 40K???

intellectawe
28-01-2008, 14:11
You have to seriously reconsider the effect terrain has on a Fantasy game, since you're obviously missing the point.

Actually, you prove my point.



Terrain has a huge effect on the game:
"Oh look, there's a huge clump of trees in our way!"
"Erm, let's walk through it and spend 500 turns in there not doing anything except wasting our general's pocketbook!"
"Great idea chief!"

You deliberately avoid terrain because it slows you down, or use it to anchor your flank because the enemy will not be able to/have difficulty moving through it to get to you.

This is exactly why terrain is worthless. Flyers can't use it effectively,chariots can't use it at all, and any other unit moving through it moves half movement and can only see 2" in and out. Hence why people avoid terrain.

As for using it to anchor a flank? 40k doe that, but in 40k, you can actually enter a building or forest and be able to do things effectively. In Fantasy, it is 2 hills and 2+ trees. How fun. Trees that you KNOW where the flank attack is coming from, so there is no strategy there, unless it is your first game of fantasy ever and you have no idea that enemy cavalry is coming around the trees.

So yeah, terrain is pretty much 'less tactical' BY FAR than it is in a supposed tacticless game like 40k.



As for scenarios, that depends on the players - some like simple pitched battles, others prefer story driven, objective based games.

Yeah, how fun! It is either the same 'cleanse/kill' mission or a mission based on events, in which you cannot change. Wow! I am assaulting the dwarf hall again! How fun!



Hell, 40K is the same; some prefer beating the living s***e out of each other whereas others love a breakout.

40k has the option of boring Cleanse, but it also has 30+ scenarios NOT based on history, so ever game is different.

$0k can easily turn any scenario into a History based one full of rich story and back ground.



We're not trying to lure him away from 40k, because he'd already decided he might want to try fantasy. 40K and Fantasy can live together in harmony ;)

My comment was directed towards allistarcaine and thomas2, who have some warped idea that combat in 40k is a lot less 'whatever' than fantasy. I needed to set the record straight since we are describing the game, not just armies.

I understand that I am posting 'pro' 40k comments, and that will only get me lambasted by the fantasy community. It happens when you try to be as unbiased as possible.

Caboose123
28-01-2008, 16:31
Intellectawe, terrain has a massive impact on games.

Any area of terrain is a major speedbump, regular units cant move through it, but skirmishers and units with special rules can, making them even more valuable. They block line of sight so your units dont get shot, or a unit can hide behind ready to charge an unwitting foe. Flyers can fly past terrain like rivers etc. making them handy as well. Buildings have the new rules which can make them very powerful to hold as well. Terrain never goes in the centre of a fantasyy board (as a general rule) as it impacts the game too much, in 40k the opposite is true, terrain is put in the centre (usually) so it actually effects the game.

There was a fantasy random game generator, which is on GW site, with awesome special rules. Down to deployment zones and special rules for VPs at the end, and scenario rules, 1 of which (of the top of my head) is that during each players magic phase both players roll a dice, and the winner gets a dispel dice or power dice (depending on who won) for that phase. In short, you play the same missions over and over, that doesnt mean they're aren't a lot of missions.

I heard (on this forum) that 40k is getting a scenario book, just tought that might be relevant.

Mr. Smuckles
28-01-2008, 16:40
Serious fanboy rage going on in this thread.

Hilarious!

thomas2
28-01-2008, 19:31
My comment was directed towards allistarcaine and thomas2, who have some warped idea that combat in 40k is a lot less 'whatever' than fantasy. I needed to set the record straight since we are describing the game, not just armies.


I'm not insulting 40K, its my main game system currently collecting 2 armies to one, just its CC is more charge everyone in and keep hacking until they're all dead. CC leadership and combat resolution are lessened in importance to just killing your opponent, which i believe to be appropriate to the background.

tanglethorn
28-01-2008, 21:05
Well, I can easily say that combat in Fantasy is equally boring.

Have a block of models with a static 5 Combat Resolution? All you have to do is beat that. Nothing more intellectual about about that at all.

Also, games in Fantasy are the same every single time. There are no scenarios at all, well, none that even compare to 40k's scenarios. Terrain in Fantasy is virtually pointless, as 95% of all units in the game avoid terrain. Want to use terrain? You must be playing wood elves, and, um, thats it. People complain that 40k is boring. Well, I find most of them just play Cleanse, and never touch other scenarios. In Fantasy, all you have is cleanse.

Don't let the players here lure you in with Rose Tinted Glasses. You should here all sides of the story.

What about 40k are you bored with? Maybe if you tell me I can help you with Fantasy better.

You couldn't be more wrong about Terrain and fantasy. Terrain forces units to spend movement on wheeling or reforming to either brace for a charge or prepare for one.

1. Terrain blocks LOS.

2. Spells can make Terrain cause demage

3. Skirmishing units and characters can run through most terrain without a penalty.

4. Flyers can use terrain to great advantage

5. Terrain affects deployment

6. Terrain can destroy certain units

7. Terrain provides cover bonuses to those hiding within

I could go on about the effects of terrain on Fantasy, but I think I've made my point.

Again, I'll state I play and like both games, but I prefer Fantasy for several reasons.

One big one comes to mind....charge reactions! Why cant I decide to run from chargers in 40k? Why cant I hold and shoot?

Rank bonuses are boring you say? If you pit one unit against another...maybe...but that usually doesnt happen in a real game fantasy . What makes the game system so wonderful, is that it rewards you charging units to the flank and rear.

In the meantime 40k units shoot and charge. That's it. You got it, point at a unit and shoot. Rinse and repeat for 6 turns.

I'll make it simple. Fantasy has a better rules system which allows for a more strategic game. 40k is a watered down version of Fantasy.

However, I have to say that the 40k storyline blows Fantasy's out of the water and for me that's all I need to enjoy a game of 40k.