PDA

View Full Version : Using warhammer forge units in normal games.



Nubl0
01-10-2011, 02:18
So down the local GW I just had somone refuse to play my skaven because I had taken the brood horror mount option. He also refused to play a friend of mine who splurged out on chaos dwarf at games day. Some people thought it was justifiable, other were slightly confused.

How do you all feel about the new units that can be taken in normal games?

I'll start with the brood horror. I might be biased but I really can't see whats nasty about this one, it's essentially a giant with a set number of attacks plus regen, nothing about it is to spectacular besides the regen which is easy enough to counter. The fact that I'm giving up a grey seer to field a tooled up combat skaven warlord probably skews the game in my opponents favour anyway.

IcedCrow
01-10-2011, 02:39
Nothing is nasty about them. Forgeworld units are typically weaker than traditional GW things. I have no problem with them, and they are more often than not allowed in tournaments and in GW store events. Those people will be mighty disappointed to run across them in tournaments if they go to them where they are allowed.

GraveGuard
01-10-2011, 02:45
It's usually either because a) never seen/played agianst the thing before and therefore scared of unknown quantity or b) person is just mean/being a git.

I know there's that whole Forgeworld GW thing about players permission to use them, but it's still a GW product you paid for it's in the lists so why shouldn't it be allowed.
There is of course the whole "tell them before hand that you intend to bring FW" but considering you don't tend to tell people what GW stuff is in your army before hand either it's just rather daft.

FashaTheDog
01-10-2011, 03:27
Welcome to what 40K players have been agonizing over for years now.

I personally am of the mindset of if you've got the rules and better yet the minis, then you should use it.

Jind_Singh
01-10-2011, 03:32
WHAT! Really? That's lame ducks, and that is being polite. Well you have learned a great lesson - don't play those dudes again!

If anyone took the time and effort to assemble a FW product and brought it out in a game I'd LOVE to see it in action!

I personally love Storm of Magic for the very reason I have access to lots of FW stuff.

But if anyone brought a FW unit in a normal game I always say yes - in a tournament perhaps I can see them not being allowed

Sexiest_hero
01-10-2011, 03:42
Depends on the unit.

Trustey
01-10-2011, 04:22
If you bought and painted the toys you should be able to play with them. Nobody can complain they are overpowered since they have every right to buy the exact same thing and play with it, and they chose something else.

I used to drag race a lot and I would always hear not fair, because I ran a supercharger. "Yeah I could do that too if I just went out and bought a supercharger." And I'd reply, "uhhh yeah, that's exactly why I built one what are you waiting for?"

I agree with Icedcrow. There's way harder standard lists that are undisputably legal. FW seems to make a far superior model, and then balance them a hair under what's already available and worth a little bit less than their points cost. Imagine if the HPA came from
FW only and people tried to run 2 of them...

Nubl0
01-10-2011, 04:22
Well the usual reason is.. "it's not in the book" I just wonder how these people feel about terrorghiests and hero choice banshees.. huh.

m1acca1551
01-10-2011, 05:16
WTF??

I'd ask them why?? and if they said FW units are OP, say fine game with them and field my 2 HPA... and spam the 13th... :P

People are scared of the unknown, they don't know the direct counter to it so fear it and avoid playing games against it. If you had asked me to play or your mate had, i'd be delighted to, just playing against a different mini or army can really add a positive experience to a game.

Alathir
01-10-2011, 06:05
That's astoundingly idiotic.

If someone wants to put it in the extra time and money to get those things together then I would be honoured to play against them, alot of the models are some of the best going around so I would jump at the chance to; especially in regards to Chaos Dwarfs!

eldargal
01-10-2011, 06:12
There is no justification for it, FW publications are as official as anything else, FW being a subsidiary of Games Workshop. I can see the sense in tournaments banning them as it means extra rules that not every player may be familiar with, but it really irritates me when that attitude starts creeping through to casual games.

Having said that it is within anyones rights to refuse to play whatever they don't like, all I can suggest is finding/starting a club with a more intelligent group of people so as to avoid the capricious idiocy of strangers.

Doommasters
01-10-2011, 07:51
Forgeworld rules seem pretty good to me and it adds flavour.

Misfratz
01-10-2011, 08:09
Well, there's a lot of anger here.

You should remember that playing a war-game is a cooperative activity and not one where you impose things on your opponent. Many people will have no idea what these FW things are, and so will be waryof them. Give them a chance to get used to it:

"ok, I'll play without him this time, but will you fight against him next time?"

There's no such thing as rights when it comes to war games. Consent is important.

H33D
01-10-2011, 08:15
Umm... speaking as a person who plays warhammer in an area where NO ONE has forge world models...

I wouldn't play someone with FW models unless it was a friendly game. If someone showed up to a tournament with a rat on a giant mount I would laugh and tell him to put it away or ill make a gigantic polar bear with a crew of dwarves on it for such occasions.

A good reason I can see for people not doing this is that some armies lack certain things for good reason. skaven characters dont get fast mounts or monstrous mounts normally do they? But if someone brought FW model slayers in their dwarf army then that would be stupid if someone complained.

Its fine if you are playing FW + WH.

Its not if you are playing WH.

Some people only play WH. Where I am at people don't play FW + WH but I doubt anyone would object in a friendly game.

xxRavenxx
01-10-2011, 08:51
Well the usual reason is.. "it's not in the book" I just wonder how these people feel about terrorghiests and hero choice banshees.. huh.

Those have a little sticker on them saying "official rules" though :)

I'm in the camp where I dislike the unofficial items. I often see the forgeworld stuff bringing "abuse" of the game, like people adding in specialist tanks which fill in gaps in their army, or using the giant avatar to provide cover to wraithlords. Or just using the nurgle daemon entries to power up their lists.

I often also see people using forgeworld rulesets as a way to switch out of say... the chaos book.


I'm unimpressed with the idea of forgeworld as a way of "patching" the game, so it works in your favour. If it wasn't for that, I'd not mind. As it stands, I do mind, and I refuse to play against forgeworld rules, because I don't feel that its fair to differentiate in front of people.

Wishing
01-10-2011, 08:52
Well the usual reason is.. "it's not in the book" I just wonder how these people feel about terrorghiests and hero choice banshees.. huh.

While I do think people should be open-minded, it's GW that have created this rift between "codex" and "FW" models and units, so the blame should primarily lie with them. The difference is in marketing.

The models produced by Citadel are meant to be bought by fans in large quantities. The models produced by FW are not, they are meant to be for collectors and connoiseurs.

Since days of old, when GW published the Citadel Journal which was full of fan-written material, GW had to explain that you could only use these things "with opponents permission" because it was all homebrewed non-tested rules. They used this concept for special characters as well, and it created a rift between "officially legal" and "permission only" in the fanbase.

GW understand that if a model is labeled "permission only", it will sell much worse than a model printed in an army book. Therefore, when they occasionally make models that aren't part of an army book currently, like the Terrorgeist, they have to publish them in White Dwarf with a note saying THIS COUNTS AS AN OFFICIAL ADDITION TO THE ARMY BOOK*. Otherwise it would automatically be considered "permission only", less people would buy it, and that's not acceptable to GW.

FW, on the other hand, aren't part of Citadel, their production and marketing are entirely separate, and there is no need for them to push their models for maximum sales. Therefore, their books and rules are considered an alternative, optional supplement to the main rules. FW are distinct and don't have a GW "officially legal" stamp, because GW sees no reason for them to have such.

Now, players of a less friendly and more competitive mindset, of which there are many, consider a big part of being good at the game to be knowing what your opponents' options are and what they do. To do this, they can study the army books for the game. When GW does their "official" WD releases, they know that they have to study those too. However, FW is not "officially legal", therefore they are not officially on the radar of being something you have to pay attention to.

In my view, that's why people refuse to play against FW and WF models. It's got nothing to do with balance, and everything to do with the fact that because they're expensive and rare, they're not part of the "canon", and competitive players therefore don't study them in order to know their opponents' strengths and weaknesses. They are an unknown variable in the puzzle that is the competitive metagame. And that makes some people uncomfortable

* I haven't read the WD issue myself, but I presume the Terrorgeist et al has this note somewhere.

Urgat
01-10-2011, 08:53
So down the local GW I just had somone refuse to play my skaven because I had taken the brood horror mount option. He also refused to play a friend of mine who splurged out on chaos dwarf at games day. Some people thought it was justifiable, other were slightly confused.

How do you all feel about the new units that can be taken in normal games?

Warhammer is a game, I like variety, those models and rules are made by a sister company to GW, and I'm not an ass: in short, I don't mind.



Well, there's a lot of anger here.

You should remember that playing a war-game is a cooperative activity and not one where you impose things on your opponent. Many people will have no idea what these FW things are, and so will be waryof them. Give them a chance to get used to it:

"ok, I'll play without him this time, but will you fight against him next time?"

"Will it be in the book next time? No."
You're not going to give them a chance to get used to it, because they won't play it. There's been discussions like that on Warseer before, and I'm sure everybody's seen it at least once in a local GW. People opposed to FW stuff are adamantine about it. The excuse that they don't know what the unit is never worked. People who field FW stuff are usually more hobbyists than powergamers (from my experience), chaps who will happily hand the book/printed profile of the unit for the opponent to peruse. The opponents don't care. The best way, quite frankly, is just to turn to another player (preferably one who is all "whoa it's cool! Is it cheap enough? I love your paint scheme, how does it fair ingame?") and say "what about you?". As you say, it's a cooperative activity. You don't have to let the other side spoil your fun, it goes both ways.

-note: I'm speaking friendly games there. I don't give a flying kick about tourneys, and I assume that FW models would be covered within their rules, so either they'd be allowed and the opponent bites it whether they like it or not, or they're not, and then it's the owner who does and keeps them home.

eldargal
01-10-2011, 09:01
I will never understand why people think a product published by a Games Workshop subsidiary is 'unofficial'. 'Unofficial' is fanmade stuff, Forge World is most certainly official. The design studios, while seperate, liase regularly, they are in the same building, the products are made in the same factory. What next, Black Library is fanfiction because it isn't GW?

To those who forbid FW rules, do you allow SoM?

I can see the sense in limiting tournaments to the basic ruleset to make it simpler, but beyond that it is absurd.


If by completely seperate you mean 'made in the same factory buy employees of a Games Workshop company', then yes. Also, you can buy the IA books on the GW website and through GW stores, and they are the rules not the models which is the issue here. Looking at one of the IA books, it has the official Warhammer 40,000 logo (which is copyright of Games Workshop) on the cover and on the title page it has the official logso of both Games Workshop and Forge World. Under the publishing information it says 'First published by Forge World, Games Workshop, Willow Road, Lenton'. Further down it says Forge World, its name and logo etc are all property of Games Workshop. No where does it talk about it being unofficial or requiring opponents permission. There is nothing that makes this unofficial beyond the petty discriminations of ignorant hobbyists.


FW, on the other hand, aren't part of Citadel, their production and marketing are entirely separate, and there is no need for them to push their models for maximum sales. Therefore, their books and rules are considered an alternative, optional supplement to the main rules. FW are distinct and don't have a GW "officially legal" stamp, because GW sees no reason for them to have such.

Richmt11
01-10-2011, 09:04
Depends on the unit.

Which FW products you think shouldn't be used?

Wishing
01-10-2011, 09:45
To start off, I quite agree with your point of view EG, I just think GW are to blame for the unfortunate state of affairs of FW being seen as illegitimate.



To those who forbid FW rules, do you allow SoM?

This question makes no sense. SoM rules are always allowed in SoM games and never in Warhammer games. SoM is a different game from Warhammer, FW/WF isn't a different game from Warhammer.



I can see the sense in limiting tournaments to the basic ruleset to make it simpler, but beyond that it is absurd.

But here lies the problem. Rather than saying "official" and "unofficial", you are saying "basic" and "expanded", but the division is exactly the same. If tournaments only allow the former and not the latter, players in the LGS will just say "I don't play against expanded stuff" instead of "I don't play against unofficial stuff". Different terminology, same situation. The only way to start to change people's views is to have all GW-sponsored tournaments allow all WF/FW models to be used, with no exceptions (other than game format ones, ie. no apoc models like titans in normal games), in my view.



If by completely seperate you mean 'made in the same factory buy employees of a Games Workshop company', then yes. Also, you can buy the IA books on the GW website and through GW stores, and they are the rules not the models which is the issue here. Looking at one of the IA books, it has the official Warhammer 40,000 logo (which is copyright of Games Workshop) on the cover and on the title page it has the official logso of both Games Workshop and Forge World. Under the publishing information it says 'First published by Forge World, Games Workshop, Willow Road, Lenton'. Further down it says Forge World, its name and logo etc are all property of Games Workshop. No where does it talk about it being unofficial or requiring opponents permission. There is nothing that makes this unofficial beyond the petty discriminations of ignorant hobbyists.

That was the point I was trying to make above - "requires permission to use" isn't used anymore. Instead, it has been replaced by the "codex divide", meaning that only army book/codex models are official, and everything else isnt. GW doesn't come out and say this directly (what would they gain by doing so?), but if they didn't believe in it, there would be no need to print the "This is an official codex addition" in its White Dwarf updates.

xxRavenxx
01-10-2011, 10:03
I will never understand why people think a product published by a Games Workshop subsidiary is 'unofficial'.


Because their rules often come with a "not officialy sanctioned" sticker on them. (The opposite of the terrorgheist.)

I see forgeworld as being the same as storm of magic. It is a game expansion, and requires both players to be on the same page.

There is no reason I couldn't break out my 1994 chapter approved variant tyranid list, except that we all acknowledge that the game is played with the current codex's.

Having mulled it over since my previous post, I think the forgeworld thing which puts me off the most is the varying powerlevels. Nurgle daemons is DEFINATELY my bugbear. A better HQ choice than in the book, a gargantuan creature greater daemon who can't be wounded by average weapons, blight drones filling in the shooting gap. Plague hulks being better than soul grinders. I find it unfair that such a boost can be added to an army by using a secondary rules set.

Rosstifer
01-10-2011, 10:07
Having mulled it over since my previous post, I think the forgeworld thing which puts me off the most is the varying powerlevels. Nurgle daemons is DEFINATELY my bugbear. A better HQ choice than in the book, a gargantuan creature greater daemon who can't be wounded by average weapons, blight drones filling in the shooting gap. Plague hulks being better than soul grinders. I find it unfair that such a boost can be added to an army by using a secondary rules set.

I don't really mind considering Codex Chaos Space Marines and it's infamy. Let them have a few more toys.

xxRavenxx
01-10-2011, 10:12
I don't really mind considering Codex Chaos Space Marines and it's infamy. Let them have a few more toys.

I was thinking more of the solid enough chaos daemons list.

Rosstifer
01-10-2011, 10:20
Oh. Forgot they even existed in 40k XD.

shelfunit.
01-10-2011, 10:24
I come down on the side of the majority here. If the game was not a tournement game (which have understandably more limitations on "new" and "unusual" things) and just a pickup game then the only reason I could think of is that the opposing person (I would say player, but they didn't) is clearly afraid of being shown up (beaten) publicly at the GW. What army did they have?

Aluinn
01-10-2011, 10:36
My view on this, in general, is that if you want to use them in a game, you should ask your opponent ... and that if you ask, your opponent should say that it's fine, provided that you have a printed copy of the rules there and let him/her see them, and that nothing in them stands out as glaringly broken. The problem is that these things are, to some extent, subjective.

Just as it's a jerk move to categorically refuse play against these things in a friendly game, anyway, it's also a jerk move to act like you're entitled to use them and that your opponent's views on it don't matter. Some people (including some in this thread) may claim that they're "official", but there is a world of difference, IMO, between something printed in the BRB or an army book and rules produced by FW. The reason for this is that the FW rules aren't produced by professional rules devs in most cases, and also that they don't have perfect communication with "real" GW rules devs, and thus might have different ideas about how many points an ability is worth, for example. They obviously try to reference GW publications and also to err on the side of making things underpowered, but one way or the other, I do find that their balance is often a bit off. (Of course, official GW rules are often a bit imbalanced too, I realize.)

So there is nuance to this matter. If someone refused to play against them because they'd had bad experiences with FW rules in the past, I think that would be a legitimate reason to say "no". Of course, that's why you ought to ask.

I take issue with anyone suggesting that someone who refused to play against FW stuff is just a WAAC-er who is afraid to be beaten, though. For one thing, this implies that they could only be worried that FW stuff is overpowered, when it's possible that they're concerned that it's actually underpowered and they won't get a challenging match. For another, it's absolutely okay to want to play a balanced game, and to feel that more balanced games are more fun because the actions of the players matter more. I dare say this is probably the majority view, and that most people dislike playing with broken things, whether they're OP or UP.

The best way to go with this stuff, IMO, is to find official, non-FW rules and see if your FW models can be fit into them as "counts-as" units. The reason for using FW stuff is almost always that one likes the models, so this is a good compromise, I think--you get to use your models and there is no need to worry about imbalance or to debate what is "official".

EDIT: It's also worth noting that neither FW nor GW itself will claim that FW rules are official and can be used without an opponent's permission, and I'm not sure how people can, in light of that, suggest otherwise.

eldargal
01-10-2011, 10:37
Really? Do any army books have an 'officially sanctioned' sticker on them? Because SoM doesn't, yet it is published by Games Workshop just like the army books which also don't have 'officially sancioned' stickers.

So you are pretty much left with the core rulebook. This is the problem I have with this ridiculous logic, you are trying to exclude supplements based on distinctions which don't exist, and when pressed on it what you claim to be a distinction would condemn pretty much everything but the core rulebook. Which I don't think has an officiall sanctioned sticker on it, either.


Because their rules often come with a "not officialy sanctioned" sticker on them. (The opposite of the terrorgheist.)

I see forgeworld as being the same as storm of magic. It is a game expansion, and requires both players to be on the same page.

There is no reason I couldn't break out my 1994 chapter approved variant tyranid list, except that we all acknowledge that the game is played with the current codex's.

Having mulled it over since my previous post, I think the forgeworld thing which puts me off the most is the varying powerlevels. Nurgle daemons is DEFINATELY my bugbear. A better HQ choice than in the book, a gargantuan creature greater daemon who can't be wounded by average weapons, blight drones filling in the shooting gap. Plague hulks being better than soul grinders. I find it unfair that such a boost can be added to an army by using a secondary rules set.

Everything in this game is by opponents permission, including the basic game. You can't force someone to play the core game with you anymore than you can a FW supplement. But by the same token you can't tell someone they can't take a FW unit because it isn't official, because that is a lie. If you don't want to play because you are unfamiliar with the rules, fair enough, but why don't you take a few minutes to read the damned rules. If you still aren't comfortable, say so, but don't go hiding behind make believe distinctions between GW products.

To clarify, I don't have a problem with a gaming group saying 'no FW/WF stuff without opponents consent' because that is redundant but harmless, everything is by opponents consent. If you don't want to play against an army with WF/FW units in it because you are unfamiliar with the rules or are worried about power levels, that is fine. But just say so and familiarise yourself with the rules so it isn't an issue, don't hide behind lies.

Sexiest_hero
01-10-2011, 10:50
By depends on the unit, I mean, if something is either fair fluffly or game abusingly broken.
Is something is fair, go for it. If it is something fluffly, Cool. If something is taken just to be broken or abused, no way.

yabbadabba
01-10-2011, 10:51
@OP

Things to consider in support of those players:
>Some stores have a no FW policy. I believe that the stores themselves cannot officially use FW stuff (at least that was policy last time I checked).
> FW might be a subsidary of GW but they are not a part of the Design Studio. Despite all their excellent efforts their products can be rightly seen as house rules and not officially endorsed products
> Some of their products are not in the main army books etc and even that hasn't always been a condition, remember SCs?
> While GW allow FW models in their official tournaments they do not allow FW rules.

In support of yourself
> Why not?
> It would be fun
> Its a GW product
> You have the rules
> You've put the effort in.

I wouldn't go too heavy on them because everyone is entitled to their vision of the hobby (even though I disagree with their interpretation and would argue against it). Just find some like minded people mate.

jimbo2
01-10-2011, 11:08
I am collecting a Chaos Dwarf army and would never begrudge anyone refusing to play me, anyone calling people names for doing this need to have a long hard look in the mirror.

I won't play certain armies because I don't find those types of games fun, for example I won't play against a super heavy tank army in 40k because I do not believe it is suitable for the scale, extra true if someone has a titan. Technically those things are legal but that's not the game I enjoy so why should I be forced to play something I don't want to just because someone else does, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Whether the rules are official or not because FW is a GW subsidiary is semantics, plain and simple and irrelevant. The simple fact of the matter is that these rules do not come from the same group of designers as all the main GW rules. It doesn't matter how balanced people think they are, which is subjective anyway, the simple fact is that they are not made by the same people. Is it really that hard to understand that some players have an issue with this? They want Vetock and Ward's version of the game, not something that's been put together by other designers, regardless of who signs their paycheques.

Aluinn
01-10-2011, 11:11
Really? Do any army books have an 'officially sanctioned' sticker on them? Because SoM doesn't, yet it is published by Games Workshop just like the army books which also don't have 'officially sancioned' stickers.

Would you walk up to someone, ask for a game, and then say: "We're playing Storm of Magic. If you don't want to do so, you're just being a jerk"?. This is just common sense, here.

I don't see the necessity for stickers. It is obvious what is published by GW and what is published by FW, and the attitude of both of these entities is that FW rules require an opponent's permission. Would you use them in a tournament? Probably not, and really no competent organizer would allow you to do so, anyway, because their balance (or lack thereof) is not established by testing, nor are they written by dedicated rules devs.

If they're not tournament legal, you should ask before using them in any game, not because every game is competitive, but because the reason that they are not used in tournaments is that their balance is questionable.

Again, I realize that there are plenty of rules produced by GW which are ... not perfectly balanced, to say the least, but those tend to be a known quantity, and if something official (say, a DE Hydra for the sake of argument) is OP, people will be aware of that and study how to counter it (say, by taking plenty of Flaming attacks). If someone shows up with Chaos-Dwarf-thingamajig X, that's a very different scenario.

RainSong
01-10-2011, 11:13
I see no problem with using FW units in warhammer games. They aren't OP, the models are cool, and it adds variety. Can't speak for 40k though. The rules for the brood horror even make clear it can be used solo in SoM games and as a character mount otherwise.

Anyone being a b¡tch about that kind of thing probably wouldn't be much fun to play against anyway.

Tokamak
01-10-2011, 11:17
Everyone is free to refuse anything.

That said, WHF are indeed a hobbyist range, not something for competitive gamers.

jimbo2
01-10-2011, 11:22
Anyone being a b¡tch about that kind of thing probably wouldn't be much fun to play against anyway.

Anyone swearing in a game store surrounded by children probably wouldn't be that much fun to play against either.

eldargal
01-10-2011, 11:57
That is exactly my point. I wouldn't force someone to use SoM, nor would I force them to play my Dark Elves nor against Warhammer Forge units. But the fact is that SoM is an 'official' GW product beyond all doubt yet it includes rules for FW models and is assumed to be by opponents consent just like WF stuff. That doesn't make it, or the WF books, unofficial products as they are all published by Games Workshop and everything requires opponents consent.

If someone doesn't want to fight against WF units or lists for whatever reason that is their prerogative, but that doesn't give anyone the right to lie and say that WF products are unofficial. Optional, yes, unofficial, no. If I was interested in having a quick game of WFB and someone wanted to play using a WF list I wasn't familiar I might well say no until I had a chance to familiarise myself with the rules. But once I had familiarised myself with the rules I would not refuse again. Heck just the other week I knocked back someone who wanted to use some FW rules in a regular game of 40k because I simply wasn't in the mood. None of this is the issue, no one should be forced to play something they don't want to. Just be honest about the reason and not hide behind lies about them being unofficial.


Would you walk up to someone, ask for a game, and then say: "We're playing Storm of Magic. If you don't want to do so, you're just being a jerk"?. This is just common sense, here.

I don't see the necessity for stickers. It is obvious what is published by GW and what is published by FW, and the attitude of both of these entities is that FW rules require an opponent's permission. Would you use them in a tournament? Probably not, and really no competent organizer would allow you to do so, anyway, because their balance (or lack thereof) is not established by testing, nor are they written by dedicated rules devs.

If they're not tournament legal, you should ask before using them in any game, not because every game is competitive, but because the reason that they are not used in tournaments is that their balance is questionable.

Again, I realize that there are plenty of rules produced by GW which are ... not perfectly balanced, to say the least, but those tend to be a known quantity, and if something official (say, a DE Hydra for the sake of argument) is OP, people will be aware of that and study how to counter it (say, by taking plenty of Flaming attacks). If someone shows up with Chaos-Dwarf-thingamajig X, that's a very different scenario.

zoggin-eck
01-10-2011, 14:17
Personally, I'd be happy to play against it, but if I had a forgeworld unit or amry myself, I wouldn't act suprised at someone not wanting to play.

I think it's fairly safe to say that anyone putting together Forgeworld stuff knows there's a chance someone won't play against it, regardless of what that choice is based on. It's just the way it is, it seems. I think it's absurd, but I've seen some super negative attitudes to Forgeworld units before, so I'd always ask first, then remember who's happy with it, and who isn't. If you really are short on players, I'd pack a backup unit or character just in case. This may seem to be a case of "Why should I go to all that effort?" but if it's the difference between playing and not, and you don't have a group of mates happy to play agianst anything, it may be worth it. Sadly, when you're the only one who wants to play using Forgeworld stuff, you're the one with the problem, not them :)

Sucks though if you've loving bought and painted a unit you look forward to using. In a "better" world (OK, my imagined world) White Dwarf would feature interesting battle reports with people's armies featuring the odd unit outside of the usual Army Book. Perhaps something like this would make them more accepted. Perhaps not though, remembering how people complain about "unfair" battle reports and how "stupid" it is when an Imperial Guard player, for instance, takes a tank that isn't considered the most powerful in internet tactics threads, and disregard the whole thing as a waste of time. I imagine a "he only won because of so and so" attitude.

xxRavenxx
01-10-2011, 15:23
Just be honest about the reason and not hide behind lies about them being unofficial.

But thats the thing, I percieve them as that, and that is my reason for refusing. They are, to me, like house-rules, or expansions, and not something I wish to interact with.

In the end, this isn't the world of pokemon, and I don't have to accept any challange thrown my way by passing strangers ;) I have the right to refuse a game based on any bizarre criteria I so choose. Wearing a purple shirt? No game for you today sir...

I've given you my criteria for not wanting to play against FW rules, and in the end, that's all you get isn't it? You can claim I'm making up excuses, but it won't change the fact that I won't be playing a game vs. Forgeworld rules.

FashaTheDog
01-10-2011, 15:25
Which FW products you think shouldn't be used?

Having played 40K with the Forgeworld units rather extensively, the only four units I would take issue with are the Forgeworld named Greater Daemons and only because they were priced purely by fluff, not by game impact (they should be priced somewhere around 1,500 points). Apart from that, if the unit is legal in your army list, including the Forgeworld ones, then it is fine by me, no questions asked. If the unit you want to run does not have a spot on the FOC, then ask and we'll figure out a way to make it work (probably just play Apocalypse). As for the Fantasy side, I have yet to encounter those, but until I encounter something that really jumps out as egregiously overpowered for its cost, I wholeheartedly welcome all that comes before me. Looking over the experimental rules downloads on their site, I see nothing that would make me pause, excepting to admire the model, so whatever crazy new Warhammer Forge you drop is a treat for me to play (and if you have a Chaos Dwarf army, I will be quite upset if I did not get to play against it).

SVKBaki
01-10-2011, 15:43
If anybody put an effort to buy, assemble and paint the model, for me this is a sign of hobbyist, who I will gladly play. The rules for warhammer forge units are freely available, so no problem checking them before the game.

Cant say for 40K, but I consider the warhammer forge units fairly balanced for points, and certainly not broken. Different case would be if somebody dropped the plain base and told me, that this is Marienburg Land Ship, then I would refuse of course.

(But if he had real Land Ship, than it would be pleasure to try the game against it.)

Or as a sign of consensus, I would modify my list to counter that nasty unofficial broken FW model But refusing to play is imho insult to other player, which I think is not the spirit of the game.

Lord Dan
01-10-2011, 15:53
There's no such thing as rights when it comes to war games. Consent is important.
Since we're apparently comparing Wargaming to a romantic relationship let's review what's important:

1) Not saying or doing things that make you look like a *********
2) Doing your best to ensure your opponent is having a good time
3) Trying to have a good time

yabbadabba
01-10-2011, 15:56
So can anyone explain why FW rules are not allowed at GTs then? Especially if this is "official" GW product?

eldargal
01-10-2011, 16:15
It is your prerogative to refuse to play WF products, I've no problem with that. However making up reasons to back this choice is what I'm taking issue with. Forge World/Warhammer Forge are a part of Games Workshop and their products are every bit as 'official' albeit optional as an army book, codex or expansion. This isn't a subjective issue, you considering them unofficial no more makes them unofficial as my viewing the Ogre Kingdoms book as unofficial (which I don't, just an example).

If you don't want to play them, then don't. But don't go spreading misinformation. That is all I am saying.


But thats the thing, I percieve them as that, and that is my reason for refusing. They are, to me, like house-rules, or expansions, and not something I wish to interact with.

In the end, this isn't the world of pokemon, and I don't have to accept any challange thrown my way by passing strangers ;) I have the right to refuse a game based on any bizarre criteria I so choose. Wearing a purple shirt? No game for you today sir...

I've given you my criteria for not wanting to play against FW rules, and in the end, that's all you get isn't it? You can claim I'm making up excuses, but it won't change the fact that I won't be playing a game vs. Forgeworld rules.

Because tournaments tend not to use expansions/supplements, and as many people may not have experience with rules beyond the basic army books it could give some players an unfair advantage. That is what I was told at any rate.

So can anyone explain why FW rules are not allowed at GTs then? Especially if this is "official" GW product?

yabbadabba
01-10-2011, 16:23
Because tournaments tend not to use expansions/supplements, and as many people may not have experience with rules beyond the basic army books it could give some players an unfair advantage. That is what I was told at any rate. Unfortunately mate, that's just the company spiele, I know I had to train staff on it ;). And it also countered by the fact they allowed armies from Eye of Terror, Armageddon, Lustria and Storm of Chaos (all supplements and campaign books, not army books) long after they were withdrawn from sale and still didn't allow FW during this time.

Now what does that tell you? :D

eldargal
01-10-2011, 16:27
It tells me that they are just doing what most tournaments do.:p I really don't think what tournaments accept has any bearing on what can be considered 'official' though, to be honest. I think it is a very twisted little sub-realm of the hobby that gets enough attention as it is.

xxRavenxx
01-10-2011, 18:34
I really don't think what tournaments accept has any bearing on what can be considered 'official' though

I do.

Its all about perception. I only play against books I perceive to be official. I draw that information from their legality in a tournament.

Why from a tournament? Because a tournament is organised play. Its an accepted "normality" in communities.

I don't want to ram my mantra down your throat, and obviously you are entirely welcome to play against forgeworld armies, rules, etc.

What I find odd though is that you seem very unaccepting of the opposite of this.

You have a reason which you have given, that explains why you *will* play against forgeworld lists.

I have a reason why I will not.

We're on opposite sides of an acceptable divison. And it is a divison, shown by the fact that people will readily describe it as "GW lists" and "FW lists" (or similar titles).

Lets use an analogy: (Which I hope you get...)

Would you be upset with me if I enjoyed playing you at carcassonne, but did not like playing you with the river expansion shuffled into the deck?

If you didn't want to play without, I wouldnt be upset with you. But we'd have to simply agree not to play.

This is the same thing. Expanded rules which I'm not into. I get to pick if I want them or not. So do you. If we can't agree, we don't play the game with each other.

God I hope you've played carcassonne and have a clue what I'm saying...

AlphariusOmegon20
01-10-2011, 18:40
Nothing is nasty about them. Forgeworld units are typically weaker than traditional GW things. I have no problem with them, and they are more often than not allowed in tournaments and in GW store events. Those people will be mighty disappointed to run across them in tournaments if they go to them where they are allowed.

Individually and as a complete army, I'd agree. However, I can see where people might be coming from, when you add in Chaos Dwarf fireglaives to a WoC army, as it takes away a serious disadvantage that WoC has and that's that they have very little shooting.

Mind you, I don't agree with that line of thinking, but I can understand it. ( I especially do not agree with it as I buy a lot of forgeworld, both 40K and WFB.)

Laurela
01-10-2011, 18:48
Who cares if you use them in a friendly game? I don't get people sometimes 8(. As long as you have the rules I'm all for using units from FW, WD, CJ, whatever you want.

SVKBaki
01-10-2011, 18:57
Because many people can´t understand what is the purpose of friendly game...

Korraz
01-10-2011, 19:31
So can anyone explain why FW rules are not allowed at GTs then? Especially if this is "official" GW product?

There is none, apart from "The Grognards calling the shots don't want it."

Col. Dash
01-10-2011, 20:24
The guy was being a DB and you should be glad not to have played him. Sorry FW is made by a GW spinoff company, its still GW and there is zero excuse not to allow someone who has spent the money and has the official rules present and readable to play them. Period. No excuse. Thats douchbaggery in the highest degree and marks the forbidding player as just another low down WAAC player upset to go against something new.

Drongol
01-10-2011, 20:56
The guy was being a DB and you should be glad not to have played him. Sorry FW is made by a GW spinoff company, its still GW and there is zero excuse not to allow someone who has spent the money and has the official rules present and readable to play them. Period. No excuse. Thats douchbaggery in the highest degree and marks the forbidding player as just another low down WAAC player upset to go against something new.

I can refuse to play you for any reason I want.

I can refuse to play you because your army is not painted. And I actually often do that--playing with or against grey plastic bores me to tears.

I can refuse to play against you because I don't like your army. I actually did that quite often when I played 40k, as there was no point in playing against a Necron list. It'd just be a very boring few turns while he picked up all his models.

I can refuse to play against you because I think you have bad personal hygiene, an annoying voice, or a lack of societal mores. And I will, every time.

I can damned sure refuse to play against you because you're using Forgeworld models, and it's not a sign of anything other than me preferring to play against someone who isn't using rules I don't get. If FW models are no different, you'd expect them to be used at all the tourneys, no?

Korraz
01-10-2011, 21:11
If FW models are no different, you'd expect them to be used at all the tourneys, no?

That's your excuse, really?
You wouldn't see much FW stuff anyway, because most of it is hilariously underpowered. Apart from a few things, like the Assault Pod, FW rules continuusly underperfom.
There simply is no reason apart from being... what is a term I could use without gaining a warning...? Ah, "It's a case of being exceedingly unreasonable."

You have the undisputable right to refuse any game you want. You have the undisputable right to refuse playing somebody using FW stuff. But the only reason is because he uses FW stuff. Don't try to hide it behind false reasons.

Haravikk
01-10-2011, 21:19
I can understand not wanting to play because you don't know what you're up against, but if you're bringing along a Forge World model then so long as you make sure to have a printed copy of the rules and let your opponent know in advance, so they can have a read of the rules, then there's no good reason to refuse to play.

If it's a pre-arranged game, and you didn't bother to tell the other player you'd be using unofficial units then I can understand someone being dubious about playing. But even so, I'd personally play anyway as I'm firmly against tailoring my list for specific armies, so finding something unexpected in an opponent's list shouldn't normally affect me, unless they've decided to tailor their list to a cheesy degree, but that's not a Forge World model specific problem :)

yabbadabba
01-10-2011, 21:53
I love GW vs FW arguments - they are almost as entertaining as listening to politicians argue about how to fix the economy.

I am quite happy to say that as little as two years ago I knew the official GW Studio policy on how they viewed FW stuff. I know why GW set up FW, and how it has got to the place they are now with some of the "discussion's" along the way.

What I will say is this. To accuse anyone of "*************" or to be so adamant about a situation without having the full facts are both worryingly dogmatic. However I am also, as I hope people know and can see by the sig, a firm believer in people taking ownership for their own hobby and not being beholden to GW's policies.

Personally I would have no problems playing with or against FW stuff but I can fully understand and accept that others might have different views.

Nubl0
01-10-2011, 21:59
Wow alot of anger here. Perhaps I should explain what happened anyway. I had the rules for the brood horror with me, I didn't just walk in expecting everyone to be ok with it. I asked if he would mind and showed him the rules. For anyone who has seen the rules they are in no way mental but it was refused on the basis that it was a forgeworld miniture and thats all.

So while he has every right the refuse a game the reasons for doing so were definatly less than admirable. To then go on and refuse to play against chaos dwarfs despite having brought Tamurkhan along for people to read is fine.

Anyway it's fine I just took the list he clealy wanted me to play, he got his double HPA/stormbanner with the screaming bell and bitched the whole 2 hours the game took. Once again I'll in my opinion as a skaven the player the horror is a terrible choice as it makes you warlord even more vulnrable and expensive. It does however look awesome.

I don't like the current trend where all casual games are played as if it were a tourney, some people will even only play 2400 because "thats GT" even if they are not even a GT player.

Doommasters
01-10-2011, 22:05
The guy was being a DB and you should be glad not to have played him. Sorry FW is made by a GW spinoff company, its still GW and there is zero excuse not to allow someone who has spent the money and has the official rules present and readable to play them. Period. No excuse. Thats douchbaggery in the highest degree and marks the forbidding player as just another low down WAAC player upset to go against something new.

The hardcore competitive players make WH a worse game IMO and it rubs off on others. I even started to get like that until some people started to inform, at which point i took a step back and realised it.

Hyper competitive environments IMO destroy war games. FW is just like an expansion and should be allowed. However people do have the right to refuse to play anyone for whatever reasons!

Wishing
01-10-2011, 22:19
It tells me that they are just doing what most tournaments do.:p I really don't think what tournaments accept has any bearing on what can be considered 'official' though, to be honest. I think it is a very twisted little sub-realm of the hobby that gets enough attention as it is.

That seems to be the crux of your disagreement with many people on this thread, I think. You define "offical" as meaning "published by a GW-related source", which FW clearly is. Many others use the term as meaning "GW-designated standard tournament legal", which FW is clearly not. So it's really just a question of semantics.

Feefait
01-10-2011, 22:23
I was talking with a friend the other day and i said I loved the model and he said it looked balanced to and he had no problem if I ever wanted to bring one. So I did on our next game. He changed his tune. Lol said next tike is have to ask, or at least let him know. I think this was mainly out of fear he would lose. I figured telling him ahead of tike would unfairly Gimp its effectiveness. Either way he ended up winning and the brood horror with warlord did very little other than scare him.

I think the main thing with FW is, as has been mentioned, there past. They really used to specialize in over the top large things that were almost impossible to deal with. I'm thinking like 40k Titan things. Now they really have gone to more manageable, usable models in addition to the crazy stuff. Changing some games perceptions on that though is hard. I would use it again your friend, let people see what it does and you will be fine.

Wishing
01-10-2011, 22:38
So can anyone explain why FW rules are not allowed at GTs then? Especially if this is "official" GW product?

Not authoritatively, but I can make some guesses.

1) The people in charge of tournament organisation (or their bosses) aren't comfortable with FW's rules or playtesting, or simply have the philosophy that players shouldn't have to look in multiple books to find their army information (other than when directly forced by GW through WD).

2) The people in charge are responding to a perceived distrust in the player base regarding FW, based on FW's past of mainly making giant towering models that were inappropriate for normal sized games. Ie. players are scared of FW, and the tournaments try to make people happy.

3) My personal favourite theory, that FW is meant to be for collectors and expert hobbyists, not for general gaming, as mass consumption of FW products might detract sales away from GW's main plastic lines. Therefore, to avoid lots of players going out and buying FW Land Ships instead of Steam Tanks in case FW happened to make the ship a better competitive choice, they ban FW from tournaments so that FW can't be a competitor in terms of sales to tournament players looking for the most effective models to field.

sholcomb
01-10-2011, 23:16
It seems like there are a lot of people on this thread saying they would not accept FW stuff because they are not official, or they do not have the "official" stamp like the Terrorgheist in the White Dwarf. A question for you. If the Forge World book said, "This army is official." Would you consider it so, and play against it without question?

Got your answer? Ok. Please consider Tamurkhan, Throne of Chaos, page 105, "... As well as all this, also included in this section os a Chaos Dwarf army list for the grim Legion of Azgorh. This should be considered an offical army list for Warhammer."

For those of you only looking for the "Official" stamp, you should therefore be willing to take on my Chaos Dwarfs with no more "permission" than if you were playing a Wood Elf player. Of course, maybe you hate Wood Elves, and never want to play against them. And you might have the same feeling about Chaos Dwarfs, and that's fine. But just don't go calling my army illegitimate.

As for what is ok at tournaments being a guide. The last few tournaments I've been to banned the Power Scroll (via the old rules), Teclis, Kairos, and the The Book of Hoeth. It was their tournament, so they did what they wanted to. The rules they made up were no more or less official than anything else. As for the idea that the FW designers are different from the GW designers; every single armybook has a different design team. There is no more homogeneity within GW, than there is between GW and FW.

At the end of the day, it is just a game. If you refuse to play my Chaos Dwarfs, I'd probably give you a weird look. But I wouldn't call you a douche-bag. And I may or may not end up playing you again, probably for reasons entirely unrelated to your prejudice against my Chaos Dwarfs.

Wishing
02-10-2011, 00:06
As for what is ok at tournaments being a guide. The last few tournaments I've been to banned the Power Scroll (via the old rules), Teclis, Kairos, and the The Book of Hoeth. It was their tournament, so they did what they wanted to.

I think when people take tournaments as their guide, they are referring to GW-run Grand Tournaments specifically, which you have to assume are GW's own version of what an ideal competitive gaming environment should be like. I've never played in one myself, but I imagine they don't ban special characters or magic items - it would be a bit weird if they did.

If GW banned their own special characters from their own tournaments (like they effectively used to, back when all SCs required "opponents permission"), they would be stating "these models are not intended for competitive use". Effectively that's what they say when they don't allow FW - the message is "we cannot vouch for these models being balanced, therefore we don't allow them". Even though GW codexes and FW IA books are all written by a variety of writers, presumably it isn't the same people that decide who writes a codex that decide who writes a FW book... the two book types will surely be subject to different editorial demands and restrictions.

Whether or not they will allow the chaos dwarf army at their tournaments in the future is an interesting question, as is the note in the Tamurkhan book calling it an "official list" as you point out. Does it have the same authority when written in a FW book as it does when written about the Terrorgheist in WD?

badguyshaveallthefun
02-10-2011, 00:08
I'll play against anything thrice; once to see what it can do, once more to try and find ways to counter it, and then once more again to try and counter it, or counter it differently. After that I'll reevaluate my decision, but nine times out of ten I'll still elect to play, simply because if you've taken the time to buy, assemble, and paint the model, then you clearly care enough, and so I'll play.

But I'm also a lot more easygoing than others...

sholcomb
02-10-2011, 01:06
Whether or not they will allow the chaos dwarf army at their tournaments in the future is an interesting question, as is the note in the Tamurkhan book calling it an "official list" as you point out. Does it have the same authority when written in a FW book as it does when written about the Terrorgheist in WD?

I think it must have the same authority. FW is owned by GW, and said it was "official". There cannot be a FW "official" which is not as good as GW "official". That would make no sense. Also note that is any fan list or competing company claimed one of its lists as an "official" Warhammer army, the I'm sure GW's legal team would be on them in a second.

Drongol
02-10-2011, 02:03
I think it must have the same authority. FW is owned by GW, and said it was "official". There cannot be a FW "official" which is not as good as GW "official". That would make no sense. Also note that is any fan list or competing company claimed one of its lists as an "official" Warhammer army, the I'm sure GW's legal team would be on them in a second.

To be honest, I really, really hope Chaos Dwarfs are considered 'official' in terms of tournaments, in that their rules are contained within one book (at least for now) and that it would suck to build a complete army that is absolutely unplayable in an 'official' format.

Of course, the same goes to the Chaos Cultists for 40k and (to a lesser extent) the IG variants, but at least there's some counts-as that would work. I really don't know how you could do Chaos Dwarfs as anything but Chaos Dwarfs.

eldargal
02-10-2011, 04:51
True, but 'tournament legal' shouldn't apply to friendly games, that is my point. If you don't want to play WF stuff just fine but just say why, don't go making up stuff about them being unofficial, that is all I'm asking.


That seems to be the crux of your disagreement with many people on this thread, I think. You define "offical" as meaning "published by a GW-related source", which FW clearly is. Many others use the term as meaning "GW-designated standard tournament legal", which FW is clearly not. So it's really just a question of semantics.

Wishing
02-10-2011, 08:42
I think it must have the same authority. FW is owned by GW, and said it was "official". There cannot be a FW "official" which is not as good as GW "official". That would make no sense. Also note that is any fan list or competing company claimed one of its lists as an "official" Warhammer army, the I'm sure GW's legal team would be on them in a second.

Well, fingers crossed. The only way to find out if the branch of GW that decides these things thinks that the CD list is as "official" as an army book release is to see if it is allowed in their GTs.

Aluinn
02-10-2011, 08:53
That is exactly my point. I wouldn't force someone to use SoM, nor would I force them to play my Dark Elves nor against Warhammer Forge units. But the fact is that SoM is an 'official' GW product beyond all doubt yet it includes rules for FW models and is assumed to be by opponents consent just like WF stuff. That doesn't make it, or the WF books, unofficial products as they are all published by Games Workshop and everything requires opponents consent.

If someone doesn't want to fight against WF units or lists for whatever reason that is their prerogative, but that doesn't give anyone the right to lie and say that WF products are unofficial. Optional, yes, unofficial, no. If I was interested in having a quick game of WFB and someone wanted to play using a WF list I wasn't familiar I might well say no until I had a chance to familiarise myself with the rules. But once I had familiarised myself with the rules I would not refuse again. Heck just the other week I knocked back someone who wanted to use some FW rules in a regular game of 40k because I simply wasn't in the mood. None of this is the issue, no one should be forced to play something they don't want to. Just be honest about the reason and not hide behind lies about them being unofficial.

Ah, well, then we basically agree in terms of how people should treat the rules. I think the only difference is that we're using the terms "official" and "unofficial" differently. Obviously WF rules are published by a subsidiary of GW; whether that makes them official or not is a moot point though, as the real question is when one should ask for their opponent's permission to use them.

I assumed that when you said they were official, you meant that they should not require an opponent's approval, but I was wrong and shouldn't have jumped to conclusions. Sorry.

(There is still a minor shade of disagreement in that I think using WF rules is different than using main-army-book-X, but it isn't really important. You are right that everything requires an opponent's consent to a certain degree.)

Wishing
02-10-2011, 09:38
(There is still a minor shade of disagreement in that I think using WF rules is different than using main-army-book-X, but it isn't really important. You are right that everything requires an opponent's consent to a certain degree.)

I'd say that this is the crucial point in this whole debate, whether using WF/FW models is considered on the same "level" as using army book models.

Sure, when playing a new opponent, you can say "sorry, take out that steam tank/thunderhorn/war shrine/whatever or I won't play you, I don't give my consent to you using it" - but you would be laughed out of the GW store. But if you said the same thing about a brood horror or toad dragon, it would be considered acceptable. You're not supposed to question "tournament legal" army book models, but "not-tournament-legal" WF is fair game to be refused. Is this fair/understandable/acceptable? And following on from that, is it fair/understandable/acceptable that WF is not tournament legal in the first place? That's the overall point of discussion.

eldargal
02-10-2011, 09:51
Poor example, as the steam tank is in the book with the rest of the Empire army, if you don't want to fight one then refuse to play Empire. In the same way you could refuse to play SoM or refuse to play WF. No one is suggesting you should pick and mix what is official, that is the point. FW things are official but there is nothing stopping you saying you want to stick the core books. Just be honest about it, and don't go trying to convince people they aren't official.

I don't understand why you keep bringing up tournament legal? I'm not talking about tournaments, I'm talking about friendly games as was the OP. Tournament legal by definition applies to tournaments, it should not be applied to anything else.

Avian
02-10-2011, 09:59
Would you be upset with me if I enjoyed playing you at carcassonne, but did not like playing you with the river expansion shuffled into the deck?

If you didn't want to play without, I wouldnt be upset with you. But we'd have to simply agree not to play.

I think that if someone had spent a pile of cash on buying the River expansion (instead of getting it free with the base game like I did) and a lot of time painting it, they'd have every right to be annoyed if someone refused solely on the grounds that they didn't like game expansions period.
(Not liking the River expansion because it's not very interesting is another matter entirely and perfectly acceptable - I don't use it anymore myself.)

Gorbad Ironclaw
02-10-2011, 10:43
True, but 'tournament legal' shouldn't apply to friendly games, that is my point.

Why not? If that's the style of play people prefer it makes perfect sense to apply it to the games they play.

There is no should or shouldn't in gaming. It's entirely up to what the people playing the game want and can agree on. You might prefer to play the game in certain ways but that's no more right or wrong than anyone else's preference for how they want to play.

Any time you agree to any sort of game you are agreeing to a set of rules, game-wise and social. Most of the time we use a lot of short hand, like "Warhammer", but that's just a convenient short-cut so we don't have to sit down and create everything from scratch every time we want to play. So it all comes down to what we put into the social contract labelled "Warhammer". For the wast majority of things it's the same, but there are a few cases where people don't agree. But the important thing is, no one is objectively right or wrong. You can justify your position any way you want, but at the end of the day it's a game pushing around toy soldiers and anyone is free to play that however they like. If that for some means playing with different or fewer toys than you wouldn't like to play with then you either reach an agreement or you don't play. But neither of you are wrong and neither are better than the other.

Also, the idea of a big split between "tournament" games and "friendly" games is rather silly I think. I can only think of one tournament game I've ever had that wasn't friendly, and that was because I didn't get on with my opponent, nothing to do with it being a tournament. All tournaments do is make it explicit and up front exactly what rules you are playing under.

As for the specific question. Meh, I don't really care. You can play with whatever you like. I've had some fun games out of messing around with the core mechanics of the game, I've had good games playing against Forge World models, I've had good games playing tournaments.

eldargal
02-10-2011, 11:14
You've got things the wrong way around, tournaments are the one telling us how we should do things, not me. By saing we should take notice of 'tournament legal' even in our friendly games you are arguing that in fact the people who make tournament rules can boss us around, but we can't tell them not too because they have a right to play the hobby how they want. Which makes no sense.

If you don't want to use WF/FW rules, that is fine. But don't hide behind fictitious distinctions between what is or is not 'official' because WF/WF products are official. That is all I'm saying, I am trying to stop people interfering with how people play thw hobby, not the reverse.

Tokamak
02-10-2011, 11:46
That is exactly my point. I wouldn't force someone to use SoM, nor would I force them to play my Dark Elves nor against Warhammer Forge units.

...because that would be, by law, illegal.


like they effectively used to, back when all SCs required "opponents permission"

Thats a very long time ago then because in the sixth edition you didn't need any opponent's permission.

Keith_Lupton
02-10-2011, 11:54
So down the local GW I just had somone refuse to play my skaven because I had taken the brood horror mount option. He also refused to play a friend of mine who splurged out on chaos dwarf at games day. Some people thought it was justifiable, other were slightly confused.

How do you all feel about the new units that can be taken in normal games?

I'll start with the brood horror. I might be biased but I really can't see whats nasty about this one, it's essentially a giant with a set number of attacks plus regen, nothing about it is to spectacular besides the regen which is easy enough to counter. The fact that I'm giving up a grey seer to field a tooled up combat skaven warlord probably skews the game in my opponents favour anyway.

If your ever in my area of the world i will gladly play your Skaven with brood mount (I havent got a clue what it does, but isnt that half of the fun!) and your friends Chaos Dwarfs. Im sure everyone reading this thread would relish a opportunity to play with such cool models and of course Chaos Dwarfs!!

Bloosquig
02-10-2011, 12:37
I think a big problem with forgeworld units is that every game has a core set of rules and assumptions that everyone starts with. This core becomes more and more important as the ruleset sprawls out over extra books, settings, and expansions. Because everyone has to start somewhere and it's best to keep somewhere simple.

For Warhammer the Core will always be the basic rulebook, and the basic armybooks. Every edition or three when sales are down GW will spice it up with a magic/psionic expansion. That's it.

When someone says, "lets play some Warhammer Fantasy" the vast majority of people will instantly think Core. If they've been trained by their gaming environment they mght add Storm of Magic stuff or Forgeworld stuff a moment later but they'll always start with the Core.

People are comfortable with the Core. And Forgeworld will never be part of that because they put out too much stuff over too many books. After you set the Core up you can't fiddle with it too much or it gets people antsy. Why do you think edition wars start?

Anyway I personally wouldn't have a problem playing against Forgeworld stuff as long as I knew exactly what options were on the table. It's not overpowered and the models are great. Hope I didn't ramble on too much there. :)

Tokamak
02-10-2011, 14:22
Forge offers centrepieces for your armies. That's it. They're visual centerpieces with some gimmick rules rather than a stratagem. I hope it stays that way, so all players get familiar and learn to trust Forgeworld with not providing their clients unfair advantages.

Drongol
02-10-2011, 16:23
I don't understand why you keep bringing up tournament legal? I'm not talking about tournaments, I'm talking about friendly games as was the OP. Tournament legal by definition applies to tournaments, it should not be applied to anything else.

In my area, at the non-GW FLGS, there is no such thing as a "friendly" game. There are "tournament games" and there are "tournament practice games" and that's it. The players at that particular store are so focused on the next tournament that they would consider anything else a waste.

Kinda funny, considering they're not exactly the alpha and omega of gaming themselves, you know? But still, going into a store like that with a copy of SoM or some FW units would get you laughed out.

It's even funnier when they pick up a game like Mordheim or Necromunda. Suddenly, it's "official rules only," and everything is optimized for maximum potential.

Needless to say, I'm not a real fan of said FLGS.

Tokamak
02-10-2011, 16:32
You've got to admit, that's just healthy competition. It's like Starcraft official ladders where anything goes. It's a good thing these things exists, it keeps the game designers sharp in regards to preventing exploits. If everything was 'friendly' then the rules would be more loose and you'd always run into jerks once in a while.

logan054
02-10-2011, 18:22
Can't say it will bother me to much if someone wants to use some forgeworld bitz in their army as long as I can have a read of the rules before hand, its hardly a new thing, before they had the official warhammer forge I had played against Rhinox riders several times.

xxRavenxx
02-10-2011, 18:37
Forge offers centrepieces for your armies. That's it. They're visual centerpieces with some gimmick rules rather than a stratagem. I hope it stays that way, so all players get familiar and learn to trust Forgeworld with not providing their clients unfair advantages.

Speaking obviously of 40k, rather than fantasy, I think FW dealt themselves a blow with some of their REDICULOUS rules of days gone by...

The gargantuan tyranid who could fight down a whole army on its own, (I recall it having every rule going, and shrugging off lascannons all day long). The greater daemons (The slaneesh one being unshootable due to minor powers?)

This has been toned down but has left a very bitter taste in peoples mouths.

Nurgle daemons (yes I do go on about them) in 40k still get overly strong toys given by FW that arent (and presumably arent meant to be) in their book. Lots of shooting for example, with the MoN stuck on to help them wrack up a tally and ignore armor saves... So very wrong.

It will be a long time before forgeworld's mistakes are forgotten I think. This will stay in my mind for at least another few years...

dimetri1
02-10-2011, 19:49
If I am just at the store playing a pick up game I would allow FW units but if I am gearing up for a tournament.... no. It would serve no purpose to play against units I am not going to see.

Avian
02-10-2011, 20:21
I guess that means Wood Elves are out too, then? ;)

Satan
02-10-2011, 20:52
I guess that means Wood Elves are out too, then? ;)

Hehe...

The sooner we see FW units in tournaments and Codexes and army books as well, the better.

Point of note: plague toads in SoM.

And hopefully blight drones in the next daemon codex, because it needs flexibility and shooting units, because CC in 40k, and by extension thus the daemon army, just isn't fun if you're only using a modest amount of tzeentch units.

I play competitively, and I don't understand the sentiment that FW units should be limited in any way when there isn't any semblance of balance and functional competitive game within the GW sphere IMO. That said I still enjoy it, but you've gotta take it for what it is.

Drongol
02-10-2011, 20:56
I guess that means Wood Elves are out too, then? ;)

To be fair, bringing my rather-highly tuned Ogre tournament army up against a Wood Elf player just wouldn't feel right. See my issues with playing Necrons. ;)

Really, though, some of us don't have a whole lot of time to get away from things and get a game or two in--my WHFB gaming tends to revolve around local tourneys as opposed to Friday-night pickup games, for example. Under those circumstances, I would much rather play against something that I'd be likely to see in a tournament as opposed to the awesome new FW model you picked up and want to test out. I'm not saying I'd refuse, but I'd treat it like I would an unpainted force--I'm going to look elsewhere first.

dimetri1
02-10-2011, 22:46
If I could find a WE player I would play him but they are a rarity.;)

Wishing
02-10-2011, 23:10
Poor example, as the steam tank is in the book with the rest of the Empire army, if you don't want to fight one then refuse to play Empire.

That was exactly the point of my example. We all agree that everything in the game requires an opponent's permission. However, it is not considered acceptable behaviour (to my knowledge) to refuse to play something that is "in the book with the rest of the army". It is only considered acceptable to refuse to play WF/FW models that are not "in the book". That is what this whole thread is about.



I don't understand why you keep bringing up tournament legal? I'm not talking about tournaments, I'm talking about friendly games as was the OP. Tournament legal by definition applies to tournaments, it should not be applied to anything else.

I keep bringing up tournament legal because you keep ignoring it when I point out that you are using the word "official" in a different way than everyone else in the thread. In a "friendly" (ie. non tournament - tournaments can be friendly too) game, when someone says "WF models are not official", they almost certainly mean "WF models are not tournament legal". That you keep ignoring this doesn't make it less true, and the fact that you feel that tournament rules are completely irrelevant for casual play doesn't mean that everyone else feels that way.

(Note again that I'm not a tournament advocate - I'm just trying to explain and clarify.)



Thats a very long time ago then because in the sixth edition you didn't need any opponent's permission.

Certainly. I personally haven't played since fifth, so most of the things I remember are from back then.



People are comfortable with the Core. And Forgeworld will never be part of that because they put out too much stuff over too many books. After you set the Core up you can't fiddle with it too much or it gets people antsy.

Agreed. And this antsiness is what people who like FW stuff have to struggle to overcome. There would be room for things like WF if everyone was willing to step outside their comfort zone and embrace a little uncertainty.

H33D
03-10-2011, 03:27
I play competitively and factor in a lot of things about other armies in tournaments. If people want to use Forgeworld that is fine. Warhammer is a complex and imbalanced game. I do my best to create competitive lists keeping this in mind. Adding many more variables to the mix makes a complex and imbalanced game much more difficult to 'know' when playing competitively, especially when you are talking about different model ranges and the rules that come with them. If Warhammer absorbed Forgeworld into their official range of products as one large game I would not object or mind at all.

eldargal
03-10-2011, 06:52
It is acceptable behaviour to refuse to play a book if you don't want too, it is also acceptable to refuse to play an army with a unit you don't like, such as a that almost immortal dreadlord from the DE book. Everything comes down to opponents consent, which is really quite irrelevent because no one is talking about forcing people to play things, it is telling people that some rules supplements are unofficial that is at issue.

Tournament rules don't say anything about WF/FW being unofficial, they just aren't allowed. Which is fine, for tournaments. But they aren't intended for friendly games. If you run friendly games by tournament rules that is fine too, but that still doesn't make FW/WF products unofficial. Saying otherwise is simply erroneous at best or deceitful at worst. Also, what are tournaments position on SoM? Becuase that IS an official product, published by Games Workshop and designed by the GW design studio. But I don't see many tournaments allowing it, either. Is SoM unofficial as well, despite being identical to the army books or ruleset in who develops, tests, publishes and sells them?


That was exactly the point of my example. We all agree that everything in the game requires an opponent's permission. However, it is not considered acceptable behaviour (to my knowledge) to refuse to play something that is "in the book with the rest of the army". It is only considered acceptable to refuse to play WF/FW models that are not "in the book". That is what this whole thread is about.



I keep bringing up tournament legal because you keep ignoring it when I point out that you are using the word "official" in a different way than everyone else in the thread. In a "friendly" (ie. non tournament - tournaments can be friendly too) game, when someone says "WF models are not official", they almost certainly mean "WF models are not tournament legal". That you keep ignoring this doesn't make it less true, and the fact that you feel that tournament rules are completely irrelevant for casual play doesn't mean that everyone else feels that way.

(Note again that I'm not a tournament advocate - I'm just trying to explain and clarify.)



Certainly. I personally haven't played since fifth, so most of the things I remember are from back then.



Agreed. And this antsiness is what people who like FW stuff have to struggle to overcome. There would be room for things like WF if everyone was willing to step outside their comfort zone and embrace a little uncertainty.

Wishing
03-10-2011, 09:30
It is acceptable behaviour to refuse to play a book if you don't want too, it is also acceptable to refuse to play an army with a unit you don't like, such as a that almost immortal dreadlord from the DE book. Everything comes down to opponents consent, which is really quite irrelevent because no one is talking about forcing people to play things, it is telling people that some rules supplements are unofficial that is at issue.


How can a question of semantics be what is at issue? Surely what is at issue is that some rules (core+codex) are branded as "OK" by and others (WF/FW) are branded as "not OK" by GW run tournaments, and like it or not, this attitude immediately filters into casual gaming environments and causes situations like in the OP.
(Of course the solution is to just not play pickup games against strangers, but that's another discussion.)



Also, what are tournaments position on SoM? Becuase that IS an official product, published by Games Workshop and designed by the GW design studio. But I don't see many tournaments allowing it, either. Is SoM unofficial as well, despite being identical to the army books or ruleset in who develops, tests, publishes and sells them?

Again, SoM and WF are two totally different things. WF makes models for use in either WHFB or SoM. SoM is its own game. Asking if WHFB tournaments allow SoM is like asking if they allow Mordheim.

Asking if SoM (or anything else) is official is meaningless when using your own definition of official, ie. GW produced. By that definition, *everything* is official. Troglodytes and Spectres are clearly official, since their rules were officially produced by GW 20 years ago. Whether something is "official" or not is completely irrelevant - the issue is with whether they are "allowed" in the game or not, and most people who care about that base their opinions on what is allowed on tournament legality.

eldargal
03-10-2011, 10:20
Storm of Magic is an optional supplement, just like Throne of Tamurkhan or any of the IA books. If a tournament doesn't allow it then the officialvs unofficial argument falls to bits, because it they are picking and mixing what they choose to declare official and what they don't. A minority of competitive players should NOT have the right to arbitrarily declare what is or is not legal outside their own narrow niche, the fact that they do is detestable.

All I've been saying from the start is that FW/WF rules ARE official and should not be banned just because they aren't part of the core ruleset. Whether or not someone chooses to use or fight against them is entirely up to them, but they shouldn't hide behind make believe distinctions between the various supplements.

Anyway, I think this has run its course, don't take anything I've said personally Wishing I'm not trying to criticise you or anyone else, I just have strong opinions about tournaments and tournament organisers having far too much undeserved influence over the hobby.

Wishing
03-10-2011, 11:27
Storm of Magic is an optional supplement, just like Throne of Tamurkhan or any of the IA books.

I have to stop you there, because it really isn't. SoM is a special game format. It requires special terrain, changes the victory conditions of the game and allows wizards to cast mega-spells. A game is either a normal game, or a SoM game. It's not possible for one player to play using SoM rules and the other player using normal rules. It's one or the other.

Tamurkhan is a book full of optional add-ons to the normal game. There is no "Tamurkhan game format". That one player fields a Tamurkhan model doesn't require his opponent to field one too.

The reason this is so relevant is because for SoM to be included in a tournament, it would have to be a SoM tournament, where the SoM rules are mandatory, not optional. It is not possible to have a normal tournament and mix SoM rules into it. So asking whether SoM should or shouldn't be allowed in tournaments makes no sense.



If a tournament doesn't allow it then the officialvs unofficial argument falls to bits, because it they are picking and mixing what they choose to declare official and what they don't. A minority of competitive players should NOT have the right to arbitrarily declare what is or is not legal outside their own narrow niche, the fact that they do is detestable.

And that is the point. Tournaments (ie. GW) *do* pick and mix what they allow and what they don't, and have chosen that they don't allow FW. You are right that tournament rules should be irrelevant outside of tournaments, but the fact is that a lot of people use them as a guideline to what they will personally allow too. I agree that it shouldn't be that way, but when debating the issue, ignoring that this is the case in lots of places is the same as covering your eyes and ears and going "lalalalala I can't hear you".



Anyway, I think this has run its course, don't take anything I've said personally Wishing I'm not trying to criticise you or anyone else, I just have strong opinions about tournaments and tournament organisers having far too much undeserved influence over the hobby.

Clearly, and likewise, I hope I haven't come across as rude in any of my criticism of your arguments. Strong opinions is good, and I hope that some day the hobby will turn away from the "tournament legal" concept and embrace everything that Warhammer has to offer.

MikeInfinitum
03-10-2011, 12:24
This issue was addressed in the foreword of one of the FW books - IA: Apocalypse IIRC. Basically they were bemused as to why people would think you could not use their rules and models. They state that the rules are "official" and can be used in games, and that the permission of the other player is not required. BUT they suggest it is good etiquette to give your opponent a heads up about what you will be fielding - the reason being that some FW stuff such as Super Heavy Tanks and Titans (or whatever the Warhammer Forge equivalents would be) cannot be wounded by most, if not all, of the weapons in a non-FW army. No-one wants to see a huge tank on the table and realise they only have sticks and stones to throw at it.

At my local GW store most people have a least one FW model in their army. No one objects to playing against them, in fact most people get pretty excited about coming up against a rare or unusual unit.

I would however remind people that FW units still adhere to the same rules as "normal" ones. They can only be fielded in the correct army. The army must still adhere to any FOCs, or the category %'s in WHFB. And a lot of FW units in 40K can be used in Apocalypse games only - so you can't play a 2000pt game and field a titan, I would assume the same applies to WHFB and it's expansions - including the forthcoming FW monster book.

I agree 100% you have the right to refuse to play for whatever reason, but from my point of view if I've paid out £50.00 for a FW rulebook and £35.00 for a fancy looking FW Tau Battlesuit and then someone says they're not playing for no other reason that its a FW model then I'm not gonna be too happy about it!

MikeInfinitum
03-10-2011, 12:38
On a related note - those Forge Chaos Dawf minis are sweeeeeet. Who wouldn't want to play with/against those!?

Verchild
03-10-2011, 14:57
ill make a gigantic polar bear with a crew of dwarves on it for such occasions.

I WANT THIS.


That being said, I get Warhammer Forge stuff because it looks nice and just intigate it into my army. Else I check with my opponent, if he says no, then I have a back up for those points.

Warhammer forge stuff is "big and scarry" to people, and I would rather play a game then have people fear the unknown.
Be Prepared for anything - EmpireScout Motto... or something like that.

Tokamak
03-10-2011, 15:01
The nurgle daemons are a really weird step in my book. Same goes for the rhinox riders.

I don't want WMD's, I want impressive models, and if their relative weakness makes people less resistant then I'm only inclined to use them more. I want people to welcome me using FW models rather than having to argue about them.

Wishing
03-10-2011, 15:06
This issue was addressed in the foreword of one of the FW books - IA: Apocalypse IIRC. Basically they were bemused as to why people would think you could not use their rules and models. They state that the rules are "official" and can be used in games, and that the permission of the other player is not required.

Maybe they should have emailed their colleagues who write the Grand Tournament rules and ask why they don't allow their stuff to be used then. Perhaps their answer would have helped alleviate their bemusement. :)

Though perhaps the fact that this was a foreword to an Apocalypse supplement provides an answer. To my knowledge, the FW conflict doesn't exist in Apocalypse games, most likely because Apocalypse was designed specifically to allow players to field their FW models like titans and superheavy tanks, plus the fact that there are no official Apocalypse tournaments to my knowledge, and therefore no "not tournament legal" mark of shame.

In other words, it seems somewhat misleading of FW to write about how some people refuse to play against their models in an Apocalypse book, since nobody actually refuses to play against their models in that particular format - it is in non-Apoc games that the problem lies.

IcedCrow
03-10-2011, 15:11
I think the easiest thing is to either make it up front with the organizer whether or not FW models can be used, or make your own event and specify whether FW models can be used.

Easy as that =)

AlphariusOmegon20
03-10-2011, 16:25
it was pointed out to me yesterday by a tournament player when I went to my shop that the reason why FW shouldn't be allowed was because "you should know what you're going to be facing at a tournament". I then pointed out that that was the whole point of bringing an all comers list to a tournament because you DON'T know what you'll be facing. ( I used to do tournaments, and always brought all comers lists because you never know if you'll be facing Dwarfs {no magic} or Daemons {extreme magic} in the first round)

Place me now in the "FW isn't the problem, whiny players are" category.

IcedCrow
03-10-2011, 16:56
I love those people oh so much ;) If the tournament packet states FW models are legal, then they do know what they will be facing.

AlphariusOmegon20
03-10-2011, 18:00
I love those people oh so much ;) If the tournament packet states FW models are legal, then they do know what they will be facing.

Lol, he then preceded to tell me that "because he can't look at the book before hand, they also shouldn't be legal", my answer was "so what prevents you from buying the book yourself and reading it before the tournament's date, in case you do end up facing that army?"

He looked blankly at me and had no answer for the question when I said that. :D

IcedCrow
03-10-2011, 18:06
Yeah, I see no difference between reading a forgeworld book and reading a GW army book. It's not like the FW book is super top secret and only a couple people can get it.

Drongol
03-10-2011, 18:49
It's kind of a cycle. I don't want to play against FW stuff because it's not allowed at tournaments.

It's not allowed at tournaments because..? I don't know.

AlphariusOmegon20
03-10-2011, 19:28
Yeah, I see no difference between reading a forgeworld book and reading a GW army book. It's not like the FW book is super top secret and only a couple people can get it.

Well, granted for the moment it is.

You don't have access to Tamurkhan unless you bought it at GD UK, but after it's made for general release, there will be no excuse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IcedCrow
03-10-2011, 19:37
I wouldn't care either way. I think it's lame to stop someone from using a list because "you haven't read it yet".

Oh well. This is one reason why I don't do pickup games as well.

Tarliyn
03-10-2011, 20:34
I would allow most things. The type of stuff I would say no to are things that could easily be a counts as situation. The best example is ogre rhinox riders. You can easily use the modeld to counts as mournfang cav so why don't you use those rules instead (which in that situation are better anyhow). But if there are suitable rules to use that are from an armybook (i am intentionally avoiding the word official ;) ) I would perfer you use those. If there are no suitable rules and the thing isn't way ott than have at it, fw models are awesome.

Sent from my phone sorry for errors

logan054
03-10-2011, 21:20
It's kind of a cycle. I don't want to play against FW stuff because it's not allowed at tournaments.

It's not allowed at tournaments because..? I don't know.

I actually don't know why its not, if the game was even remotely balanced to begin with then I could see why, maybe the only reason they are not allowed at tournaments is the fear it would take away sales from the core games.

Personally I love the forgeworld stuff, I don't care what the rules are like they just have so many cool models I want to paint!

Sexiest_hero
03-10-2011, 21:52
WF is tarnished by 40k's IA. Where things like a thunderhawk or the 1 billion different land raider models are put in mor for "Cool factor rather than balance, and are built around a theme. The fault oof this is not the game but the players. More options, leads to more broken combos and risks of unbalanced. People are leery of somebody saying "Can I use" from warhammer forge because they remember people trying to get landraider transports for genestealers or plopping down a baneblade pre Apocalypse. Nobody wants to play a game like that. In fact there was an article in another site about how to try and break the Death magic college lord on her shadow dragon. When it turned out to be balanced it was deemed Overpriced crap. I remember people putting the big FW Eldar wraith-thingy with the regular wraithlord behind it and the old smaller avatar behind that.

Wishing
03-10-2011, 22:50
I actually don't know why its not, if the game was even remotely balanced to begin with then I could see why, maybe the only reason they are not allowed at tournaments is the fear it would take away sales from the core games.

That's certainly my theory. GW want their tournament audience to be spending money on FW/WF models only *in addition to* the money they spend on regular plastic kits, not instead of.

AlphariusOmegon20
04-10-2011, 01:38
WF is tarnished by 40k's IA. Where things like a thunderhawk or the 1 billion different land raider models are put in mor for "Cool factor rather than balance, and are built around a theme. The fault oof this is not the game but the players. More options, leads to more broken combos and risks of unbalanced. People are leery of somebody saying "Can I use" from warhammer forge because they remember people trying to get landraider transports for genestealers or plopping down a baneblade pre Apocalypse. Nobody wants to play a game like that. In fact there was an article in another site about how to try and break the Death magic college lord on her shadow dragon. When it turned out to be balanced it was deemed Overpriced crap. I remember people putting the big FW Eldar wraith-thingy with the regular wraithlord behind it and the old smaller avatar behind that.

You do realize that a T-hawk is 900 pts, way far beyond what it should cost according to it's power potential?

Thunderhawks aren't that great.

The blame for the flood gates being opened isn't on FW, it's on GW themselves with the waythe Apoc rules were written themselves. They should have known garbage like the Land Raider/Genestealer thing might happen when they wrote the Apoc rules and said "all bets are off".

You also cite a big problem with 40K in general and that's cover saves.

I'm not seeing anything that is directly FW's fault. More I'm seeing the main design studio screwing up.

Doommasters
04-10-2011, 03:35
All it would take is a few tournaments to allow FW stuff around the place for it to catch on. We have a policy that if you want to play with stuff outside of the Army books you have to make your opponent aware of it before you next meet, normally via online forums.

Not a big deal at all. Often the rules for next weeks games are decided early in the week so everyone knows what the deal is.

Preston
06-10-2011, 07:15
From my own experience:

When I first started playing 40k many years ago there were people at the LGS who owned stuff like Titans and other big FW style models that weren't in the core army book.

These people wanted to play with their toys so they could have fun. Problem was, they didn't really care if I had fun. So after a couple of games against these Titans in "friendly games" (usually under 2k pts) and me getting my ass handed to me I no longer wanted to play against Titans.

Those experiences have really soured my outlook on FW/WHF/Alternate Rules models - Especially against people I don't know, or don't game with on a regular basis.

So if a stranger comes into my LGS says "I have a so and so army, and I'd like to play a friendly game..oh can I bring my (FW BIG STOMPY THING) too?" I say no.

Now, against someone I trust, or know? If they have a big stompy thing and they give me a chance to see what it does etc before hand? Sure. I know what to expect. Further, it would be a friend - someone I game against on a regular basis.

My friends and I have a simple "Don't bring WAAC lists to friendly games" policy. Before a big 'Ard Boyz we discuss WAAC lists we could take (before the edition change a friend talked about the Stegadon heavy LM list, for example). But we don't play those lists in friendly games, we don't think its cool.

Those are the people that, if they said "hey I want to try this Warhammer Forge thingy I bought" I'd say "Hrm, ok."

Stranger? Someone I don't play against a lot?

Sorry. No thank you.

enygma7
06-10-2011, 09:36
From my own experience:

When I first started playing 40k many years ago there were people at the LGS who owned stuff like Titans and other big FW style models that weren't in the core army book.

These people wanted to play with their toys so they could have fun. Problem was, they didn't really care if I had fun. So after a couple of games against these Titans in "friendly games" (usually under 2k pts) and me getting my ass handed to me I no longer wanted to play against Titans.


This is a perfect example of why some people are wary about facing forgeworld stuff. The sad thing is superheavies and titans never have been legal in games under 2k, these players were cheating. They are meant for large apocalypse games and will of course unbalance a small game.

Forgeworld is about so much more than massive epic models and many players don't seem to appreciate this. They do entire armies for both WFB and 40k and loads of interesting units that expand the existing armies. These kind of products are aimed at mature fluff gamers and almost all (with 1 or 2 very rare exceptions) are underpowered compared with stuff in the codex/army book.

I'd urge people faced with someone who wants to use forgeworld stuff to keep an open mind and take a look at the rules for it. Obviously, if they want to use an exhalted daemon or something size inappropriate (illegal!) say no, it still has to comply with the list restrictions (max 25% lords etc).

FashaTheDog
06-10-2011, 13:10
From my own experience:

When I first started playing 40k many years ago there were people at the LGS who owned stuff like Titans and other big FW style models that weren't in the core army book.

These people wanted to play with their toys so they could have fun. Problem was, they didn't really care if I had fun. So after a couple of games against these Titans in "friendly games" (usually under 2k pts) and me getting my ass handed to me I no longer wanted to play against Titans.

Those experiences have really soured my outlook on FW/WHF/Alternate Rules models - Especially against people I don't know, or don't game with on a regular basis.

So if a stranger comes into my LGS says "I have a so and so army, and I'd like to play a friendly game..oh can I bring my (FW BIG STOMPY THING) too?" I say no.

Now, against someone I trust, or know? If they have a big stompy thing and they give me a chance to see what it does etc before hand? Sure. I know what to expect. Further, it would be a friend - someone I game against on a regular basis.

My friends and I have a simple "Don't bring WAAC lists to friendly games" policy. Before a big 'Ard Boyz we discuss WAAC lists we could take (before the edition change a friend talked about the Stegadon heavy LM list, for example). But we don't play those lists in friendly games, we don't think its cool.

Those are the people that, if they said "hey I want to try this Warhammer Forge thingy I bought" I'd say "Hrm, ok."

Stranger? Someone I don't play against a lot?

Sorry. No thank you.

This is exactly the sort of thing I am working to change. There have been people who brought out massive units with little regard for their impact in the past and it has left a bad taste in people's mouth even years after the fact. There has also been the problem of certain Apocalypse combos which has further reinforced this such as your Genestealers in a Landraider (wasn't that a webcomic, oh wait that was Turn Signals on a Landraider :p), yet in standard games even Forgeworld says, "we want no part of that nonsense." Then there is also the case of someone just "missing" the part about how their titan or superheavy needs a separate FOC just for each type taken (the Warmachines Detachment).

Forgeworld stuff is mostly balanced or overpriced (there is the notable exception of the four named Greater Daemons costed on fluff not performance as I pointed out), but there is one rather important detail that tends to make a huge difference; some units are too large and overbearing, even if overpriced, for a normal game of 40K. Since Imperial Armour Apocalypse, Forgeworld units now state where on the FOC a given unit goes and which codices or army lists may take them. Other units will be stated as being taken as 1-3 in a separate Warmachine Detachment, including nearly all superheavies with the sole exception of the Gorgon which can be a dedicated transport and massive point sink for the Krieg Armored Battle Group.

So long as it is understood that the four named Greater Daemons, which can be taken as HQs for a Daemon army, are closer in value to about 1,500 points, not their their sacred number times 111, very few problems now arise in pickup games where someone shows up with a Forgeworld list or a few legal additions so long as both parties are able to read the rules of anything new before the game (oddly enough against my Krieg most folks have the biggest issue with all my artillery units as they've just skipped that section of the main rule book). A good way to give Forgeworld units another shot might be to try just allowing the Forgeworld army lists on a trial basis. Some lists are fairly well balanced such as Krieg, while other such as D-99 are just fun lists that have little hope of winning. Since these lists are self contained they offer a few new toys and rules, but do not swing the flood gates fully open. Playing against or watching my Krieg army has changed several people's opinions on the use of Forgeworld from "no way in hell" to "we need more of that." All told, however, you and your group get final say on what is legal, but a second chance may be worth it.

logan054
06-10-2011, 13:23
That's certainly my theory. GW want their tournament audience to be spending money on FW/WF models only *in addition to* the money they spend on regular plastic kits, not instead of.

What really gets me is you can bet the same people that moan about FW/WF stuff will be happy enough playing against Karios, Techlis or think Tzeentch heroes having easy access to 3+ wardsave is balanced/perfectly fine because GW put some magic stamp on it. The ultimate thing is the reason why they don't allow allow FW/WF rules at tournaments is the same reason they started to allow special characters.

Lord Greyskull
06-10-2011, 21:18
There is always going to be some new unit GW came up with that you've never played against before. You learn from experience. Its just a game.

zak
06-10-2011, 23:13
I have to agree. As long as the rules are there to read I never refuse. I recently played against an opponent using the terrorgheist. I had read the WD, but couldn't remember exactly what it did. He had the rules to hand so it was fine.....should have read them really, that scream was nasty!

ivan55599
07-10-2011, 08:17
If you "must" reveal your monster's, cahracter's or whatelse stats and special abilities, it loses its surprice advantage. There goes that fun. I dont even read other armybooks than my armies.

Satan
07-10-2011, 12:08
If you "must" reveal your monster's, cahracter's or whatelse stats and special abilities, it loses its surprice advantage. There goes that fun. I dont even read other armybooks than my armies.

OR you can play in a tournament with open lists.

SotF
07-10-2011, 12:34
Personally, with a lot of the forgeworld and warhammer forge things, I'd be disappointed if I couldn't use them after spending all that cash on the pieces and the time getting them table ready.

However, at the same time, a lag period after release is acceptable. Mainly for people to have a chance to at least glance at the new rules. If you show up with a list from Tamurkhan right now, I'd be unhappy because I'd gain an instant disadvantage due to both the lack of access to the current limited release of the book and the fact that they'd have known what I had access to.

Wishing
07-10-2011, 12:38
Saying that many people don't like FW models because they are unfamiliar with them is true, but isn't the whole story. The reason people are unfamiliar with them is that they are rare, and the reason they are rare is that they are expensive models that aren't tournament legal and whose rules are found in big expensive hardback books, or download only, and which therefore aren't as easily accessible as the rules found in army books and white dwarf.

Everyone is unfamiliar with a new model or unit the first time they face them. However, models from codexes and army books are considered core material, and therefore people will make sure to familiarise themselves with what they do since they are likely to play against them regularly. People don't familiarise themselves with what FW models do because they don't expect to meet them due to rarity. And their rarity is due to two main factors: the models and books being expensive, and that they aren't tournament legal. And of those two, the expense is the lesser factor I think. The Brood Horror is in the same price range as GW plastic kits like the Dreadknight, but the DK isn't considered some freak unit that you don't need to know what does because it's too expensive...

IcedCrow
07-10-2011, 13:41
Depends on the tournament-legal. Most tournaments I have been to let you use FW models but you have to have a copy of the rules with you.

The big national tournaments held a few years ago before I dropped out of warhammer competitively also let you use Forge World models.

(I do acknowledge that there were and are tournaments that also disallow them, I'm just saying that it's not a universal ban on them)

Wishing
07-10-2011, 21:24
Depends on the tournament-legal. Most tournaments I have been to let you use FW models but you have to have a copy of the rules with you.

The big national tournaments held a few years ago before I dropped out of warhammer competitively also let you use Forge World models.

(I do acknowledge that there were and are tournaments that also disallow them, I'm just saying that it's not a universal ban on them)

Here I will just have to trust what people say, because I've never been to a GW tournament myself. However, what I mean when I say "tournament legal?" is "will GW allow this in their grand tournaments held at games day and similar events?". It's not really about what local tournament organisers around the world do, since this will invariably vary, it is more about what signal GW send to their fanbase about what they allow in the most high-status, hosted by GW themselves, "official" tournaments.

My impression from reading discussions on here is that FW rules are not generally allowed at GW GTs, but I am ready to be corrected on that if that is wrong.

H33D
08-10-2011, 01:15
Do FW models show up in White Dwarf battle reports ever? Such as having a Skaven player with a Warlord on a gigantic monstrous rat thing in the army?

Avian
08-10-2011, 06:53
Sometimes they do. Rarely the FB stuff because until a couple of months ago there was very little of it and it didn't have rules. Obviously the Brood Horror hasn't been fielded as it was released just true other week...