PDA

View Full Version : length of gaming vs progression of backstory



Torga_DW
28-01-2012, 06:25
I was just having a smoke (as i do) and had an interesting thought. Basically i'm interested in seeing how many people want the backstory progressed (on here at least), versus how long you've been playing 40k. Not really looking to prove anything, just thought it would be interesting to see the results. :)

ForgottenLore
28-01-2012, 06:30
How long do you consider "long time player"?

Torga_DW
28-01-2012, 06:40
I'll leave that to the voters discretion. Basically when you get the 'feeling' that you're no longer a newb in the game. I know its all highly subjective, but its hard to pin down. When i wrote the poll option i was wondering how to qualify it, like been through an entire edition or more? Been playing for 2 years or more? Been following the game for 2 years or more? So basically, along those lines.

Noobie2k7
28-01-2012, 06:42
I would have voted the top option but I really do like voting on polls so that was an obvious choice. Me and my long term gaming group have had our personal little story progressing for a long time now (probly going on 7-8 years)

I've been playing since i was about 12 as my dad got me into fantasy and then i asked if we could play 40K as i saw people playing in GW one day and it looked really fun. (i mean what 12 year old boy doesn't like the idea of tanks and big shooty armoured guys with chain swords)

Been playing 40k since then and always been a backstory kinda player (although if i started my back story back then it would have been about a rather unlucky SM chapter that were the eldars whipping boys)

But yeah, i got side tracked. I'm a long-term player that loves the backstory and want the 42nd millenium already and something to bloody well happen around the galaxy.

Battleworthy Arts
28-01-2012, 06:43
This year happens to also be MY 25th anniversary of playing 40k.

I do not care if the backstory progresses. I like the setting, and don't want to see it change.

Noobie2k7
28-01-2012, 06:47
I just wanna see some stuff get blown up. . . is that too much to ask. It's not like i'm asking for the Emprar to rise up and start slapping some races about, i just want something.

thorgrim
28-01-2012, 07:12
Firstly I've been playing for 18 years so far. Personally I like the current story arc where it is (so voted for don't want the story to progress). However I am a massive fan of the HH series though and am loving the progression of the 30k story and would love to see that progressed through the seige of Terra and beyond (and hopefully have it influence the 40k setting so I can finally get my hands on a actual codex that can represent my Iron Hands).

The Death of Reason
28-01-2012, 07:55
I want the story to regress back to RT days.

The new fangled fluff, they pass of to the kiddies these days, is nothing more than ripoffs from sundaymorning cartoons - and when a guy like Dan Abnett is their star writer, then you really know that the rest is pure and utter crap.

Besides, the point of it all is to tell your own stories, not just be reduced to Draigo fanboys and have a juvenile wankfest at your 'grimdark' superheroes :p Its called 'getting involved' and brings with it the greatest reward, Independence :)

Bunnahabhain
28-01-2012, 09:59
I really, really don't want the background story progressed at the moment. Not by the likes of Mat Ward. Just No.

At some point in the future, when they have a better crop of writers about? Then, maybe.

Radium
28-01-2012, 10:16
About 10 years into the hobby now, and I don't want the story to move forward at all.

laudarkul
28-01-2012, 10:17
I still consider myself as a "noob" player despite being in the gaming for 4 years (and other almost 2 only watching).
I would like that the new edition to bring some hints about the background progression and maybe some new worldwide campaigns to advance the story.

stroller
28-01-2012, 10:22
Like the setting where it is. Not remotely interested in 30K or 45K or nK. I like the fluff to set a context. I remember some of the games my dark eldar warriors have played since 3rd edition but that doesnt quite translate into a personal fluff history for them.

Despite the opinion of others, it aint broke. Please dont fix it.

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2012, 10:23
Why do you need the background advanced by someone else? Take a leaf from FFG's book (or Dan Abnett's Sabbat Worlds), and simply tell your own stories based on the games you and your group play. That was, IIRC, the original intention of the writers.

The setting is balanced at "two minutes to midnight" deliberately, to let the gamers make up their own stories of what happens next. Does Abaddon's Black Crusade reath Holy Terra and usher in a new age of darkness? Does the Imperium survive against the odds? Do the Tau continue to expand, or does pressure from Hive Fleets, Tomb Worlds, Orks and Imperial forces prove too much? That's up to you to decide. Or perhaps you'd rather just fight for the fate of a single world. That's good too.

"canon" doesn't matter - it's all made up. Take the setting and change it in your own way. If you get worried that someone on the other side of the world whom you'll never meet might disagree, I'd suggest you're doing it wrong. :)

I'd like new material to look at the last 10,000 years of the background, rather than move on to 0001001.M42, myself. There's still plenty of things left undetailed since 1st edition; What's the "4th Quadrant Rebellion", for example?

Battleworthy Arts
28-01-2012, 10:25
More thoughts...

40k is not a STORY, it is a SETTING.

WE tell the stories. We play them out on battlefields all across the hobby world. To me, its why both LotR and Warmahordes lack... Those stories are written for you, either currently or long ago... but in 40k, they've given us the backdrops, the costumes, and the motivation... WE provide the action, the drama, and the spectacle.

"WE are the music makers... WE are the dreamers of the dreams"
-W. Wonka

Bloodknight
28-01-2012, 10:29
About 10 years into the hobby now, and I don't want the story to move forward at all.

This, but with 18 years.

Hrw-Amen
28-01-2012, 10:52
Been interested in the hobby since RT days and I fine it very frustrating that nothing has advanced much. I am not suggesting it should suddenly advance by thousands or even hundreds of years. Yes I realise it is a setting, but I do think that it would not hurt to every now and then come out with some new 'Up to date' bit of fluff that is happening. It does not have to be Imperium shattering or anything, just something new advancing the timeline a little, as opposed to something new shoehorned into old fluff.

Gorbad Ironclaw
28-01-2012, 13:13
Here is the question then. What would you have happen? Players really don't like it when bad stuff happens to whatever they are playing so that almost rules out major losses to any of the playable factions. You are not going to see know Space Marine chapter X get almost wiped out or humiliatingly defeated. You are not going to see the Imperium lose a major world (but what about Cadia and Armageddon I hear you say. How much difference did the campaigns there really make?). Or the Eldars lose a known Craftworld etc. Similarly I doubt that they are going to kill of named characters either, although that have occasionally happened. What you might see is Planet Y (that you haven't heard of before) be invaded by Waagh X (that you haven't heard of before) where they either crush or lose to force Z (that you haven't heard of before). Does that really count as story progression? And does anyone really care in that case?

If you want real story progression then everyone will have to accept that 40k is a story and that things will change. But since the whole point of 40k is selling miniatures, not telling a story that seems counter-productive to what it's there for.


Besides, and this might just be a grumpy old man speaking, but I don't think the stories have gotten better over time so I don't think that progressing 40k will lead to anything better than what we have at the moment. And at the end of the day I'm less interested in GW's story than in what I can do with the setting they have presented.

thorgrim
28-01-2012, 16:35
Been interested in the hobby since RT days and I fine it very frustrating that nothing has advanced much. I am not suggesting it should suddenly advance by thousands or even hundreds of years. Yes I realise it is a setting, but I do think that it would not hurt to every now and then come out with some new 'Up to date' bit of fluff that is happening. It does not have to be Imperium shattering or anything, just something new advancing the timeline a little, as opposed to something new shoehorned into old fluff.

Well we have had a new few new races emerge (Nids, Tau and Crons). The Nids having had the first 2 invasion fleets broken (Behemoth at Ichar IV and Kraken at Macragge) and the third and forth have had there effect on the Imperium reduced (Jomundr (i think) is chewing through the edge of Tau space and Leviathon has had a considerable portion diverted into ork held sectors for the ultimate meatgrinder). The Tau have moved from a race that was nearly destroyed by the Imperium to a credible threat. And that little lot is just on the eastern fringe.

Lord Damocles
28-01-2012, 20:37
40k is not a STORY, it is a SETTING.

WE tell the stories. We play them out on battlefields all across the hobby world. To me, its why both LotR and Warmahordes lack... Those stories are written for you, either currently or long ago... but in 40k, they've given us the backdrops, the costumes, and the motivation... WE provide the action, the drama, and the spectacle.

Of course, the background date grinding to a halt (more or less, at least) makes it far more difficult for players to 'make their own stories'.

It might be fine if you play Marines, Guard, Orks, Eldar, but several races (Necrons, Tyranids, Tau) only have a couple of hundred years of timeline to play around in, which is already causing problems with them having to do almost absurd amounts in such a limited timespan (or have their introduction bumped back in time).


Besides which, timeline/story progression didn't cause any problems before, and we got the 3rd Armageddon War with Yarrick vs. Ghaz, Tycho's story, the 13th Black Crusade, Ichar IV, and so on out of it.
Neither have any of the bits of background that we do have which are set post-999.M41 made any particularly noticeable changes to the setting, so the overall 'feel' needn't change.

mdeceiver79
28-01-2012, 21:20
I would like to see expansions which expand on the storyline. Maybe an expansion set in 50k where the human race is in tatters again, with humanity allied with various alien factions vs pirates and slavers of all races. The tyranid invasion in full swing, necron tomb worlds fully awake and entire worlds fallen to orks living in the ruins of imperial society. Travelling bands of imperial survivors, rag tag warbands with priests and crusaders. Space marines working for themselves trying to carve out their own piece of survival.

Also the "unification war" expansion taking place on earth with a warband setting and admech tech raiders.

Project2501
28-01-2012, 21:21
While I would love to restart the argument for the progression of the storyline (even though it already has thanks to the Black Library), I will simply say that I voted long time player that would like to have the storyline progress.

Torga_DW
28-01-2012, 21:27
I'll just chip in with setting vs story. As i recall, the game was pretty much anywhere between 3901 and 3999 for a long time. I never gave thought to the 'current' time of the game, it was just a period in the far future. Now i might be wrong, but the first global campaign was ichar IV, and the intentions were good enough. The tyranids had become a fully playable army, and they were able to get a global community set of games going. Everyone had fun, and the results were largely predictable and yet inconsequential. Even if ichar (chair?) IV fell, the tyranids were already aiming at the imperium. But it did fix a specific time in the timeline for the event to occur, which was also largely inconsequential, but would have ramifications later.

So encouraged by their success with ichar iv, they eventually did another worldwide campaign, armageddon 3. But, as seems to be the case with GW, they had to outdo the last event. So the consequences of losing were explained to be more dire. The event happened after ichar iv, so the point in time on the timeline progressed. Again, not a big thing, but setting the scene for the straw that broke the camels back.

Abaddons 13th black crusade. Again, things had to be ramped up. Instead of being just a major threat in general, it had to be a major threat that threatened earth itself, and therefore the whole imperium. Thinking with a linear mindset, it had to occur after the last events, and hey, the end of the millenium sounds cool right? Then the unthinkable happened: the bad guys won*. All this talk of next stop terra was suddenly a reality, and the implications to the game and setting were staggering. As it is, the (then newly created models of) cadians suddenly had no homeworld, and were potentially obsolete as a product line. And everything imperium-related was in the firing line.

Now i don't know exactly what went on in gw hq, but i imagine the suits weren't very happy. So the chaos victory was fluffed into them being contained to cadia in a constant state of battle. Many angry players, who had been tracking the results on their webpage and knew what was 'supposed' to happen, as promised by gw. But the point is, the timeline had been quite clearly fixed at the end of the millenium. The game was no longer set somewhere in m39, it was set at the very end of it, with no room left for further progression.

GW seems to have realized, too late, what they did. The game went from some time in the far future, who really cares when, to the end of m39. Future events therefore had to 'go back in time', and the consequences had to be scaled back to: business will continue as normal, either way. GW seem to be hoping that the unwanted veterans will go away and forget what happened, so that the new players (churn and burn remember) will start again with: sometime in the far future, no-one really cares quite when. But its too late, they opened pandora's box. Older players talk to newer players, and the idea of progressing the setting doesn't seem like it will go away any time soon. Add to this the inclusion of at least the tau, which as said above only have a couple hundred years of timeline to play with in the current setting.

And there we have it, both sides of the progression conundrum have valid points to make.

*as i recall, at the time i remember hearing massive rumours about game fixing (cheating) going on. Someone got the bright idea to post all disorder losses to the same planet (system?), and spread the word around. So of all the fronts, chaos were largely only losing ground on one small location. Then there were the snafus in the actual gaming. I was playing in a gw store at the time, and we were only allowed to play 500 point armies in the campaign. I played marines (blood angels). For the entire campaign, we only used the very first event card (lost in the warp, which meant i pretty much lost a random squad of marines in each game. At the 500 point level). It was only much later that i even found out each week? month? was supposed to be a different event card. But that was just my personal experience in the event, and largely an irrelevant side note to the topic at hand.

Bunnahabhain
28-01-2012, 21:45
I always wondered why GW didn't make a subtle change, either around 2000, or after Black Crusade, Mark13

" In the grim darkness of the far future, 40,000 years ahead, there is only war"

You keep the 40k name, but can go into M40.XXX without problems

Lord Damocles
28-01-2012, 22:02
Abaddons 13th black crusade
The 'problems' with the result(s) of the Eye of Terror campaign were/are largely the result of Imperial players not being able to conceive that they didn't win.

Sure, there probably was some cheating (on both sides), but with the sheer numbers of players involved the influence this would have had on the outcome would have been minimal. The simple fact is, Order players weren't as organised as Disorder players (irony ahoy!), and were slow to accept the 'threshold mechanic' which altered control in neighbouring battlezones when a certain territory's control reached certain critical percentage levels.

Cadia didn't fall completely to the Chaos forces ('unreliable' rating, if I recall correctly), and was unlikely to even with manipulation of the threshold effect (Cadia was a black hole of results posting, with victories registered there being basically worthless) - and even if Cadia had fallen, or Chaos had achieved a more complete victory in the Gate, the prelude to the campaign never promised anything like Abaddon suddenly rocking up on the Emperor's doorstep to wreck up the status quo (the sheer distance between the Eye and Terra would make this seem highly unlikely anyway...).
Even within the campaign there were reasons for the Cadian models to be able to survive even if Cadia has ceased to exist.


Iracundus wrote out a series of excellent posts looking at the results of the campaign, and discussing how players approached it here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?151201-Cadia-and-the-Black-Crusade/page3). Individual warzones are addressed from pg.5 onwards. Well worth a read.

Erazmus_M_Wattle
28-01-2012, 22:07
I've been playing 40k for twenty four years. I got first edition a year after it was released.

What refreshed it for me was in fifth edition they introduced new events into the history of the game. The battle of Badab, the age of apostasy and the Horus Heresy had been in the background for a long time.

Mere mention of the reign of the Cacodominus or the Nova Terra Interregnum were enough to get me really excited. Looking at the time line made me realise that the Space Marine chapters were organisations of warrior knights that had existed for a staggering amount of time. Try to imagine how much history has happened to us for the last ten thousand years.

We've got that span of time to play with. Why would we ever need to advance the story at all when we have all that rich history to play with. Admittedly some parts of the setting are inaccessible to some players. Tau and Nids just weren't around.

I want to know what the armies of the Cacodominus looked like. What did the imperium look like in the Nova Terra Interregnum? Who were on the differing sides? They might not be on the scale of the destruction of the imperium the way the Horus Heresy was but they are as interesting nonetheless.

Torga_DW
28-01-2012, 22:21
The 'problems' with the result(s) of the Eye of Terror campaign were/are largely the result of Imperial players not being able to conceive that they didn't win.


I'd agree to a certain extent, but i think the real problem was GW didn't anticipate that the imperials might not win. They were promising consequences of this campaign, after all.




Sure, there probably was some cheating (on both sides), but with the sheer numbers of players involved the influence this would have had on the outcome would have been minimal. The simple fact is, Order players weren't as organised as Disorder players (irony ahoy!), and were slow to accept the 'threshold mechanic' which altered control in neighbouring battlezones when a certain territory's control reached certain critical percentage levels.


I'm totally inclined to believe you here. As i said, it was the rumour i heard going around at the time. Me personally, i didn't care that the imperium didn't win, but i wasn't happy when the offical fluff didn't match up with the actual results. For example, the death of eldrad. Now i might be wrong here, its been a while and its never been big on my list of things to remember, but i seem to recall a mini-battle happening between the eldar and the dark eldar. And my recollection was that the eldar kicked their asses. The consequence: eldrad getting killed off officially in the fluff.



Cadia didn't fall completely to the Chaos forces ('unreliable' rating, if I recall correctly), and was unlikely to even with manipulation of the threshold effect (Cadia was a black hole of results posting, with victories registered there being basically worthless) - and even if Cadia had fallen, or Chaos had achieved a more complete victory in the Gate, the prelude to the campaign never promised anything like Abaddon suddenly rocking up on the Emperor's doorstep to wreck up the status quo (the sheer distance between the Eye and Terra would make this seem highly unlikely anyway...).


For what its worth, a quote from a text box in the eye of terror book (page 33): "the fate of the imperium hangs in the balance. The forces of the despoiler stand poised to deliver the deathblow to the cadian sector and pour forth from the eye of terror to wage endless war on the emperor's realm." blah blah blah " white dwarf and the games workshop website will be keeping you up to date with all the happenings throught the warzones and, while the campaign runs, your gaming group's battles can play a part in deciding the fate of a particular world, or even sector. The fate of the imperium is in your hands."

page 1: blah blah blah "Can they prevent this thirteenth crusade, the greatest so far, from breaching the cadian gate to assail the very heart of the imperium - ancient terra?"



Even within the campaign there were reasons for the Cadian models to be able to survive even if Cadia has ceased to exist.


I think thats arguable. Off the top of my head i can't think of any armies (special characters yes) that no longer exist in the fluff. How can they be cadians if the planet they come from is gone? Fair enough you could say they come from other worlds they've settled, but then they're not really cadians at that point, are they? anyhoo, just my opinion. I know, technically the planet wasn't destroyed in the results, but the potential for it was certainly there. On a side note, what ever happened to abbadon's planet killer ship?



Iracundus wrote out a series of excellent posts looking at the results of the campaign, and discussing how players approached it here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?151201-Cadia-and-the-Black-Crusade/page3). Individual warzones are addressed from pg.5 onwards. Well worth a read.

I'll have to give it a look. :)

Lord Damocles
28-01-2012, 22:53
I'd agree to a certain extent, but i think the real problem was GW didn't anticipate that the imperials might not win. They were promising consequences of this campaign, after all.
To be fair, there were some consequences (Eldrad died, Ygethmor (sp?) got into Abaddon's good books, Altansar returned from the Eye, the Eldar got a foothold on Eidolon, Typhus got a daemon world, Abaddon breached the Cadian Gate etc.
They might not have been the galaxy shattering consequences which some people expected, but they have popped up in background since the end of the campaign.



I'm totally inclined to believe you here. As i said, it was the rumour i heard going around at the time. Me personally, i didn't care that the imperium didn't win, but i wasn't happy when the offical fluff didn't match up with the actual results. For example, the death of eldrad. Now i might be wrong here, its been a while and its never been big on my list of things to remember, but i seem to recall a mini-battle happening between the eldar and the dark eldar. And my recollection was that the eldar kicked their asses. The consequence: eldrad getting killed off officially in the fluff.
The battle report ('Shadows in the Jungle') was part of the battle for a Basilica on Cadia, rather than having anything to do with Eldrad's excursion to the Blackstone. The Eldar victory gave the Order forces a boost in the main battle (and Ra's part in it was mentioned in the aftermath of the campaign), although they still failed to stop Abaddon achieving his [main] objective (which was also mentioned in the aftermath).

Eldrad getting killed off was a bit of a bummer though (although his death scene was kind of cool).



For what its worth, a quote from a text box in the eye of terror book (page 33): "the fate of the imperium hangs in the balance. The forces of the despoiler stand poised to deliver the deathblow to the cadian sector and pour forth from the eye of terror to wage endless war on the emperor's realm." blah blah blah " white dwarf and the games workshop website will be keeping you up to date with all the happenings throught the warzones and, while the campaign runs, your gaming group's battles can play a part in deciding the fate of a particular world, or even sector. The fate of the imperium is in your hands."

page 1: blah blah blah "Can they prevent this thirteenth crusade, the greatest so far, from breaching the cadian gate to assail the very heart of the imperium - ancient terra?"
Abaddon needn't have gone straight from victory at Cadia to assaulting Terra though (and he didn't - he stopped off at Thesus Reach in Apocalypse). An Order defeat gave the Chaos forces an advantage, and allowed (allows) them to maraud around beyond the Eye/Gate, while the Imperium forces are stretched almost to breaking point (the Tau's Third Sphere Expansion, for example).



I think thats arguable. Off the top of my head i can't think of any armies (special characters yes) that no longer exist in the fluff. How can they be cadians if the planet they come from is gone? Fair enough you could say they come from other worlds they've settled, but then they're not really cadians at that point, are they? anyhoo, just my opinion. I know, technically the planet wasn't destroyed in the results, but the potential for it was certainly there. On a side note, what ever happened to abbadon's planet killer ship?
Not all Cadians were on Cadia/in the Cadian Gate, so there'd still have been some left. There's also the possibility that since the Cadians' battlegear has been copied by other regiments, the models could represent them.


The Planet Killer was damaged during a boarding action by Honour Company Marines/Grey Knights and was forced to withdraw after destroying the planet Macharia if I remember correctly.

Torga_DW
28-01-2012, 23:15
I read that thread. Someone quoted andy chambers as saying disorder won in a white dwarf. Some really good breakdowns on just what happened by a guy who sadly seems to be banned now. Overall, still seems a lot of confusion. But a good read, thanks for giving out the link.

But to bring it back (slightly) to the original topic (and i'm guilty of that mental wandering into the EoT campaign), the point of the EoT is that it happened at the end of m39. There literally is no where else to go in a game called warhammer 40,000, unless you go backwards. I think the issue with that (my opinion of course) is that anything they do will have less appeal due to the perceived lack of impact, since we already know the ending. And it is my belief, that like i said, the whole concept of progressing the timeline started with ichar iv and ended with EoT. Now whether or not progression is good or bad, necessary or not, should happen / shouldn't happen is largely irrelevant to this thread. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on what and why, and i don't want to say that one is right and one is wrong.

I'm just interesting in hearing the what and whys, and how that stacks up as a group overall. I'm noticing that so far, not many people have voted who consider themselves new players.

EDIT: typos

Project2501
28-01-2012, 23:44
Holy crap, Iracundus got banned?! I was wondering why he wasn't all over this thread like white on rice. Guess my 'hiatus' was too long. :'(

On topic: My reasoning in the past was that progression of the timeline does not exclude continued exploration of the past, only exploration of the future. To which naysayers replied "But you can do that on your own" which, while true, does not give us canon like it does them, and is equally applicable to them as well to begin with. In other words, progessing the story also gives all those historical battle recreation lovers more battles to fight and benefits them regardless.

As far as the name of the game itself goes, even if the timeline was advanced to the 64th millenia, it can still be called warhammer 40,000 as it's the part where the story picks up or rather, where you come into it. You get thrown smack dab in the middle of it all (more fitting IMO) timeline/story wise and have to fend for yourself either way you choose to go (forward or back).

As for the cadian guard if cadia fell, as I've said before, and Lord Domacles stated here, not all cadians are on cadia, and cadian guards' outfits/equipment are standard issue for the entire region if not more. Also, apologies as my memory is not the best, but isn't there a famous guard regiment whose planet was destroyed and they've been allowed to continue with their name anyway?

Edit: I still feel the same way now and will still unreletingly cast my vote/support for progression, but just wanted to give my reasoning, hopefully without sparking a firestorm.

Edit numero zwei: As mentioned, Tyranid and Tau get hosed if the timeline doesn't progress and GW only creates past historical battles (and retcon horrors) and the Black Library has already advanced the timeline with ciaphas cain if mem serves. Been a good while since I've argued the bujeebuz out of this topic.

Shadowheart
29-01-2012, 01:04
Got into 40K in 2nd ed, don't like the idea of it being a story one bit. I want a setting I can invest in without having to keep up with new releases or worrying they're going screw over my own stuff.

Torga_DW
29-01-2012, 01:06
As I recall now, gaunt's ghosts (the tanith) are one such army, in that they have a (small) range of models available for the 40k game.

Kevlar
29-01-2012, 01:16
20 year player, couldn't care less about the fluff. If I want to read bad sci-fi stories there are plenty of those on my kindle. I just want playable rules and nice looking minis.

zoggin-eck
29-01-2012, 01:51
Long time player/fluff nut, I always vote "don't want them to progress the story".

For me, it's a setting rather than "story" anyway, and I think there's plenty of fun to be had with the current timeline and backstory.

Wrath
29-01-2012, 01:52
There literally is no where else to go in a game called warhammer 40,000, unless you go backwards.

Sure there is, if you assume that Warhammer 40K encompasses all of the 10 millennia in 40K. 1999 is still in "the 90s", with this assumption you have 10K years to fill before it becomes Warhammer 50K

snailboy.jr
29-01-2012, 04:09
Long time player, I also want the story to progress. Something to mix it up, to freshen it a bit. I don't think every one wants the story to break or dreadful things to happen to entire playable races.
Lets be honest, if that is going to happen wait until (matt ward# your codex gets updated, because it will happen regardless of the background. There will always be updates, there will always be new codices released
so you can't stop it. Let chaos move in be a threat, put some real tension on humanity, let tau do some cool stuff and get them out of their comfort zone, and make it grimdark. #lulz)

It's a story to me. If I'm reading something to get filled in to what is happening currently and why, its history or a story, imo. Keep it going. Not too far, just enough. ;)

"What's long enough?" Not our job, let GW figure it out. "The will screw it up!" No they wont, if they do, don't play if its so unappealing. Go for what you believe then and make it your own, separate the time line with your own. Do eet!

AndrewGPaul
29-01-2012, 11:27
Holy crap, Iracundus got banned?! I was wondering why he wasn't all over this thread like white on rice. Guess my 'hiatus' was too long. :'(

On topic: My reasoning in the past was that progression of the timeline does not exclude continued exploration of the past, only exploration of the future. To which naysayers replied "But you can do that on your own" which, while true, does not give us canon like it does them,


So? Tell your own story. There's this bizarre obsession with "canon" in the "geek fandom" for want of a better phrase. Comic books tie themselves in knots to explain everything and the internet is full of websites and forums where people sit and chew over meaningless throwaway nuggets from twenty years ago or more and lambast the writers of games, TV series and films for not being as obsessive as they are. It's fun, in a way (which is why I'm here, after all), but why is it so important to you? GW don't particularly care if the details change, after all. Why can't you and your group have your own 40K setting? Why does it matter if to you, Cadia fell in 999.M41 and some people you'll never meet claim otherwise?

It can be something as simple as the way you've painted your army. If anyone paints their Ultramarines with yellow shoulder pad rims and uses a captain other than the Sicarius special character, they're either playing in the "past" or creating an alternate setting. My Space Wolves of Ragnar Blackmane's company spent most of their career fighting against Eldar from Biel-Tan and Tyranids from Hive Fleet Kraken, which probably isn't that representative of the "official" history. :)

Freakiq
29-01-2012, 14:58
If they start to go forward fans will keep pushing to have them go even further.

40k is a setting not a story, you might as well ask when they'll advance the plot and introduce gunpowder in Lord of the Rings.

Kozbot
29-01-2012, 16:15
If they move the story forward there are two options, they can change things up or leave it basically the same but in the future. If they don't actually change anything then all the people wanting progression still aren't happy and all the people who don't want progression aren't happy. If they advance into the future and change some things those players who come out on the short end of the stick will be unhappy as will the anti-progression folk, only the subset of pro-progression players that didn't get their armies screwed over by advancement will be happy. This is the definition of a lose-lose scenario for GW.

And to anyone who says "Well they can advance it without screwing over any factions" then that's not really progression is it? Nothing is changed, it's all the same, it's what happened after the 13th crusade which angered a lot of players. If the story moves forward people want something that matters to change, so unless they take out some named chapters, finish off one or more of the chaos legions, destroy an important named craftworld, wipe out the tau, etc the pro-progression folk will continue to complain that the setting is static and boring.

Lord Damocles
29-01-2012, 18:12
It should perhaps be noted that the timeline has already progressed into M42 (Cain archive notes, Cadian Blood, Atlas Infernal), so it certainly doesn't seem to be the case that the timeline has mostly ground to a halt because someone at GW is worried about Warhammer 40,000 not being the current date.

Project2501
29-01-2012, 18:48
So? Tell your own story.

You should read what you quoted, your response was already covered. The irony in the 'haves' (people that don't want the timeline to progress but the past to be further explored) telling the 'have nots' (people that do want the timeline to progress and don't mind if the past is still explored) that it doesn't matter, you don't need it etc. is remarkable.

Erazmus_M_Wattle
29-01-2012, 19:02
I'm not sure I understand what's ironic about it. Care to explain please?

Gazak Blacktoof
29-01-2012, 19:08
40k is a setting not a story, you might as well ask when they'll advance the plot and introduce gunpowder in Lord of the Rings.

Indeed. I've never felt that there's a need to progress the timeline beyond its current state. Those who want it to progress always have the option to grab some paper and a pen (or sit at their computer) and stick their thinking caps on and have a go themselves.

Balragore
29-01-2012, 19:32
I've always wondered why people think the timeline progressing would 'hurt' anything. I just don't see how, if anything it prevents things from being 'hurt' due to more bad retconing. How exactly would wh40k no longer be a 'setting'? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Gazak Blacktoof
29-01-2012, 19:40
I don't think it will hurt anything and if I want to muck about with the past, present or future there's nothing to stop me doing so already.

Project2501
29-01-2012, 20:14
I don't think it will hurt anything and if I want to muck about with the past, present or future there's nothing to stop me doing so already.

And there's nothing stopping you from doing that if the timeline progresses...

Except that past battles that exclude 3 races would be more prominent, without horrible retconning...

But don't worry, you and your armies that were there at the time are safe, hope you play/have those armies...

Hey, if we force GW to stay in the past long enough, they'll bring back Squats! Because the tyranid couldn't have eaten them if they didn't exist right?

Noobie2k7
29-01-2012, 20:16
"I just love polls"

My and my friends have just made up our own stories and background, hell we've even made to special characters are just important enough to afford to have clones made so it doesn't matter when we kill them in our games. (see, sad enough to even have that covered) We have all sorts of random stuff we've made up cause it suites us. I still really enjoy the actual background though and don't get me wrong i love reading all the history and backstory of everything 40k. I even have every IA book and codex just for the history, background and some art work (although the art has been getting worse as of late sadly)

susu.exp
29-01-2012, 21:16
Iīm a long time player and I donīt want the timeline progressed. The reason for this is simple: The 40k universe is a big place and most of it is unexplored. Thereīs a lot of room for innovation without chronological advancement. Itīs not as if the introduction of the Tau was a retcon - it simply was something that hadnīt been detailed before. In the same way there are lots of smaller alien races, loads of imperial regiments, loads of... Thatīs plenty of space for GW to add new things and for players to find their niche of fluff. On the other hand it is hard to advance the timeline of such a vast universe - most things that can happen do so on a small scale that wouldnīt count as time line advance. If some hive city is lost to a waargh in 41k.001 thatīs hardly worth noting, because in the grim darl future of the 41st millenium there was only war as well. The things that would mark a progression are those that have galaxy wide implications. A new reign of blood. A new Heresy. The destruction of Commoragh. The astronomicon going black. The return of the old ones... These things would fundamentally alter the setting.
Universes in which progression happens are far smaller. You can list all the planets in the Battletech universe. In 40k there are millions upon millions. In Battletech you had a reasonably small number of movers and shakers running a small number of states and substates. In 40k you have an Imperium with enough different organizations that arenīt neccessarily on the same page interacting with local governments. And even without that you have 6 known alien civilizations. And countless others. Nothing is idle - there are a 1000 chapters fighting campaigns, millions of guard regiments do so as well, there are Waarghs starting to form as Meks commence on the construction of Gargants. Thereīs so much stuff going on that you either have an insurmountable task in explaining what everybody has been doing (check the IA books for details on single campaigns), or you do something big enough that the whole galaxy is involved in that exclusively.

AndrewGPaul
29-01-2012, 21:16
You should read what you quoted

Funnily enough, I did do that, which is why I quoted it. I'm not in the habit of randomly picking a post and clicking "reply with quote".

I was questioning why you need the fictional background to your wargaming to be "canon".

Really, that's the only benefit that I can see for having GW write the background as opposed to the players doing it themselves. That seems like quite a negligible benefit, since any new background material seems to get slated. :) That or people get upset because their own inventions get "retconned". As far as I'm concerned, most of the events in the Horus Heresy novels are noncanonical, because I find most of the novels rather tedious. Horus falls to Chaos because of Erebus' schemes? Nope, that's wrong.

Now you could say "but in that case, why not just think up your own background", and you'd be right. What I would say is that personally, it's easier for me to take a setting already written and extrapolate from there than it is to make something up from scratch. I like the 40K setting for the themes, the aesthetics and the background to the various factions and characters. Once that's there, I can make up my own stories about what I'm doing without anything else.

Colonel_Kreitz
29-01-2012, 21:25
This is chiefly interesting to the extent that virtually no one things they're a short-time player...

Project2501
29-01-2012, 21:40
I was questioning why you need the fictional background to your wargaming to be "canon".

What I would say is that personally, it's easier for me to take a setting already written and extrapolate from there than it is to make something up from scratch.

Ironic how you say canon isn't necessary, yet you have it and use it to go by.

I obviously can't say it enough, progressing the timeline does nothing to hamper further exploration of the past, and only helps (not only give historical players more battles to work with) keeping retcon nightmares to a mninimum when fleshing out stories/events for the newer armies/events in the furture (in real life and in game). And if you're playing in the past settings provided regardless the timeline progressing, then what do you care what time it is currently (in game)?

It's not strictly that people like me will not have a progressing timeline, it's also the fact that anyone that plays Tyranids, Tau and Necrons better hope that there's no more fluff planned for them, because there's no more room timeline wise.
Enter retconning, where suddenly the Tyranid and Tau where around for the Horus Heresy (Necrons waking up ealier in force/en mass, Tau being warp time tunneld in and the tyranid would invade sooner because they'd have to be there even earlier actually in order to be able to eat the squats...) because GW wants to revist the Horus Heresy, and knows that by doing so they're hosing customers and armies.

Now, if the timeline were to progress, GW could do the HH, and then do a new epic battle that includes everyone or everyone except (GASP!!!) the Imperium in the future as they now have the time/room to do so.

Everyone wins if the timeline progresses, only the people that want to play in the past (or even can to begin with) win if it doesn't.

thor2006
29-01-2012, 21:52
Only the factions that have the fluff short end of the stick, or dissapear loses.

Project2501
29-01-2012, 21:55
Only the factions that have the fluff short end of the stick, or dissapear loses.

Um, while I agree (with everything but the first word), it's still all people that want the storyline to progress, regardless of the army they play, that lose.

thor2006
29-01-2012, 22:05
It almost a given that all IOM factions and armies would massively loose in the fluff, maybe the IOM and humanity would go extinct, and for the other factions nothing terrible bad would happen , because of grim dark.

Project2501
29-01-2012, 22:15
It almost a given that all IOM factions and armies would massively loose in the fluff, maybe the IOM and humanity would go extinct, and for the other factions nothing terrible bad would happen , because of grim dark.

Or Russ, Khan and Vulkan could come back, heal Guilliman and wake up Lion'el or the Emperor could be reborn (starchild) or...

AndrewGPaul
29-01-2012, 22:20
..... .....

thor2006
29-01-2012, 22:21
But unfortunately it will not happen. In my opinion GW will not add anything that will make the situation of the IOM better in a way that matter, and not a useless figlif,that the IOM can cope with the problems.
But it would be nice to have something in fluff major in favor of the IOM just this once.

Project2501
29-01-2012, 22:27
But unfortunately it will not happen. In my opinion GW will not add anything that will make the situation of the IOM better in a way that matter, and not a useless figlif,that the IOM can cope with the problems.
But it would be nice to have something in fluff major in favor of the IOM just this once.

Whose to say that it would benefit the IoM? If Russ (for example) was to come back, that means that 'the end times' battle is near which means there's clearly something about to hose over the IoM (from within again or outside). There's a myriad of possibilities to explore for everyone's benefit.

Noobie2k7
29-01-2012, 22:32
This is chiefly interesting to the extent that virtually no one things they're a short-time player... I'm a new-ish player (only been full on playing 40k for about 5/6 years) but i just really like voting on polls so i picked that option.

Kozbot
29-01-2012, 22:40
Anything that fundamentally shook up the status quo of 40k would make it not 40k anymore. If Russ came back Space Wolves would change drastically, which won't make everyone happy, if nothing else those that play other chapters would feel left out. If you advance in the timeline Blood Angels need to fundamentally change. Either they cure the Black Rage/Red Thirst issue, the entire chapter succumbs or they find out that the whole "It's getting worse soon there won't be BAs anymore" was all lies, either way not fun for BA players. If the Emperor dies and is reborn as the starchild or whatever then you'll have a fundamentally different setting to the point it would be close to unrecognizable.

There is no way to advance the timeline without screwing over some faction or changing it utterly, or retconning all the "the end times are nigh" fluff to "eh, not really, few hundred years later nothing's changed." Whenever I think advancing timeline I think Legend of the Five Rings, which invalidated whole factions, repeatedly. I want a setting to play my games in and come up with my own story, if Russ comes back and suddenly all the new Space Wolf models revolve around that then my army is basically discontinued as far as I'm concerned.

Colonel_Kreitz
29-01-2012, 23:20
I'm a new-ish player (only been full on playing 40k for about 5/6 years) but i just really like voting on polls so i picked that option.

And there's nothing wrong with that! Welcome to the community, and I hope you're enjoying 40K.

I find it more interesting to the extent that it makes me think people tend to vote "long-term" even if, by any reasonable metric, they're short term.

Noobie2k7
30-01-2012, 01:55
And there's nothing wrong with that! Welcome to the community, and I hope you're enjoying 40K.

I find it more interesting to the extent that it makes me think people tend to vote "long-term" even if, by any reasonable metric, they're short term. I mean i've only been alive for 23 years so kinda hard for me to have been playing for that long lol. But i started when i was about 12 but never really had my own army till i was about 18 and could actually afford one. Till then i was just using my dads (he;s been playing for the full 25 years and has about 6 40K armies of 3000pts+ but never gave me anything, cheeky sod. Had to earn my wins too, more fun that way though, i never asked for any quarter to be given, no fun learning the game if the opponent is going easy, even if it is your dad. But after i started winning every time he didn;t want to play anymore lol.

i kinda went of subject a bit. damn me and my random splurges of rantage.

Lord Damocles
30-01-2012, 18:26
There is no way to advance the timeline without screwing over some faction or changing it utterly, or retconning all the "the end times are nigh" fluff to "eh, not really, few hundred years later nothing's changed."
And yet, in the decade or so up to the Eye of Terror campaign, the timeline advanced just fine...

DEADMARSH
30-01-2012, 21:25
I really, really don't want the background story progressed at the moment. Not by the likes of Mat Ward. Just No.

At some point in the future, when they have a better crop of writers about? Then, maybe.

This is a great point, in my opinion.

Would I like to see the storyline advance? Sure. I got into 40k right after the Eye of Terror that was supposed to kind of change things, but apparently didn't, etc. etc.

I think with the right talent and a little foresight, you could move the story ahead without mashing big toes that'd invalidate codexes or whatever, but would still hold some significance to the players and their armies. Stuff like that seems fun to me and I think if some things actually did change once in awhile, it'd be cool. As it stands right now, I could have started playing 3 years ago or six months ago and really nothing has changed in anything but the rules (and head-scratching retcons).

That said, if done badly, it definitely has the potential to get really silly, really quickly, and for that reason my final answer is, "Leave it alone."

Kozbot
30-01-2012, 23:38
And yet, in the decade or so up to the Eye of Terror campaign, the timeline advanced just fine...

Hey if it'd advance in such away that absolutely nothing changed in any way what so ever then sure, though if you go too far you run into the "Hey I thought Blood Angels were going to all go nutters any minute" issue. However I doubt very much that the pro-advancement people want things to advance in a way that literally nothing changes.

GrimZAG
31-01-2012, 00:44
I don't mind either way. I will still play the game. GW won't invalidate the current set of armies any time soon I reckon.