The stupid thing about the allies table...

[yabbadabba]

Not at all. The fluff is risible and irrelevant - I play with and for rules, not fluff.

Can't imagine why the hell you are wasting your time with GW's core games then.

[Bubble Ghost]

The fluff is risible and irrelevant - I play with and for rules, not fluff.

OK, so forgive me if this sounds blunt or facetious, but: why the hell are you playing 40K then? Playing 40K for the rules and being dismissive of the background is like going to Wimbledon and stuffing your face with kilo after kilo of rotten, maggot-ridden strawberries and spoiled cream, all the while declaring your contempt for tennis and that you only bought your ticket for access to the strawberries.

40K's rules are awful. If you don't care about the "fluff" but like wargames, why on earth don't you play a good one? As it is, you're spending an awful lot of time and money on something you could get an infinitely better version of elsewhere. That's just barking mad.

[Kevlar]

40K's rules are awful. If you don't care about the "fluff" but like wargames, why on earth don't you play a good one? As it is, you're spending an awful lot of time and money on something you could get an infinitely better version of elsewhere. That's just barking mad.

Because the models are cool?

The fluff has always been bad/silly, and seemed almost an afterthought.

[Veteran Sergeant]

Until there's an actual LIST for Genestealer Cults, it's the closest you'll get.

The army has been gone since the start of 3rd Edition, except in an unofficial capacity. I think they can wait a little longer to be dusted off if it means waiting for a sub-list in the next Tyranid Codex or something. I'd rather they not do it at all than do it completely wrong.

[Veteran Sergeant]

Except the Black Dragons are most certainly NOT codex, regardless of what Mr. Ward might think. But then he'd know that, had he done his homework on both the Sallies AND the Dragons.

The Storm Giants, yes they ARE codex, but NOT the Dragons, based on what we know. If the Dragons are Codex, then arguably the BA are Codex too and shouldn't even have a separate book.

The Blood Angels are a Codex Chapter, lol. You need to keep up on your fluff. What makes them different is their gene seed flaw that requires them to allow for the Death Company. The Thirst and Death Company is what makes them unique enough for their own book. They still follow the majority of the tenets of the Codex, even if they have a propensity for Assault troops and close combat. The Codex does cover close combat too, lol.

As far as the Black Dragons, well, what do we know about them? That they have weird bone protrusions as a result of mutation? That doesn't prevent them from being a Codex Chapter. I don't think you really understand what a Codex Chapter is. It isn't a Chapter that uses Codex: Space Marines to the letter, lol. Those are the game rules. In the fluff, a Codex Chapter just adheres to the majority of the Codex's tenets on recruitment, training, heraldry, and organization. It has nothing to do with certain peculiarities of gene seed or preference in tactics. The Codex isn't a book of hard and inflexible rules. The Space Wolves and Black Templars are non-Codex because they refute nearly all the organizational tenets, and from all appearances all of the training and recruitment guidelines too. The White Scars are a Codex Chapter, even though they like bikes and dislike dreadnoughts.

[Gutlord Grom]

Because the models are cool?

The fluff has always been bad/silly, and seemed almost an afterthought.

I'd disagree with the afterthought part. Bad (venerable Dreadnaught blows up all the Necrons!) or silly (Mortarion looks down at the Draigo carved in his chest) has always been part of the reality of playing 40k. Hell, the game could probably benifit fro some tighter writing from the people actually working on the in-universe canon.

But...

There's always a been a decent attempt made by the designers to make the universe, characters and events interesting. Most players can point to a moment that caught their interest or inspired their armies. The reason I'm building a Night Lords warband is that the Night Lords books by Dembski-Bowden (and Lord of Night helped too) add such great character to the CSM. Saying the fluff is the an afterthought ignores the fact that the background informs miniature design and army layout, and even in this case, who armies can ally with.

[MooseOnTheLoose]

If what i see is right, then Dark eldar are battle brothers with the Eldar. but in the same allies matrix space marines and chaos space marines cannot ally. i find this weird as the hatred between the eldar has been going in fluff/history wise for many many millenia. This is a lot more deep rooted and a great deal longer than the SM's and the CSM's have been fighting it out for.

Battle brothers was indeed a bit far imo however this is not the same relationship between the two armies like the fantasy equivalents (High Elf and Dark Elf) as most seem to think. There is not a direct hate/desire to conquer or defeat one another. They had a difference of belief and how their society was too function and react so they parted ways so to speak.

[Kevlar]

Most players can point to a moment that caught their interest or inspired their armies. The reason I'm building a Night Lords warband is that the Night Lords books by Dembski-Bowden (and Lord of Night helped too) add such great character to the CSM. Saying the fluff is the an afterthought ignores the fact that the background informs miniature design and army layout, and even in this case, who armies can ally with.

I don't know if I would say "most" players. I don't personally know anyone who has bought any piece of warhammer fluff except for what they force upon you in the rule books. I certainly wouldn't pay for a single line of it. It is utter garbage.

[Gutlord Grom]

It's fine if you don't like it; and I'm not really disagreeing that a lot of it isn't all that good (The Blood Angels 'saga' and Last Chancers come to mind as examples as the worst to come out). But it still informs a lot of the aesthetic and army design; saying otherwise is silly. The background is a part of the game, just as much as the rules.

[EDMM]

The allies matrix must be used to some degree for competitive play. Otherwise why do we need a matrix? Ultimately, it is counter-intuitive in places and needlessly restrictive. For campaign play with mature players there is simply no reason for a FOC at all, nor any restrictions on units - nor a points value at all!

So what's the ally matrix for? It's not suitable for competitive play, it's unnecessary for campaign play. Which is the OP's point I think.

Absolutely that is my point.

They accomplished precisely 0 goals.

The table is idiotic from a fluff standpoint. Look at all the threads about Black Templars allying with Eldar, or Tau with Space Marines. The table fails entirely from a fluff point of view.

The table is equally idiotic from a gameplay point of view. It's totally unbalanced, and provides huge benefits for some races (right now, for armies without access to psychic defence, any army that can ally with Eldar), and huge drawbacks for others (particularly Tyranids). The table fails entirely from a gameplay point of view.

It needs to be done away with entirely, for the good of the background and for the good of the game.

I propose that we, as gamers, tell GW where to shove their stupid allies matrix. I don't want to see a single tournament using it, I don't want to read battle reports where players adopt it.

Can we do that?

[Spiney Norman]

Absolutely that is my point.

They accomplished precisely 0 goals.

The table is idiotic from a fluff standpoint. Look at all the threads about Black Templars allying with Eldar, or Tau with Space Marines. The table fails entirely from a fluff point of view.

The table is equally idiotic from a gameplay point of view. It's totally unbalanced, and provides huge benefits for some races (right now, for armies without access to psychic defence, any army that can ally with Eldar), and huge drawbacks for others (particularly Tyranids). The table fails entirely from a gameplay point of view.

It needs to be done away with entirely, for the good of the background and for the good of the game.

I propose that we, as gamers, tell GW where to shove their stupid allies matrix. I don't want to see a single tournament using it, I don't want to read battle reports where players adopt it.

Can we do that?

Mostly agree, some of the decisions on the allies chart were unfathomably stupid

Why the hell did they think it was appropriate to make Edlar & DEldar bosson buddies? From the fluff the two hate each other, it's even a required part of Incubi training not just to kill an aspect warrior, but to take posession of his/her soul. The DE codex mentions somewhere that CWE prisoners are considered the most sought after slaves in all of Commoragh. The fluff points to a major grudge match between the two, but apparently the new allies chart reveals that Yrellian and Vect take tea together an explain pleasantries once a week wtf?

Imp Guard options should be pretty broad, not alliable with chaos of any sort, Battle brothers with sisters and marines is ok. Never Orks though, that was dumb, although not as dumb as space marines with Orks. Why the hell did they let IG ally with chaos, especially daemons, I suppose they are supposed to represent traitor guard right?

Dark Eldar should not have got any kind of alliance with daemons, a DEldar/Daemonette alliance is maybe one of the most fluff-murdering combinations they could have come up with.

Here is roughly what I would have expected from an allied table, maybe a w tweaks he and there

Space marines (inc DA, BA, SW & BT)
battle brothers; sisters & guard,
convenience; Eldar, Tau, GK,
Come the Apoc; DEldar, Crons,
Never; Orks, CSM, Daemons, Nids

IG:
BB; Sisters, Marines (inc BT, BA, DA & SW),
Con; Eldar, Tau, GK, Crons, DEldar,
CtA; Orks,
Never; CSM, Daemons, Nids

Sisters;
BB; all SM and IG,
Con; GK,
CtA; Eldar, Tau, Cron
Never; CSM, Daemons, Nids, Orks, DEldar

GK
BB: none
con; All Imperial
CtA; Tau, Eldar, Crons
Never; DEldar, CSM, Daemons, Orks, Nids

Eldar
BB; tau
Con; IG & marines
CtA; DEldar, Orks, GK, Sisters,
Never; daemons, CSM, Crons, Nids

Tau
BB; Eldar
Con; DEldar, all SM, IG, Crons,
CtA; Sisters, GK, CSM
Never; Orks, Nids, Daemons

DEldar
BB: none
Con; Tau, Orks, CSM
CtA; IG, all SM, Eldar
Never; GK, daemons, Nids, Sisters, Crons

Orks:
BB; none
Con; DEldar, CSM, Daemons,
CtA; IG, Eldar
Never; All SM, GK, Nids, Crons, sisters

Crons
BB: none
Con: Tau, IG, CSM
CtA; GK, all SM, Sisters
Never: Orks, Nids, Daemons, Eldar, DEldar

CSM
BB; daemons
Con: DEldar, Crons, Orks
CtA: Tau
Never: All Imperial, Eldar, Nids

Daemons
BB: CSM
Con: Orks
CtA: none
Never; all imperial, Eldar, DEldar, Tau, Crons, Nids

Nids- stays as per BRB

[Gutlord Grom]

Well, in reply to the Imperial Guard issue above, most of the backgrounds supports the existance of traitor Guard, so there's less of an issue there. Otherwise agreed with most of what you brought up.

[yabbadabba]

I see this is turning from a "debate" into a shouting match in the school playground.

Allies aren't compulsory.
You don't have to play someone.
This game requires mature and sensible attitudes, as well as a degree of imagination.
Your hobby is yours, but that doesn't entitle you to force it on someone else.
There is no such thing as canon.

GWs universe is huge and mostly unexplored. If people want to explore that in ways that isn't represented in GWs limited background then so be it. You don't have to agree with it, but it doesn't give you the right to say that person is wrong.

The only discussion on the Allies matrix is whether you, personally, are going to use it or not.

[Spiney Norman]

Well, in reply to the Imperial Guard issue above, most of the backgrounds supports the existance of traitor Guard, so there's less of an issue there. Otherwise agreed with most of what you brought up.

I don't think traitor guard really work using the regular guard list, assuming that cultists are going to feature prominently in the forthcoming chaos legions book it seems to me that will be a much better fit for traitor guard by decouple them from the standard I'm
Equal command structure and giving them some more appropriate chaosy leaders.

I'd rather that Imperial Guard stayed Imperial, suggesting that you should be able to represent traitor guard from the IG codex is a bit like saying you should be able to represent dark Eldar from the Eldar codex.

I see this is turning from a "debate" into a shouting match in the school playground.

Allies aren't compulsory.
You don't have to play someone.
This game requires mature and sensible attitudes, as well as a degree of imagination.
Your hobby is yours, but that doesn't entitle you to force it on someone else.
There is no such thing as canon.

GWs universe is huge and mostly unexplored. If people want to explore that in ways that isn't represented in GWs limited background then so be it. You don't have to agree with it, but it doesn't give you the right to say that person is wrong.

The only discussion on the Allies matrix is whether you, personally, are going to use it or not.

I think the point is the allies table is neither limited by established background nor allowing total freedom for players to make their own decisions, it is instead subject to a range of seemingly random restrictions which don't appear to bear any relation to the background material. I would have preferred that they had either strictly adhered to the background, producing a list similar to mine above, or just left allies totally open and allowed players to decide for themselves what was acceptable and what was not. What we got was a bizarre and mostly non-sensical halfway house that doesn't make any kind of sense.

They could have made the fluff gamers happy by giving them a strictly limited allies system, or they could have made the gamey players happy by leaving allies completely open, instead they managed to piss of both groups by inventing a set of restrictions which don't follow the background, gamey players can't make the combos they want and fluff players a frustrated because allies don't follow the fluff, everyone loses...

[Kevlar]

Mostly agree, some of the decisions on the allies chart were unfathomably stupid

Why the hell did they think it was appropriate to make Edlar & DEldar bosson buddies? From the fluff the two hate each other, it's even a required part of Incubi training not just to kill an aspect warrior, but to take posession of his/her soul. The DE codex mentions somewhere that CWE prisoners are considered the most sought after slaves in all of Commoragh. The fluff points to a major grudge match between the two, but apparently the new allies chart reveals that Yrellian and Vect take tea together an explain pleasantries once a week wtf?

Imp Guard options should be pretty broad, not alliable with chaos of any sort, Battle brothers with sisters and marines is ok. Never Orks though, that was dumb, although not as dumb as space marines with Orks. Why the hell did they let IG ally with chaos, especially daemons, I suppose they are supposed to represent traitor guard right?

Dark Eldar should not have got any kind of alliance with daemons, a DEldar/Daemonette alliance is maybe one of the most fluff-murdering combinations they could have come up with.

Here is roughly what I would have expected from an allied table, maybe a w tweaks he and there

I think your list is a lot crappier than the one given to us. Basically you want all imperials to ally together and all the xenos to really get no allies. That is pretty rubbish and also wouldn't foster much in the way of generating sales.

[Spiney Norman]

I think your list is a lot crappier than the one given to us. Basically you want all imperials to ally together and all the xenos to really get no allies. That is pretty rubbish and also wouldn't foster much in the way of generating sales.

Right, you want sales, then scrap the allies table and let any army ally with any other army, OR you try and follow the background of the game, this crappy BRB table with its myriad of inexplicable restrictions that are not based on anything doesn't help anyone. I was just trying to illustrate what an allies chart based on the background would actually look like, not necessarily suggesting it should be adopted. If you have any specific questions about my choices I'd be happy to discuss and maybe even modify them after a well reasoned debate.

[bad dice]

If what i see is right, then Dark eldar are battle brothers with the Eldar. but in the same allies matrix space marines and chaos space marines cannot ally. i find this weird as the hatred between the eldar has been going in fluff/history wise for many many millenia. This is a lot more deep rooted and a great deal longer than the SM's and the CSM's have been fighting it out for.

Craftworld Eldar and dark eldar are not like high elfs and dark elfs

They are not best buds by any means. They are still the same race tough are regard each other that was. Its just a difference in philosophy.
In fact there are a couple of examples of fluff where they work together.

I also think there is a third faction of eldar (so not dark not crafworld) that has equal dealing whit both.

[Kevlar]

I also think there is a third faction of eldar (so not dark not crafworld) that has equal dealing whit both.

Yes, the Harlequins, which both armies could already field.

Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines can never ally because "Traitor" Marines tried to exterminate the emperor. Chaos can ally with guard because there are lots of "traitor" guard in the fluff, on worlds taken by chaos, they were just never officially included in any rules, outside of the video games...

[AlphariusOmegon20]

See for me it is more that they murdered the fluff to create this stupid table. *mumbles something about tau and marines being battle brothers*

THIS +1000

Balck Templars allying with Eldar who are xenos that have witches, or Tau, who are xenos without witches? Yep, that's REAL fluffy.

[Bubble Ghost]

Because the models are cool?

He didn't say he played for the models, though. He said he played for the rules. And playing 40K for the rules is borderline insane, because the rules are abominable.

Besides, models counts as "fluff" for me, as far as it matters for that last post - they're part of the imagery. You can buy into whatever aspects of this you like, whether you like to delve into the back story (I don't, largely because it's silly and juvenile if you look at it too closely these days) or just soak up the aesthetic. Same kind of principle when it comes to motivation to play. You can't filter the rules in the same way though.