PDA

View Full Version : Is Forgeworld stuff legal?



Pages : [1] 2

Forsworn
15-01-2012, 02:35
The new Eldar aspect warriors look VERY useful, and add in some nice anti-tank firepower to the army. I also like their look. Would they be legal in, say, a tournament? I doubt that anyone would give me flak for using them in friendly games (I hope).

The Marshel
15-01-2012, 03:10
In before the usual forgeworld debate

Technically, they are as legal as forgeworld can make them, but untill they are actually put into their respective codex there will be people who refuse to play because of forgeworld products. As for tournies, afaik many tournies disallow forgeworld units. I'd advise you check with the TO before the tournament

Noobie2k7
15-01-2012, 05:40
I personally enjoy playing against FW lists and units. I myself am building a chaos renegades list for fun friendly play.

-Loki-
15-01-2012, 05:45
People will refuse to play you for all sorts of reasons.

In 3rd edition, one of our friends would not play my brothers Guard army if he used 2 Leman Russes. Battlecannons terrified him.

Don't let 'legality' guide your purchase of Forgeworld models.

For tournaments, it's all down to the organiser and what they will allow. Adepticon allowed them in their team tournaments last year, and are apparently allowing Forgeworld units in all of their games this year. It's all down to the organisers.

For friendly games, despite what the internet tells you, you won't find as much resistance to using them as it tells you. Just make sure you have the book with the unit in it on you at all times, just like you do with a rulebook and codex. Tell people up front - they'll be less annoyed. Show them the models when you tell them, so they don't get the wrong idea and think you'll plop a Scorpion on the table (people still think this will happen to them, despite being illegal).

Most people will see the model is an infantry model (in this case anyway, since you're talking about Shadow Spectres), and just ask to see the rules.

igwarlord
15-01-2012, 07:31
most tournies I seen say no

adepticon is more the exception than the rule

Todosi
15-01-2012, 07:43
The only person that can answer your question is the tournament organizer. They are free to make whatever rules they like.

Charistoph
15-01-2012, 08:00
People will refuse to play you for all sorts of reasons.

Truth here.


Don't let 'legality' guide your purchase of Forgeworld models.

Truth again here. Only look into getting them if your model set is already self-sufficient. If you just got the battlebox, then getting their stuff is usually premature (exceptions, such as Tau Crisis and Broadside Suits, are a different story, they mostly just look different of codex units).

Most people I know LOVE seeing Forgeworld models on the table. They are rare, so get attention when they come out.



For friendly games, despite what the internet tells you, you won't find as much resistance to using them as it tells you. Just make sure you have the book with the unit in it on you at all times, just like you do with a rulebook and codex. Tell people up front - they'll be less annoyed. Show them the models when you tell them, so they don't get the wrong idea and think you'll plop a Scorpion on the table (people still think this will happen to them, despite being illegal).

Truth again here, but with a caveat. There are some who only see friendly games as nothing more than practice for tournaments, and so refuse to play anything but what the tournaments they regularly attend will allow. Once you get to know who those are and avoid using your FW units with, it's not so bad.

Arador
15-01-2012, 13:05
Absolutely not. Forge World does no playtesting at all, their rules are pulled out of a hat to sell books. Use them at your own peril.

Inquisitor Kallus
15-01-2012, 13:10
No it is not, the vice squad will lock you up!

Btw im joking, don't listen to the guy above, it is. It is however ruled out of some tournaments

Axel
15-01-2012, 13:40
Absolutely not. Forge World does no playtesting at all, their rules are pulled out of a hat to sell books. Use them at your own peril.

And where is the difference to the GW codizes?

Blackhoof
15-01-2012, 13:45
Forgeworld stuff can be a little imbalanced at times, but usually to the detriment of the fw player.

Dervos
15-01-2012, 15:48
Absolutely not. Forge World does no playtesting at all, their rules are pulled out of a hat to sell books. Use them at your own peril.

Just to make this clear Forgeworld does make units that are found in some armies codexes that you can legally use.

Units like Sister of Battle Immolator's and Exorcists to name just a few. These are units found in the codex and don't need Imperial Armor books because it's the same unit using the same rules found in your army codex.

Your main point of contention with players will be models that Forgeworld makes themselves that are not in the army codexes and have their own pdf rules like Arador mentioned.

Noobie2k7
15-01-2012, 15:58
Just to make this clear Forgeworld does make units that are found in some armies codexes that you can legally use.

Units like Sister of Battle Immolator's and Exorcists to name just a few. These are units found in the codex and don't need Imperial Armor books because it's the same unit using the same rules found in your army codex.

Your main point of contention with players will be models that Forgeworld makes themselves that are not in the army codexes and have their own pdf rules like Arador mentioned. Plus, some conversion kits to make some stuff in the codex's are only available through FW, it;s how i got my redeemer conversion kit. Not sure if GW do one.

Korraz
15-01-2012, 15:59
By now, FW has probably more extensive playtesting than the main line.
Most of the time the FW rules are actually weaker than they should be.
Does the FW entry say "THIS can be used as a SOMETHING choice in a ANYTHING army"? Then you are free to use it. The grognards laying down Da Rules for the "tournaments" simply do not have with any solid arguments against FW, just prejucides.

UberBeast
15-01-2012, 16:52
The only time you need to worry about "Legal" is when it comes down to your local tournament rules. I've seen tournament organizers make normal codex units "Illegal" before so it's really a crapshoot when you ask if something is legal.

Forgeworld seems to put a fair amount of play testing into their rules, and if anything they tend to error on the side of meekness when it comes to how powerful some of their units are compared to their costs.

Think of it this way: The stuff forgeworld makes is a part of the GW IP and exists in their respective universes. Therefore they are an official, and integral part of both the games and the fictional worlds they represent. It is not only "legal" to use these models, but it’s encouraged by anyone who wants to really experience the game and the worlds as fully as possible.

Charistoph
15-01-2012, 17:43
The only time you need to worry about "Legal" is when it comes down to your local tournament rules. I've seen tournament organizers make normal codex units "Illegal" before so it's really a crapshoot when you ask if something is legal.

Special Characters are a good example of that. They used to be completely banned, without a second thought. When Dark Angels came out, it began to soften, largely because of both Deathwing and Ravenwing. 5th Edition codecies continued to wear it down to where most tournaments now accept them. My LGS only makes a point of them when they are doing a special FOC tournament, such as 3 Elites required, all else is optional, and I don't even remember seeing that recently outside of Z-Day.

If this keeps going by trend, FW basic 40K units like the Tau Hazard Suits may see full legitimacy in 3-5 years.

Leftenant Gashrog
15-01-2012, 18:29
Forgeworld rules are totally legal. Forgeworld says so. Some independent tournaments say you can't use them - that's irrelevant outside of that tournament. However GW's own official tournaments (unless they've changed it in the past year or two) also refuse to allow their use. THAT is a big deal. The best analogy I can think of is that one of your parents says you can do something and the other says you can't, which parent do you listen to?

Charistoph
15-01-2012, 19:36
Forgeworld rules are totally legal. Forgeworld says so. Some independent tournaments say you can't use them - that's irrelevant outside of that tournament. However GW's own official tournaments (unless they've changed it in the past year or two) also refuse to allow their use. THAT is a big deal. The best analogy I can think of is that one of your parents says you can do something and the other says you can't, which parent do you listen to?

And since independent tournaments generally follow GW guidelines...

Mannimarco
15-01-2012, 19:36
Yes they are legal except in the tournaments which expressly forbid them.

-Loki-
15-01-2012, 20:12
Forgeworld rules are totally legal. Forgeworld says so.

IAA Apocalypse Second Edition actually says they're official, but it's still a good idea to tell your opponent before the game.

Leftenant Gashrog
15-01-2012, 20:26
IAA Apocalypse Second Edition actually says they're official, but it's still a good idea to tell your opponent before the game.

Which is a Forgeworld book, which means its Forgeworld saying they are official.

Noobie2k7
15-01-2012, 20:33
Still a product sold in Games Workshop stores.

Korraz
15-01-2012, 22:12
Which is a Forgeworld book, which means its Forgeworld saying they are official.

Which is part of GW.

ForgottenLore
15-01-2012, 23:29
So are you saying it's ok to use LotR or Fantasy in 40K then? It's a GW product. Or blood bowl?
Do Bretonian Men at Arms have 40K rules that have been stated by a division of GW as being officially allowed in regular, non-apocalypse games? Because a lot of the Forgeworld stuff does. Whereas Superheavies (and Flyers?) have been explicitly stated as requiring special dispensation from your opponent before using them in a non-apocalypse game.

Oh, and probably half the people who bought copies of Space Hulk did so for the purpose of using the models in 40K games.

Wishing
16-01-2012, 00:13
Which is part of GW.

And a different part of GW - the tournament organising part - says they're not official enough to be tournament legal. So it boils down to which part of GW you think has most clout in the world of "officialdom".

Mannimarco
16-01-2012, 00:27
Although if its not in a tournament and you're not a tournament player, playing against a tournament player or see friendlies and pick up games as practice for the next tournament whats "tournament legal" has little meaning.

The books say its legal so feel free to use it. Tournament organizers will have their own rules which may or may not coincide with whats in the books, this is entirely up to them.

Brother Dimetrius
16-01-2012, 00:30
I still don't understand how this can ever be a debate.

GW/Forgeworld states that the rules are official. However...

- In tournaments the organizers decide what is allowed and what is not. So regardless of "official" status or not, their rules apply.
- In pick-up games, what are you going to do if someone does not like playing with certain rules? Hold a gun to his head? Different people have different ways of playing the game, Forgeworld is no different. If someone's way of playing isn't compatible with yours, so be it, don't play them.

I honestly don't understand why this topic comes up every fortnight. Where did we lose the ability to agree between ourselves as adults (or young adults as the case may be) in which framework we play with our little toy soldiers? :D

madprophet
16-01-2012, 01:34
I still don't understand how this can ever be a debate.

GW/Forgeworld states that the rules are official. However...

- In tournaments the organizers decide what is allowed and what is not. So regardless of "official" status or not, their rules apply.
- In pick-up games, what are you going to do if someone does not like playing with certain rules? Hold a gun to his head? Different people have different ways of playing the game, Forgeworld is no different. If someone's way of playing isn't compatible with yours, so be it, don't play them.

I honestly don't understand why this topic comes up every fortnight. Where did we lose the ability to agree between ourselves as adults (or young adults as the case may be) in which framework we play with our little toy soldiers? :D

This!

FW is "legal" if the tournament organizers say it is. It is "legal" in friendly games if everyone agrees. I have some old Rapiers so using the rules from Citadel Journal 45 or the more recent rules from FW lets me use my old models. But if my opponent has a huge problem or the tournament (when I played in tournaments) didn't allow it there is the ever-popular counts as

Col. Dash
16-01-2012, 04:26
My store has decreed until they are allowed to sell them like they do normal GW products they will never be allowed for any official game. Grrrr Independent retailers do not like FW or at least mine doesnt.

Avatar_exADV
16-01-2012, 05:41
With most FW models, you're not going to have a problem (do, however, have the rulebook handy in case your opponent isn't familiar with it and has questions).

However, there are a small number of FW units that are, frankly, not well-balanced with the rest of the game. Lucius Drop Pod, we are looking at you. 65 points? There are a tiny amount of units elsewhere in all of the 40K armies which can assault directly from deep strike, and ALL of them pay a significant price premium for it - and NONE of them can drop on the first turn and assault. If it didn't drop on the first turn, it wouldn't be too bad. If it didn't have the usual drop pod "lol I'll drop right on the target and if I scatter onto it, it's okay" rule, then it wouldn't be so bad. But a dreadnought assaulting your vehicles before the start of turn 1? How do I fight that? (Answer, by not playing the idiot who shows up with them!)

The Land Raider Achilles is a bit over the top too. Immune to lance, immune to melta, artillery piece, and twin-linked multi-melta sponsons? Okay, for 325, with no assault ramp, I can see it. But then -1 on the damage chart after that? Pshaw. I'd let that go if it was the only minus-damage defense it had. But AV14 all around, immune to both the extra armor-piercing rules, AND a penalty on the damage table? Oh, AND it's a transport you can put a cheap scoring unit into. Pull the other one, it's got bells on!

If you're playing FW units because they have some nice models that fill the occasional gap in your army's loadout, well and good. But if you're playing with one of the handful of broken rule sets they've put out, well, you know damned well that's what you're doing; nobody's buying Lucius drop pods because they dig the aesthetics. So don't be surprised if people say "I'd just as soon play someone else, thanks" and tournament organizers tell you "show up with codex units if you'd like to play".

solkan
16-01-2012, 06:54
On the one hand, it's like asking whether Planetstrike is legal. Let's say you want to use your Forge World models, and the other person wants to play Planetstrike. Both players have equal grounds for saying, "No."

On the other hand, Forge World models live in a bad neighborhood where the Lucius Drop pod and other poorly-balanced-even-by-GW-standards models also live, so when you mention that a model or list is by Forge World that bad reputation caries over. Just how accommodating are willing to be in order to overcome that bad reputation? Do you have the books for all of those models with you? Are you going to give the other player several minutes to look over those rules and familiarize themselves with the rules? What about the inevitable mid-game rules questions?

Then again, it seems like no one ever posts asking if they can use Tau Auxiliary or the Atlas or Cyclops when they ask about Forge World models, either.

Noobie2k7
16-01-2012, 07:19
Plus we're all missing the whole FW lists as well as models. I mean i'm starting on building myself a Tyrants Legion army (i already know most of the people at my local GW would agree to play me) But obviously it wouldn't be legal in tourneys but that brings a whole new question to mind really.

stonegiant
16-01-2012, 07:31
I still don't understand how this can ever be a debate.

GW/Forgeworld states that the rules are official. However...

- In tournaments the organizers decide what is allowed and what is not. So regardless of "official" status or not, their rules apply.
- In pick-up games, what are you going to do if someone does not like playing with certain rules? Hold a gun to his head? Different people have different ways of playing the game, Forgeworld is no different. If someone's way of playing isn't compatible with yours, so be it, don't play them.

I honestly don't understand why this topic comes up every fortnight. Where did we lose the ability to agree between ourselves as adults (or young adults as the case may be) in which framework we play with our little toy soldiers? :D

wot he said

Glabro
16-01-2012, 07:48
Absolutely not. Forge World does no playtesting at all, their rules are pulled out of a hat to sell books. Use them at your own peril.

Seconded. When FW made the rules for the Thunderstorm Drop Pods, they effectively lost all credibility for making rules for eternity until proven otherwise. Even their "fixed" version was horrendous.

Effectively if I'd allowed anyone to take one or more, it's very likely the game would've been over the moment it hit the table against my horde orks - all units within 12" of the pod taking D3 Whirlwind shots. And you could have three (never mind Apocalypse).

I decided to give them a chance when a friend wanted to take a "Cestus Ram", or whatever, flying transport which was basically cheaper and better (more durable, faster, able to transport 2 units, better armed etc.) than a Land Raider in every way AND had a huge ass ram attack. It confirmed for me that they still don't have a clue.

Granted, a lot of the time they produce underpowered rules, but that's little better either.

If I'm being fair, the IA books I've taken a look at (The Raid on Kastorel Novem with the Elysian list and the Badab war one) were of a higher quality, it's the web-published stuff which is totally bonkers usually.

D503
16-01-2012, 08:01
I would only have a problem with someone using forgeworld stuff if they were an arrogant **** before the game began, or if they were proxying something.

Other than that, it's fine by me. If they do it too often though, I'd be ordering a lucius pattern drop pod and a death company dread to kill whatever thier forgeworld doodad was on turn 1, and keeping it in my case for when they walk in the store.

Wishing
16-01-2012, 09:15
Although if its not in a tournament and you're not a tournament player, playing against a tournament player or see friendlies and pick up games as practice for the next tournament whats "tournament legal" has little meaning.

You are very correct. However, asking if FW rules are legal in casual, non-tournament games has no meaning whatsoever. Because the answer will always be: Anything your opponent agrees to is legal.

In casual games, making up your own Xenarch codex is legal, as long as your opponent agrees to play it. Therefore, the concept of "legal" only makes sense to use in the context of tournaments or other game situations where there is some authority other than just the two players involved that decide what can be played and what cannot.



I honestly don't understand why this topic comes up every fortnight. Where did we lose the ability to agree between ourselves as adults (or young adults as the case may be) in which framework we play with our little toy soldiers? :D

It's a topic that people are interested in discussing, clearly. It's true that as long as someone has spent at least a week on warseer, they should know that the question "is this legal?" has no other answer than "depends on the tournament organiser, store manager or your opponent". However, people keep asking, so I guess people just like exchanging opinions about what they feel should be considered "legal" and what shouldn't, and why.

logan054
16-01-2012, 09:39
If I'm being fair, the IA books I've taken a look at (The Raid on Kastorel Novem with the Elysian list and the Badab war one) were of a higher quality, it's the web-published stuff which is totally bonkers usually.

The Web stuff is experimental! if you fine with the stuff from the books then I can't understand what your issue is with FW, I am slight amused by the comments on here about FW not play testing, obviously they did that with the space wolves and GK codex!

-Loki-
16-01-2012, 09:47
The Web stuff is experimental! if you fine with the stuff from the books then I can't understand what your issue is with FW, I am slight amused by the comments on here about FW not play testing, obviously they did that with the space wolves and GK codex!

If people are actually basing their 'FW units are broken' comments on the experimental rules - which Forgeworld very specifically point out each time as being expermental and subject to change based on their playtesting and even customer feedback - I don't know what to say. That's just flat out dumb.

xxRavenxx
16-01-2012, 10:04
If people are actually basing their 'FW units are broken' comments on the experimental rules - which Forgeworld very specifically point out each time as being expermental and subject to change based on their playtesting and even customer feedback - I don't know what to say. That's just flat out dumb.

I'm basing it on the plethora of game changing models they make, from titans, down to the humble nurgle daemons who become auto include "best in army" slots.

I can state my issue clearly:

I like the normal version of 40k, and dislike the version where I have to double or triple my anti-tank guns, and have a race against a superheavy vehicle.

I also dislike it when an army replaces units from its book with other, better units that someone made later.



And to the guy earlier who posted about indies not liking forgeworld, I can fully sympathise with them. In my store, there is an army about £600 of forgeworld imperial guard, to which I didn't recieve a penny. So. Y'know. That sucks.

-Loki-
16-01-2012, 10:16
I'm basing it on the plethora of game changing models they make, from titans, down to the humble nurgle daemons who become auto include "best in army" slots.

Titans shouldn't even enter the discussion. The only places they can be legally used is Apocalypse, or games above 2500 points where you use multiple detachments.


I like the normal version of 40k, and dislike the version where I have to double or triple my anti-tank guns, and have a race against a superheavy vehicle.

Again - stop playing Apocalypse then. And if you're not playing Apocalypse or a game where you have agreed to use multiple detachments, your opponent is cheating. It's not Forgeworlds fault they're cheating.


I also dislike it when an army replaces units from its book with other, better units that someone made later.

Care to point out replacement units? They make additional units. I've never seen a replacement unit from Forgeworld.

Your post very clearly demonstrates the lack of knowledge about Forgeworld models that simply asking to read your opponents book, like any other codex would solve.

People are terrified of playing a 1500 point game and facing a Warhound titan. This cannot happen. It is illegal, even going by Forgeworlds rules. Stop playing cheaters. Don't blame Forgeworld for people cheating. You wouldn't blame GW because someone took, say, Tervigons as troops choices without taking Termagants as accompanying troops choices, right? No, you blame the person trying to cheat.

AlphariusOmegon20
16-01-2012, 10:26
Seconded. When FW made the rules for the Thunderstorm Drop Pods, they effectively lost all credibility for making rules for eternity until proven otherwise. Even their "fixed" version was horrendous.

Effectively if I'd allowed anyone to take one or more, it's very likely the game would've been over the moment it hit the table against my horde orks - all units within 12" of the pod taking D3 Whirlwind shots. And you could have three (never mind Apocalypse).

I decided to give them a chance when a friend wanted to take a "Cestus Ram", or whatever, flying transport which was basically cheaper and better (more durable, faster, able to transport 2 units, better armed etc.) than a Land Raider in every way AND had a huge ass ram attack. It confirmed for me that they still don't have a clue.

Granted, a lot of the time they produce underpowered rules, but that's little better either.

If I'm being fair, the IA books I've taken a look at (The Raid on Kastorel Novem with the Elysian list and the Badab war one) were of a higher quality, it's the web-published stuff which is totally bonkers usually.

I take it you've never run into the IG triple Executioner, IG Triple Manticore or the SW LongRazorspam lists, which are almost as bad, but they, unlike the FW things, are far worse and are part of a codex so you can not refuse them.


My store has decreed until they are allowed to sell them like they do normal GW products they will never be allowed for any official game. Grrrr Independent retailers do not like FW or at least mine doesnt.

I'd find another store, if it were me in your position.


And a different part of GW - the tournament organising part - says they're not official enough to be tournament legal. So it boils down to which part of GW you think has most clout in the world of "officialdom".

I'd argue the FW one does. At least they make a substantial amount of money for the overall company, compared to the Tournament part.


Absolutely not. Forge World does no playtesting at all, their rules are pulled out of a hat to sell books. Use them at your own peril.


SW LongRazorspam? IG Triple Executioners or Triple Manticore? IG Vendetta spam? Death Company Spam? Purifier spam?

Yeah FW really playtests their rules far less than GW does theirs.....:rolleyes:

tu33y
16-01-2012, 10:26
well i use the Imperial Armoured Company list from the IA1 update. it is a complete, independent codex that has its very own style and challenges. what we say in our little gaming circle is:

"if it you have bought the model, you can use it. but we would RATHER (emphisis) you dont proxy FW vehicles, troops or MC's for more than a couple of games (to playtest)."

however, no Super Heavy or out and out flyers or gargantuan creatures or other obvious apoc things unless we have arranged before hand.

my personal view on tourneys, from a non tourney player (admittedly) is however, only actual codex units printed in your current codex.

it blows my mind peoplehave such a mee-mar (tantrum) over pickup and friendly games using FW stuff. it seems people PREFER playing the same old lists again and again

HOWEVER- that said

there is a lovely unit combo i use- a griffon as "spotter", then a basilisk and a collosus. normally that is three lg Bl templates yes? and costs somewhere round 340pts. for 20pts per model more, the Basilisk and collosus can have "slick loader" which lets them fire twice. so thats FIVE ordanance blasts, two S9, two S6 no cover, one S6.

i wouldn't fancy being on the wrong end of that. and its all in the FREE available to download right this second IA1 update armour co. list.

a free, powerful, copyright legal codex. who says GW never gives "owt away for nowt"

Wishing
16-01-2012, 10:31
I also dislike it when an army replaces units from its book with other, better units that someone made later.

I think this is a fundamental point with regards to the problem of FW. GW's business model is to release a codex for an army, and then that army is considered finished until the next time they get a codex. GW army lists don't actually grow, they just get rewritten. FW circumvents that business model by adding new models and units to army lists outside of the codex, and since FW makes models for whatever they think is cool rather than distributed evenly across the game, it means that some armies grow outside of their codex and other armies don't. Not exactly fair, and I can understand why people would dislike this. GW does release models outside of codexes in WD articles, but it's very rare.



And to the guy earlier who posted about indies not liking forgeworld, I can fully sympathise with them. In my store, there is an army about £600 of forgeworld imperial guard, to which I didn't recieve a penny. So. Y'know. That sucks.

That's definitely a good reason for stores to discourage the use of FW rules. Why FW isn't available in stores I'm not sure, but it's definitely a shame and sets FW markedly apart from mainstream GW product.

jt.glass
16-01-2012, 10:34
Effectively if I'd allowed anyone to take one [Thunderstorm drop pod - I assume you mean Deathstorm (http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Space_Marines/Space-Marine-Support/DEATHSTORM-DROP-POD-WITH-MISSILE-LAUNCHERS.html)] or more, it's very likely the game would've been over the moment it hit the table against my horde orks - all units within 12" of the pod taking D3 Whirlwind shots. And you could have three (never mind Apocalypse).I took one once, agains orks. It did next to nothing. Of course, it is based on the whirlwind which also does next to nothing firing all game, so that is no great surprise.


I decided to give them a chance when a friend wanted to take a "Cestus Ram", or whatever, flying transport which was basically cheaper and better (more durable, faster, able to transport 2 units, better armed etc.) than a Land Raider in every way AND had a huge ass ram attack. It confirmed for me that they still don't have a clue.Well, it is faster, I'll give you that. But it certainly isn't more durable and can't transport more than one unit.

So, not just basing your opinion on experimental rules, but on rules you've made up. Nice! :wtf:


glass.

Wishing
16-01-2012, 10:36
I'd argue the FW one does. At least they make a substantial amount of money for the overall company, compared to the Tournament part.

My point was just that when a GW grand tournament says "FW rules are not legal", it actually means something, because it means that you cannot play in that event using FW rules. When FW prints "FW rules are legal" in a FW book, it doesn't actually mean anything, because FW do not organise any events and therefore have no say or authority over what people are allowed to play or not.

-Loki-
16-01-2012, 10:40
My point was just that when a GW grand tournament says "FW rules are not legal", it actually means something, because it means that you cannot play in that event using FW rules. When FW prints "FW rules are legal" in a FW book, it doesn't actually mean anything, because FW do not organise any events and therefore have no say or authority over what people are allowed to play or not.

You're right, it does mean something.

It means that that tournament has disallowed them. Is every single game played done at that tournament?

As I already said, Adepticon has allowed them in the team tournament for a while, and is allowing them in all of their events this year.

Saying they're illegal because some tournaments don't allow them is just plain silly. It just means those tournaments don't allow them.

Yes, there is actually a difference between the legality of something and whether or not they're allowed at tournaments. For a long time Special Characters were not allowed at tournaments - they definitely weren't illegal.

AlphariusOmegon20
16-01-2012, 10:44
My point was just that when a GW grand tournament says "FW rules are not legal", it actually means something, because it means that you cannot play in that event using FW rules. When FW prints "FW rules are legal" in a FW book, it doesn't actually mean anything, because FW do not organise any events and therefore have no say or authority over what people are allowed to play or not.

I understood what you were going for. ;)

My point stills stands though. Make enough money for the company, then you should have the clout.

The Tournament Organizing part makes very little money for GW, compared to FW, which makes a ton.

You also have to remember that we do have some bleed over going on ( Hydra, Valkyrie, and some of the Leman Russ variants, just to name a few.) Just because it's in a codex instead of a IA book, doesn't mean that the unit doesn't have merit and is unbalanced, as some have claimed.

Wishing
16-01-2012, 10:52
You're right, it does mean something.

It means that that tournament has disallowed them. Is every single game played done at that tournament?

As I already said, Adepticon has allowed them in the team tournament for a while, and is allowing them in all of their events this year.

Saying they're illegal because some tournaments don't allow them is just plain silly. It just means those tournaments don't allow them.

Yes, there is actually a difference between the legality of something and whether or not they're allowed at tournaments. For a long time Special Characters were not allowed at tournaments - they definitely weren't illegal.

After re-reading this, let me edit my reply. I think we are talking about different things. As I understand, you are saying that you like FW models and you want people to be happy to play against FW models rather than be suspicious about it. Am I right? If so, I totally agree. FW models are fantastic and they are a shining beacon of hobby excellence in our wargaming world. So we are on the same page in that regard.

However, FW models being awesome doesn't make them "legal". In this context, what we should be talking about is whether they are "welcomed" or "acceptable" or something of that nature. "Legal" is only appropriate to use in a context where there is a specific YES or NO decision being made by an authoritative body. Casual gaming has no authoritative body. Therefore, we should be talking about attitudes towards FW, not the technical status of FW, which is meaningless in casual gaming.


My point stills stands though. Make enough money for the company, then you should have the clout.

The Tournament Organizing part makes very little money for GW, compared to FW, which makes a ton.

I guess that's part of why this debate can be a bit confusing, when we start comparing things that aren't really comparable. The "GW tournament organising director/committee" doesn't produce any product for the company, so of course it isn't going to be making money itself. Their job is to regulate the organised play at official GW tournaments. The purpose of tournaments isn't to make money from entry fees, it is to keep people who like tournaments engaged in the hobby by giving them a venue to play tournament games in. They don't produce, they make decisions, and the decision (which I presume comes from whatever GW management is in charge of FW's activities overall) is that FW products aren't intended for tournaments and therefore aren't allowed in events. FW, on the contrary, just produce product, they don't make any decisions about anything related to community or organised play.

I'm rambling, but my point is that the people who think FW stuff is official and legal in casual play seem to not understand that casual play is regulated only by public opinion. You cannot force public opinion, you can only appeal to it and try and influence it. Wanting FW to be publicly accepted as standard is a noble goal, but it is an uphill struggle as long as mainstream GW regulations treat FW products as unusual and esoteric. Once we start seeing FW rules mixed in with codex rules in WD battle reports, FW will probably start seeing more general acceptance, but GW seem to specifically want FW to be a marginal sideline product so this may never happen.


You also have to remember that we do have some bleed over going on ( Hydra, Valkyrie, and some of the Leman Russ variants, just to name a few.) Just because it's in a codex instead of a IA book, doesn't mean that the unit doesn't have merit and is unbalanced, as some have claimed.

Definitely, and using specific model rules as examples of why FW should or shouldn't be allowed in tournaments is missing the point. The issue is entirely one of principle regarding FW's role in relation to GW, it is not about specifics.

Noobie2k7
16-01-2012, 11:24
GW tourneys i can imagine don't allow FW lists either (like ones found in IA books) even if every model found in those lists is available in a GW store. I wouldn't know for sure though. Plus i guess it would be the exception of SC's as you can only pick those up from FW.

MvS
16-01-2012, 11:35
"Legality" is just a matter of opinion and/or context.

If any arm of GW release rules and models for something, it is, generally speaking, "legal". It's designed to be used in games of WFB/40K and that's that. If a tourney organiser says something isn't "legal" in that tourney, then it isn't in that tourney. This has little bearing on games we play in stores, in clubs, with each other, or tourneys where Forgeworld stuff is deemed "legal".

The question is a moot one really. Any rule and any miniature is as legal as your opponents agree to them being. If they don't agree, they won't play against you. The same applies to any and all of the 40K expansions as well, like Apocalypse, Planetstrike and so on.

Personally, quite a few of the Codices as they stand are open to spamming, so arguments that Forgeworld's rules are always and objectively worse or more open to abuse than GW Studios are flawed.

I don't know many players who 'ban' Forgeworld miniatures/rules from their games with each other, and those that do don't end up playing many games. No-one likes a stick in the mud.

DrunkTerminator
16-01-2012, 14:25
SW LongRazorspam? IG Triple Executioners or Triple Manticore? IG Vendetta spam? Death Company Spam? Purifier spam?

Seriously if you are having trouble against triple executioners and death company i must assume that you have no idea what you are doing.

All of these lists you talked about are beatable, they are not easy to beat but with an equally competitive list there is no reason you shouldnt win.On the other hand the new FW land raider is almost unkillable. It needs huge amounts of AT fire that you cant really spare because if you do the rest of the list will kill you while you are not able to ignore the raider at the same time as well.

So yeah face it. FW has some really really broken stuff.

Noobie2k7
16-01-2012, 14:32
I want to use a LR Achilles :( (i think it's the Achilles anyway)

Erik_Morkai
16-01-2012, 14:52
However, there are a small number of FW units that are, frankly, not well-balanced with the rest of the game. Lucius Drop Pod, we are looking at you. 65 points? There are a tiny amount of units elsewhere in all of the 40K armies which can assault directly from deep strike, and ALL of them pay a significant price premium for it - and NONE of them can drop on the first turn and assault. If it didn't drop on the first turn, it wouldn't be too bad. If it didn't have the usual drop pod "lol I'll drop right on the target and if I scatter onto it, it's okay" rule, then it wouldn't be so bad. But a dreadnought assaulting your vehicles before the start of turn 1? How do I fight that? (Answer, by not playing the idiot who shows up with them!)

The Land Raider Achilles is a bit over the top too. Immune to lance, immune to melta, artillery piece, and twin-linked multi-melta sponsons? Okay, for 325, with no assault ramp, I can see it. But then -1 on the damage chart after that? Pshaw. I'd let that go if it was the only minus-damage defense it had. But AV14 all around, immune to both the extra armor-piercing rules, AND a penalty on the damage table? Oh, AND it's a transport you can put a cheap scoring unit into. Pull the other one, it's got bells on!


Lucius Drop Pods have a chance of immobilzing the Dreadnought coming. The risk is small but the risk is still there.

If you have not figured how to wreck an Achilles yet, you need to look harder. It's actually quite easy, you need 1 weapon destroyed and the thing's effective range drops by more than 50%.

325 points? I WILL wreck it with 180 points unit.

Plenty of things can harm it.

The main problem is that people are...afraid. Yes people are scared of what they do not know. I do not see how not knowing what X or Y Forgeworld unit does is different from new units when a new Codex comes out. I have not played them before, I do not know what they do. Will I hide? NO. I am Space Wolf player I do not hide from ANYTHING. Bad match up? Bring it! I will make you work for it.

Have you actually and I mean actually faced a Land Raider Achilles on the table? How did it do? Because that is the second point. Most people that complain about Forgeworld units complain from a mathhammer point of view and not actual gameplay. Heck use a proxy Land Raider and run some tests. And if you think real carefully you can find a way around it. Heck I don't even have to modify my usual list to wreck one because it's easy.

Why do people complain it's hard to beat a LR Achilles? Because the complainers wear blinders and can only see their precious cookie-cutter metagame and cannot think outside the box or net list. Sometimes what looks like an overpriced unit or inefficient unit can do catastrophic damage and surprise an opponent.

Back to the topic, as far as the legality is concerned. It's like everyone says: "It's up the TO." As far as regular games I do not see the difference between a new unit that comes out after the codex and a FAQ. It's an adjustment to the codex. A different kind of adjustment but an adjustment nonetheless. If the rules say: "Can be used as a Fast Attack in a Codex: Space Marine army" It's not really different than putting out a FAQ with a unit attached to it.

As far as the whole stipid argument of: "Forgeworld says it's official but GW does not." Stop nitpicking, Forgeworld IS a subsidiary. The GW logo IS on the Forgeworld books.

In order to protect their IP in the past GW has removed videos from youtube, closed down websites and sued others. If Forgeworld models were not meant to be official they would be sued (which would be stupid I totally agree but nobody ever said lawyers had to make sense) or at the very least be forced to issue a statement to correct what is in the books and say that models are not really official or they did not have the permission to make that claim. The fact that this never happened speaks volume on the actual legality of the models.

TO will always have the final say but I think Adepticon is taking a step in the right direction, hats off to them for having the balls to put their foot down and saying: Enough bickering, let's add some cool stuff and spice things up a bit.

Wow this post is alot longer than I thought it would be. Oh well, flame away.

stereynolds
16-01-2012, 15:44
Having tested the Achilles it is easily dealt with. My opponents (Dark Angels and Necrons) fielded infantry hordes, stayed in cover and ignored it. It killed some scrabs about half a unit of warriors and some marines. Not much considering it had a Librarian and Scouts in it too (pushing up to 500pts of a 1500pt list).

Col. Dash
16-01-2012, 18:50
The Lucius drop pod also takes up a valued FA slot and cannot be taken by BA. The new version is far less broken than the old.

The other takes a valuable Heavy slot. If you know the Deathstorm is coming, which unless your opponent is a dick and didnt let you know he had them, stick your army in reserve. He will have to severely change around his plans to minimize the Death storm when it comes in after the first time and gimp his own deployment if he is bringing a whole DP assault.

The Cestus Assault ram costs more than a MM equipped Land Raider. Far too over priced, especially when compared to a Storm Raven.

Bloodknight
17-01-2012, 12:22
I have some old Rapiers so using the rules from Citadel Journal 45 or the more recent rules from FW lets me use my old models.

FW published rules for the Rapier? where? gimmegimmegimme.....(not the rules, just interested in which book they are).

IcedCrow
17-01-2012, 13:44
The tournaments here mostly let you use them. Our campaign group actively encourages forgeworld.

I find people slamming forgeworld as unbalanced and unplaytested humourous, particiularly as they roll out a grey knights draigo list or other unbalanced monstrosity and keep a straight face while saying it.

I've not really ever encountered something from forgeworld that was ever unbalanced broken in a bad way. FW typically are unbalanced in that they cost more than they are worth in points.

On the flip side I've never seen a forgeworld model used that didn't incite gasps of awe and overall positive reaction to its aesthetic, which is the most important aspect of the game to me.

My necron army uses a tomb stalker. That model looks too sweet.

Archibald_TK
17-01-2012, 15:11
News appeared on Dakka that Imperial Amour books were no longer available on the GW websites. It appears to be true for the UK, US, German and French sites so it's probably also true for the other ones.
You can still use the research function to force find them but trying to see them may result in being sent back to the homepage depending on which volume you are looking at.

No idea what they are doing.

DuskRaider
17-01-2012, 17:14
Simply put: If someone refuses to let you use Forge World models and rules, don't expect a fun game out of them anyhow. Yes, they're legal. Both GW & FW have indicated so. Those who have an issue with people using them should probably step back and realize this is just a game.

Glyn
17-01-2012, 23:51
it's an interesting debate in my local store unless their superheavy ie Apocolypse level stuff then their fine for regular games, and if you check the Apocolypse books own wording it says "put down everything in your collection" look at the Baneblade, Eldar Scorpion, Ork Stompa, the list keeps going on...and that's from a GW publication and the fact GW sell these books in their store sort of says that their official and fully legal...I was told by a staffer that the only reason that the ForgeWorld models arent sold in their stores is that the resin is carcenogenic in dust form and as such the legalities get involved.

johnnyrumour
18-01-2012, 10:17
That is complete and utter crap. If that's true then ask them why they sell Finecast.

Any dust particules can aggravate existing breathing conditions but it's only carcinogenic if you're using machinery on it and breathing it in. By machinery, by the way, I mean belt sanders and the like.

It's not sold in stores because FW can't produce at a level to meet the demand of a worldwide retail chain and because each store would have to have so much extra space to carry a reasonable amount of the range that it's not viable. That and the GW retail guys are keen to avouid 'distraction' from the main range.

Hendarion
18-01-2012, 11:20
Technically, they are as legal as forgeworld can make them, but untill they are actually put into their respective codex there will be people who refuse to play because of forgeworld products.t
Even our local GW store didn't allow Forgeworld-units in their own mini-tournament, because someone might not know their rules... I don't know 90% of any 40k units except Eldar either... their basic rules and stats maybe, but not special equipment or special rules. :shifty: But nobody tells my opponents these units cannot be used against me. They are inside a book, like all GW stuff... well... meh!

Biggy
18-01-2012, 11:46
We use FW stuff all the time. No problem.

ErictheGreen
18-01-2012, 12:05
Go back a couple of years and Forgeworld stuff did indeed have terrible rules balance. However now, if anything, they are simply not worth their points costs in competitive play. In pick up and fun games? yeah sure.

That Lucius pattern drop pod? yeah, costs me a land speeder slot, is easily negated by my opponents deployment and generally the dread coming out of it needs to wreck a fair bit to justify the expenditure. Likewise with the automated weapon drop pods. Woop de do, some whirlwind templates. You are aware how underwhelming that is, right? your example of orcs is the BEST possible scenario for that unit and even then it costs me a slot for a predator, or a land raider, or even a vindicator. all of which are more useful.

The Caestus ram? too expensive for what it does, but it's a damn site nicer than that flying brick known as the storm raven.
the contemptor dread? well over 200 points for all the bells and whistles.
the land raider achilles? yes. it is practically unkillable and you can stick a 5 man unit in there to hold an objective. well done. you just spent upwards of 325 points on a static......thunderfire cannon. because we see those on a regular basis[/sarcasm]. instead of destroying it, how about you just ignore the damn thing and kill the rest of the army? because, y'know, you've picked a better army. and as for bubble wrapping it with terminators, that's another minimum of 200 points youre wasting that's going to do jack all for most of the game. you, sir, fail at analysing unit effectiveness.

I love seeing forgeworld units on the table across from me because they are beautiful. end of. In the newer forgeworld worlds there is even a "40K" stamp and an "apocalypse" stamp to show you what's legal for what. Come 6th edition, i see GW tournaments allowing FW stuff because FW is one of the most profitable divisions of the company and its encouraging people to know they can use them. It also adds some variety to what is quite a stale game at the moment.

The reason it isn't available in store is because the FW moulds are more expensive to make than the regular plastic/metal and they need more maintenance, so to mass produce FW products would cost GW a lot more and at FW prices, they wouldn't be getting many sales. That's why FW does the big stuff like titans and why their gorgeous infantry models are so expensive.
as an aside, this is why finecast is so poor. it's a worse quality resin poured into exactly the same mould as the metal versions and manufactured using a different process.

As for TOs? they'll come around when GW's official line is consistant. I know my local GW and my previous local GW allow FW units and it made the atmosphere all the better.

Col. Dash
18-01-2012, 12:12
Not knowing what they do is a common excuse from the lazy and WAAC players. Lazy because they do not want to read about it beforehand(because you brought your book with the rules right?) and the WAAC players because they do not want an element of the unknown to interrupt their carefully balanced rock paper scissors game. You will find non-douche bag players enjoy playing them. Unfortunately, tournies especially the bigger ones tend to attract DB types who only want to play their version of the game. Note I said tend, not every big tourney player is a DB, they would let you play FW too though heheh.

Wishing
18-01-2012, 12:19
Even our local GW store didn't allow Forgeworld-units in their own mini-tournament, because someone might not know their rules... I don't know 90% of any 40k units except Eldar either... their basic rules and stats maybe, but not special equipment or special rules. :shifty: But nobody tells my opponents these units cannot be used against me. They are inside a book, like all GW stuff... well... meh!

I think that the reasoning "people might not know their rules" has to be put into context to be understandable. It's not about whether or not players have every 40k codex memorised or not. It's about the fact that a codex presents itself as a closed, finished product. The army = the codex, according to the codex itself.

Since FW rules are defined by not being in any codex (when FW models are incorporated into codexes, like the Trygon and Valkyrie, they stop being FW models), they indirectly contradict the codex by being extra options that you will not know about unless you happen to be an IA book fan. This is why FW models are considered to be something players aren't expected to know about, and why tournaments therefore tend to shy away from them. It's because the core game is found in the codexes, and the codexes do not present themselves as being open to random expansion through FW. If they did, there would not be an issue.

The reason there is an issue though is that GW specifically want FW to have this semi-obscure status. Like johnnyrumour says above, GW are trying to do a balancing act with FW, both wanting them to be successful, because they make them money, but also wanting to keep them marginalized, because they don't want FW to take sales away from their primary model lines.

doubleT
18-01-2012, 13:10
What about FAQs? I could argue the same way that I don't follow the Errata because it's not in the Codex itself.

Now, before I reply to some previous posts, I have to say that my army is FW only and I use the Siege Regiment Army List.


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--


Absolutely not. Forge World does no playtesting at all, their rules are pulled out of a hat to sell books. Use them at your own peril.

Hi there, it's 2012. All the current official (not experimental) rules from FW have seen more playtesting and are more ballanced, sometimes even overpriced, than some of the GW rules.


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--


Seconded. When FW made the rules for the Thunderstorm Drop Pods, they effectively lost all credibility for making rules for eternity until proven otherwise.

[..]

Granted, a lot of the time they produce underpowered rules, but that's little better either.

If I'm being fair, the IA books I've taken a look at (The Raid on Kastorel Novem with the Elysian list and the Badab war one) were of a higher quality, it's the web-published stuff which is totally bonkers usually.

You have effectively proven otherwise yourself.

Yes, initially FW did write some bad rules. All current rules are either clearly experimental or rather overpriced – but fun!


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--


I'm basing it on the plethora of game changing models they make, from titans, down to the humble nurgle daemons who become auto include "best in army" slots.

[..]

I like the normal version of 40k, and dislike the version where I have to double or triple my anti-tank guns, and have a race against a superheavy vehicle.


I don't get it. As someone said previously, the units you listed aren't allowed in normal games. Neither with GW rules nor with FW rules.
Superheavy vehicles are Apocalypse only – or if you agreed with the other player that it's OK to include them.

To me it seems like you say that everything FW has is "illegal" just because the company sells Titans and they would be unfair to use in a normal game – which no-one ever does.


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--



And to the guy earlier who posted about indies not liking forgeworld, I can fully sympathise with them. In my store, there is an army about £600 of forgeworld imperial guard, to which I didn't recieve a penny. So. Y'know. That sucks.

You know, I hate diversity, too. I hate to look at other people's nice things that I cannot have. I hate it that my neighbour can afford a Ferrari while I cannot.
[/sarkasm]

£600 is on the small side of FW-only armies, btw.


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--

All people that I played against where fine with me using a FW-only army and the Siege Regiment Army List from FW.
They said that they like the challenge to see if their army can take an uncommon army. They loved to play against nice models and a cool army. We had fun during the games and they won most of the times (ok, I'm a n00b).

One time a guy on a board asked my friend why he'd play against FW rules / why he'd allow me to use FW rules. And he said:

"It'd be pathetic display and a sign of weaknes to say that my army can only win against GW armies or units that I approve of."

Hendarion
18-01-2012, 15:32
This is why FW models are considered to be something players aren't expected to know about, and why tournaments therefore tend to shy away from them.
But how come GW doesn't use this as a chance to say: "If you don't know his units, get the books!" - they always use all of these chances to sell more stuff.
But suddenly the BlackShirt tells me I can't use this stuff in his store at this "tournament" and this is really bad - if GW blocks its own stuff, who wouldn't? It is bad enough already that I have to ask the BlackShirt if I can use it or not, but that he denies it is even worse.

Johnnya10
18-01-2012, 16:03
The fact that this argument persists is proof enough that this issue needs addressing by the chaps upstairs at GW.

I love FW stuff and for giving an army personality, it's simply astounding. Few people deny that the units look stunning, from Titans to Plague Toads, they do great work.

However they are exclusive. The price (and I know all the arguments about this hobby being naturally expensive) does prohibit a lot of players from using them. A squad of Chaos terminators goes from being £25 to £40 if you want to add FW's torso kits, or a Land Raider becomes £60 if you want to add the doors. Ok, those aren't new units, but they do demonstrate the monetary constraints of FW.

And because GW don't carry them in store, it means that kids who see them on tables or in cabinets and want one (and why wouldn't they) get a bit disappointed when they are told they can't buy them in store - and if they set their hearts on it, this becomes a lost sale for the company in store.

The key question I find myself asking is 'Why don't GW carry FW products in-store?' The products sell, they can be made in volume (perhaps not the volume of GW's lines but still enough) and the price mark-up would mean taking more in-store funds. Is it because of the pricing? Is it in order to retain the exclusivity of the FW brand? If anyone know or has any theories, I'd like to hear them.

Until that day comes, when you can pick up a Reaver titan or a Blight Drone in-store, we will be arguing about this until someone pins the GW company to a wall and forces them to clearly and coherently answer the question: Is FW (stamped with 40,000) legal as a unit. Until then, store managers, tournament organisers and gaming groups will have to go it alone and set their own standards. One of these answers would do:

a) FW units are legal.
b) FW units (stamped with 40k) are legal.
c) FW units are legal at the discretion of your opponent/tournament organiser/store manager.
d) FW units are not legal.

As I've said before, personally, I welcome playing against FW models, even if I don't know the rules (I've got a fair few IA books now so I can always look them up) and I think they add variety to the game. If I have weapons that can kill it, and as long as it fits into the FOC, it's cool with me. But then I'm not a WAAC player. So this argument will go on and on until we get that answer...

GrogDaTyrant
18-01-2012, 16:15
Simply put: If someone refuses to let you use Forge World models and rules, don't expect a fun game out of them anyhow. Yes, they're legal. Both GW & FW have indicated so. Those who have an issue with people using them should probably step back and realize this is just a game.

I don't really agree with you. If someone wants to put out 3 Lucious Drop Pods, has a raging love for the Timmy-Firepants pattern Land Raider, or feels like spamming whirlwind templates because they saw that my figure case says "Me Orks"... Then I wouldn't expect a very enjoyable game from them, at the least.

Then again, I don't expect an enjoyable game at all from someone pulling out Grey Knights, Space Wolves, or Blood Angels, either... Hell I don't expect any 5th ed game to really be that enjoyable, unless it's my good mate fielding his IG.

Hmm... so yeah, guess there's really no difference then. Might as well just let FW stuff be used. IA8 certainly makes the game a bit more enjoyable on my end.

ErictheGreen
18-01-2012, 16:29
And because GW don't carry them in store, it means that kids who see them on tables or in cabinets and want one (and why wouldn't they) get a bit disappointed when they are told they can't buy them in store - and if they set their hearts on it, this becomes a lost sale for the company in store.

The key question I find myself asking is 'Why don't GW carry FW products in-store?' The products sell, they can be made in volume (perhaps not the volume of GW's lines but still enough) and the price mark-up would mean taking more in-store funds. Is it because of the pricing? Is it in order to retain the exclusivity of the FW brand? If anyone know or has any theories, I'd like to hear them.


Ordering Forgeworld in store is exactly the same as ordering mail order pieces.

Your other points are accurate. As to why GW don't carry FW in store? Price to make, distraction from the cheaper kits, general store space (this is an important one. You start sticking the FW line on shelves and you will not have enough space for all 3 systems). That's one of the reasons for the Grey Knight, Necron and Fantasy monster kits giving you the option to make one or the other - shelf space and manufacturing cost. They get ROI on the mould much quicker.



I don't really agree with you. If someone wants to put out 3 Lucious Drop Pods, has a raging love for the Timmy-Firepants pattern Land Raider, or feels like spamming whirlwind templates because they saw that my figure case says "Me Orks"... Then I wouldn't expect a very enjoyable game from them, at the least.
Land Raider Achilles or 3 thunderfire cannons. I wonder which one would cause you more problems?


Then again, I don't expect an enjoyable game at all from someone pulling out Grey Knights, Space Wolves, or Blood Angels, either... Hell I don't expect any 5th ed game to really be that enjoyable, unless it's my good mate fielding his IG.

Hmm... so yeah, guess there's really no difference then. Might as well just let FW stuff be used. IA8 certainly makes the game a bit more enjoyable on my end.
Hang on. You don't enjoy games against GK, SW and BA is fair enough. But IG are still one of the power books of this edition.

Noobie2k7
18-01-2012, 16:31
I think GW stores should allow you to order things from FW in store. Then you can just come pick it up from them (maybe at a small extra price for p&p) in store. Like having all GW stores have some sort of FW catalog you can flick through or some computer that's set on the FW site and you can order things to store to get as not everyone can have things mailed to their address (like me) for various reasons. This would go some way to help i think. It would allow GW to technically have FW stuff available to buy and they wouldn't have to run the risk of stocking all the expensive specialist merch that FW offers.

Noobie2k7
18-01-2012, 16:34
Then again, I don't expect an enjoyable game at all from someone pulling out Grey Knights, Space Wolves, or Blood Angels, either..
I take offence to that :p I'm a blood angels player and i'm far from a WAAC dude. I run a furioso librarian ffs cause i like the idea of one.

Col. Dash
18-01-2012, 16:38
Its definately something that needs to be looked at but the stores will need a discounted price so they can sell the item at an equivalent price to FW and still make a profit. That doesnt seem to be something FW is willing to do at this time. If anyone can simply order FW online at the same price as they can at the store, why would I waste time doing it at the store when I can have it shipped to me at the house?

Secondary we need spoken approval for FW. It will never be wholeheartedly accepted until GW steps in and says "FW is part of us and is just as official as our codex rules." Hoping the "leaked" 6th rules are true because there is alot of stuff there that is almost FW specific. I dont plan on bringing superheavies in small games but the new book seems to be bringing massive variety in to the game and it would be a shame to have FW stuff and rules left out.

johnnyrumour
18-01-2012, 16:40
Noobie - someone enquired about this on their Facebook page and FW explained that they don't have the systems in place to match in-store orders with in-store payments, or the staff capacity to sit and go through them all...

Disturbed Frog
18-01-2012, 19:29
I asked my local store and bassicly got a similar answer to an earlier poster,
The resin the fw models are made of is dangerous and so they are not classified as a toy.
Apparently they have a strict process to go through as to what they can sell, it all has to pass some board of "toy" safety approval, all countries have something like this.

All of GW instore products have passed this I suppose which is probably why fine cast is so much worse then FW resin because it's missing the poison crap!

enygma7
18-01-2012, 20:21
The fact that this argument persists is proof enough that this issue needs addressing by the chaps upstairs at GW.


It has been addressed. The latest IA book details which units are 40k official and clarifies that these are totally acceptable for use in your games of 40k. Claims that because this clarification is in a forgeworld book it means nothing is a rather rules lawyery arguement to avoid accepting what is in plain black and white. Forgeworld is a GW subsiduary and this is published with GWs knowledge and consent.

Wishing is correct that forgeworld is still banned from most tournaments because it is a fairly exclusive product not part of the core game that many people are totally unfamilier with. In a competetive environment that isn't always a welcome distraction. Because some gamers focus only on the competetive aspect of the game they will continue to take their que as to what is "legal" in their games from tournaments. Nothing wrong with that.

I also doubt we'll see an even more plain declaration of "officialness" from GW. GW has always made it known that players should make the game their own and feel free to tweak things however they want and I don't think they want to dictate to players how they should play the game - you're free to use or not use forgeworld units if you wish!

There was a rather excellent post earlier on in the thread clarifying the actual position of forgeworld. Legal only has a meaning in tournaments- if you're unsure whether they are allowed ask the organisers. In friendly games forgeworld units are "official", but GW aren't going to send the games police round to make sure no-one refuses to play against them. Its up to individual gamers and clubs to decide whether to allow their use - frankly you all should be mature enough to decide for yourselves how you want to play the game, stop looking for GW to tell you the "right" way to do it.

Korraz
18-01-2012, 20:50
I asked my local store and bassicly got a similar answer to an earlier poster,
The resin the fw models are made of is dangerous and so they are not classified as a toy.
Apparently they have a strict process to go through as to what they can sell, it all has to pass some board of "toy" safety approval, all countries have something like this.

All of GW instore products have passed this I suppose which is probably why fine cast is so much worse then FW resin because it's missing the poison crap!

No, not really. Resin is poisonous. Every resin is.
However, I wouldn't reccomend eating or inhaling any form of plastic in larger quantities. Or Metal.

althathir
18-01-2012, 20:57
I take offence to that :p I'm a blood angels player and i'm far from a WAAC dude. I run a furioso librarian ffs cause i like the idea of one.

Don't sweat it, its part of the hobby and honestly its not as bad as it used to be. When I first starting bringing my eldar to stores during 3rd people thought I was a WAAC player even though I didn't take the power units (skimmers). People like to judge you based on your army without even seeing it, its their loss and its silly cause any army can be WAACed out.

Fable
18-01-2012, 21:17
In friendly games forgeworld units are "official", but GW aren't going to send the games police round to make sure no-one refuses to play against them.

Oddly enough if you refuse to play against Thunderwolves GW does send the games police around, and if found guilty they take away your birthday.

doubleT
18-01-2012, 21:18
The resin the fw models are made of is dangerous and so they are not classified as a toy.

:rolleyes:

It's as dangerous as wood or usual plastic.

Seriously, if you inhale plastic dust from filing your parts or saw dust from wood, you're taking the same risks as with resin dust.

Difference: The vapor DURING the process of resin casting is dangerous.

Wishing
18-01-2012, 22:37
But how come GW doesn't use this as a chance to say: "If you don't know his units, get the books!" - they always use all of these chances to sell more stuff.

I explained that in my post. GW specifically don't want to sell lots of FW. They want to sell a reasonable amount, but they don't want FW sales to in any way take away from their citadel sales. Why that is I cannot tell you, maybe to do with it being difficult to produce in large quantities, but it seems pretty clear.


Until that day comes, when you can pick up a Reaver titan or a Blight Drone in-store, we will be arguing about this until someone pins the GW company to a wall and forces them to clearly and coherently answer the question: Is FW (stamped with 40,000) legal as a unit. Until then, store managers, tournament organisers and gaming groups will have to go it alone and set their own standards. One of these answers would do:

a) FW units are legal.
b) FW units (stamped with 40k) are legal.
c) FW units are legal at the discretion of your opponent/tournament organiser/store manager.
d) FW units are not legal.


To me it seems like answer C is the fully official answer from GW by a process of elimination. If the answer was D, FW units are never legal, why would they produce rules for them? On the other hand, if the answer is A or B, then why don't they allow them at official GW tournaments? Hence, the answer must be C.

Also, there is ultimately no need to ask for an answer to the question from GW. Since the rules for casual play are created 100% by the players themselves, if everyone loved FW, everyone could just agree that FW is always legal. The reason people argue and disagree about it is that there are people that don't like FW. Trying to force people to play against something they don't want to play against by claiming it is "legal" is bad form in my book. I'd rather accept that the concept of "legal" does not exist casually, and just agree with my opponent what we think is fun to play with and what isn't.

Erik_Morkai
18-01-2012, 23:05
It will never be wholeheartedly accepted until GW steps in and says "FW is part of us and is just as official as our codex rules."

Read my earlier post. GW has a history of viciously protecting their IP. If for one quarter of a second, FW did NOT have the permission to say: "Official" and "40K approved" you can bet there would be a press release on FW's site saying: "We did not have the right to make that claim."

The latest books have the GW logo on them. No not the 40K logo, the GW logo.

The credits in the book mention:
- "Published by Forgeworld, Games Workshop..."
- "The copyright in all text, artwork and images herein is property of Games Workshop." That's right, Forge World publishes a book but they do not own the content, GW does.

Do you REALLY and honestly think that those books would have hit the market if someone from GW did not go over them? Would GW allow someone to print something, in THEIR name and not check it? Come on...

How much more grasping at straws and dicking around must happen before people stop being afraid? What is there to be afraid of? Seriously?

Wishing
18-01-2012, 23:28
Do you REALLY and honestly think that those books would have hit the market if someone from GW did not go over them? Would GW allow someone to print something, in THEIR name and not check it? Come on...

Agreed with all of the above. Thinking that FW somehow goes behind GW's back and publishes bad rules while GW isn't looking is clearly delusional. FW is a GW product 100% through.

However, FW is a separate product to GW's main product line, and denying this is equally delusional. Otherwise FW wouldn't be a separate part of GW. GW's plastic models and finecast models don't have their own separate company sections that produce rules in their own separate book types. There is core 40k, and there is FW. Both are 100% GW. But they are different things at the same time.

xxRavenxx
18-01-2012, 23:41
Again - stop playing Apocalypse then. And if you're not playing Apocalypse or a game where you have agreed to use multiple detachments, your opponent is cheating. It's not Forgeworlds fault they're cheating.

There is nothing preventing many of their superheavy vehicles from being used in non-apocalypse games.

To quote IA1: As noted in the introduction, all vehicles in this book can be used in games of 40k as part of an Imperial Guard army.


Care to point out replacement units? They make additional units. I've never seen a replacement unit from Forgeworld.

Your post very clearly demonstrates the lack of knowledge about Forgeworld models that simply asking to read your opponents book, like any other codex would solve.

People are terrified of playing a 1500 point game and facing a Warhound titan. This cannot happen. It is illegal, even going by Forgeworlds rules. Stop playing cheaters. Don't blame Forgeworld for people cheating. You wouldn't blame GW because someone took, say, Tervigons as troops choices without taking Termagants as accompanying troops choices, right? No, you blame the person trying to cheat.

Twisting my words does not prove your point. Many forgeworld options are strictly more powerful for the points than a standard codex entry. Example: Great unclean one vs. Mamon. He is just plain better, for nearly identical points. He will replace a GUO in any list attempting to be powerful.


The rest of your post from there is facetious, as I pointed out from the IA rules, which state you can field your three baneblades in 2000 point games, which are not large games. I suspect you chose 1500 so that you avoided the value at which forgeworld "allow" their big toys.

There isn't much more to say after that. Forgeworld even STATE in their books that superheavies completely change the game. I don't want to play this variation, so I won't, so thats the end of the story for me. I won't play games vs. Forgeworld stuff, and as is often said: Noone can force me to.

otakuzoku
19-01-2012, 00:09
to my knowledge Bainblades a super heavy and outside the FOC. and normal games are restricted by the FOC.

Mannimarco
19-01-2012, 00:09
There isn't much more to say after that. Forgeworld even STATE in their books that superheavies completely change the game. I don't want to play this variation, so I won't, so thats the end of the story for me. I won't play games vs. Forgeworld stuff, and as is often said: Noone can force me to.

Your refusal to play any FW stuff is based on the IA books saying that superheavies unbalance the game?

Why not take it as and when it comes up rather than a blanket ban on everything otherwise we start seeing some strange logic like:

Thunderwolf wound allocation is abusive therefore I refuse to play any SW armies.

twin lash 9 obliterators was broken therefor I refuse to play and Chaos

wound allocation abuse on Nob bikers used to be considered cheese therefore I refuse to play any ork armies.

MechMeltaVets are considered cheesy therefore I refuse to play any IG armies.

purifiers and psyriflemen are broken therefore I refuse to play any GK armies

superheavy tanks are unbalanced at low points levels therefore I refuse to play any FW stuff whether you are taking SH tanks or indeed even playing as a race that can take them :angel:

You are right about Mamon though, one of the few cases where FW stuff is actually pretty good compared to its codex equivalent.

-Loki-
19-01-2012, 01:01
There is nothing preventing many of their superheavy vehicles from being used in non-apocalypse games.

To quote IA1: As noted in the introduction, all vehicles in this book can be used in games of 40k as part of an Imperial Guard army.

To quote IA1, and give you the page reference, page 274.

"Super heavy tanks fight as their own 'army', fighting alongside another army as a separate detachment.In addition, you may only include one super heavy tank detachment for every 'normal' detachment. This limits the use of super heavy tanks to large games of over 2000 points."

To quote the BRB, page 87.

"If you want to play an especially large game, then, as well as agreeing on a points limit, you should also agree on a maximum number of detachments'"

You cannot use a super heavy vehicle or gargantuan creature in a non-apocalypse game without specifically agreeing to be able to do so. If they did this to you without discussing it, they were cheating.

Stop blaming Forgeworld because someone cheated against you.




Twisting my words does not prove your point. Many forgeworld options are strictly more powerful for the points than a standard codex entry. Example: Great unclean one vs. Mamon. He is just plain better, for nearly identical points. He will replace a GUO in any list attempting to be powerful.

Mamon is a daemon prince. A special character daemon prince. This is not twisting your words, it's you making an incorrect statement. Forgeworld do not make replacement units - Mamon is not a replacement for a Great Unclean One or a Daemon Prince. He's a special character.



The rest of your post from there is facetious, as I pointed out from the IA rules, which state you can field your three baneblades in 2000 point games, which are not large games. I suspect you chose 1500 so that you avoided the value at which forgeworld "allow" their big toys.

Incorrect, and you are making things up. As above, you cannot use a super heavy vehicle in a regular game of 40k, without agreeing to use them with your opponent. These games need to also be above 2000 points. As per the very book you referenced, you can only take 1 super heavy tank for every normal detachment, and as per the BRB, you and your opponent agree on how many separate detachments you can take.



There isn't much more to say after that. Forgeworld even STATE in their books that superheavies completely change the game. I don't want to play this variation, so I won't, so thats the end of the story for me. I won't play games vs. Forgeworld stuff, and as is often said: Noone can force me to.

They do state that super heavies completely change the game. They also put in a series of roadblocks to stop people using them without opponents consent. You need to be playing a 2000+ point game. You need to agree with your opponent that you are using multiple detachments. This makes it a non standard game. This makes it not a normal game of 40k. You also need to have regular detachments of normal armies before you can take super heavy tanks.

You're right though - there's nothing left to say. You are making things up to make Forgeworld look bad, when all that's happened is someone cheated against you.

Learn the rules, then come back and argue about the rules.

Charistoph
19-01-2012, 03:47
Stupid question, but if Super-Heavies are Apocalypse only and not sanctioned by GW, why are they an option for a GW-published and copyrighted mission?

The reasons that FW units are not generally allowed in tournaments is varied. On one end, the store generally can't order them, and tournaments are used to showcasee what they sell. Another is they have odd, sometimes quite powerful, and often very expensive rules that adds just one more thing to research and decision for the organizer to make. And sometimes it is just jealousy, in that the TO can't afford the resources to get them himself, so bans them so he won't have to see them.

Is it right? That's up for interpretation. But in friendly games, it's good form to talk about it before Deployment.

Avatar_exADV
19-01-2012, 04:30
Even if you start from the working proposition that all FW stuff is fine for inclusion in the game with respect to balance, FW stuff still presents specific problems to tourney organizers.

First off, while it's reasonable for players to have a nodding acquaintance with the standard rules and stat lines of the other armies, that's simply not a reasonable requirement for FW stuff (since its rules are contained in a whole series of books that aren't sold through normal GW or independent stores, and summaries for them are not found in the main rule book).

Complicating this is the fact that several of the FW lists are quite like "conventional" army lists, but with certain differences. I'll use IA8 for example because, hey, I play orks. I could run a Dread Mob list out of IA8, with 15 killa kans (3 units of 5 each, all in the fast attack slots) along with a variety of other walkers in the other slots. My opponent, who may not have ever seen IA8, may be put off somewhat by seeing what certainly looks like a flagrantly illegal army across the table.

And even if we're assuming the TO is checking all lists for validity before play, that doesn't mean the opponent is going to be familiar with what those units can do. The first time I fire up the ol' lifta-droppa, is my opponent going to be okay with me pitching his land raider halfway across the table? Or are we going to have to break out the IA book and read out the rules?

More to the point, how honest am I about what's in those rules in the first place? There's a LOT of room for casual misrepresentation about the rules when you're dealing with models which the other guy hasn't ever seen before, and hasn't ever seen the rules for before. And let's be honest, MOST FW units have a special rule or two that you aren't going to see elsewhere, and plenty of them have three or four that are unique to that model or at least to FW models from that army.

That sort of situation isn't conducive to tourney play, which needs to be a little faster than you'd generally play otherwise if you want to pack three games into a day. Now you can always have the TO deal with problems as they crop up, but what do you do if you find your FW-unit player is making up half his rules? Or if the FW guy accuses the other guy of slow-playing by asking for rulebook checks twice a turn? Given the small number of players with anything FW-built in the first place, the precedent GW sets by not allowing FW units in (some of) the tourneys it runs, and the other reasons noted above (i.e. "you won't even let me stock them"), it's no surprise that FW items aren't welcome at most tourneys.

-Loki-
19-01-2012, 04:43
(since its rules are contained in a whole series of books that aren't sold through normal GW or independent stores, and summaries for them are not found in the main rule book).

GW stores carry them now (not all stores, but it's growing), and any GW store will do FW orders.

ForgottenLore
19-01-2012, 04:54
The problem is that there are many different classes (or types) of "Forgeworld stuff", and people's acceptance of each of those classes is different. There is:

Add on parts and bits - replacement tank doors and stuff like that.
Full models that simply replace something already in the codex - Kreig and Elysian guard if they are using the IG codex, FW crisis suits if they are being used as regular WYSIWYG suits and so on.
Non-super heavy models/units that have their own FW rules - Using a contemptor dread with the FW rules for it, Eldar Shadow Spectres, The Cestus Assault Ram.
Super Heavy and Gargantuan creatures - Titans, Baneblades, Bio-Titans
FW army lists - Kreig Seige regiment, Tyrant's Legion etc...
I suppose we should also throw in there: FW designed Apocalypse formations.

Each of those things is a different thing. I have a hard time believing ANYBODY is going to have a problem if your Dark Angel's army has Forgeworld DA doors on its Land Raiders. I don't think people SHOULD have a problem using a Land Raider Proteus as a regular LR, but I can imagine some people who would. I can understand people who have issues with FW rules, even though the official policy on them has changed over the years, and I agree with people that don't want to play vs Super Heavy things in regular games (which, as has been pointed out, still requires special permission according to the rules)

So, if your going to discuss the "acceptability" of FW stuff, specify exactly which type of FW stuff you mean. (Which, to be fair, the OP did).

The reason I bring it up is because most FW stuff works perfectly well as replacement models for regular codex entries. The fact that some of them have rules associated with them is more icing on the cake and someone saying the have a problem with FW "stuff" (stuff, ie actual physical matter, the models) when what the really mean is they have a problem with FW "rules" is rather disingenuous and counter productive.

Hendarion
19-01-2012, 05:56
It has been addressed. The latest IA book details which units are 40k official and clarifies that these are totally acceptable for use in your games of 40k. Claims that because this clarification is in a forgeworld book it means nothing is a rather rules lawyery arguement to avoid accepting what is in plain black and white. Forgeworld is a GW subsiduary and this is published with GWs knowledge and consent.
Now go tell that to the BlackShirts of my local GW-store. :rolleyes:


I explained that in my post. GW specifically don't want to sell lots of FW. They want to sell a reasonable amount, but they don't want FW sales to in any way take away from their citadel sales. Why that is I cannot tell you, maybe to do with it being difficult to produce in large quantities, but it seems pretty clear.
Well, someone aged 12-17 doesn't have a Creditcard, even the older ones don't. So ordering from ForgeWorld would be a bit difficult - plus the fact that even the older ones are put off already by the FW-prices. So that can't be the reason or fear they have. Someone (at least in my area) who has enough money to buy ForgeWorld doesn't buy it *instead* of GW-products, but additionally to the GW-lines.

xxRavenxx
19-01-2012, 10:46
This makes it a non standard game.

I shall refrain from going through the rest of your post. It seems pointless given that a) you seem incapable of holding discourse without trying to pervert my every word to a hidden meaning to make you correct, and b) that you state right there that what I initially stated, that Forgeworld models make the game none standard, is true.


Anyway, onto someone who puts forward a rational statement:


Your refusal to play any FW stuff is based on the IA books saying that superheavies unbalance the game?

Why not take it as and when it comes up rather than a blanket ban on everything

My refusal to play against things using FW rules comes from the fact that of the local players who use FW rules sets, I have never seen any of them use anything subpar. I see str10 melta ordanance blasts being slung about, I see 3 wound superheavy tanks, and I see undercosted item X being used with abandon.

Essentially: Yes, I might consider playing someone who had one reasonable addition to their army, BUT, I also wonder if that would be a can of worms with everyone else expecting to be able to add just the one baneblade, or even full armies of specialist stuff. I prefer my blanket policy to some degree, because it doesn't offend any individual person.

I own a little forgeworld stuff myself, incidently:

A tombstalker
A plaguehulk
A set of templar upgrade parts for my terminators and their landraider.

Of the three things, the templars don't use special rules, the hulk is always used as a soulgrinder, and has never seen play as a hulk, and the tombstalker is permenantly shelved because I feel bad if it ever does anything effective to someone, almost as if I were cheating them by using additional rules not found in the official "core game".

Whitehorn
19-01-2012, 11:04
Ask the people you play and come to an agreement.

johnnyrumour
19-01-2012, 11:13
My refusal to play against things using FW rules comes from the fact that of the local players who use FW rules sets, I have never seen any of them use anything subpar. I see str10 melta ordanance blasts being slung about, I see 3 wound superheavy tanks, and I see undercosted item X being used with abandon.


I played a game against a Grey Knights army with my Space Marines and didn't kill a single model. I am lucky, and know what I'm doing.

It sounds like you're referring to the Caestus there... why not just lascannon it? Or Outflank it with something close combat-y like Thunder Hammers or whatever? And what exactly is undercosted item X? you;re being very vague while making fairly rude accusations to be honest. specify unit and context maybe?

With reference to your quote from IA1 it's also worth point out that IA1 is A) out of print due to it being obsolete and B) largely replaced by various Codices, the Apocalypse book and FW's own IAA books which further clarify that you can't use super-heavies in normal games without prior consent.

I agree with ManniMarco and Loki - it sounds like you are blaming FW because a guy cheated.



I own a little forgeworld stuff myself, incidently:
A tombstalker
A plaguehulk
A set of templar upgrade parts for my terminators and their landraider.

Of the three things, the templars don't use special rules, the hulk is always used as a soulgrinder, and has never seen play as a hulk, and the tombstalker is permenantly shelved because I feel bad if it ever does anything effective to someone, almost as if I were cheating them by using additional rules not found in the official "core game".

I would feel bad if I used a Grey Knights army against anyone ever quite frankly, given how ridiculous they are. And by your definition/opinion that would be fine.

Hendarion
19-01-2012, 11:30
I would feel bad if I used a Grey Knights army against anyone ever quite frankly, given how ridiculous they are.
Ha! Welcome to the club. Even Goatboy admitted that recently on BellOfLostSouls, that means a lot ;)

ErictheGreen
19-01-2012, 11:32
Raven.

The Ork Stompa and the Baneblade are GW plastic kits. They do not come from forgeworld and their stats are (i believe) in the Apocalpyse book.

Now, correct me if i'm wrong, but if I turned up with them to a regular game of 40k, you wouldn't play me because they are Apocalypse only, yes?

but if I turn up with a caestus assault ram, which is overcosted compared to a land raider and has the offical "40k" stamp in its book, you would also refuse to play me.

Seems to me like you just won't play what you don't know because when you have played FW stuff before you got screwed on rules or focused on the performance of the FW model over the fact that it probably gimps the rest of your opponents army

GrimZAG
19-01-2012, 12:04
No.

Forgeworld stuff is not legal. I believe its legitimacy is in question here.

And I'd be happy to play it, if I could have a quick read of the rules of said army being presented to fight me :)

Spider-pope
19-01-2012, 12:07
Ultimately it all comes down to either the people you are playing with or the tournament rules.
We can all say on Warseer whatever we like about Forgeworld, either yay or nay, but ultimately it's not us who will decide.

Personally i'm all for using whatever Forgeworld you like. I can't currently afford Forgeworld stuff, so the next best thing is facing it across the tabletop. I would and have let opponents use Titans and the like, as long as i was given a little bit of notice to adjust my army list.



And to the guy earlier who posted about indies not liking forgeworld, I can fully sympathise with them. In my store, there is an army about £600 of forgeworld imperial guard, to which I didn't recieve a penny. So. Y'know. That sucks.

Presumably then you also dislike people who start coming to your store who already have armies then? Since you didn't receive a penny for those either. Perhaps you should implement a policy of nothing being allowed unless they bought it from you, i'm sure that would be really popular.

Col. Dash
19-01-2012, 12:08
If you have superheavies showing up in standard games of 40k you are wrong for not making your opponent get your permission. Even FW says superheavies and flyers are only for Apoc and not regular 40k. The rest of their stuff is heavily playtested by the general populace and is well suited for 40k.

My problem with the unknown thing is it is war. Every game shouldnt be rock paper scissors and throwing in something different is a great thing to vary things up a bit. So a tourney player needs to think out the box in a game and face something he has mentally prepared for, waaaaaaa would you like some cheese with your whine? Nothing is too complicated that a person cant simply open the entry and say here it is. Not like we are reading VCR programming instructions.

Noobie2k7
19-01-2012, 12:09
So long as my opponent has the rules available for me to look through if there are any issues and so i can have a read of what he's bringing to the table before a battle i don't mind what he uses. Obviously super heavies and stuff are out of the question but anything that has a 40K seal of approval i'm fine with so long as i can see the rules for it.

I mean if someone turned up to play me with a list containing a bunch of FW models i;d never heard of then said "oh sorry i only have the rules on PDF at home but i've memorised them" then i would have issues and more than likely wouldn't play them. But if they have the rules in front of them in the book for me to actually read up on then i'm cool with anything 40K

xxRavenxx
19-01-2012, 12:15
[QUOTE=johnnyrumour;6041573it's also worth point out that IA1 is A) out of print due to it being obsolete and B) largely replaced by various Codices, the Apocalypse book and FW's own IAA books which further clarify that you can't use super-heavies in normal games without prior consent.[/QUOTE]

But... and this is me using the same argument as those who feel that FW is completely legal, it is a book that was printed by a GW company. How can it possibly be illegal?

I know how facetious that is. But its true is it not? GW printed the book. Why isn't it legal now, when all other FW books "are"?

The fact is that while people seem to disagree with my stance, I don't personally know many people (just those who own the items, who are a small percentage) who like playing the apocalipse FW version of the game.

Korraz
19-01-2012, 12:34
Because nearly all (I say nearly because there is a chance that I'm missing something, but I think it's actually all) rules have been replaced in newer publications.
Just like codizes, you know?

doubleT
19-01-2012, 12:44
Yes, like a newer generation Codex.


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--


I shall refrain from going through the rest of your post.

Pitty! You should read what he posted because it's 100% true and would open your eyes so you could see that what you said is wrong.




I own a little forgeworld stuff myself [..] permenantly shelved because I feel bad if it ever does anything effective to someone, almost as if I were cheating them by using additional rules not found in the official "core game".

That is ... just ... so ... sad.


--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--

To quote my buddy again (and I added the last part to quote you – without changing the meaning), who loved to play against my Death Korps even without knowing the rules:

"It'd be pathetic display and a sign of weaknes to say that my army can only win against GW armies or units that I approve of – or that use official(!) additional rules not found in the official 'core game'."

Wishing
19-01-2012, 13:00
The fact is that while people seem to disagree with my stance, I don't personally know many people (just those who own the items, who are a small percentage) who like playing the apocalipse FW version of the game.

Since nobody here is a member of your local group, all this arguing is obviously all academic. But just for the record, I think it is fair to divide 40k games into three types with regards to FW.

1. Core 40k only. No FW. (tournament default)
2. Core 40k with FW codex additions. Non-apoc FW models allowed.
3. Apocalypse 40k. FW and 40k apoc models allowed.

You seem to gloss over the second game type above. Your Tomb Stalker is not an apocalypse model - it is a bog standard 40k model intended to be used in normal 40k games, just like a Ghost Ark or anything else, it just happens to be produced by FW and not in the codex.

If you don't like playing with FW because you want to stick with core only, that is fine. But there is a middle ground between "core 40k only" and "apocalypse anything goes".

doubleT
19-01-2012, 13:04
Yeah, but is oppinion that "FW is bad" is based on some guy that did field a Baneblade in such a regular game. I guess it was even a GW Baneblade.

Charistoph
19-01-2012, 14:17
The Ork Stompa and the Baneblade are GW plastic kits. They do not come from forgeworld and their stats are (i believe) in the Apocalpyse book.

Um... Those were Forgeworld models first. Than Citadel made plastic options. Just like the Tau Piranha and Sky Ray, the Imperial Guard Vendetta, and a few other current Codex kits.

Just so you know.

Wishing
19-01-2012, 14:40
Um... Those were Forgeworld models first. Than Citadel made plastic options. Just like the Tau Piranha and Sky Ray, the Imperial Guard Vendetta, and a few other current Codex kits.

Just so you know.

Just out of curiosity, how do the rules that FW originally wrote for those kits compare with the rules that ended up in the codex when they were turned into GW plastic kits? I'm surprised that this has never been brought up in this debate, actually.

Hendarion
19-01-2012, 14:41
I know how facetious that is. But its true is it not? GW printed the book. Why isn't it legal now, when all other FW books "are"?
Apocalypse-units are for Apocalypse-games which is not the same ruleset as Warhammer 40k. Easy as that.
There are enough ForgeWorld-units though that are neither super heavy, nor Apocalypse units and there your statement of "legal GW book" comes into play.


Just out of curiosity, how do the rules that FW originally wrote for those kits compare with the rules that ended up in the codex when they were turned into GW plastic kits? I'm surprised that this has never been brought up in this debate, actually.
They dropped in points massively. Some flyers got degraded to skimmers. And that shows that many ForgeWorld units are just overcosted. Some seem (or are) undercosted, others are fair, but some... ya know... like 200+ points for an AV10 skimmer - are just overcosted.

xxRavenxx
19-01-2012, 14:52
Pitty! You should read what he posted because it's 100% true and would open your eyes so you could see that what you said is wrong.

I read it. It was just fairly pointless trying to repudiate it. It was nothing but him twisting my words and going "ha! you said replacement, and there are no replacements! ahahaha. I win". Which I don't see the purpose of rising to. He can "win" that argument for all I care.


Yeah, but his oppinion that "FW is bad" is based on some guy that did field a Baneblade in such a regular game. I guess it was even a GW Baneblade.

No. My opinion is not that. That is what someone else claimed my opinion is.

As I have said, my dislike of FW rules can be simplified thusly:

If I were to start including their rules in normal games, I would bin my GUO and buy mammon, bin my soulgrinders for Plaguehulks, and add 3 blightdrones. When you look at a ruleset and think "this will replace half of what I own with BETTER OPTIONS" you will either go "yay! this is awesome" or you'll go "I don't like this".

I fall into the latter group. Nuff said.

Bloodknight
19-01-2012, 15:05
Just out of curiosity, how do the rules that FW originally wrote for those kits compare with the rules that ended up in the codex when they were turned into GW plastic kits?

The Baneblade dropped by somewhere around 180 points and got much more powerful.

The Hydra got its cost lowered by 2/3 and got more powerful.

The DE Raven used to cost around 200 points, the codex equivalent is much better and costs less.

Most of the IG stuff actually got better when it got turned into "GW" rules.

As to the Chaos stuff: I embrace it, it makes a dull codex just that tiny bit more fun to play.

Mannimarco
20-01-2012, 15:35
The Baneblade dropped by somewhere around 180 points and got much more powerful.

The Hydra got its cost lowered by 2/3 and got more powerful.

The DE Raven used to cost around 200 points, the codex equivalent is much better and costs less.

Most of the IG stuff actually got better when it got turned into "GW" rules.

As to the Chaos stuff: I embrace it, it makes a dull codex just that tiny bit more fun to play.

And now that they are cheaper and much better nobody will bat an eyelid at them, I mean its not like they are apocalypse only FW cheese now. ;)

Charistoph
20-01-2012, 20:19
The Baneblade dropped by somewhere around 180 points and got much more powerful.

The Hydra got its cost lowered by 2/3 and got more powerful.

The DE Raven used to cost around 200 points, the codex equivalent is much better and costs less.

Most of the IG stuff actually got better when it got turned into "GW" rules.

As to the Chaos stuff: I embrace it, it makes a dull codex just that tiny bit more fun to play.

And that's just for Apoc Mk 2, not stuff that went codex. Sky Rays dropped in price, but lost a special rule allowing it to hit Flyers VERY easily. I'm not well versed on mosof them, though, as I started collecting codecies and other information around Eldar's or Dark Angels' last launch, and didn't know about Forgeworld for about a year after that. That leaves what information I have quite second-handed.


And now that they are cheaper and much better nobody will bat an eyelid at them, I mean its not like they are apocalypse only FW cheese now. ;)

Indeed. Quite curious that, eh?

Carnage
20-01-2012, 21:20
And now that they are cheaper and much better nobody will bat an eyelid at them, I mean its not like they are apocalypse only FW cheese now. ;)

People bitch constantly about the vendetta, because it's massively under-priced.

Lets face it, forgeworld is basically the exact same as GW when it comes to producing rules. It's 80% garbage, 15% okay, and 5% broken over-powered. The units you mentioned were all firmly in the "garbage" category and GW has moved them into the "okay" or "broken" category via the codex updates. When you get into competitive, or at least non-fluff bunny gaming where 2 players who build and play armies to have some fun but still try to win, that "garbage" category is basically dead to you. Who was taking those units when they had the opportunity to before GW updated them? The answer is going to be Apoc players (where balance is basically laughed at), and people who like how it looks.

No one is concerned they are going to be swept under in a tide of Contemptor dreadnoughts, tauros scout vehicles or Eldar Hornets, people don't want to deal with Land Raider Achilles, Lucius Drop-pods, Blight Drones, Breaching drills and to a lesser degree Caestus Assault rams and the like which bend the army that was access to them in weird ways. It's the "broken" 5% that has people throw up their hands and just blanket ban Forge-world. It's done so you don't start arguments of "Well Timmy can use his Contemptor, why can't i use 3 Lucius drop pods?"


1. Core 40k only. No FW. (tournament default)
2. Core 40k with FW codex additions. Non-apoc FW models allowed.
3. Apocalypse 40k. FW and 40k apoc models allowed.

This is basically a perfect example. Apoc is basically a different game, and anything goes there. Tournaments are at the organizer's discretion but default to "No Forge-world", and casual gaming is whatever you agree to with your opponent. Personally, my group plays category 1, not because we hate forgeworld and think it's an abomination, but because none of us have any forgeworld stuff. In fact, I can count on a single hand the number of forgeworld unique models i have seen on a table in 15 years. We're tournament gamers, so are constantly refining and testing tourny lists so there is no reason for us to use forgeworld.

Korraz
21-01-2012, 00:13
Lets face it, forgeworld is basically the exact same as GW when it comes to producing rules. It's 80% garbage, 15% okay, and 5% broken over-powered. The units you mentioned were all firmly in the "garbage" category and GW has moved them into the "okay" or "broken" category via the codex updates. When you get into competitive, or at least non-fluff bunny gaming where 2 players who build and play armies to have some fun but still try to win, that "garbage" category is basically dead to you. Who was taking those units when they had the opportunity to before GW updated them? The answer is going to be Apoc players (where balance is basically laughed at), and people who like how it looks.


Wherever you play, it's a sad, sad place. A place where you only ever see one list per book isn't one where I'd want to play.
Thank god I have my diversity furthering IA books.

KronusDaSneaky
21-01-2012, 01:00
While people are considering their position on FW I want to make clear that while FW admittedly includes its own share of broken units that can be abused (not as much as GW generally but its there) this tends not to be commonplace and generally most units are balanced or a tad overpriced if anything. In particular I want to bring to your attention that the FW army lists are one and all worse then the generic lists they are based off. If you see a death corps of krieg army across the table, don't think, ahhh FW must be overpowered, just praise the emperor that hes not using them as regular IG who happen to be a bit prettier as the former are substantial more powerful. The same applies to both the Ork and SM lists respectively and the CD Warhammer one too. I have never encountered a FW list that was more then mildly competitive if that and even if they were allowed tourney legal I dont see them placing any time soon.

Wishing
21-01-2012, 09:05
While people are considering their position on FW I want to make clear that while FW admittedly includes its own share of broken units that can be abused (not as much as GW generally but its there) this tends not to be commonplace and generally most units are balanced or a tad overpriced if anything. In particular I want to bring to your attention that the FW army lists are one and all worse then the generic lists they are based off. If you see a death corps of krieg army across the table, don't think, ahhh FW must be overpowered, just praise the emperor that hes not using them as regular IG who happen to be a bit prettier as the former are substantial more powerful. The same applies to both the Ork and SM lists respectively and the CD Warhammer one too. I have never encountered a FW list that was more then mildly competitive if that and even if they were allowed tourney legal I dont see them placing any time soon.

I guess this ties in with what Carnage says above... that when you allow FW additions to codexes in even a semi-competitive environment, you are basically just allowing a couple of armies some extra broken units. That you are also allowing all the underpowered units is irrelevant since nobody will field them.

But as you say, the FW army lists don't have this problem, since they are self-contained entities that aren't overpowered overall. So maybe a potential compromise for those that dislike FW is to disallow FW additions to codex armies, but allow full FW armies.

Presumably this will be the case in WHFB, if the Chaos Dwarf list becomes popular enough... then tournaments would most likely allow the list itself, but not allow a WoC army to field CD warmachines, for example.

johnnyrumour
21-01-2012, 09:16
But... and this is me using the same argument as those who feel that FW is completely legal, it is a book that was printed by a GW company. How can it possibly be illegal?

I know how facetious that is. But its true is it not? GW printed the book. Why isn't it legal now, when all other FW books "are"?

The fact is that while people seem to disagree with my stance, I don't personally know many people (just those who own the items, who are a small percentage) who like playing the apocalipse FW version of the game.

Erm... because it's no longer on sale due to being written for 3rd edition? I appreciate your point but to carry it further can we play a game where I use 2nd Ed rules against your 5th Ed rules? because the 2nd Ed rulebook was published by GW so that must still be legal too right?

Noobie2k7
21-01-2012, 09:18
We allowed a Chaos Dwarf list at a recent Tourney we had at our LGS. It did quite well. Then again we also allow all FW lists. The only FW models i plan to use in a non FW army would be Blight Drones as Nurgle lack dedicated Nurgle Fast Attack.

xxRavenxx
21-01-2012, 09:32
Erm... because it's no longer on sale due to being written for 3rd edition? I appreciate your point but to carry it further can we play a game where I use 2nd Ed rules against your 5th Ed rules? because the 2nd Ed rulebook was published by GW so that must still be legal too right?

See, this is the thing. If you like 2nd ed, why not? :)

This is what I don't get with people and this double standard.

I don't see FW as any more or less legitimate than 2nd ed rules, simply that it is an "edition" I don't wish to partake in.

People seem to think that this stance is perfectly fine for one, but abhorrent behaviour for the other.

KronusDaSneaky
21-01-2012, 10:21
We allowed a Chaos Dwarf list at a recent Tourney we had at our LGS. It did quite well. Then again we also allow all FW lists. The only FW models i plan to use in a non FW army would be Blight Drones as Nurgle lack dedicated Nurgle Fast Attack.


I guess this ties in with what Carnage says above... that when you allow FW additions to codexes in even a semi-competitive environment, you are basically just allowing a couple of armies some extra broken units. That you are also allowing all the underpowered units is irrelevant since nobody will field them.

But as you say, the FW army lists don't have this problem, since they are self-contained entities that aren't overpowered overall. So maybe a potential compromise for those that dislike FW is to disallow FW additions to codex armies, but allow full FW armies. Given this do not see FW lists as a threat to fun gaming, they exactly an opposite introducing more variation and interesting gameplay, without threatening the power balance.

Presumably this will be the case in WHFB, if the Chaos Dwarf list becomes popular enough... then tournaments would most likely allow the list itself, but not allow a WoC army to field CD warmachines, for example.

Personally I advocate FW anywhere any time. The broken units are pretty rare generally and if I want to feel all powerful I just need to break out my grey knights who are OP enough for anyone as is. I have had a few hairy experiences admittedly with lucius assault drop pods and the caestus assault ram when it was still experimental but these tended to be isolated events and more of a challange then an irritation.

However I understand some people have their reservations and would encourage them at leasts to allow full FW lists, they include the odd broken unit but the lists themselves are well balance and lack the power of your average 5th edition codex. I don't agree with Carnages stance on the matter but do accept FW has little place in competitive WAAC gaming. Where its used to induct the most powerful models to buff an already highly competitive army its painful enough that removing it from the equation is a possible means of ensuring reasonable parity while FW only lists aren't really all that competitive so I don't expect a WAAC gamer would want to use on of the lists in any case. Tournies however encourage all sorts and I think we can all be mature enough not to ban another games whole army because you have a rules issue with the odd unit. I have to admit I have even gone as far as attempting to undermine this perception when using my own CD. If I use them in a pick up game and someone makes indignant fuss with no effort to explain his FW-phobia I just break out my WOC Tzeentch double warshrine double hellcannon death madness and ask them if they are really happier.

As to you thoughts Tourney wise its most as if you have been reading the communities mind. The only major tourney I am aware of that does not allow the new CD list is Throne of Skulls, every indy and most store tournies I have encountered are already permitting it. I have to admit that the reasons for doing so are perhaps stronger then any of the existing FW 40k lists since CD are a unique army in their own right that are not support by GW directly anymore while the 40k lists, however fun, are varients of core lists that are fully supported.

Noobie 167 its nice to know you allowed the CD list. If build competitively it can do quite well but their still a number of worse armies out there. If you can beat the best then one should not fear a FW army.

Noobie2k7
21-01-2012, 12:31
It was a 1000 point mini tourney. The guy with the CD came in 3rd in the end. I came 5th out of 8 >.> Then again i was running pure goblins and i had the bad luck of them standing around picking their noses half the games and the other half of the games running away cause someone sneezed. Was still a lot of fun though.

The Death of Reason
21-01-2012, 22:19
Reasons not to allow FW:

Its broken - but so are GK, IG, SW and whatever is the flavour of the month.

People haven't access to the rules, so they can't prepare - the rules are available in books, just like any other army lists, and GW codexes aren't free either.

Some random guy on the internet said so - some random guy said the other thing too.

Titans and superheavies wreck the game - yeah, but superheavies are meant for Apoc games, so thats really beside the point.

Tournaments don't allow them - some do, some don't. Those who don't most often do based on the reasons listed above.

I'm rather grumpy and disgruntled and need to assert my authority to forget that my mother never said she loved me - OK, fine by me :)

Noobie2k7
21-01-2012, 22:25
Been said a million times but i personally love seeing FW models on the table. And so does pretty much everyone at our local GW. Hell, the store cabinets have enough FW stuff in them. Speaking of that, our store is having its annual auction and raffle next saturday where they get rid of everything in their cabinets. I'm so bidding on their blight drones and maybe the nurgle land raider.

Balragore
21-01-2012, 22:39
FW is legal in any game where the people that organized the game say it is, just like anything else in this hobby.

doubleT
22-01-2012, 16:30
I agree with Wishing – and partly with Kronus. While, yes, FW army lists seem a bit overcosted compared to the original Codexes and are missing some valuable entries (Chimeras, for example), they get some other nice stuff. And I think they actually can get pretty competitive. But if go there and actually win, your opponents will go ravenxx on you and say that FW is overpowered. (Maybe even when they win.)


maybe a potential compromise for those that dislike FW is to disallow FW additions to codex armies, but allow full FW armies.

I like that!

Hey, Raven, so you really wouldn't play against my Death Korps?

xxRavenxx
22-01-2012, 18:34
Hey, Raven, so you really wouldn't play against my Death Korps?

Firstly, you just attempted to use my name as a verb for "being a tosser", so no. No I wouldnt play against you. Period. Which I'm sure you'll think is very odd, because I must LOVE being directly insulted by strangers on the internet.


And secondly, no. In the same way that I wouldnt play you at epic, or second edition 40k, nor at Bushido, nor Mechwarior. Because I want to play a game of 5th edition 40k, using its applicable codexs, with no additions or wierd stuff.

Sorry if that horrific attitude upsets you. Apparently because you like something and I don't, I'm in the wrong...

doubleT
22-01-2012, 18:54
Yeah, I used your nick (not your name) as a verb because in this thread you're the only one holding up a sign that says "ban Forge World"*, so if someone else does the same, I'd name it after you. Sorry if this upset you.

* yet, all your arguments can be dismissed easily – but you prefer to ignore the facts (for example, that superheavies aren't allowed in normal FOC lists or that FW lists are overcosted while original GW lists are often overpowered, in comparison)

Ok, the first answer I understand. You won't play me because you feel insulted that I called you a whiner.

The other answer I don't understand. What does Epic, 2nd Ed 40k, Mikado or whatever have to do with this?

I'm speaking of an "applicable codex" based hugely on the Codex IG, that was made by a GW subsidiary for 5th edition 40k.

Yet you let yourself get raped by GWs GK, IG parking lot, etc. but refuse to play against a fun army. :confused:

xxRavenxx
22-01-2012, 19:11
Yet you let yourself get raped by GWs GK, IG parking lot, etc. but refuse to play against a fun army. :confused:

I think DKOK can pull way more cheese out with engineer/drill spam than IG can with chimera spam. That is irrelevant to this though.

As I have said possibly... 6? times now in this thread: I like the basic game. I don't want to play the forgeworld varient. I don't want to play a game where I would feel compelled to buy some forgeworld stompyness to keep up with the crowd, and I am perfectly happy playing the bog standard normal game.

What people seem obsessed with in this thread is that I am somehow *wrong* in my wish to only play the normal game, to the point where they essentially allude that I should (or even must) play what my opponents want to play. Hence my reference to other games that I don't play. You wouldn't expect me to play you at those, but you do expect me to give you a game of "imperial armour".

In the same vein, I do not expect you to give me a normal game, but if you were to wish to use a normal codex, like the standard IG book, I would happily do so. I wouldnt attempt to force you though, and I would respect your desire to not play me at a non "imperial armour" game for the same reasons I gave in not wanting to play.

And before someone asks: If the hypothetical situation came up that I was bored and wanted a game, and you were my only available opponent, then yes, I would probably relent and play you at "imperial armour", but with the expectation that next time we play a game, we'd play 40k 5th edition: basic rules.

Also, while I'm replying: I have not at any point stated "ban forgeworld". Nor have I whined. I have simply stated my dislike for something. Perhaps you'd like to call me a whiner for not liking carrots next? :) I don't like how they crunch, and I think they taste bitter. Perhaps someone who loves carrots can come and accuse me of something sinister?...



ps. I was using the term imperial armour in this post purely to differentiate between the expanded and basic games. Not as some hamfisted attempt to claim they are actually separate.

ForgottenLore
22-01-2012, 20:18
What people seem obsessed with in this thread is that I am somehow *wrong* in my wish to only play the normal game,
No, I think what the others are getting obseesed over is your definition of "normal game".

Do you have the same issue playing vs the Eldar Night Spinner from the WD? I think for most of the people in this thread there is absolutely NO difference between a White Dwarf add-on unit and a Forgeworld add-on unit, but I suspect most of them think that you wouldn't have a problem with a Night Spinner, and THAT incongruity is where people are having a problem.

Now, if they are wrong in that assumtion and you do have the same issue with WD additions, then you might want to make that clear. It would at least change the dynamic of the argument and might bring it to an "agree to disagree" ending.

doubleT
22-01-2012, 20:25
I don't get it. I use "basic 5th ed rules" as written in the 40k rulebook, no Apoc stuff. I use a perfectly fine Codex that is available for download by everyone, written by a GW company, based on a GW Codex.

I guess you make use of the online FAQ and Errata on GWs website, or even demand that your opponent stick to the latest Errata (which he'd have to download because it's not in the normal book/Codex).

To follow your example:
I'm OK with you disliking carrots. What I wouldn't like to see is you saying bad things about carrot eaters and that you don't speak with people that like carrots, just because one of the guys that like carrots tried to shove one up your's.

I guess we are both a bit bitter at this topic.

You encountered a cheater that bent the rules and told you FW superheavies were OK to use in a standard FOC game or got spammed by FW units while playing against an idiot and thus think every FW fan is an idiot like this.

And I on the other hand love the background of my FW army and put a lot of effort into them to make them look really cool, and of course I want to use the rules that fit their background, only to encounter ignorant guys that – without looking at the rules – call them illegal, even though they are less of a threat to you than original GW rules and perfectly legal, being rules by a GW company.

ForgottenLore
22-01-2012, 20:34
To follow your example:
I'm OK with you disliking carrots. What I wouldn't like to see is you saying bad things about carrot eaters and that you don't speak with people that like carrots, just because one of the guys that like carrots tried to shove one up your's.
:wtf:


You encountered a cheater that bent the rules and told you FW superheavies were OK to use in a standard FOC game or got spammed by FW units while playing against an idiot and thus think every FW fan is an idiot like this.
Well, I may have missed something, but to be fair I haven't seen him actually confirm that this happened, or really even address this point at all. He seems to have largely ignored that argument and simply shifted to other lines of attack.

xxRavenxx
22-01-2012, 20:38
You encountered a cheater that bent the rules and told you FW superheavies were OK to use in a standard FOC game

People keep saying he cheated. I stated quite clearly the book used, and its rules content stating it was fine to do so. He did not cheat.

I don't believe I have falsely said anything bad about FW items beyond that? Blight Drones and Mamon are way too good for their points. Plague hulks seem strictly better than soul grinders too. I dislike that, and I do not feel I am being unfair in disliking them for those reasons. The engineers and their drill are pretty overpowered too. (Though I do not think the engineers on their own are too good at all.)

Similarly people have mentioned the rocket-droppods (lucius I think?) as being OTT.

My blanket approach beyond that is as I stated a few pages back: If I agree to play one person using even a single FW item, I essentially advertise that fact to all the people owning the overpowered items I do not like. Simply put: Can of worms - Do not open.


[edit]



Well, I may have missed something, but to be fair I haven't seen him actually confirm that this happened, or really even address this point at all. He seems to have largely ignored that argument and simply shifted to other lines of attack.


I just addressed that in this post. So hopefully it clears it up nicely. And, I'd like to state: Not lines of attack. Lines of defence. I am defending my right to not play FW games, not attacking your right to play them with likeminded people...

doubleT
22-01-2012, 20:41
@ Forgotten Lore:

IIRC he stated that he encountered Baneblade(s) in a normal game and based his "I don't like to play against FW" on this.



I like the normal version of 40k, and dislike the version where I have to double or triple my anti-tank guns, and have a race against a superheavy vehicle.

I also dislike it when an army replaces units from its book with other, better units that someone made later.



There is nothing preventing many of their superheavy vehicles from being used in non-apocalypse games.

Completely ignoring the fact that – FW or not – superheavies are not allowed in standard non-apocalypse FOC games.

edit:

k, I'm done with this and I just hope that I find more people that like to play against me and my Death Korps than I find people like you, whining how overpowered the drills are, instead of using their brains to find a way to actually beat them.

btw. so far, my drills turned up – and got destroyed. Seems overpowered, uh? And a drill spam list will always field a lot less standard troops, thus missing the backbone of the army. What sense does this make?

Anyway, ... I hope you have fun in your little bubble of ignorance.

xxRavenxx
22-01-2012, 20:49
IIRC he stated that he encountered Baneblade(s) in a normal game and based his "I don't like to play against FW" on this.

I have given multiple reasons why I dislike them, all of which you seem to have taken personal offence to. I do not see why. My reasons are entirely reasonable, and I don't see why people take it personally that I don't like something.

Secondary to this, people, especially you doubleT are deliberately misrepresenting everything I post, and ignoring choice sections of it.

I'm growing tired of repeating myself purely because people are responding only to half of each of my posts, and people are then reading their posts and presuming they know what I have written.

Further to this post, if I am addressed in a reasonable way by someone in this thread, I will reply to them. If people decide to further ignore what I have taken the time to write out, I will simply ignore them too. Circular arguments based on misinformation are tiring and pointless. I will also be ignoring any more posts containing petty insults, for obvious reasons.

I post on warseer for productive discussion, not for personal attacks from strangers because I like different things to them.

Mannimarco
22-01-2012, 21:08
People keep saying he cheated. I stated quite clearly the book used, and its rules content stating it was fine to do so. He did not cheat.

Did he use the Baneblade stats found in the book saying its ok to take them or did he take the newer, more powerful baneblade rules with the old rules saying its ok to take them?


I don't believe I have falsely said anything bad about FW items beyond that? Blight Drones and Mamon are way too good for their points. Plague hulks seem strictly better than soul grinders too. I dislike that, and I do not feel I am being unfair in disliking them for those reasons. The engineers and their drill are pretty overpowered too. (Though I do not think the engineers on their own are too good at all.)


Blight Drones - only decent fast attack choice for a CSM army, pretty good one for daemons as well. Devilfish with a mawcannon is not overpowered, especially if it makes 2 sub par codexes halfway playable.

GUO vs Mamon - GUOs arnt exactly spectacular so being better than a mediocre unit does not make something "too good".

Plague Hulk vs Soulgrinder - better than a mediocre unit

Engineers + drill - what would you rather play against? a drill which might pop a tank when it comes up, then it gets shot or assaulted and dies then squad of weapon skill 4 guardsmen pop up and get shot or assaulted and die or yet another MechMeltaVet squad in a Vendetta. You know all those things that make the Guard codex so powerful? The DKOK list doesnt get them so lets not pretend that DKOK are somehow overpowered compared to Codex: IG because they get drills :cheese:. Engineers and breaching drills are powerful yes but compared to the Codex? Not quite so much.




My blanket approach beyond that is as I stated a few pages back: If I agree to play one person using even a single FW item, I essentially advertise that fact to all the people owning the overpowered items I do not like. Simply put: Can of worms - Do not open.


Then do you refuse to play all armies because some broken things might exist in their codex? Can I refuse to play all Space Wolf armies because they have some broken units? Can I refuse to play all Grey Knight armies because some of their units are overpowered? Its a dangerous can of worms to open; if I let Tim play with his interceptor heavy list then am I not advertising that I play against Grey Knights so Tom can roll up with his purifiers and psyriflemen spam list. Best not to open that can of worms and just refuse to play all Grey Knights

doubleT
22-01-2012, 21:13
Of course I take personal offence when you say that people that use FW rules like to give themselves an unfair advantage by using "illegal rules" as you call them. The rules I use are basic 5th Ed rules and a LEGAL GW subsidiarie's 40K Codex. Nothing illegal about it. Nothing unfair about it, too. Every Codex has strong and OP units and every Codex has weak and overpriced units. Published FW rules (not the experimental rules) are even balanced to a point of disadvantage for the player, compared to GW – and you call it illegal.

As someone who uses the Siege Regiment Army List to play the awesome army of the Death Korps of Krieg I don't like to hear all this. But what makes me angry is that your only example is someone who didn't play with standard FOC games' rules – yet you use it as example why people shouldn't allow their opponents FW in standard games.

Let me put it another way: You forgot to bring superheavies to an Apoc game and blame FW.

Colonel Jacka
22-01-2012, 21:23
:eyebrows: Pardon my jumping in to this old chestnut, but as a FW fan I like to do this quote from Warwick Kinrade in IA V1 May 2003 to hopefully get someone to close this thread.

"Are FW models legal? The answer is Yes, feel free, use these vehicles, none of them will "ruin" a game by giving an unfair advantage, if fact they will only enhance it!"

As my mate Lord Cook says it is polite to ask the uninformed if you can use them in a game and some are certainly only suitable for bigger games and Apocalypse. They still can be used. It is a fact that a number of FW Tanks are now main stream (ie: Vanquisher, Medusa, Colossus, Griffin, Manticore, Hydra, Valkyrie etc). They were once all only available from FW. :D (Whoops forgot of course the Baneblade.) They only add to the flavour of the game and if you think it is all about winning you miss the point. Unfortunately, in the end it is all about points and point scoring.

Most of my vehicles below I've had since the 90's and have used them regularly. Its nice now that many are in the Codex.

doubleT
22-01-2012, 21:45
I'm searching for the "like" under your post to click it, but I can't find it. ;)

And I agree with you, this thread should be closed.

xxRavenxx
22-01-2012, 21:47
Did he use the Baneblade stats found in the book saying its ok to take them or did he take the newer, more powerful baneblade rules with the old rules saying its ok to take them?

We played at a time where to the best of my knowledge that book had not been replaced. It goes on record as my second or third worst game I can remember playing, along with a GK vs. Daemons game where I didn't get to assault a single model before being wiped out, and a BA vs. Necrons game where he phased me out on turn 2. GKs taking the cake, to be honest.


Then do you refuse to play all armies because some broken things might exist in their codex? Can I refuse to play all Space Wolf armies because they have some broken units? Can I refuse to play all Grey Knight armies because some of their units are overpowered? Its a dangerous can of worms to open; if I let Tim play with his interceptor heavy list then am I not advertising that I play against Grey Knights so Tom can roll up with his purifiers and psyriflemen spam list. Best not to open that can of worms and just refuse to play all Grey Knights

You can refuse to do all of those things. That has pretty much been my point throughout this thread. The only person you could hurt with your policy is yourself, assuming you run out of people to play...

ForgottenLore
22-01-2012, 23:11
People keep saying he cheated. I stated quite clearly the book used, and its rules content stating it was fine to do so. He did not cheat.
And like 20 posts in this thread have commented that those rules which you claim said it was fine for him to do so required that the two of you be playing a special, multi-detachment game where you agreed to allow super-heavies. You have not, thus far, said whether or not you agreed to that (although, since you did play the game, an argument that you agreed to by default can be made).

If you said "Yes, let us play a multi-detachemnt game with super-heavies allowed" then it is your own fault for agreeing to allow an apocalypse level unit in a non-apocalypse game without thinking through the consequences.

If he said "This Forgeworld book says I can take a super-heavy in a regular game as just a regular part of my army" then he cheated because that is NOT what IA1 says (as has been said many times in this thread).

That is what you have yet to address, which of those options happened in that game.


edit: No one really addressed this quote, I think because the conversation moved on too fast, but...

This makes it a non standard game.

you state right there that what I initially stated, that Forgeworld models make the game none standard, is true.
That is not remotely what he stated. If you actually read his post he says that, "according to the rules in IA1, the use of SUPER-HEAVIES makes it a non-standard game. Whether they are FW models or not is totally irrelevant to what he said.

Wishing
22-01-2012, 23:13
I agree with ForgottenLore that simply pulling out a war engine against an unexpecting opponent and saying that FW rules let him do this will definitely have been cheating on that player's part, regardless of when it happened. FW have always known that this is a situation that shouldn't happen since it makes for sucky games.

However, it is clear that Ravenxx didn't memorise the event in detail, so exactly what he agreed to and what the opponent claimed is difficult to discuss. Please just take our word for the fact that FW have always been aware of the potential for their super-cool war engine models to ruin people's games, knowing that there are lots of overzealous players out there who only care about themselves having fun making pow-pow noises and don't care whether their opponent is enjoying the game, and tried to prevent this as much as possible.

However, that's really beside the point. Ravenxx's reasons for disliking FW aren't dependent on this example. His reason boils down to the fact that FW is a 40k supplement. It is not considered part of the core rules. The FW fans in this thread keep denying this, saying that there is nothing that separates FW from core 40k. This, however, is being deliberately obtuse. Of course there is a difference - FW is a separate brand from core 40k, all its models and rules are published and sold through different types of channels, and they don't fit into the normal expansion and development model that core 40k does. The rules are the same as for core 40k - obviously, if they weren't, they wouldn't be playable as a compatible expansion. But compatible and identical is not the same thing. Just think about it, do you expect to see FW rules used in a WD battle report, ever? No? The reason for that is that battle reports showcase the core game, and FW is an expansion, which per definition is separate from the core game.

Feel free to disagree with Ravenxx's reasons for not wanting to play against the expansion - I disagree with these too - but blatantly denying that FW is an expansion is just silly.



And I agree with you, this thread should be closed.

Why exactly? I see nothing here but interesting, if heated, discussion.

xxRavenxx
22-01-2012, 23:50
@ Wishing: Thankyou for the rational and balanced response.

I in fact do remember the statement which was made at the start of the game, and it was this:

"Am I ok to use my forgeworld stuff?"

And that line is what many people have dropped over the years. I said yes to him. So he was not cheating. Maybe you think he was misleading. I personally don't think he was doing so deliberately, despite the impact it had on the game.

Had I stopped him, said "maybe. Let me read the unit in its full, mull it over for 5 minutes, maybe run some stats in my head and compare it point for point to a landraider" I'd probably have said no, and I'd also have been acting like a bit of a jerk.

Anyway. I'm glad you understand my reasoning. The fact that you disagree means only that we're different people. I certainly don't think you're wrong in your enjoyment of FW models.

GrimZAG
23-01-2012, 00:13
Had I stopped him, said "maybe. Let me read the unit in its full, mull it over for 5 minutes, maybe run some stats in my head and compare it point for point to a landraider" I'd probably have said no, and I'd also have been acting like a bit of a jerk.


This does not make you a jerk if you courteously consider and decline to play someone IMO.

madprophet
23-01-2012, 04:20
Had I stopped him, said "maybe. Let me read the unit in its full, mull it over for 5 minutes, maybe run some stats in my head and compare it point for point to a landraider" I'd probably have said no, and I'd also have been acting like a bit of a jerk.

Anyway. I'm glad you understand my reasoning. The fact that you disagree means only that we're different people. I certainly don't think you're wrong in your enjoyment of FW models.
I get your reasoning, but personally, rather than saying 'No' I would have said "okay, but you are going to have to let me adjust the points value of my army upwards or let me proxy some weapons I haven't modeled or this is going to be a very one-sided affair and not much fun."

Maybe adjust the victory conditions, let you place some minefields or let your heavies use the specialized munitions from the Apocalypse books - things to even out the game. Then it might be fun to see what your standard army would do if the enemy dropped a little "surprise" on them.

I'm not saying you're wrong or would even be a "jerk" for declining the game - just offering some alternatives to think about.:cheese:

Colonel Jacka
23-01-2012, 06:31
His reason boils down to the fact that FW is a 40k supplement. It is not considered part of the core rules. The FW fans in this thread keep denying this, saying that there is nothing that separates FW from core 40k. This, however, is being deliberately obtuse. Of course there is a difference - FW is a separate brand from core 40k, all its models and rules are published and sold through different types of channels, and they don't fit into the normal expansion and development model that core 40k does. The rules are the same as for core 40k - obviously, if they weren't, they wouldn't be playable as a compatible expansion.

Why exactly? I see nothing here but interesting, if heated, discussion.

Rubbish and verbose. You are missing the point of diversity that is in the game. FW models are legal. Read some of Jervis Johnson comments on supplements and expansion and you will see you have missed the point on these rules.

I repeat my quote: "Are FW models legal? The answer is Yes, feel free, use these vehicles, none of them will "ruin" a game by giving an unfair advantage, if fact they will only enhance it!" I say again that it is a fact that a number of FW Tanks are now main stream (ie: Baneblades, Vanquisher, Medusa, Colossus, Griffin, Manticore, Hydra, Valkyrie etc).

Go and have a look at the latest the second edition IA Apocalypse and you will see that what you have said is not correct. Supplements,expansions may not be core rules, but they still are legitimate rules that can be used to play the game. FW products can be used in 40k games. The use of the vehicles in a game only enhances it. Sure you will find idiots that play to win at all cost and will use rules in ways that were not envisaged but that is the nature of the game. You can to chose to play with these types or not. It's up to you.

It fantastic that there is a diversity of models to use therefore I really do not see your problem with FW. This is a very old argument that you will either agree with or not. Just let it go.

The Death of Reason
23-01-2012, 06:56
...And that line is what many people have dropped over the years. I said yes to him. So he was not cheating. Maybe you think he was misleading. I personally don't think he was doing so deliberately, despite the impact it had on the game.

And because of this, you decided that you didn't like playing anything FW? Even though you later find out that the toy that ruined your day, wasn't meant for the kind of game, you'd prepared for? This is said without even considering your opponent motives and whether he was up to no good.

Its quite human to err. We do make bad decisions once in a while, but we're only fools, if we do not learn from them. Yes, your gamer pride was hurt, when you were steamrolled by a something with a FW logo, but this really had nothing to do with FW, they have a disclaimer saying 'Super Heavies ruins 40K, use them for Apoc only'. Its you and your opponents fault for not reading your rules properly - just like what happened in my first game of 5th, where I remembered my Jokaeros special ability as something to be rolled for every round - and subsequently forgot to :p

We make mistakes, but use them to learn, not to make more mistakes :)


-

To follow up on this. Cause the next argument are usually that you can't read up on FW doodads, as they only come in IA books, not codexes. Well they're equally available, they're both printed books sold for money, if you have the cash, you can get the info - just like codexes.

"But they're not sold in stores, and, and they cost more'

Welcome to the 21st century, where everything is available from the comfort of your own home - go to forgeworld.co.uk. Or if the internet seems like a scary place, then most LGS will have no problem ordering the stuff home for you. And regarding the price.. GW codexes cost money too, everything does. You do not need to have every single rule and supplement, if you can't afford so, and you certainly aren't entitled to. I personally only buy the ones concerning my own armies, preferring to learn the rest on the field of battle - besides, I get sick from reading Ward fluff :p

Wishing
23-01-2012, 09:00
I repeat my quote: "Are FW models legal? The answer is Yes, feel free, use these vehicles, none of them will "ruin" a game by giving an unfair advantage, if fact they will only enhance it!" I say again that it is a fact that a number of FW Tanks are now main stream (ie: Baneblades, Vanquisher, Medusa, Colossus, Griffin, Manticore, Hydra, Valkyrie etc).

Go and have a look at the latest the second edition IA Apocalypse and you will see that what you have said is not correct. Supplements,expansions may not be core rules, but they still are legitimate rules that can be used to play the game. FW products can be used in 40k games.

What you seem to not understand is something I was trying to explain earlier: Unless there is some sort of authority to enforce it, "legal" is a totally meaningless label to apply. Nobody at GW could care less whether people play with FW models in their basement. The only place where "legal" makes any sense to use is when you are playing in an environment where there is actually someone at a higher level telling you what you can or cannot play. Examples of this would be a tournament or a league with an organiser and specific rules and restrictions. Something can be legal for the purpose of a tournament or a league, but it cannot be legal in general unspecific games, because the only thing legal there is what the players decide themselves.

To illustrate, try and replace the concept of FW with the word "homebrew" in your argumentation. "Supplements,expansions may not be core rules, but they still are legitimate rules that can be used to play the game. FW products can be used in 40k games." becomes "Homebrew rules may not be core rules, but they still are legitimate rules that can be used to play the game. Homebrew products can be used in 40k games." None of this would be wrong. You can write up your own codex rules and use these in 40k games (presumably this would be the point of writing them). These are fully legitimate as long as your opponent agrees - GW used to always state that their products were just the starting point and players should come up with their own house rules to customise their games.

House rules are only legal depending on the context in which they are played.
The core 40k rules are only legal depending on the context in which they are played.
FW rules (and other expansion/supplemental rules) are only legal depending on the context in which they are played.

These are three different types of rules. None of them have any inherent legality other than what is agreed on in the environment where they are being played.

The big question, and the only one worth debating with regards to FW, is players' attitude towards FW. The question boils down to whether the FW expansion models should be accepted as a normal and uncontroversial part of the game or whether it should be considered unusual and marginal to use FW products. This is essentially what is always being discussed, it just tends to get tied up with this meaningless debate of "legality" a lot. It is always a question that will have different answers in different gaming environments. In some places, groups play with FW in every game and there is no problem with this whatsoever. In other places, only core 40k models are allowed - and this happens to be the case in GW tournaments and WD battle reports.

Personally I'd like it if FW was seen as more integral to the game by GW, and FW products were referenced in codexes and used in WD battle reports. However, I also would like it if there were no tournaments, and the game was made into a narrative game like Inquisitor, and made only able to be played competitively if the players made up rules for this themselves. Because I hate the competitive, streamlined nature of the game, and am in it only for the cool models and narrative scope. Remember that all we are debating here is opinions. This is a game with flexible and mutable rules, and the only rules that matter are those we choose to use.

Colonel Jacka
23-01-2012, 09:34
:confused: Right what he said! Sorry but the IG Codex mentions Vanquisher's, Medusa's, Colossus's, Griffin's, Manticore's, Hydra's, Valkyrie's and they are all FW products. Have you read that Codex. Oh and IA books are sold here at GW stores. I bought IA 11 yesterday. Got the Crassus in it. Great tank that one. Here's a picture of mine for you.

Speaking of Homebrew, I'm of for a drink this is not Kansas Toto! I hope you feel better now that's of your chest. :D

-Loki-
23-01-2012, 09:51
The big question, and the only one worth debating with regards to FW, is players' attitude towards FW. The question boils down to whether the FW expansion models should be accepted as a normal and uncontroversial part of the game or whether it should be considered unusual and marginal to use FW products. This is essentially what is always being discussed, it just tends to get tied up with this meaningless debate of "legality" a lot. It is always a question that will have different answers in different gaming environments. In some places, groups play with FW in every game and there is no problem with this whatsoever. In other places, only core 40k models are allowed - and this happens to be the case in GW tournaments and WD battle reports.

Personally I'd like it if FW was seen as more integral to the game by GW, and FW products were referenced in codexes and used in WD battle reports. However, I also would like it if there were no tournaments, and the game was made into a narrative game like Inquisitor, and made only able to be played competitively if the players made up rules for this themselves. Because I hate the competitive, streamlined nature of the game, and am in it only for the cool models and narrative scope. Remember that all we are debating here is opinions. This is a game with flexible and mutable rules, and the only rules that matter are those we choose to use.

This is what I was primarily addressing - xxRavenxx summed it up nicely by having someone cheat against him. He wasn't prepared for a super heavy, and didn't realize that there were restrictions that specifically are in place to stop that sort of cheating. The problem is, people think there's a massive cost restriction to 'get into Forgeworld'. This creates a large amount of people who hear from other people who have had someone cheat against them in this fashion, which creates more, and ends up with what we have now, a large population of the playerbase who - no offense intended here - don't know what they're talking about. They have this imaginary massive financial roadblock in front of them that stops them from even accpeting to broaden their game by looking at a series of expansions published by GW for 40k.

Buy one of the books - buy one that focuses on your army. They have pretty much covered everything by now, with exceptions like Tzeench cults. Every single Forgeworld book has the rules for super heavy vehicles in normal games. There is no way to buy a Forgeworld book without their rules in it. Buy one of their books, any one of their books, that has anything in it that interests you, and you have the rules for including super heavy vehicles in non-Apocalypse games. You also then have rules for stuff that interests you by relating to your army. That is the 'cost of entry' to Forgeworld, and not only do you get the rules for super heavy vehicles - which will end the fear of having someone cheat against you - but rules for a bunch of models you *gasp* might even like.

This is my main concern with Forgeworld. Not convincing people that it is legal. Wishing is absolutely correct here. Legal means nothing really. It's all subjective to your group of friends, the areas stores, or the specific tournament you're looking at. But convincning people that it's not as bad as they fear. There's very few units that are overpowered, and even those aren't the sort of bedtime horror stories the internet spreads. Simply buying a book will give you heaps of ideas for expanding your collection beyond the stuff you find on the shelves at GW, units that are genuinely different and completely useable without being broken in regular games of 40k.

People just need to take that first step - buy one of their books, read the rules for super heavy vehicles, and get over your fear of someone cheating against you. You might just enjoy what you find in the book.

orkmiester
23-01-2012, 10:34
.

The big question, and the only one worth debating with regards to FW, is players' attitude towards FW. The question boils down to whether the FW expansion models should be accepted as a normal and uncontroversial part of the game or whether it should be considered unusual and marginal to use FW products. This is essentially what is always being discussed, it just tends to get tied up with this meaningless debate of "legality" a lot. It is always a question that will have different answers in different gaming environments. In some places, groups play with FW in every game and there is no problem with this whatsoever. In other places, only core 40k models are allowed - and this happens to be the case in GW tournaments and WD battle reports.

Personally I'd like it if FW was seen as more integral to the game by GW, and FW products were referenced in codexes and used in WD battle reports.

This is the problem, you also have it with FW models for units already in the codexes- so what if i have a FW chaos dreadnought i'm using the entry in the codex, why quibble?:eyebrows: (of course if its a 'loyalist marine' player complaining then...:p)

most of the time in general week-to-week gaming i haven't seen anyone complain about one of our club members using FW stuff for his chaos marines, it adds a bit of variety. Though on superheavies, that has to be by agreement anyway- in apocalypse they are almost expected. And there was not much sympathy when some later complained about them when an apoc game was organised (i was not taking part in it by the way...), the moans were that they got 'owned' by them despite there being roughly equal numbers on both sides:rolleyes:

Of course that is just the folks i game with...

But at the end of the day it is up to the player's concerned to decide whether to allow them to be used or not. And until GW come clear on the matter then this 'status quo' will remain:shifty:

just my humble view:angel:

Wishing
23-01-2012, 10:37
Thanks Loki, and I agree with your points entirely. FW is an extra layer on top of core 40k for those that wish to explore it. All it takes to do so is to buy an IA book and some of the appropriate models, which is no different from buying a codex and some of the appropriate models. The principle is the same.

However, we have to accept the fact that the FW layer is intentionally made optional by GW and is not presented as core, and that we should respect those who prefer to stick with just the core game (even though we really want to convert them into using the really really cool extra layer too).

Wishing
23-01-2012, 10:40
This is the problem, you also have it with FW models for units already in the codexes- so what if i have a FW chaos dreadnought i'm using the entry in the codex, why quibble?:eyebrows: (of course if its a 'loyalist marine' player complaining then...:p)

If you mean that there are players who complain about their opponents using a FW model to represent a standard codex option, then I do find that mind-boggling and I'd think that would be extremely rare. The FW chaos dreadnoughts are basically the official GW models nowadays, considering that the latest citadel model is like 15 years old or so.

-Loki-
23-01-2012, 10:44
Thanks Loki, and I agree with your points entirely. FW is an extra layer on top of core 40k for those that wish to explore it. All it takes to do so is to buy an IA book and some of the appropriate models, which is no different from buying a codex and some of the appropriate models. The principle is the same.

However, we have to accept the fact that the FW layer is intentionally made optional by GW and is not presented as core, and that we should respect those who prefer to stick with just the core game (even though we really want to convert them into using the really really cool extra layer too).

Absolutely. I just find that the majority of people who refuse Forgeworld stuff - and who are generally the people who hop into these threads and say they are illegal or should be illegal because they're totally broken and not intended for normal games and and... They just have these misconceptions that come from not actually having read one of the books, and thus are basing their opinions on what someone else told them. Who is going off what someone else told them.

They're not terrible, gamebreaking books and models. They're not any more legal or illegal than anything else in the game. They're not a 'variant called Imperial Armour'. They're simply, as you said, another layer, which people should actually read the rules for themselves before becoming jaded and biased against them. And also not base their opinions on the experimental rules Forgeworld throw up, which are experimental for a reason.

jt.glass
23-01-2012, 11:05
I asked my local store and bassicly got a similar answer to an earlier poster,
The resin the fw models are made of is dangerous and so they are not classified as a toy.
Apparently they have a strict process to go through as to what they can sell, it all has to pass some board of "toy" safety approval, all countries have something like this.That'd be fine, except they sell, y'know, knives!


But... and this is me using the same argument as those who feel that FW is completely legal, it is a book that was printed by a GW company. How can it possibly be illegal?It was a 4th edition book. It has been superceded. GW printed the 4e core rulebook too, but you don't get to use that anymore either (unless you specifically agree you are playing a 4e game, of course).

ETA:

I have given multiple reasons why I dislike them, all of which you seem to have taken personal offence to. I do not see why. My reasons are entirely reasonable, and I don't see why people take it personally that I don't like something.Well, whether they are reasonable or not is debateable, but here is the thing: They do not have to be. Personal preference is just that, you don't have to justify it.

What people are objecting to, I think, is not your preference, but the fact that you keep trying to paint it as the default, when in fact your way is the varient.


jt.

Bloodknight
23-01-2012, 12:47
If you said "Yes, let us play a multi-detachemnt game with super-heavies allowed" then it is your own fault for agreeing to allow an apocalypse level unit in a non-apocalypse game without thinking through the consequences.

I'm not sure if the old, roughly 700 points with upgrades, Baneblade is actually apocalypse worthy. It's always been a pretty crappy and undergunned unit for the massive points is costs, even in a 2000 points game, especially if the opponent knows what's coming.

That said, I had fun playing the Max Weisemann guarding the bridge vs 1000 points of speed freekz scenario. I don't think Weisemann ever won that, though.

Forgeworld has always had a problem with pricing their vehicles realistically before the Apocalypse book with the gut-feeling points, because they used the VDR formula back in those days. Look at the rules for the old Shadowsword as well, then check what it costs, then have a laugh.

I think the same counts for the current Malcador Defender. My opponents let me use it in basically any game because it's cool, does absolutely not warrant its own detachment and is so badly overpriced that it sucks even at 1500 points with all those meltas around.

doubleT
23-01-2012, 13:48
Every single Forgeworld book has the rules for super heavy vehicles in normal games. There is no way to buy a Forgeworld book without their rules in it. Buy one of their books, any one of their books, that has anything in it that interests you, and you have the rules for including super heavy vehicles in non-Apocalypse games.

Please tell me which book you're referring to. There is not one single super heavy vehicle rule that I know of that says anything about a FOC entry.

Normal game = Using the FOC but Super Heavy Vehicles = no FOC entry

If you are referring to the "Super Heavy Detachment" like in the Siege Regiment Army List (IA 5, Siege of Vraks I, p. 144 – also the last page in the PDF) please have a look at p. 130 (first page of the PDF), too. You'll see the FOC for Standard Missions – not saying anything about "Super Heavy Detachment" because it's not supposed to be in normal games.

-Loki-
23-01-2012, 19:47
Please tell me which book you're referring to. There is not one single super heavy vehicle rule that I know of that says anything about a FOC entry.

Normal game = Using the FOC but Super Heavy Vehicles = no FOC entry

If you are referring to the "Super Heavy Detachment" like in the Siege Regiment Army List (IA 5, Siege of Vraks I, p. 144 – also the last page in the PDF) please have a look at p. 130 (first page of the PDF), too. You'll see the FOC for Standard Missions – not saying anything about "Super Heavy Detachment" because it's not supposed to be in normal games.

Please read the rest of the thread. As I have said multiple times in this thread, super heavy tanks require multiple detachments, so I do know this. I was referring to the Forgeworld books including rules for using them in non-Apocalypse games. Normal games was the wrong wording. But they're there - rules for using super heavy vehicles in non Apocalypse games using only the core rulebook.

Hendarion
23-01-2012, 20:06
Which book and which vehicle are you referring to?

xxRavenxx
23-01-2012, 20:49
Which book and which vehicle are you referring to?

Nearly all superheavys and titans are in the vraks krieg list, for an example, in their super heavy detachment addendum. I don't believe it states apocalypse, just that its a detachment.

Inquisitor Kallus
23-01-2012, 21:06
Nearly all superheavys and titans are in the vraks krieg list, for an example, in their super heavy detachment addendum. I don't believe it states apocalypse, just that its a detachment.

You need to read what Forgeworld says about using Super Heavy Vehicles in games.....

xxRavenxx
23-01-2012, 21:11
You need to read what Forgeworld says about using Super Heavy Vehicles in games.....

I have. I believe it is: "You can as part of a special detatchment". This, incidently, was discussed several pages back, wherin someone pointed out the exact rules of detatchments to me. (something I didn't know till then).

Colonel Jacka
23-01-2012, 22:21
Yes there is alot of misconceptions out there. Bottom line to this argument is that you can use FW vehicles, they have rules for both 40k and Apocalypse. But it is polite to say you are using them and explain there rules and uses.

40k is about diversity and enjoying the game nothing more nothing less. Let this thread die every one has made their point.

doubleT
23-01-2012, 22:48
The only thing I'm saying is:

Normal game = FOC
Super Heavies = Not FOC, so:
Super Heavy Detachment = Not a normal game

Normal Game || Game with Super Heavy Detachment || Apocalypse

You cannot blame FW for someone using Super Heavies in what you thought was a normal game because FW makes it really clear that they are not allowed in FOC games.


Nearly all superheavys and titans are in the vraks krieg list, for an example, in their super heavy detachment addendum. I don't believe it states apocalypse, just that its a detachment.

Please look at the Siege Regiment Army List you are referring to:
Excerpt of the page about Super Heavy Detachment from the Siege Regiment Army List, available for download on ForgeWorld (http://www.abload.de/img/untitled-1vhj66.jpg)

No rules, no points, no stats.
Some of them (Macharius, for example) are in the book, the others aren't. But, clearly, they are NOT in the army list (regarding FOC). They are mentioned and it reads where you can find the actual rules. They have no FOC slot mentioned, thus aren't allowed in standard missions, a.k.a. normal games.

Charistoph
24-01-2012, 03:35
So I take it that ayou only consider the 3 missions in the BRB to be standard games? Even though there are at least two more sets of missions written and provided for in every official GW way possible? Even though one of those missions is specifically set up and configured specifically with a Super-Heavy as its central feature?

Now tell me there is nothing "official" about Super-Heavies, and how they are only for Apocalypse play.

Hendarion
24-01-2012, 06:05
I really dunno what use all this fighting forward and backward will be of.

There are people who don't allow the use of ForgeWorld units. They have their right to do so. Period.
There are people who do allow the use of ForgeWorld units. They have their right to do so. Period.
There are people who don't allow the use of Thunderwolves, StormRavens, Jetbike Councils. They have their right to do so. Period.

Fun is what you make of the game. And if there is something in your opponents list of which you think it will spoil your fun, you may refuse to play that list. Simple as that. I don't play Leaveblower-lists with my Foot-Eldar either, because I don't see any fun in playing 2 turns and then everything of my units got wiped off the table. And I don't need to.
I also hate Scout-Landspeeders because they may assault me before my first turn. I do allow them, but I clearly told my opponent he'll always face full-reserve-lists whenever he fields them.

No matter how official something is or not, if there is something that makes you not enjoy the game, you may decide that you don't wanna play it.

That's it. That's the only truth in the entire topic and you won't convince someone to allow FW-units or not if he has made a decision. The only chance you have is to hope that he will buy some FW stuff himself and see in what position he is if someone else is refusing to play against it for any reason.

Colonel Jacka
24-01-2012, 06:45
Well said mate!

Wishing
24-01-2012, 09:45
Absolutely. I just find that the majority of people who refuse Forgeworld stuff - and who are generally the people who hop into these threads and say they are illegal or should be illegal because they're totally broken and not intended for normal games and and... They just have these misconceptions that come from not actually having read one of the books, and thus are basing their opinions on what someone else told them. Who is going off what someone else told them.

This is a very good point. I can understand if a player doesn't like FW simply because they cannot be bothered with the hassle of having to learn/deal with an additional layer to the game. But it is a shame if players start disliking FW because they think the models are broken and overpowered, when that idea stems from simply not understanding the rules properly.

Then again, the reason that player doesn’t understand the rules properly is presumably because they don’t have any interest in actually buying and reading the FW books. So a player that misunderstands something as being unbalancing when it is actually not probably wouldn’t have made a FW fan in the first place, since they would otherwise have investigated this for themselves.

You can argue that you don’t need to understand or like something in order to agree to play against it… which would be an interesting point I think. This issue boils down to the fact that GW presents FW as an optional expansion, while they present the codexes as an integral and non-optional part of the game, so refusing to play against FW for any reason is seen as legitimate, but refusing to play against certain codexes just because you don’t like them and find them uninteresting is generally frowned upon.

As an aside, I find the new Chaos Dwarf army to be quite fascinating because it is the first example we have seen of a FW army that isn’t just a variant of an existing codex army, and which cannot be fielded at all without the FW rules. So I expect that this list will get special status as being considered to be a pseudo-core army in its own right with regards to tournaments and such.

Col. Dash
24-01-2012, 14:23
The only list I am aware of that allows SH in a normal game is the Krieg Tank Company and it only allows the Gorgon, which is one of the lamest superheavies in existance for 40k(but one of the cooler looking). Yeah it can transport 50 guys, still only moves 6". Its still open topped, has one shot griffin mortars, but hey, it is amphibious :).

A separate detachment means that you have agreed to play a game with two Force orgs and your second force org is composed of superheavies. I know I personally have never played this way in almost 20 years of playing 40k and i have played in a lot of places with a lot of different people(I might want to get that checked :P )

Charistoph
24-01-2012, 14:36
The only list I am aware of that allows SH in a normal game is the Krieg Tank Company and it only allows the Gorgon, which is one of the lamest superheavies in existance for 40k(but one of the cooler looking). Yeah it can transport 50 guys, still only moves 6". Its still open topped, has one shot griffin mortars, but hey, it is amphibious :).

There's a Battle Mission that is basically one side takes a Baneblade and the other side takes the same amount of points in another army without a Super-Heavy, and they have to take the Baneblade out. They even say you can replace the 'Blade with any other Super-Heavy you want or have.

Hendarion
24-01-2012, 15:40
That *still* is a special mission and your opponent *still* and *always* may refuse to play it. I really dunno what you're trying to use the example for, but it won't change anything.

Charistoph
24-01-2012, 16:05
That *still* is a special mission and your opponent *still* and *always* may refuse to play it. I really dunno what you're trying to use the example for, but it won't change anything.

It is not more special than any other mission available in 40K. EVERY game with an opponent is subject to refusal on any grounds, including body odor and halitosis.

Is it part of the BRB Missions? No. Is it written by and produced by the same company that wrote the BRB? Yes. Is it official? D*** right it is. Is it a mission you will normally see in a tournament? No, but some tournaments are built around odd mission setups.

doubleT
24-01-2012, 16:23
So you agree with me that Super Heavies in a "normal" game are nothing FW is to be blamed for, as Raven does.

Hendarion
24-01-2012, 16:23
EVERY game with an opponent is subject to refusal on any grounds
That is exactly what I'm saying.

But no single argument said here will change that.

Inquisitor Kallus
24-01-2012, 16:43
The only thing I'm saying is:

Normal game = FOC
Super Heavies = Not FOC, so:
Super Heavy Detachment = Not a normal game

Normal Game || Game with Super Heavy Detachment || Apocalypse

You cannot blame FW for someone using Super Heavies in what you thought was a normal game because FW makes it really clear that they are not allowed in FOC games.



Please look at the Siege Regiment Army List you are referring to:
Excerpt of the page about Super Heavy Detachment from the Siege Regiment Army List, available for download on ForgeWorld (http://www.abload.de/img/untitled-1vhj66.jpg)

No rules, no points, no stats.
Some of them (Macharius, for example) are in the book, the others aren't. But, clearly, they are NOT in the army list (regarding FOC). They are mentioned and it reads where you can find the actual rules. They have no FOC slot mentioned, thus aren't allowed in standard missions, a.k.a. normal games.


This^


I really dunno what use all this fighting forward and backward will be of.

There are people who don't allow the use of ForgeWorld units. They have their right to do so. Period.
There are people who do allow the use of ForgeWorld units. They have their right to do so. Period.
There are people who don't allow the use of Thunderwolves, StormRavens, Jetbike Councils. They have their right to do so. Period.

Fun is what you make of the game. And if there is something in your opponents list of which you think it will spoil your fun, you may refuse to play that list. Simple as that. I don't play Leaveblower-lists with my Foot-Eldar either, because I don't see any fun in playing 2 turns and then everything of my units got wiped off the table. And I don't need to.
I also hate Scout-Landspeeders because they may assault me before my first turn. I do allow them, but I clearly told my opponent he'll always face full-reserve-lists whenever he fields them.

No matter how official something is or not, if there is something that makes you not enjoy the game, you may decide that you don't wanna play it.

That's it. That's the only truth in the entire topic and you won't convince someone to allow FW-units or not if he has made a decision. The only chance you have is to hope that he will buy some FW stuff himself and see in what position he is if someone else is refusing to play against it for any reason.

And this^

I will generally play against anyone or anything once. After that, if youve made a bad impression on me then I wont ever play you again. I do not use people using Forgeworld as an 'excuse' not to play against someone as I have seen from a number of people in this thread. Forgeworld in game is typically over-costed with a few exceptions.

To be honest Raven im wondering whether for you its just the rules of a number of 'scary FW' units that youre afraid to play, or whether its the fact that the big ol' £££ signs in your eyes arent 'pinging' because you know that a person who has a FW army or indeed any models hasn't put money into your pocket. I suspect its more of the latter... .

Anyway, yes, I dnt mind people using FW models/armys. They bring a lot more character and indeed, a lot more variety. I myself love campaigns and more 'story-based/fluff games' and dont necessarily mind if the games arent completely even as long as their is some cool story going on to back it up.

GabrielEvander
24-01-2012, 20:31
I get mixed reactions.
Generally ask hey is it ok to field this. *produce Prometheus*
opponent goes wow.... 8 heavy bolters...
yup heres the rules have a glance and then the answer is yup!


though i have plonked down my dread (dark angels ven) and got hey you can't use the its not a legal 40k model even after explaining it was a standard ven dread.
answer to that was neither is your tw cavalry you converted etc....

-Loki-
25-01-2012, 11:23
I have. I believe it is: "You can as part of a special detatchment". This, incidently, was discussed several pages back, wherin someone pointed out the exact rules of detatchments to me. (something I didn't know till then).

So... he cheated. He used your lack of knowledge of super heavy vehicles and the multiple detachment rule to use a super heavy in a reglar game.

This isn't a dig - everyone has someone cheat against them from lack of knowledge of the rules at some point. But it's unfair to blame Forgeworld for that. Just like if someone uses a codex you've never read and takes an illegal selection of units. Not you're fault, nor GW's, it's the fault of the person who cheated.

Condemning all Forgeworld because of one person cheating against you is kind of harsh. My recommendation still stands - people should buy a book that relates to their army. They're not that expensive, and a lot of GW's carry them now. You might just find something you like, and learn about super heavy vehicles.

orkmiester
25-01-2012, 11:36
though i have plonked down my dread (dark angels ven) and got hey you can't use the its not a legal 40k model even after explaining it was a standard ven dread.
answer to that was neither is your tw cavalry you converted etc....

good for you sir:D

i forgot about the TWC issue:rolleyes:

Though i would like someone to try to pull that one off at a tourney... i know what i would say;)

DuskRaider
25-01-2012, 15:59
I love how Raven finds Blight Drones to be OP, considering they're more than a Vindicator points-wise, they're more fragile, and they add a fast attack choice to an army that otherwise has nothing. Same with Plague Hulk... But I mean, it would be perfectly fine to this guy if I field 9 Obliterators instead. Makes a whole lot of sense...

Carnage
25-01-2012, 17:33
I love how Raven finds Blight Drones to be OP, considering they're more than a Vindicator points-wise, they're more fragile, and they add a fast attack choice to an army that otherwise has nothing. Same with Plague Hulk... But I mean, it would be perfectly fine to this guy if I field 9 Obliterators instead. Makes a whole lot of sense...

No one cares about 1 blight drone, it's the git who shows up with 9, and 9 obliterators that ruins your day and makes people dislike some of these units. It's a FAST ATTACK BATTLE CANNON that can be taken in units of 3! Honestly it should have been heavy support and taken individually.

I know it was sarcasm, but you can't honestly compare a slow and purposeful lascannon/whatever obliterator to a fast skimmer battle-cannon blight drone in any sane way and come to the conclusion that oblits are better.

DuskRaider
25-01-2012, 18:18
You honestly think they're worse than Obliterators? Honestly? They're really not. Considering its well over 1,000 points for 9 of them, their BS is worse than Obliterator, and once you remove that Battle Cannon it's more or less useless. There are worse things in standard GW codices than the Blight Drone, but I'm sure you won't cry over those.

xxRavenxx
25-01-2012, 18:42
And now compare them to a soulgrinder for me please. In a list with epidimius perhaps, so their MoN kicks in. Then tell me how the blight drone is worse than a soulgrinder, and not one of the best things available to the whole DoC book.


Oh, and the comment "once you remove the battle cannon" is incredibly facetious. One you kill an obliterator he's even worse at shooting you know...


And for the nine millionth time: I do not think ALL forgeworld items are broken, just a select few gamechanging items. My desire to not play the ******* game is because I like the regular version of 40k, and not the forgeworld expanded edition. GOOD LORD I'm fed up of repeating that in this thread...

DuskRaider
25-01-2012, 18:48
For Daemons they're better, but that's because Daemons are so subpar it's not even funny. And your complaints about Forge World rules can be countered by codices such as Imperial Guard, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Grey Knights which are all so over the top it's not even funny. Let's compare a Leman Russ and a Blight Drone and talk. Your argument is invalid.

Hendarion
25-01-2012, 19:43
GOOD LORD I'm fed up of repeating that in this thread...

And that's what I said too. Nothing is going to change it. No arguments and no discussions. Dunno why people still try, it's just wasted time. ;)

Inquisitor Kallus
25-01-2012, 19:51
For Daemons they're better, but that's because Daemons are so subpar it's not even funny. And your complaints about Forge World rules can be countered by codices such as Imperial Guard, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Grey Knights which are all so over the top it's not even funny. Let's compare a Leman Russ and a Blight Drone and talk. Your argument is invalid.

DuskRaider im totally with you on this. Raven the irony in your beliefs about Forgeworld is that GW has taken multiple things from Forgeworld (the Pirahna and Valkyrie to name but two) and they decreased their points and made them better. Then they took the 'better' Valkyrie and gave it 3 twin linked lascannons.

Also, Forgeworld is not an expansion, it is a supplement.

As Dusk Raider has said, Daemons are considered sub-par. Would you really begrudge them a few decent units when the rest of the army is not all that?

Konovalev
25-01-2012, 20:00
My desire to not play the ******* game is because I like the regular version of 40k, and not the forgeworld expanded edition. GOOD LORD I'm fed up of repeating that in this thread...

Given the kind of responses boisterous forgeworld players are giving you, I wouldn't fault you for skipping forgeworld games because of their players alone!

While I agree that I would prefer not to play armies running any forgeworld addon units I wouldn't mind playing a forgeworld lists like krieg or elysians. I can sympathize though, sometimes I just want the core game, if that means purifier spam, longfang packs, chimera parking lots etc so be it I'm prepared for it.

Edit:

GW has taken multiple things from Forgeworld (the Pirahna and Valkyrie to name but two) and they decreased their points and made them better. Then they took the 'better' Valkyrie and gave it 3 twin linked lascannons.
What everyone who says this seems to be missing is the timing. WHEN did this happen? It happened in time where codicis are called out for power creep. So compared to NOW the old FW units are indeed underpowered. Compared to THEN, the new GW-FW ported units would be absurd.

MvS
25-01-2012, 20:09
I think there's a difference between the discussion about whether we would want to play with or against Forgeworld rules and whether or not those rules are 'legal' though.

DuskRaider
25-01-2012, 20:14
I think there's a difference between the discussion about whether we would want to play with or against Forgeworld rules and whether or not those rules are 'legal' though.

This is true, and it is stated in various sources that various Forge World units are in fact 100% legal for 40K games.

Konovalev
25-01-2012, 20:23
I think there's a difference between the discussion about whether we would want to play with or against Forgeworld rules and whether or not those rules are 'legal' though.

I think that's subjective and has been touched on in the topic previously. What is "legal" is what you and your opponent agree to. Agreement to core rules and codicis tend to be implicit. As mentioned, what of the old squat rules? Would they still be "legal" today? Where in any of the rulebooks does it say the old squat codex is no longer legal? But we can't just toss out old codicis though. Would you say the Tau codex isn't legal because of its age and the edition it was written for? What about dark eldar before their update?

Some people argue that purifier spam and grey knights in general are not "legal" because of the ability of their codex compared to others. Prior agreement with your opponent is the key issue here. Prior agreement doesn't neccesarily mean a full stop review of respective army lists, codicis, units prices and abilities, special rules etc, but sometimes it does. And when it does some people, such as myself, prefer not to play because we are here for a game and just a game.

MvS
25-01-2012, 20:48
This is why I prefer strongly narrative-driven games within campaigns.

I'm not much of a 'pick up' gamer truth be told, hence the reason I tend to like Forgeworld stuff.

doubleT
25-01-2012, 21:40
I like the regular version of 40k, and not the forgeworld expanded edition. GOOD LORD I'm fed up of repeating that in this thread...
You really think there is something like a "Forge World expanded edition 40k", uh?

I feel dumber now ... "Hi, I'd like to buy the FW extended edition, please."

FW supplies us with units and army lists, as does GW. FW puts more thought into the background, procudes cooler models and does better balancing and playtesting than GW – after they initially had made some mistakes. They do not change any core rules of the 40k rule book or add anything to them.

As long as you repeat hate-driven, untrue superficial knowledge, we have to repeat that to you. If you like it or not.

It's fine if you don't accept to play against Super Heavies, because they are not for normal games.
It's your thing if you don't accept to play against FW units or army lists, but accept GW add-ons.

But stop distributing false facts and insisting on them being true. People might read your statement about "FW allowing super heavies in normal games" and think that it's actually true.

igotsmeakabob!!
25-01-2012, 21:48
My problem is my Dreadnought Drop Pod. Friends either won't let me use it, or chastise me for using the pod that allows the 'nought to assault the turn it drops.

xxRavenxx
25-01-2012, 21:52
You really think there is something like a "Forge World expanded edition 40k", uh?

Lets repeat this yet again:

Yes I do. Many people do. You clearly do not. You are a broken record. If someone disagrees with you, they MUST be wrong, even if something is subjective. More importantly, this time, you ARE wrong. The imperal armor bolt-on units are an expansion to 40k. If they were not, they would be in the codex's, and sold in stores, alongside all the other books.

Apocalipse is an expansion as it is a book which allows the game to be played a different way. Storm of magic is the same. Imperial armour is again an expansion book. Sorry if you don't like that, but it is.

And that, incidently is the last time I rise to you. You are incapable of pleasant debate, and in future I will ignore every word you direct at me. Life is too short to waste arguing pointlessly with you on the internet.

DuskRaider
25-01-2012, 21:56
It's not subjective. In the IA: Apocalypse 2nd Edition, there are plenty of Forge World models are rules that have now been labeled 40K Legal. Legal as in, I have just as much a right to field a Contemptor as you do a Purifier squad.

doubleT
25-01-2012, 22:05
Apocalypse is an expansion, yes. It changes the core rules (no FOC, no limitations).
IA doesn't. IA books are practically codizes with a huge fluff part with a background story and an army list or add-ons for existing codizes.

IA Apocalypse is an add-on for the Apocalypse expansion. IA books are add-ons for 40k core just like the GW codizes.

That is not subjective!

As I said, I'm a "broken record" because you repeat false facts all the time. And I can't stand the fact that people might be influenced by lies, for example SH in normal games.

edit: I'm done here, too.

Wishing
25-01-2012, 22:54
And for the nine millionth time: I do not think ALL forgeworld items are broken, just a select few gamechanging items. My desire to not play the ******* game is because I like the regular version of 40k, and not the forgeworld expanded edition. GOOD LORD I'm fed up of repeating that in this thread...

To be fair, I think that if you ignore the "everyone who disagrees with me is wrong" people, the point of the debate is *why* you like core 40k only and not 40k + FW. Earlier you stated that it was because someone used a Baneblade against you once, and even though it's fair enough to just have a bad taste in your mouth about Baneblades after that, you have to admit that it doesn't make a lot of sense to defend a dislike as being reasonable based on that alone, since the rules weren't being used correctly. Saying that most FW models are fine but a few are overpowered also doesn't seem like a very good reason, since the exact same thing is normally considered true of core 40k products.

I'm interested in this because I wonder if it's related to simply wanting the game to be more... "overskueligt", hmmm, danish word I find difficult to express in english. Easy to survey, to keep tabs on. Basically, if someone likes to know what the various things in the game do, for core 40k, they only have to learn what is in the rulebook and the codexes (and the very occasional WD addition). If you add FW to the game, you increase the amount of info to learn by a series of quite expensive books. It's not that those books are any different than the codexes - it's that they don't replace the codexes, they are in addition to them, so they represent more to memorise and learn... and more to the point, they are things to learn that aren't found in the same place everything else is found about that army. If you want to know all the vehicles available to codex marines, you normally only need the codex, but if you allow FW, you have SM vehicles spread out over a number of additional books. The information simply becomes inconvenient to access.

I don't know if you actually feel this way, but it's a point of view I can certainly understand if someone sees it this way.

Inquisitor Kallus
25-01-2012, 23:06
I believe one of the biggest reasons he refuses to play against anything FW is as I said earlier, he is trying to take a stand against it to justify the position he is taking with his business of allowing no FW in his store. I also believe it is because he knows it wont make any money for him, so to be seen 'promoting' it would be 'bad for business'. I knew a few GW managers who also didnt allow FW in their stores, as it potentially robbed them of sales and therefore targets. I would not be surprised if this is Ravens primary reason for not playing against anything FW.

Wishing
25-01-2012, 23:09
Legal as in, I have just as much a right to field a Contemptor as you do a Purifier squad.

I still maintain that this "right" isn't actually a right when there is nobody with the authority to enforce it. No GW book has any authority unless players and/or event organisers accept that authority. The difference between Purifiers and Contemptors is that they belong to different model type categories (Citadel vs. FW that is), and there are some players that make a distinction between the two. A book/person saying that there should be no distinction is just that book's/person's opinion.

-Loki-
25-01-2012, 23:20
I believe one of the biggest reasons he refuses to play against anything FW is as I said earlier, he is trying to take a stand against it to justify the position he is taking with his business of allowing no FW in his store. I also believe it is because he knows it wont make any money for him, so to be seen 'promoting' it would be 'bad for business'. I knew a few GW managers who also didnt allow FW in their stores, as it potentially robbed them of sales and therefore targets. I would not be surprised if this is Ravens primary reason for not playing against anything FW.

Which would be fine if all he was saying was 'I don't allow FW models to be used in my store, as I don't carry them and don't want to promote them'.

Wishing
25-01-2012, 23:24
I believe one of the biggest reasons he refuses to play against anything FW is as I said earlier, he is trying to take a stand against it to justify the position he is taking with his business of allowing no FW in his store. I also believe it is because he knows it wont make any money for him, so to be seen 'promoting' it would be 'bad for business'. I knew a few GW managers who also didnt allow FW in their stores, as it potentially robbed them of sales and therefore targets. I would not be surprised if this is Ravens primary reason for not playing against anything FW.

Though I see what you're saying, lets not assume that Raven's personal opinion of FW is influenced by his business policy. Since he's stated that he own several FW products, he clearly doesn't hate them, and if his store policy is the only reason he doesn't play against them that's all he would need to say and there would be no cause for this debate about how overpowered or not FW models can be.

xxRavenxx
25-01-2012, 23:26
I don't know if you actually feel this way, but it's a point of view I can certainly understand if someone sees it this way.

This would factor into my general disinterest in the forgeworld version of the game. What you are grasping that others obtusely seem to ignore, is that there are multiple reasons for not liking something. I personally feel that I could go as simple as: "I just don't like the way the game plays with FW added in." A combination of not liking the additions it brings to several armies, not liking the powerful vehicles, especially superheavies, not liking the dozens of extra books I'd have to buy and read, and just simply not liking the complications it brings in terms of availability, extra cash needed to play etc.


I believe one of the biggest reasons he refuses to play against anything FW is as I said earlier, he is trying to take a stand against it to justify the position he is taking with his business of allowing no FW in his store. I also believe it is because he knows it wont make any money for him, so to be seen 'promoting' it would be 'bad for business'. I knew a few GW managers who also didnt allow FW in their stores, as it potentially robbed them of sales and therefore targets. I would not be surprised if this is Ravens primary reason for not playing against anything FW.

I have no such ban (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?313143-Plague-hulk-soulgrinder&highlight=plague+hulk). Nice try though.

artekfrost
25-01-2012, 23:27
I believe one of the biggest reasons he refuses to play against anything FW is as I said earlier, he is trying to take a stand against it to justify the position he is taking with his business of allowing no FW in his store. I also believe it is because he knows it wont make any money for him, so to be seen 'promoting' it would be 'bad for business'. I knew a few GW managers who also didnt allow FW in their stores, as it potentially robbed them of sales and therefore targets. I would not be surprised if this is Ravens primary reason for not playing against anything FW.

so if I move to a new town, should I have to repurchase my army in order to play in the stores of that town? As my models came from a different store and make the current store no profit. what if they don't even have Games Workshop models in stock? I've played necrons for three years and if I wanted anything besides the codex, the battle force or possibly the monolith I had to go online.
What about the models that have no Games Workshop model? Is it fair to say that a person can't use a titan because its a Games Workshop supplement product and not from the main line? even though the only thing close to a titan Games Workshop makes is the Stompa.
I fail to see how models that are predominantly models not shown in codexes or additional parts for Games Workshop models are gong to hurt a store's profit, if i wanted a Chaos dreadnought for some reason, I'd buy either the Forge World one or not buy one because i hate the Games workshop Chaos Dreanought, either way the store makes no money and I don't spend money on a horrible model tha'ts probably not even in stock.

Inquisitor Kallus
25-01-2012, 23:30
I suggest you look at his posts about people gaming in his store, and that he doesnt allow people to use armys in it that they did not buy from him, apart from one offs of visitors etc, if I remember correctly.

DuskRaider
25-01-2012, 23:38
I still maintain that this "right" isn't actually a right when there is nobody with the authority to enforce it. No GW book has any authority unless players and/or event organisers accept that authority. The difference between Purifiers and Contemptors is that they belong to different model type categories (Citadel vs. FW that is), and there are some players that make a distinction between the two. A book/person saying that there should be no distinction is just that book's/person's opinion.

Except when it's the actual company that's making the statement... Sure, I can say I don't want to play against... say... an IG army because he's spamming Valks, but it doesn't mean that they're illegal. Kind of makes me look like a jerk if I say that actually, and that's how I feel when someone say the same about FW things. Just an opinion on how I feel about them I suppose, but it states the rules are official and they can be used in 40K... can't argue that too much, honestly.

doubleT
25-01-2012, 23:42
To be fair and to defend Raven, he only said that he doesn't like customers that bought (parts of) their armies at other stores. That could include other stores, other GWs, GW mailorder, FW, Scibor, etc. ...
But he didn't say that they weren't allowed to play there.



And to the guy earlier who posted about indies not liking forgeworld, I can fully sympathise with them. In my store, there is an army about £600 of forgeworld imperial guard, to which I didn't recieve a penny. So. Y'know. That sucks.

DuskRaider
26-01-2012, 00:10
To be fair and to defend Raven, he only said that he doesn't like customers that bought (parts of) their armies at other stores. That could include other stores, other GWs, GW mailorder, FW, Scibor, etc. ...
But he didn't say that they weren't allowed to play there.

That in and of itself has nothing to do with the legality of Forge World. Seems like bad business practice, IMO... but who am I to judge? I don't own a shop so my opinion means little. Has nothing to do with the legality of the rules, so if that's his reasoning (which it seems to be the more you look back on his posts), then his argument is invalid.

xxRavenxx
26-01-2012, 00:30
That in and of itself has nothing to do with the legality of Forge World. Seems like bad business practice, IMO... but who am I to judge? I don't own a shop so my opinion means little. Has nothing to do with the legality of the rules, so if that's his reasoning (which it seems to be the more you look back on his posts), then his argument is invalid.



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


Read my god damned posts :(

Wishing
26-01-2012, 01:05
Except when it's the actual company that's making the statement... Sure, I can say I don't want to play against... say... an IG army because he's spamming Valks, but it doesn't mean that they're illegal. Kind of makes me look like a jerk if I say that actually, and that's how I feel when someone say the same about FW things. Just an opinion on how I feel about them I suppose, but it states the rules are official and they can be used in 40K... can't argue that too much, honestly.

You're right that if you look only at the FW book and nothing else, then it would seem like there isn't much to argue about. The problem is just that the FW books are part of a larger system, and there are other people that work for the same company that do consider FW's products to be separate from GW's main products and treat FW products differently. So the statement "don't treat these models differently" ends up being somewhat meaningless in the eyes of many of the consumers when the company that hired the people who wrote the statement actually does treat those models differently. So even though it seems so clear-cut if you only look at one aspect of the case, it actually becomes less straightforward when you look at it from different angles.

(Of course there are many people who refuse to look at it from different angles and therefore stick to insisting that they are right and everyone else is wrong, but that much should be clear.)

mdeceiver79
26-01-2012, 01:55
I have to say Ravens point (this thread seems to be people vs raven) is pretty valid.

In my local store theres a guy using a contemptor dreadnought with his khorn list. Its pretty evil and it just seems to be there for the rules. He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is. It is in the list purely for the competitive edge it gives him.

ForgottenLore
26-01-2012, 01:59
In my local store theres a guy using a contemptor dreadnought with his khorn list. Its pretty evil and it just seems to be there for the rules. He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is. It is in the list purely for the competitive edge it gives him.
So why play that guy? He sounds like someone who wouldn't be fun to play against, which is not FWs fault.

Bloodknight
26-01-2012, 02:11
He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is

Dunno, it is pretty expensive pointswise. You could get 2 normal dreads for it, and if they didn't have that stupid insanity table that doesn't give them a points break, that would be the better buy.

Mannimarco
26-01-2012, 03:01
In my local store theres a guy using a contemptor dreadnought with his khorn list. Its pretty evil and it just seems to be there for the rules. He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is. It is in the list purely for the competitive edge it gives him.

Taking a powerful yet expensive unit in a sub standard codex he is limiting himself even further by going mono Khorne? I cant see a problem with taking a contemptor really.

When it comes to todays codexes (or whatever this weeks plural is) taking the more competitive FW stuff isnt that big a deal.

Scribe of Khorne
26-01-2012, 03:27
Taking a powerful yet expensive unit in a sub standard codex he is limiting himself even further by going mono Khorne? I cant see a problem with taking a contemptor really.

When it comes to todays codexes (or whatever this weeks plural is) taking the more competitive FW stuff isnt that big a deal.

No kidding. Someone tell me how a 195+ Unit (that will have Rage if its a Khorne variant...stupid FW and their rage-hardon...:shifty:) compares even favorable to oh...a Furioso?

195 points
-1 WS
+1 S (who cares its a dread)
-1 A (it only comes with one arm, and a TL HB, you add 10 points for that second DCCW arm!)

Identical otherwise, **** is overpriced, for no reason other then to say 'no, Chaos cant have nice things'.


In my local store theres a guy using a contemptor dreadnought with his khorn list. Its pretty evil and it just seems to be there for the rules. He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is. It is in the list purely for the competitive edge it gives him.

If chaos gets the SW/BA/GK treatment, prepare to weep nightly if you think its 'pretty evil' and gives the guy a competitive edge when all its really doing is causing you to give him a mental edge by being afraid of it.

Lord-Caerolion
26-01-2012, 04:24
I have to say Ravens point (this thread seems to be people vs raven) is pretty valid.

In my local store theres a guy using a contemptor dreadnought with his khorn list. Its pretty evil and it just seems to be there for the rules. He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is. It is in the list purely for the competitive edge it gives him.

As opposed to people playing a Leafblower list, or Biker Nob spam? What about people taking psyflemen Dreads, or any other "broken" unit? The guy takes one model that's fairly powerful, in a list that he's voluntarily hampered by taking mono-Khorne. I don't really think you can call the guy a WAAC player. If anything, he's just relishing the fact that he's got a unit in his army that both matches his fluff and is fairly good.

AlphariusOmegon20
26-01-2012, 05:26
I have to say Ravens point (this thread seems to be people vs raven) is pretty valid.

In my local store theres a guy using a contemptor dreadnought with his khorn list. Its pretty evil and it just seems to be there for the rules. He shows people the rules smiling saying how powerful it is. It is in the list purely for the competitive edge it gives him.

No, it's prolly in the list because our normal dreads are utterly and without argument tootally craptastic. Have you had a look at the codex Chaos dread rules lately?

Colonel Jacka
26-01-2012, 11:39
What of the old squat rules? Would they still be "legal" today? Where in any of the rulebooks does it say the old squat codex is no longer legal? But we can't just toss out old codicis though. Would you say the Tau codex isn't legal because of its age and the edition it was written for? What about dark eldar before their update? /.

Bugger! :p Squats and a FW Tank. What rules is he using? :confused: :shifty: IG me thinks! :D

doubleT
26-01-2012, 12:20
Another point that I find utterly hilarious whenever someone says "I don't play against ...":

I always have to imagine my Death Korps entering a battlefield just to see army XY. Never would they say "We have no chance to win. We're not even gonna try. Let's get back home."

My HQ would laugh at me. Do I have no faith in my own army, skills or even luck? My Commissar would probably go berserk executing everyone in sight.

GabrielEvander
26-01-2012, 12:41
off topic but has to be said...
awesome tank Colonel Jacka.

Colonel Jacka
26-01-2012, 12:46
Point is you can still use Squats they are just another IG trooper. And they are the crew for Basilisk with a armoured compartment. A FW tank that is allowed in the IG codex.

Wishing
26-01-2012, 13:44
Another point that I find utterly hilarious whenever someone says "I don't play against ...":

I always have to imagine my Death Korps entering a battlefield just to see army XY. Never would they say "We have no chance to win. We're not even gonna try. Let's get back home."

My HQ would laugh at me. Do I have no faith in my own army, skills or even luck? My Commissar would probably go berserk executing everyone in sight.


Personally I would describe this as identifying with your model troops a little bit too much. That's like saying that your guardsmen clearly aren't having any fun dying on the battlefield, so why should you?

Basing real-life decisions on what you think your fictional soldiers might do if they were real doesn't sound like the way to a good time to me...

Konovalev
26-01-2012, 14:02
Point is you can still use Squats they are just another IG trooper. And they are the crew for Basilisk with a armoured compartment. A FW tank that is allowed in the IG codex.


You're sidestepping the issue, read it again. You imply that this thread is about the use of forgeworld MODELS in games. Which it isnt. I don't think anyone is arguing for or against the use of FW models. It's the rules that are being discussed here.

I'll say again, if someone showed up with a squat army and the squat codex, would it be 'legal'? I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Charax
26-01-2012, 14:07
I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Yup. Squats have never had a codex.

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 14:43
I kinda miss Squats :( I feel sad for losing them.

doubleT
26-01-2012, 14:55
Personally I would describe this as identifying with your model troops a little bit too much. That's like saying that your guardsmen clearly aren't having any fun dying on the battlefield, so why should you?

Basing real-life decisions on what you think your fictional soldiers might do if they were real doesn't sound like the way to a good time to me...

Guardsmen are there to die. It's their job. It's what they do best. I just have to bring more men than my enemy has bullets. ;)

Nah, the point of my post was that it's weak to say that you have no chance against army / list xy so you don't even try to compete against it. It really is a sign of weaknes not even to try to win. See what I mean?
Trying to find a way to beat a seemingly overpowered enemy can be fun, too.

Wishing
26-01-2012, 14:57
I know there was a recent thread about how to determine if an old army list is considered current or not, but I'd say that's only tangentially related to a FW model and army list debate... though I suppose it's all part of the same "what is legal?" issue.

Wishing
26-01-2012, 15:00
Nah, the point of my post was that it's weak to say that you have no chance against army / list xy so you don't even try to compete against it. It really is a sign of weaknes not even to try and win. See what I mean?
Trying to find a way to beat a seemingly overpowered enemy can be fun, too.

Sure, but that's a personal philosophy and not related to whether FW is "legal" or not. Your principle applies to homemade house rules as well, after all. Your bravado suggests you'd take on anything that your opponent can come up with, simply to show how tough and hard you are. :)

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 15:07
Last Sunday we had a 1250 point elimination 40K tourney and we let all sorts of FW models and lists in so long as the person bought the rules with them and they were legal for 40K (IE, no SHV's or the like) we ended up with a DkoK list, Elysian list, Khorne Renegades and Heretics list and a Siege assault vanguard list (with an LR achillies) and it was a lot of fun. I had to face the SAV list first game and immobilised the achillies first turn. His fault for bringing a tank that basically has big flashy lights on it saying "i'm super expensive, shoot me first!"

Wishing
26-01-2012, 15:15
Last Sunday we had a 1250 point elimination 40K tourney and we let all sorts of FW models and lists in so long as the person bought the rules with them and they were legal for 40K (IE, no SHV's or the like) we ended up with a DkoK list, Elysian list, Khorne Renegades and Heretics list and a Siege assault vanguard list (with an LR achillies) and it was a lot of fun. I had to face the SAV list first game and immobilised the achillies first turn. His fault for bringing a tank that basically has big flashy lights on it saying "i'm super expensive, shoot me first!"

That sounds like a lot of fun, good show!

doubleT
26-01-2012, 15:16
I played against an Achilles once, too. Immobilised it in turn 2 and destroyed the weapon in turn 3. I don't know why people complain about it.

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 15:25
Cause it;s incredibly hard to actually wreck the bleeding thing. But pretty easy to make that 350+ pt model useless to them. Specially as we were in a 1250 pt tourney and the guy was using one. It is just a "mwahahaha, my vehicle is unkillable. . . .wait you what? now it can't move or shoot it's main weapon? Not fair!"

Hendarion
26-01-2012, 16:01
You are a broken record. If someone disagrees with you, they MUST be wrong, even if something is subjective. More importantly, this time, you ARE wrong.
>> "you suck", "no you suck", "no you", "no you", "nooo you!", "no youuu!" <<

Seriously?

Konovalev
26-01-2012, 16:24
>> "you suck", "no you suck", "no you", "no you", "nooo you!", "no youuu!" <<

Seriously?

This is warseer. You honestly expected a higher level of discourse? Have you read any of the other threads in general, including this one?

Captain Collius
26-01-2012, 16:25
its fun watching my devestator squad of las cannons blast ridiculous tanks out of the water. LR Achillies you are not overpowered but you are fun to hit

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 17:02
its fun watching my devestator squad of las cannons blast ridiculous tanks out of the water. LR Achillies you are not overpowered but you are fun to hit This was my point exactly when i played against it. I had 3 Las/Plas Razors and a Land Raider (decided to run a standard one) all firing at his Achillies turn one and made it useless for the rest of the game. Sure it;s hard to actually blow up unless you're using S10 AP1 weapons but it;s not hard to make it redundant. Same as the old monoliths.

Mannimarco
26-01-2012, 17:03
If you're using lascannons against a land raider then your game plan has went wrong somewhere.

Im kinnda hoping to fight one of these things, my new rapiers need a worthy target.

Captain Collius
26-01-2012, 17:07
manni i know you don't thinmk they're effective. but what elese would you use demolisher (turn 1 not in range) DCCW (need to assault) so that pretty much leaves lascannons in my armory for now. (till the damocles rhino gets here)

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 17:18
Las cannons were the only thing i could really shoot it with that had a chance of doing damage in turn 1. Plus the guy was gloating about it being so good i just had too. It's like one of those things.

Mannimarco
26-01-2012, 18:04
They toned down its abilities somewhat from the test rules did they not?

I still fancy my chances with rapiers, ordnance lascannons anyone?

Yeah when somebody is gloating about their new super unit of doom its like a challenge to take it out. People treat my chemical mortars the exact same way.

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 18:06
yeah, well chem mortars are a bit different to uber armoured land raider of armourness. Tbh i really did feel he could have done a lot better if he didn;t run the stupid achillies. Like fit in another 3 ironclad dreads which would have been a lot scarier.

Captain Collius
26-01-2012, 19:43
yeah the achillies my be melta nd lance proof but i can still wreck it with enough las (oh i got weapon destroyed on my first roll so i chose the thinderfire, then imbolised so if my tanks or troop got in range it could still damage but it was severely limited

xxRavenxx
26-01-2012, 19:47
yeah the achillies my be melta nd lance proof but i can still wreck it with enough las (oh i got weapon destroyed on my first roll so i chose the thinderfire, then imbolised so if my tanks or troop got in range it could still damage but it was severely limited

Out of interest, do dark eldar just lose to it? I havnt directly read its rules, but have seen complaints along the lines of the blessed hull rules of the templars.

Vaktathi
26-01-2012, 19:57
Out of interest, do dark eldar just lose to it? I havnt directly read its rules, but have seen complaints along the lines of the blessed hull rules of the templars.
Basically immune to lance/melta penetration abilities and -1 on all pen hit rolls. That said, it no longer has -1 on glancing hits and is a bit more expensive than it was in its trial rules, doesn't have an assault ramp and only holds 6 dudes. After it's revision from its initial rules it's not so bad, but still not really something that was necessary or good game design. It's one of the few FW things I've ever had an issue with.

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 19:59
It's a good vehicle against a lot of armies due to it only really being able to reliably be taken out by S9+ and can only be destroyed reliably by S10. It;s just not as amazing as it;s made out to be, mainly due to it;s 350+ pricetag and it;s teeny transport capacity of 6. And seeing as LR's are supposed to be heavily armoured assault transports the achillies kinda defeats the purpose of using a LR in the first place. If you wanted the Thunderfire cannon then you could probly afford 3 for the price of 1 Achillies and any other land raider is like 100 points cheaper.

Radium
26-01-2012, 20:01
Dark Eldar still have Haywire (both the guns and grenades) to deal with it. But they may have a slightly tougher time than most other armies.

Colonel Jacka
26-01-2012, 22:18
You're sidestepping the issue, read it again. You imply that this thread is about the use of forgeworld MODELS in games. Which it isnt. I don't think anyone is arguing for or against the use of FW models. It's the rules that are being discussed here. I'll say again, if someone showed up with a squat army and the squat codex, would it be 'legal'? I think the answer is fairly obvious.

No I'm just not taking it seriously like some people here. Also I mentioned my points on the "rules" well back. Try not to repeat myself. I not the one who has the issue.

And what would the answer be if someone turned up with a list?


Yup. Squats have never had a codex.

Correct. That's why they are Guardsmen in my Army.


I kinda miss Squats :( I feel sad for losing them.

Go over to the project log, there lots of them in my thread.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?237913-12TH-CADIAN-MECH-REGT-(Abhuman-heavy!)

Wishing
26-01-2012, 22:21
Plus the guy was gloating about it being so good i just had too. It's like one of those things.

I think this sounds like a perfect example of the wrong way to approach FW, too. "Haha, look at the amazing rules on this FW thing, I'm gonna batter you" is both obnoxious, likely to turn people off playing against FW models, and likely to disappoint you when your thing isn't as good as you thought. I like to think that the idea with FW is that its customers should be mature enough to buy the models for being gorgeous models, and then maybe look at the rules as a secondary priority, not the other way round... even if that idea doesn't hold up to the reality of wargame fans in general.

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 22:38
I think this sounds like a perfect example of the wrong way to approach FW, too. "Haha, look at the amazing rules on this FW thing, I'm gonna batter you" is both obnoxious, likely to turn people off playing against FW models, and likely to disappoint you when your thing isn't as good as you thought. I like to think that the idea with FW is that its customers should be mature enough to buy the models for being gorgeous models, and then maybe look at the rules as a secondary priority, not the other way round... even if that idea doesn't hold up to the reality of wargame fans in general.
Well he wasn't so much bragging like it was unstoppable and he was going to batter me he was just bragging cause he had one and saying it was awesome. I think it was his first game with it, so i guess he didn't really know how good it was actually going to be. It's one of those units that looks better on paper. So i was just hoping to las cannon it death as i went first and wanted the only time he touched it that game to be putting it on the table then back in the case. Kinda harsh but these things need to be done.

Wishing
26-01-2012, 23:50
Well he wasn't so much bragging like it was unstoppable and he was going to batter me he was just bragging cause he had one and saying it was awesome. I think it was his first game with it, so i guess he didn't really know how good it was actually going to be. It's one of those units that looks better on paper. So i was just hoping to las cannon it death as i went first and wanted the only time he touched it that game to be putting it on the table then back in the case. Kinda harsh but these things need to be done.

I guess I don't get it - if he wasn't being obnoxious, but was just happy about his new model, then I don't see the point in teaching him a lesson. But I'm of the philosophy that I only game with friends and I want all of us to have a good time, so actively trying to reduce the amount of fun my opponent will have seems pretty alien to me (unless I misread you and he thought it was fun that the tank got wrecked). This has got nothing to do with FW though so is probably a discussion for somewhere else.

Noobie2k7
26-01-2012, 23:57
Yea, probly. But i guess i just wasn't explaining it well enough anyway >.< He was being obnoxious but not in the "my FW model is going to hammer you" just in the "my FW model is better than your models cause it's more expensive and prettier"

But yes, my local GW actively encourages people to bring along FW models and use lists in the IA books so i find it kinda strange that some places don't.