Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: How fluffy became a ruleset.

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    How fluffy became a ruleset.

    So I've noticed there seems to be allot of difference between "fluffy" lists and normal army lists. I personally dont understand some of this. Don't take me wrong, the thing I like most about warhammer is infact reading the novels, not so much the playing or the painting. However, some of this appears to be utter bull.

    I can understand how one could say that playing plaguemarines in a "Emperor's children" army is unfluffy, however some of these "fluff rules" are getting creepy.
    For example earlier today i saw an Emperor's Children list, which called itself fluffy because he had 6 units each of 6 men strong (6 ofcourse being the favoured number). Now dont take me wrong, but that following a small part of fluff which summed up a bonus rule in the previous edition does not dictate what is fluffy.

    Allow me to elaborate: For some reason everyone thinks that a fluffy iron warriors army is a mainly undedicated army (which I can't argue with) that favours shooting as a whole with some crazy melee units to "storm the breach". There should be some artillery and allot of obliterators. This is because they are a siege force, its their tools of the trade. Now what strikes me as odd is that what I named above isn't automatically the best setup for a siege, yet everyone is convinced this is how an Iron Warriors army should be set up for it to be fluffy. This is ofcourse because previous edition, the Iron warrior's special rules stated you couldn't take marks, were allowed basilisks and the like, and had no limit on obliterators. To not take most of that was to basically handicap yourself with restrictions and not take any of the benefits.

    Now ofcourse there is a nuance to all of this, I would say an Iron Warriors army would usually be led by an undivided lord or daemon prince, and not a slaaneshi sorcerer. However, I don't agree with this in some cases pretty much written in stone army list template with which you have to start to be fluffy, which in most cases is based solely on rules from the previous ruleset, or the fluff that supported those rules.

    Conclusively I'd like to say that a fluffy army should be an army with a story to be told. It should have a decent amount of leaders for it troops and vice versa, if its a force joined by a splinter faction of something else, that splinter faction should be represented by a leader aswell. Ideally, one should have a written story on which he bases his army. Fluff should in no case be a ruleset that gives you a little list to tick off when you avoid another parameter however.

    You shouldn't go

    All cult troops or marked troops - check
    All units have favoured number - check
    No other marks or cults apart from the main one - check
    Hq marked with main mark - check

    Ok Im fluffy.
    Last edited by Sepharine; 17-02-2009 at 14:58.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts