40k Privateer Press style ... Is it possible?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**ArmyC**

49 year old guy. Been playing wargames since the 2nd grade. Avalon Hill until 2000. Mage Knight 2000 to 2005. WARMACHINE 2005 to 2009. 40k since last summer.

I am all 40k now. I own 20,000 points across 4 races.

Love 40k, should have started back in 3rd edition when it was presented to me, but oh well.

One thing I hate is the release schedule. I hate how some races get totally stale. I like variety. I like being able to play my army different ways. I loved how WARMACHINE allowed you to change the way your army played by buying a $10 warcaster model. I also loved how each new book had something for every faction. Everyone got new stuff at the same time, and it was great to play week to week and see the strategy evolve.

Now, WARMACHINE is switching over to Forces of WARMACHINE books. They are like codexes of sorts. One thing that is cool though is they have fluff oriented lists that grant synergistic abilities that you can only get if you stay within the confines of the list choices.

And now to the point. I would love for 40k to move to this type of release schedule. I do not know the marketing, production, distribution, etc. limitations. I think Spearhead is a small effort in this direction, because several races will get new stuff. I do think it would be difficult to transition. I think they could do it through White Dwarf. I think two White Dwarf issues per year could be printed with a cardstock cover, and have the datasheets for the new releases scheduled to come out over the next 6 months.

This would not stop codex releases.

Perhaps a way to accomplish this would be to publish alternate FOC lists that came with updated abilities in White Dwarf. That way they only have to playtest one list per race. But over the course of codex release cycles, it would keep the race up to date. Consider if Dark Eldar players had 10 or 15 alternate FOC lists that expanded the fluff, and granted some updated abilities, or maybe unique charactures. It would be a way to keep every race fresh.

Nirvanha ?? Hell in the hobby store ?? Crazy talk ??

**jake**

I liked Rackham's old release plan for Confrontation (back before it went plastic). Every month (or two) you'd see a few new models released, with each army getting something new about every other release. So you could count on getting a few new units every year! Which was totally awesome! It was great to have a constantly evolving army, and a constantly changing game. The only real downside was that every now and then a race would go forever without a new release (16 months for Orcs) or get a fairly lame release.

I was disappointed to return to 40k after 10 years and see that GW was still clinging to their traditional release patterns. As a new Tyranid player I'm pretty sad to know I probably won't see a tervigon, tyrannofex, harpy or spore pod kit in the next few years, but that marines will see several kits in the next 12 months. There's no good reason why GW shouldn't change their support structure to something that would allow them to support new/updated armies with a selection of releases, while still providing 1-3 new things for every army each year.

**wuestenfux**

The WM/Hordes books are absoluted great,
while I dislike some of their miniature.
All are metal and some are hard to assemble.

**themocaw**

IIRC, Privateer Press has stated that the Forces books for WARMACHINE (gotta write it in all caps) and HORDES are just to update all of their factions to Mk II rules. After they finish that, they're going back to the old model of giving a little something for everyone with every new book.

**ArmyC**

Well, I am out of WM and H, but I am glad they are doing that.

**The Power Cosmic**

themocaw wrote:IIRC, Privateer Press has stated that the Forces books for WARMACHINE (gotta write it in all caps) and HORDES are just to update all of their factions to Mk II rules. After they finish that, they're going back to the old model of giving a little something for everyone with every new book.

I've read that too. From the head guy Matt Wilson, if I remember correctly.

**Platuan4th**

wuestenfux wrote:
Most are metal and some are hard to assemble.

FYP.

PP sells plastics now. All the WM Factions except Mercs have plastic heavy Jacks, and there's a few plastic units.

**Mad Rabbit**

People will probably hate me for this, but I thought the 3rd Edition rulebook was the best by FAR. It contained a sort of universal codex that included every race's army lists. That way, you know all the enemies you could face and you had all the rules on hand in one volume.
I'd pay twice as much for a rulebook that contained all the army lists too.

**ArmyC**

I like that idea as well.

**JohnHwangDD**

I don't want to constantly have to buy rulebooks on top of Codices.

**ProtoClone**

I have always felt the way the codices are released, as well as the rule book, is really messed up. So any way that makes it smoother and cleaner is an improvement...just as long as all the armies are able to play within the current edition of the rules. None of this "well this codex was released during 4th edition rules but was designed with 5th edition rules in mind as well, so it should be fine" style of thinking.

**JohnHwangDD**

Instead, it should be like PP: "this is newer, shiner, and flat-out better. Buy this new rulebook and new minis, right NOW, or your army simply won't be competitive anymore".

Yeah, there's a better business model for the consumer...

At least, with GW, all I really need is a new Codex when it comes out. I play whatever's armies are still hot (or at least warm) of my several armies, and all is well.

**themocaw**

JohnHwangDD wrote:Instead, it should be like PP: "this is newer, shiner, and flat-out better. Buy this new rulebook and new minis, right NOW, or your army simply won't be competitive anymore".

Yeah, there's a better business model for the consumer...

At least, with GW, all I really need is a new Codex when it comes out. I play whatever's armies are still hot (or at least warm) of my several armies, and all is well.

Eh, you pays your money and you makes your choice. I can't say which company is better, except in one regard: stat cards. Every other company releases game stats with their minis, can't understand why the biggest and bestest doesn't. :/

**JohnHwangDD**

At this point, I think PP is essentially the same as GW. PP has completed their initial "Rogue Trader" phase of expansion and is moving into a 40k 2E consolidation / 3E streamlining. And GW's coming over from the other side, now that BA & Orks can (finally) make 'bot armies, the PP 'jack thing isn't even uber-unique.

The big question will be whether you like your game sized & flavored as 30mm steampunk or 28mm gothic.

**insaniak**

To an extent, GW are moving into this sort of release style. Yes, Codexes are still staggered and in some cases take far too long to be updated... but the move into scenario books like Apocalypse and Planetstrike gives them the opportunity to give everyone some love, and gives players new ways to use old armies.

**Disposable Hero**

What I'd like is something, which many wil probably believe to be tantamount to the Horus heresy, different from anything mentioned so far.

First, I'd like a major rules simplification. The rules and costs are the biggest deterrents to many people. I think revised rules that are more universal, as well as the removal of all the ridiculous vehicle rules, will fix this problem. Also, the rulebook structure should be changed so it is diminished in size and can be purchased for about the price of a codex, give or take five US dollars.

Second, I'd like factional consolidation. This is primarily aimed at Space Marines, but also extends to the Inquisition forces as well. Merging the different SM and Inquisition factions into one, all-encompassing codex would reduce the cost and clutter, as well as silencing those like myself who believe that the various Space Marine factions are overexposed. Personally, I think that only the SPace Wolves and Black Templars, due to their structure and its deviations from the Codex Astartes, should have their own factions. The SM need to take a cue from their Traitor bretheren and make their special factions into specialist units.

Thirdly, we need mass-market distribution in more hobby and craft stores. This allows the sales of more models, rulebooks, and codexes and will allow GW to do the thing they love the most - make more money. We also need a major price drop. This will encourage more model purchases, putting more money into the hungry pockets of GW.

Finally, we need a major change in the sturucture of starter forces. Instead of the Battleforce and Megaforce, each army should have a box set containing its codex, one HQ choice, 2 Troops choices, and a rulebook about the size of the Assault on Black Reach and Battle for Maccrage ones. This eliminates Black Reach and Maccrage, and would provide a superior starting model for players.

**JohnHwangDD**

@DH: I see where you're coming from, but that kind of wholesale shakeup doesn't seem warranted

1. 5E rules are quite good, and if you want a streamlined ruelebook, the BfM / AoBR books can be gotten cheaply secondhand. Those of us who like large books and large print type can be happy with the regular rulebook.

2. GW makes plenty money with multiple SMs, so I doubt they'll step backwards and consolidate them. If they didn't, Templars never would have been added.

3. GW doesn't want to saturate the market with cheap product like McDonalds or Bic, especially given how long their products last (decades).

4. GW wants people to buy whole armies at full price, not small starters under bulk discount.

Given that GW continues to make more money on less product, supporting their "superior niche" model will continue or accelerate.

**Quintinus**

Disposable Hero wrote:
First, I'd like a major rules simplification.

Crimony, the game is simple enough as it is! What do you want? "If you play Imperial Space marines, on a 4+ you win the game. If you play Chaos, on a 6+ you win."

**Disposable Hero**

JohnHwangDD wrote:@DH: I see where you're coming from, but that kind of wholesale shakeup doesn't seem warranted

1. 5E rules are quite good, and if you want a streamlined ruelebook, the BfM / AoBR books can be gotten cheaply secondhand. Those of us who like large books and large print type can be happy with the regular rulebook.

2. GW makes plenty money with multiple SMs, so I doubt they'll step backwards and consolidate them. If they didn't, Templars never would have been added.

3. GW doesn't want to saturate the market with cheap product like McDonalds or Bic, especially given how long their products last (decades).

4. GW wants people to buy whole armies at full price, not small starters under bulk discount.

Given that GW continues to make more money on less product, supporting their "superior niche" model will continue or accelerate.

1. I've been trying to do that. I'm stuck with 4e rules right this second. All I've heard of 5e is that it adds in more new rules.
2. The problem is that multiple chapters for specialized forces clutters the market and simply adds in variants that appeal to few members of the fan community.
3. That's not what I'm saying. What I meant was that more hobby shops need to carry 40K, and I would also like to see them at my local Michael's.
4. GW would go for it because it would allow them their heart's desire: more money. In the past, they did similar things with the WHF army boxes.

Vladsimpaler wrote:
Disposable Hero wrote:
First, I'd like a major rules simplification.

Crimony, the game is simple enough as it is! What do you want? "If you play Imperial Space marines, on a 4+ you win the game. If you play Chaos, on a 6+ you win."

My beef lies with the Assault phase almost exclusively. Sweeping advances, consolidation, and retreats make life too hard for Warhammer players.

**JohnHwangDD**

@DH:

1. 5E cleaned up a lot of 4E things. 5E plays much smoother and cleaner than 4E. Much more comprehensive than just "adding rules", because they also took some rules away and clarified a number of things as well. You really should try 5E.

2. You say that, but GW's approach to supporting sales probably proves you wrong.

3. You asked for broad availability and low prices, like McDonalds / WalMart. That just isn't GW's approach, given that they have their online store to reach everybody.

4. GW is margin-conscious. They think they make more money selling fewer, more expensive items. If they continue to do well, that won't change.

**Tacobake**

I used to bitch about 40k in third ed (experimental rules, crappy codices, may as well play from the back of the book) but I think they pretty much have their act together these days tbh. Crappy Dark Angels (imo) was made up for with Blood Angels. Dark Eldar are waiting to get done perfect when they are done. Space Wolves were good. Stompa was and is cool. It would seem that Lost and the Damned are pretty done with, which is... OK I guess.

The only thing remaining is Inquisition. After that FAQs are better? and we have the Adepticon FAQ as well, GW even going so far as naming our own Benevolent Overlord Mr. Regul in its own FAQs.

Honestly I think GW is "OK". I mean there is Forge World too don't forget. The only thing I would like to see is consistency (again) about White Dwarf, what used to be called Chapter Approved. I mean Chapter Approved is great but they need what you could call a consistent output with accompanying articles online and in a yearly supplement or available as print-outs at stores that sort of thing.

Not that I am going to say no to whatever freebies they want to throw us. And the painting articles!

**Mad Rabbit**

Disposable Hero wrote:

Second, I'd like factional consolidation. This is primarily aimed at Space Marines, but also extends to the Inquisition forces as well. Merging the different SM and Inquisition factions into one, all-encompassing codex would reduce the cost and clutter, as well as silencing those like myself who believe that the various Space Marine factions are overexposed. Personally, I think that only the SPace Wolves and Black Templars, due to their structure and its deviations from the Codex Astartes, should have their own factions. The SM need to take a cue from their Traitor bretheren and make their special factions into specialist units.

How can I put this simply?

NO. A THOUSAND TIMES NO.

Do you have ANY idea how much Chaos players hate this generic new book? The old one had the rules for all the traitor legions in one book. I could see combining BA/DA in the SM book with some special rules, but pushing everything into one codex would mean:
1. You'd lose stuff. Otherwise, that codex would be too huge and too good
2. You think cookie cutter builds are common now? Wait until there's ONE optimized build from ONE book.

If all of the codexes were like the Great CSM codex that we all loved so dearly and less like the current edition SMurf and BA codexes, 40k would be a better game.

**Disposable Hero**

Mad Rabbit wrote:
Disposable Hero wrote:

Second, I'd like factional consolidation. This is primarily aimed at Space Marines, but also extends to the Inquisition forces as well. Merging the different SM and Inquisition factions into one, all-encompassing codex would reduce the cost and clutter, as well as silencing those like myself who believe that the various Space Marine factions are overexposed. Personally, I think that only the SPace Wolves and Black Templars, due to their structure and its deviations from the Codex Astartes, should have their own factions. The SM need to take a cue from their Traitor bretheren and make their special factions into specialist units.

How can I put this simply?

NO. A THOUSAND TIMES NO.

Do you have ANY idea how much Chaos players hate this generic new book? The old one had the rules for all the traitor legions in one book. I could see combining BA/DA in the SM book with some special rules, but pushing everything into one codex would mean:
1. You'd lose stuff. Otherwise, that codex would be too huge and too good
2. You think cookie cutter builds are common now? Wait until there's ONE optimized build from ONE book.

If all of the codexes were like the Great CSM codex that we all loved so dearly and less like the current edition SMurf and BA codexes, 40k would be a better game.

I loved the old CSM codex too. The problem is this: How do you check if someone is playing a "pure" version of an Undivided army? You can't.

**ArmyC**

All I want is for my investment in GW product to pay me dividends in hobby happiness.

A big part of this is getting new toys to play with and new ways to play with the old toys.

GW could do a much better job at doing this. IMHO

**Mark1130**

I agree ArmyC.

**sebster**

Vladsimpaler wrote:Crimony, the game is simple enough as it is! What do you want? "If you play Imperial Space marines, on a 4+ you win the game. If you play Chaos, on a 6+ you win."

The game is tactically fairly simple, the overall complexity of strategic concepts are about right for a beer and pretzels game. There’s reward for intelligent and experienced players, but it isn’t so sophisticated as to be inaccessible to new and casual players.

But the rules themselves are an horrendous mess. They’re probably about twice as long as they need to be, containing a very strange mix of abstraction and extreme detail. The rules could be streamlined and cut to about half their current length without losing any tactical elements out of the game.

ArmyC wrote:All I want is for my investment in GW product to pay me dividends in hobby happiness.

A big part of this is getting new toys to play with and new ways to play with the old toys.

GW could do a much better job at doing this. IMHO

GW grew much of the current list in the style you propose, a lot of units were first created in Chapter Approved pieces in White Dwarf, many others came out of even less official sources than that. Even now we’re seeing units taken from Forge World and added into the new codices. However, the long a game is around the harder it becomes to add new units without negatively impacting the way an army plays.

I do agree that armies shouldn’t spend five or ten years in the wilderness, but I think that could be solved with a quicker release schedule. It should be possible to cycle through every codex within three years.

**Disposable Hero**

sebster wrote:
Vladsimpaler wrote:Crimony, the game is simple enough as it is! What do you want? "If you play Imperial Space marines, on a 4+ you win the game. If you play Chaos, on a 6+ you win."

The game is tactically fairly simple, the overall complexity of strategic concepts are about right for a beer and pretzels game. There’s reward for intelligent and experienced players, but it isn’t so sophisticated as to be inaccessible to new and casual players.

But the rules themselves are an horrendous mess. They’re probably about twice as long as they need to be, containing a very strange mix of abstraction and extreme detail. The rules could be streamlined and cut to about half their current length without losing any tactical elements out of the game.

QFT

**Mad Rabbit**

Disposable Hero wrote:I loved the old CSM codex too. The problem is this: How do you check if someone is playing a "pure" version of an Undivided army? You can't.

Do you mean in game terms? No marks other than Chaos Undivided. No daemons other than Furies. Done. That's how it was in the old codex, and that's impossible to go around. Those rules said, "look, you can have this cool Undivided legion stuff, but you give up the cult goodies."

If you're talking in terms of fluff, it's pretty hard to make unfluffy armies with the restrictions that were given. For example, unfluffy Night Lords are tough to make with only 1 Heavy slot, 4 Fast slots, and no 0-1 for Raptors.

My point is that I am completely against consolidating factions in terms of army lists. If they released a book that contained army lists for all of the loyalists, I wouldn't complain. But basing them all off of a very bland vanilla list like the current CSM dex is too much.

**JohnHwangDD**

Mad Rabbit wrote:If you're talking in terms of fluff, it's pretty hard to make unfluffy armies with the restrictions that were given. For example, unfluffy Night Lords are tough to make with only 1 Heavy slot, 4 Fast slots, and no 0-1 for Raptors.

Aside from not getting the bonus Fast, you can still field that army today: umarked / MoCU models, 0-1 Heavy, 3 Fast, unlimited Ratpors...

**Disposable Hero**

I won't give up my positions, but I will apologize for being inflammatory.
May the discussion continue as previous.