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.

I've gotten into Wikipedia editing and here are my 2 additions to the 40k entry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer_40%2C000#Influences

(under background)

===Influences===
The game draws heavily from other historical, fantasy and science fiction settings.  The most obvious influence is [[Frank Herbert]]'s [[Dune (novel)]] series which also featured an immortal God Emperor, armies of fanatical superhumans, psychic navigators and mysterious guardians of lost technology.  [[JRR Tolkien]]'s [[Lord of the Rings]] and its successors (including GW's own [[Warhammer Fantasy Battles]]) provided inspiration for the elf-like Eldar and the Space Orks.  [[Michael Moorcock]]'s [[Elric]] series and other books provide inspiration for the Chaos gods and their mutant servants. 

Games Workshop has been criticized for jealously protecting their own intellectual property while liberally borrowing from other sources.

 

 

(under gameplay)

<h3>Criticisms</h3>

The design team has been criticized for inadequate proofreading and editing. For example in the 3rd Edition Chaos Space Marine codex different statistics were given for the same tank in the same book. It was corrected in a later edition. More alarmingly the 4th edition rule book is missing some key explanations. For example the rules for hitting and wounding with ordinance weapons are omitted although they are referred to in the rules for blast weapons. Players are told to resolve any rules questions by rolling a die and seeing who scores higher. Another common criticism is that new army lists are not sufficiently play-tested. Players claim that certain armies are much more powerful than others. Game designers have conceded that some armies are more appropriate for beginners and others require veteran players to use effectively. In the end Games Workshop has said that balanced armies are less important to them than creating a fun, friendly game.

 

Comments?  Additions?

Jealously doesn't make much sense when guarding your own IP. I'd go with something closer to zealously.

Try to cite as much as possible from published works, articles and other referencable material. Though I rarely edit on Wikipedia, I read enough articles and article discussions to know they'll thump you on using hearsay and other uncited source material. Despite that, sounds bang on target (though I'd also take into consideration bigchris's advice).

I think the most obvious influence on 40K's main race is Starship Troopers - novel, not the film. The novel features marines in suits of power armour who drop from orbit and use jump packs. Space Marines are so ripped from ST.

Posted By SuperJohn on 09/10/2006 6:42 AM
I think the most obvious influence on 40K's main race is Starship Troopers - novel, not the film. The novel features marines in suits of power armour who drop from orbit and use jump packs. Space Marines are so ripped from ST.

d'oh!  Totally forgot them. 

As for cites can anyone cite specific examples of bad editing?

"defend the enemies of mankind" typo in the main book.

Can anyone type out an error or at least give a page cite.

You could always use my favorite typo Kyoto Sama:
p.84 of the Cities of Death codex "Every man is a but spark in the dark"

Not really a rules typo.

Its spot on, but you should put it on encyclopedia dramatica, Kyoto-sama. Wikipedia is as anal as Katja Kassin.

yeah they both got zorched. I'd still like rule errors from the current edition, I think a version of that with page cites would get through.

Another influence you could cite is a late 70's or early 80's British comic (put out by the same people that did Judge Dredd, I believe) called Nemesis the Warlock. In it, you have an inquisition style religious order that runs the Earth and sends armies throughout the galaxy to eliminate aliens and make room for humanity.
The clothes, armor, and philosophies in the series very closely resemble their 40k counterparts.

  I'm not sure, but I think, the same comic book company put out another series called Strontium Dog.  I think it was from one of those books that GW made a direct  copy of a character, right down to a pose from the cover of one of the books, for an IG trooper in an early version of 40k. 

Just found the link for Nemesis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_the_Warlock

You know, I always thought that the Space Marines were more of a blend of Sardukar and Starship Troopers. Super fanatical and loyal to ONE man. Then add in the technological base and it just gets better

Inspirations for the Sardaukar can be seen in the Crusader military orders, and in Hitler's SS. The new point about the Sardaukar was their recruitment from a hostile planet which made them tougher than run of the mill galactic citizens. This concept was also used in Harry Harrison's "Death Planet" series.

Why not just start a new entry on Wikipedia for "Rules errors in Warhammer 40k" instead? Might just as well make a definitive listing of all the foul ups, and it would certainly require a category all of its own. Can then link to it from the main 40k article.

This is a laudable enterprise Kyoto, but any article that is born from an idea like "GW should be criticized, here's why..." is inherently POV.

Try starting over with references to any specific lawsuits involving GW if you want to tackle the IP issue. I ran a quick search on google and couldn't find anything concrete, all references seem to be "I heard GW sued this guy, blah blah..." There must be an e-trail somewhere if such lawsuits existed.

Also, for Influences, try and draw extreme undeniable similarities, specifically names matched with personalities that are ripped straight from other sources.
e.g. God Emperor of Mankind's Golden Path = God Emperor of Dune's Golden Path. 40k's ancient elf-like Eldar = Tolkein's ancient-elf Eldar race, also known as the Starpeople. Marine Power Armour = Power Armour from Tom swift and His Jetmarine or from Starship Troopers.

The Dune/LOTR/Moorcock stuff you had above was good, but lacked cited parallels with which to substantiate your claims.


As for the rules errors, your best bet will probably be to site published rules and compare them to later designers statements that they "didn't mean that" or to the FAQs themselves.

You can also site a rule and show how it is impossible to accomplish/enforce when in combination with other cited rules, and then link references to the numerous repeated online debates about such rules.

Also, check out the recent WD article on RAW. IIRC there was a statement which boiled down to "we didn't mean that, but we wrote it, so that's the way it is".


What you had above was good, but it falls apart when you state "Players claim...." or "Designers have conceded...." without backing it up with a reference. One can just as easily state that "Players claim that the game works perfectly as is and that anyone who complains is simply working for GW's competition." Without concrete reference, there is no weight behind the words.