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.

Right, bit of a here....

Just been reading through the thread about Spiky Loyalist Marines, and read a post about how using an Inquisition Army and the 'Allies' rule you can once again incorporate such delights as Cultists and that into your army.

But I say, why stop there? (sorry, going to be a lot of these in this post, because I've just found out I like playing with them).

Codecies etc are only essential when a) Playing a pick up game against a newcomer and b) Playing a Tournament. Beyond that, the 40k Universe is a bleeding great Sandbox!

Now I am aware perfectly aware that sadly, not every game has access to a decent and stable gaming community, and thus, find it harder not so much to embrace but practice this philosophy.

But why be restricted to what is Codex or Tournament Legal? Want to field your Lost And The Damned? I say go for it. Makes variety for me as an opponent. And even if you want to mish mash the Inquisition, Marine and Guard Codecies to represent your vision of it, I say go for it. The points value to power might be very slightly off, what with units being priced according to the contents of the rest of it's respective armies, but surely if you are playing to this tune, winning is of less importance than having a satisfying, and interesting game?

It disheartens me somewhat when people get overly antsie about a list being 'dropped' by GW, as generally speaking it just means you can't use it in a Tournament, but for home play, it's more than legal. Likewise for conversions. So, a looted Vehicle now has fairly generic rules in the Orky Codex, and yet you built yours to look like a slightly Orkified Land Raider. You want it is a Land Raider? Fine by me, as long as I know.

So why so restricted when not participating in a Tournament? Yeah, there is Apocalypse for some, but that deals with big games. Why limit the spirit of fun and a laugh to big engagements?

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But why be restricted to what is Codex or Tournament Legal? Want to field your Lost And The Damned? I say go for it. Makes variety for me as an opponent. And even if you want to mish mash the Inquisition, Marine and Guard Codecies to represent your vision of it, I say go for it. The points value to power might be very slightly off, what with units being priced according to the contents of the rest of it's respective armies, but surely if you are playing to this tune, winning is of less importance than having a satisfying, and interesting game?

It disheartens me somewhat when people get overly antsie about a list being 'dropped' by GW, as generally speaking it just means you can't use it in a Tournament, but for home play, it's more than legal. Likewise for conversions. So, a looted Vehicle now has fairly generic rules in the Orky Codex, and yet you built yours to look like a slightly Orkified Land Raider. You want it is a Land Raider? Fine by me, as long as I know.

So why so restricted when not participating in a Tournament? Yeah, there is Apocalypse for some, but that deals with big games. Why limit the spirit of fun and a laugh to big engagements?

2 reasons:
1) One of the best things about 40k & WHFB is that they have a huge install base. You can travel the country, or the world, and find people who are playing the same game. This "pick up and play" advantage is lost as soon as you go deeply into home-brew rules; at that point, you may as well grab one of the (many!) other miniature games and run with it. (Disclaimer: I play wargames to do battle with my enemies, not to bask in the fluffy goodness of the setting. YMMV.)

2) Some of us are tired of sinking time into preparing an army, which will later be invalidated by the whims of GW. Most of my gaming is done at tournaments these days - I have the disposable income necessary to enjoy the hobby, but not so much time that I can game weekly with friends. As such, if I'm going to build an army, it damn well needs to be tournament-legal, or I'm expending time for less return than I'd get from working on a tournament force.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Right, bit of a here....

Just been reading through the thread about Spiky Loyalist Marines, and read a post about how using an Inquisition Army and the 'Allies' rule you can once again incorporate such delights as Cultists and that into your army.

But I say, why stop there? (sorry, going to be a lot of these in this post, because I've just found out I like playing with them).

Codecies etc are only essential when a) Playing a pick up game against a newcomer and b) Playing a Tournament. Beyond that, the 40k Universe is a bleeding great Sandbox!

Now I am aware perfectly aware that sadly, not every game has access to a decent and stable gaming community, and thus, find it harder not so much to embrace but practice this philosophy.

But why be restricted to what is Codex or Tournament Legal? Want to field your Lost And The Damned? I say go for it. Makes variety for me as an opponent. And even if you want to mish mash the Inquisition, Marine and Guard Codecies to represent your vision of it, I say go for it. The points value to power might be very slightly off, what with units being priced according to the contents of the rest of it's respective armies, but surely if you are playing to this tune, winning is of less importance than having a satisfying, and interesting game?

It disheartens me somewhat when people get overly antsie about a list being 'dropped' by GW, as generally speaking it just means you can't use it in a Tournament, but for home play, it's more than legal. Likewise for conversions. So, a looted Vehicle now has fairly generic rules in the Orky Codex, and yet you built yours to look like a slightly Orkified Land Raider. You want it is a Land Raider? Fine by me, as long as I know.

So why so restricted when not participating in a Tournament? Yeah, there is Apocalypse for some, but that deals with big games. Why limit the spirit of fun and a laugh to big engagements?

I personally dig the spirit of Apocalypse, where GW has basically said "have fun" - I think you can take this approach to smaller battles as well, so yeah, I agree with you.

It does suck when GW does invalidate an army list though, as that represents a lot of time, and more importantly: a lot of money on an army that is no longer legal for tournament play, and has to be relegated to friendly, fluffy-esque battles.

I think the really big problem in that discussion isn't that people's armies are going illegal, its that OTHER codexes of OTHER armies are better for your fluff than your own codex. Imagine, if you will, that you are a tyranid player, who enjoys swarming. Now assume that in 5th edition endless swarm vanishes, and hormagaunts get some ridiculously small unit amount (10 for argument's sake) and there's really no other alternative for a nid swarm.

Disheartened, you read the ork codex, and realize that 180 models of swarming madness can in fact be yours, and play your nids with the ork codex rules, happily ever after until you go to a tournie and they tell you 'lol, noob'. Of course, among friends and even at the FLGS this should never, ever be a problem. I sure wouldn't mind, though I'd demand a skittering sound effect be made in place of WAAAGH!

Except, mind you, in this case its spikies and beakies who were always pretty much the same. And in all honesty if you wanna be true to fluff and you are CSM, just say you are pre-heresy. I know that's what I'll do if I like the SM Codex enough to start an alpha legion. My 2 cents.

gfAlexander: Which would you prefer:

"SKRREEEEEEE!"
or
"Wrryyyyyyyy!"

Those are the only two buggish sounds I can reliably make.

Wehrkind wrote:gfAlexander: Which would you prefer:

"SKRREEEEEEE!"
or
"Wrryyyyyyyy!"

Those are the only two buggish sounds I can reliably make.

Don't be modest. I'm certain you can do a wonderful "BzzzZZZZZzzzzZZZZZzzzZZ!"

Yea, but it always ends up sounding like a poor impression of a Suzuki shifting gears... I don't know if I can't distinguish reliably enough to be pleasing :(

It is my eternal secret shame!

Not everyone wants to travel the world seeking wargaming wisdom.

Mr. Grotsnik has captured the GW ethos -- the point of the rules is to provide a framework within which players can tell whatever kind of heroic stories they like (assuming it involves blowing heads off.)

This is why 40K rules have hitherto always been pretty loosely written.

Kilkrazy wrote:Not everyone wants to travel the world seeking wargaming wisdom.

Mr. Grotsnik has captured the GW ethos -- the point of the rules is to provide a framework within which players can tell whatever kind of heroic stories they like (assuming it involves blowing heads off.)

This is why 40K rules have hitherto always been pretty loosely written.

Says the man from London, addressing the guy in San Jose, CA, USA.

I imagine GW is pretty happy that their game has worldwide appeal.