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.

So, to put it bluntly, I really like a lot of the Rogue Trader and 2nd edition WH40k stuff.

Genestealer cults? Awesome.

Anti-plant missiles? Sign me up!

A lot of the fluff interests me, sometimes more so than the new stuff. For example, the Battle for Macragge happening because Marneus Calgar was so full of if that he believed that Space Marines were invincible and could deflect the attack easily, or something to that effect.

Space Marines being serial killers with armor.

I would be more tempted to start a Space Marine army based on these things than any of the newer stuff, imo.

So anyway, onto the topic at hand, and it's been nagging me for a while. I was reading some stuff in the Off-Topic forum, and I came upon a specific thread that essentially put down those who had not been there for older editions of the game but still liked them. I've come across this before, but I suppose that this incident led to this thread being created.

I'm asking, what gives? What's with the elitism? So what if I wasn't there?

Is it off-limits for me to be in any semblance interested in stuff that I wasn't there for? Am I a poseur for being interested in WWII?

Just wondering about other people's opinion on this matter.

-Vlad

Think of it like music.

If someone says "I like 60's music better than 70's music" and was born in the 80's, does that make them wrong somehow? Someone who hates 80's music and was born in the 90's isn't, in my mind, 'less than' someone who hates 80's music and was born in the 80's (like me).

H.B.M.C. wrote:Think of it like music.

If someone says "I like 60's music better than 70's music" and was born in the 80's, does that make them wrong somehow? Someone who hates 80's music and was born in the 90's isn't, in my mind, 'less than' someone who hates 80's music and was born in the 80's (like me).

That's actually a really good example. Thank you.

To be honest I'm just confused why some people are looked down upon just because they weren't originally there to experience it but are interested in it anyway.

Vladsimpaler wrote:To be honest I'm just confused why some people are looked down upon just because they weren't originally there to experience it but are interested in it anyway.

Think of it like the 60's - if you can remember it, you weren't there. But a question - how often do you encounter people looking 'down' on you for not being around in 2nd and 3rd?

Over in the better-written-and-balanced world of BattleTech, there are people I know who have been playing the game since it started - 25 years ago. I've only really been playing seriously since Feb last year, yet at their main website where the biggest forums are, the writers of the game welcome new players with open arms, will answer any 'newbie' question (even duplicate questions) and there's no sense of "You don't remember BTech when the Clans didn't exist? Get out child!" at all. So I can't say I've ever experience the 'being younger' stigma.

There's definitely a nostalgic element to it all. I suppose it's like kids with obsessions about hendrix or the beatles, despite being born 40 years too late. Despite my intense dislike of kids born in the 90's rocking the same generic nirvana shirts or talking about how awesome the 70's were, there's definitely some great stories that came out of those time periods.

Similarly, while a lot of the fluff from Rogue Trader is incredible and has definite long term relevancy (Genestealer Cults), there are also some things best left forgotten (Squats and the Space Slaan are great examples).

Personally? My favourite nostalgia was the first Orc and Goblin army book I ever bought. A bright eyed ten year old, I LOVED the fluff. So much so I would bring it to school and freak out my friends with my "advanced" vocabulary. AND imo, the BEST giant model was the one with the beard, holding the tree trunk, with the crazy pants.

All the others (from those Albion Giants to the current one), while nice, don't capture the same feel.

*sigh* I've rambled a bit, but! to answer your question, it's like someone cherry picking select parts of something they didn't know anything about and then talking about it like they were there. Nobody likes a tourist.

But! I can see the appeal of the older stuff. I got into the hobby about 11 years ago? So I feel like I missed out on a lot, so I definitely see where you're coming from.

hahah, I hate to double post but I love how HBMC and I had the same idea when we read this. I swear I thought it first!

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Think of it like the 60's - if you can remember it, you weren't there. But a question - how often do you encounter people looking 'down' on you for not being around in 2nd and 3rd?

Hahaha!

Anyway, it's not too often, but occasionally I will come across a comment on either Dakka, or another 40k board about people who liked older editions of the game but weren't there for them were poseurs. Kind of annoying to me as I happen to be one of those people. (But am in no way a poseur! I don't say, oh I was there, good times. I haven't posted in the 'what do you miss about 2nd edition' thread.)

Over in the better-written-and-balanced world of BattleTech, there are people I know who have been playing the game since it started - 25 years ago. I've only really been playing seriously since Feb last year, yet at their main website where the biggest forums are, the writers of the game welcome new players with open arms, will answer any 'newbie' question (even duplicate questions) and there's no sense of "You don't remember BTech when the Clans didn't exist? Get out child!" at all. So I can't say I've ever experience the 'being younger' stigma.

That sounds like a cool community. Unfortunately I don't have nearly enough time (or money) to get involved in another game, but in the future I could see me getting interested.

And the 'being younger' stigma isn't necessarily annoying, it just gets a bit tiresome after a while.

@punkisntdeadyet-

No, I definitely agree, stuff like Egg Armor Angry Face Chaos Squats should probably be best forgotten, but fun stuff like Genestealer cults is what I'm interested in.

I just think that Squats are funny, a kind of joke race if you will. Miniature Hell's Angels.

Though I may be interested in Hendrix and whatnot, I don't own any shirts and I don't have any generic rocker shirts.

:edit: Love your avatar by the way!

I think ANYONE calling anyone else a "poseur", especially in relation to a tabletop wargaming with plastic miniatures should re-evaluate themselves and who they hang out with.

I actually really like the new direction GW is taking with its miniature/game lines. I honestly LIKE the dark and gritty 40k. And a lot of the fluff of old has worked it's way into contemporary story lines. I still think it's super cool that if an Imperial Guardsmen saw a Space Marine, they would think that the Space Marines were invincible. The mythos surrounding them is pretty sweet!

And it's not so much about what said people are wearing, more so their attitude that generally turns people off. It's like having a suburban white kid from the Hamptons rocking a Rage Against the Machine shirt talking about how awesome Che and his socialist uprising was. It just seems strange!

Edit: Thanks! I just changed it as soon as I saw your comment. I'm a philosophy major so me and plato have a love/hate relationship.

I do enjoy the colorful and fun Eldar and comical Orks from 2nd edition. Now if only they made the Tau more clearly good guys. Or at least the Sensei and presence of hope.

edit: Crap this was posted in the wrong older edition thread.

I started out in 2nd edition. There were definitely some really cool things from back in that period of the game and universe. I don't think there's anything wrong with being genuinely interested in the older material.

The only problem I have, and this goes for people who did play back then as well, is when they say how much better it was and how the game was more complex and not designed for kids like it is today.

The game was more complex in some ways, but it was also a clusterfeth of vague rules and time consuming and unnecessary stuff, etc. Complex doesn't always equal better. So when I hear that the current game is dumbed down and it should be brought back to 2nd edition, it annoys me slightly. Especially when it is from someone who wasn't there for it.

You seem genuinely interested in the background and stuff from that period in the game and that's cool. It was fun and quirky and I'm more than a little nostalgic about it, but I wouldn't trade it for the loads of great plastic kits and streamlined rules we have now.

Thinking about it, I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been a retro gaming fad like everything else. The young kids busting out their 2nd Edition rules from eBay and rolling old school.

Cadaver wrote:
Thinking about it, I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been a retro gaming fad like everything else. The young kids busting out their 2nd Edition rules from eBay and rolling old school.

Though as you said yourself, 2nd edition was very complex and not for kids.

So there is that reason why.

Perhaps if I really wanted to, I could get some 2nd edition rules and whatnot. However I'm afraid that I would have to make up a bunch of house rules (i.e. no vortex grenades, or virus bombs etc.) to keep up a sort of semblance of balance. And I'd end up GM'ing it or something.

I love the model kits today. So much better than the plastics back then. The first Goff Orks just look terrible in my opinion, for example.

Well, I, in 2006-7 started playing my first games of second edition before I even read the forth edition rulebook. The reason was simple. I wasn't introduced to warhammer 40000 by passing the store. I was grown up at home with 'Big Dads' collection of armies from the rogue trader and second edition era.

And by the way, I still think that second edition was a better rulesystem. I still think the game would be much better ofhad they decided to fix up second edition instead of aborting it and starting 3rd.

Paul Atreides wrote:And by the way, I still think that second edition was a better rulesystem. I still think the game would be much better ofhad they decided to fix up second edition instead of aborting it and starting 3rd.

Question for you then. How many of the 2nd ed Codices do you have/have you read? And have you realized what can be possible with those rules "out of the box"? Chaos Lords, Vortex Grenade, Grenades in general (we had 20+ paper circles to rep the blasts, and usually ended up making more)

Look through the "What I don't miss" thread and oyu will see how many holes and exploits there were in 2nd ed.
I think 2nd ed is really better used in a "historical" scenario based manner, and not with a tourney mindset. And a smaller, skirmish style is where it shines.

@Vladsimpaler: House rules were the only way to go.
After playing a few games within a group, you got a feel for what was cool, and what sucked, and what sucked to be on the receiving end of.
I had a virus outbreak take out all but 3 Orks once, vs a Space Marine army. After that it was agreed that those were out.

I ahve no prob with those who have found the rules more recently having opinions on them. But I do think it is necessary to have played games using said rules, before bringing forth an opinion of how "good/bad" they were.

skrulnik wrote:Question for you then. How many of the 2nd ed Codices do you have/have you read? And have you realized what can be possible with those rules "out of the box"? Chaos Lords, Vortex Grenade, Grenades in general (we had 20+ paper circles to rep the blasts, and usually ended up making more)

Look through the "What I don't miss" thread and oyu will see how many holes and exploits there were in 2nd ed.

Hence the reason he said "fix up" 2nd Ed. Pay attention.

punkisntdeadyet wrote:I think ANYONE calling anyone else a "poseur", especially in relation to a tabletop wargaming with plastic miniatures should re-evaluate themselves and who they hang out with.

QTF.

This comes back to the 'Nerd Superiority' thing from the other thread.

I don't have a strong opinion one way or another towards 2e. The background and options were crazy, but the impression that I get is that the game was painful to play in many ways.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

punkisntdeadyet wrote:I think ANYONE calling anyone else a "poseur", especially in relation to a tabletop wargaming with plastic miniatures should re-evaluate themselves and who they hang out with.

QTF.

This comes back to the 'Nerd Superiority' thing from the other thread.

Yes and no.

It depends entirely on whether the person in question (the nostalgee perhaps?) has ever actually played some 2nd Edition games. If they haven't, and their opinions are formed from the rather rose tinted views of more experienced gamers, then what the hell do they know? At this point, it just becomes mindless pontificating about something they don't really know much about. However, if they have gathered together enough gubbins and played even a couple of games, then fair enough. They have genuine experience of a much loved games system.

But then that totally works both ways. If someone is rubbishing an older edition, and yet hasn't bothered playing it, then they can just blimming well shut up as well.

Now, liking the background the way it used to be, fair enough. Is pretty easy to find it online after all.

It's like someone claiming the Beatles to be better than the Stones, based purely on the popularity of their songs. Do a little digging, and you will soon see that whilst the Beatles were absolutely the definition of their time, the Stones in some ways were far ahead of their time, and probably more accomplished musicians in terms of ability (yes Ringo, I'm looking at you).

So it's all a matter of experience at the end of day. If your opinion is formed on pure experience, no matter how you got onto it, then you are as entitled to your opinion as someone who played it when it was current.

And as for 2nd Edition not being for kids....could have fooled me. I was one of the older players in my local GW at the tender age of 15, so that kind of puts paid to that particular bit of rubbish

So if I started in Rogue Trader and left before 3rd edition, am I a poseur for getting back into it at 5th edition?

Same silly argument in reverse.

Who cares what you like? Like what you like, don't like what you don't like.

there are also some things best left forgotten (Squats and the Space Slaan are great examples).

Bite your tongue, boy!

TR

One thing I will agree with Jervis on is why Squats were removed. They were great in Epic, and, as he said, they had really nailed Squats on the scale of Epic with their warmachines and whatnot. But for 40K scale, they were half Dwarves in Space and half Biker Gangs, and it just didn't work. It was too comical and too limited. Not everything works on the small scale. Removing Squats made sense, even if it was annoying and was a loss to Epic.

Space Slann would be cool if Lizardmen came with them!

If I were to hazard a guess, I would say that it's not so much that the Grognards really look down on new guys saying 2nd edition seems cooler as poseurs, it's more of a dismissal based on their experience. Everything I've heard and read about 2nd edition makes me think of it in many ways like D&D: endless possibilities, but a lot of opportunities for bad times.

In many ways, it's similar to the way older, more experienced guys (or women) who have dated really wild, out of control women (or guys). Yes, it looks fun, but you don't really see the downside until you've been in there, so to speak.

Squats rocked. Period.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Yes and no.

It depends entirely on whether the person in question (the nostalgee perhaps?) has ever actually played some 2nd Edition games. If they haven't, and their opinions are formed from the rather rose tinted views of more experienced gamers, then what the hell do they know? At this point, it just becomes mindless pontificating about something they don't really know much about. However, if they have gathered together enough gubbins and played even a couple of games, then fair enough. They have genuine experience of a much loved games system.

But then that totally works both ways. If someone is rubbishing an older edition, and yet hasn't bothered playing it, then they can just blimming well shut up as well.

Good, was hoping that you would post.

I've based my 'views' so to speak, of 2nd Edition, at least, the actual wargame portion, on two conveniently placed threads, the "What do/don't you miss about 2nd edition?"

From what I gathered, and Polonius read my mind, from what I see 2nd edition had a lot of options, but it could go badly pretty quickly.

Now, liking the background the way it used to be, fair enough. Is pretty easy to find it online after all.

Cool, thank you.

The reason that I'm happy that you posted is because, well, I kind of subtly called you out. I hope that you take no offense from this.

-Vlad

The way I see it, is just because things are new doesnt mean they are better then the older versions. I think there was ALOT of cooler things in older versions of 40k and things in the modern edition that kind of bugs me. It happens. You arnt wrong at all man.