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.

Hi all.
After many discussions , I have arrived at the conclusion 40k rules are written to help sell new releases.
As the current 40k game play could be achived with far fewer more straight forward rules.

The obsession with lots of exclusive 'special rules' could only be down to someone high up at GW thinking they improve sales.

Most people I asked , belive the background artwork and fine sculpts have a far greater influence on peoples purchases of minatures.

Is makeing the 40k rules unnecissarily convoluted, abstract and counterintuative , in an attempt to boost sales, worth it?

I thought it might be worth while to ask fellow Dakka'ites opinion.

What is the main influence on what minis and kits you buy?

TTFN
Lanrak.

I tend to look at a few things when I'm picking a miniature up.

I look to how I'm going to use the mini within my current or future projects or those of my friends. If I run into something that literally won't have a home, I'm less likely to make the purchase. I've a homeless Wolfguard now and he's getting lonely.

After that, I just look at whether I like the mini and will enjoy painting it. That's pretty much it.

I buy models first for their effectiveness and secondly for their looks. I won't short myself on army strength just because I think a model looks bad. At the same time though if there's a model that looks awesome (Lictor) I'll use it despite it not being so strong in game. Once my army hit about 2k points I bought a couple things on the side because they looked neat. Though they don't see much game time they're nice to have.

I first write my army list based on rules, fluff, and models. Then I buy the models that I need.

I buy models I like. It is the only reason I decided to play Grey Knights at first. The Terminators are the coolest minis GW has ever put out. Only after reading the codex and understanding them did I have more interest in playing them.

But I buy 90% of my models for looks alone. It is why I own a Skulltaker, a PP Gnarlhorn Satyr and a few Everblight guys, and multiple Confrontation figs.

My main influence is what my army (or armies) currently needs. For instance my ork army is in desperate need of trukks, so my next purchase probably will be trukks. However I have bought units that currently don't have a place in my army list. Like an extra squad of kroot, grotz, nobz, sinkrot - prinarly because of the look or the potential for use in larger points games.

I will say that I have always been tempted to buy a unit or individual model that would have no use for any of my armies what so ever. Many of these are from Forgeworld (like thier avatar), or a farseer and warlocks...I can go on. I finally decided to make alist of stuff I just want to get and paint, so eventaully when I complete my armies then I will buy for looks/modeling potential only.

I'm right in line with ph34r on this one - I write my list first, then figure out what models I need from there.

I generally select based on what the final model will look like as part of an army.

Fluff and rules have some influence in that I tend not to buy things that I don't see myself ever playing. Like, say Ogryns or Ratlings. But if rules or Fluff are awesome, I might convert something to stand in.

But overall, I'm primarily focused on the look of the army.

combo of effectiveness//in game shenanigans and looks, and thirdly fluff...
soul grinders?
must have for my upcoming daemon army because they are awesome models and really good...
skarsnik?
sweet model, goofy fun rules, perfect...

but if somethings really out of place, like adding land speeders to my salamanders, as good as it is in game, i think the fluff conflict with something as big as that will over rule model coolness...
same thing with having like tactical squads in an army that is strictly 1st and 2nd DA companies...

The miniatures are, unquestionably, the greatest priority to me. I spend time Monday to Friday (and often Saturday and Sunday) painting those things; if they do not inspire me, I will not be interested in painting them. Since I spend more time painting than playing (only playing, at most, on the weekend), my first criteria for selecting an army is the quality of the minis. The fluff comes second, as I like to theme my lists by the fluff (eg I have a Corsair Raider themed list for my Dark Elves, Corsairs being the minis I like best from that range), In game effectiveness is the final line where I prune the list. For example, I like the minis for the Sisters Repentia, and the fluff interest me, but the rules are so bad that I never field them.

I buy armies for a combination of things, the character of the army. For example, I really like the rules for Chaos but I hate the models and the background, so I won't touch them. On the other hand I love Orcs, and, well, Orks and love the insanity in there rules (Shokk Attack Gun, Night Goblin Fanatics, etc) and so I have armies of both, albiet small and low priority.

Hi all.
Thanks for the feed back so far.

To those people that voted for special rules.You buy the models kits ONLY because they have particular special rules?
If the same in game effect was covered by basic rules would you still pick the unit?

I may not have been very clear sorry.
I should have had 'in game effect' as a seperate option .Whoops!

I belive the masses of special rules in 40k are unecissary , and complicate comprehension and game play.
And the only reason to include so many is to market new shiney minatures with new shiney rules.

But when a rule set has more exceptions than rules,( like 40k does,) I think its gone horribly wrong somewhere!

If those that voted for 'special rules' , meant 'in game effectivness', please respond.

Many Thanks ,
Lanrak.

I seriously doubt anyone picks their units purely because of the presence of special rules. If the special rules were a factor in their choice, it would be due to the way the special rules influence play. In other words, in-game effectiveness. If one unit has the special rule ``Pimping: gets to say `What-up dawg?' when charging'', whereas another has the special rule ``Broken: denies the opponent their ability to make close combat attacks on the charge'', most people will take the Broken unit. Some people will take the Pimping unit for fluff reasons, but there is no denying that these special rules influence the unit's in-game effectiveness.

I have three criteria when it comes to buying models:
1. can I afford it?
2. does it look good?
3. does it look fun to paint?

if its three yes's then its coming home with me

I go:
1.Value for money
2.How much I like the sculpt
3.Game effectiveness.

With stuff like my Orks, I tend to just buy at least one of everything regardless.

What about an option "It fits my army and is worth having"?

I have Tau and SM armies. I don't care how fluffy, special ruley, sculpturally groovy or box artworky an Ork or IG model is, I'm still not going to buy it.

In terms of choosing an army it is mainly a fluff and models thing with a tiny bit of how they'll work in game i.e. the two armies I run in 40k are Space Wolves and Orks. SW have my favourite fluff of any 40k army with orks a close second. I have wanted to play an ork army for aaages and actually bought my first ork models BEFORE the new ork codex was released.

In terms of what models I use in the army though it is mostly a rules issue. I have thus far only bought units for my orks that I intend to use on the table. Basically I write a list, buy it then buy more stuff to tinker with/ expand it.

At that stage aesthetics comes into play as I love to convert things so I will very often buy models to convert to be models in my list. For example one of my trukk nobz is made of fantasy black orcs because I like the models. I have a huge range of space wolf models that I have converted from other sources. Presently sternhammer is my rune priest and my wolf lord is built from the space marine commander box + lots of green stuff and wolfy bitz. Prior to that it was a heavily converted wolf guard.

"special" rules aren't a draw it's tabletop effectiveness and that only comes into play once I have already selected my army. I'm not going to ever buy a landspeeder typhoon for my wolves because i will never use it so it is a waste of money. But I didn't select my wolves purely because of how they play on the table.*



* tabletop performance is a factor but not in a "this is an uber army" way. Basically SW are such a small elite army I decided I wanted my next army to be a horde. Orks and SW are so cc orientated that I wanted a shooty army for my third force so in Fantasy I play dwarves and my next 40k army will probably be witch hunters.

Rules make a huge difference for me. However if the model sucks (like in my opinion the obilterator one does) I wont get it. Fluff is also important and ages ago I used to think fluff was cool, but if your army is a lemon it aint no fun.

I guess it's primarily the background for me.

I'll read the Codex or Army Book cover to cover, and in doing so, hopefully find an aspect or element of the race which tickles my fancy. From there, it's time to start considering a list which I feel reflects the cool bits of the army.

Usually said themes will require a conversion or two, which adds to the fun, but largely I'm happy with stock models. There is of course, consideration as to how the army will work on the board, this is inevitable, as the models etc are a tad too expensive to buy if I don't stand at least some chance of winning. Sometimes my theme builds a powerful list, such as my Dark Elf monsters, other times it's an army which requires cunning and a great deal of thought, like my Savage Orcs. If when writing the list, it appears inevitably duff, I'm not above going back and re-writing it a couple of times until I'm happy it will be fun to use, and probably more imporantly, fun to play against. Seems to me that writing an extremely beardy list is as futile as writing a weak one, as my opponents will soon not want to play against me. For example, I genuinely defy anyone to enjoy a game against a Dwarven gunline, as it completely reduces your strategy to a hell for leather sprint across the board, with fingers crossed there'll be enough of your force left to beat up the accursed Stunties!

I would say I'm in the little bit of everything camp. Fluff/artwork has inspired me to start armies, and I have purchased models for armies I don't actually play just because I like the kit(s). As far as special rules, that comes into play when trying to fill out an army but the initial attraction is all art/kits. Luckily I had a small collection of guard going in 4th ed. so they valkyrie(s) I am sure to buy won't just be for show.

Definitely the rules. I like waging a 'modern' war, with mechanized infantry and supporting tanks/artillery, and occasionally air support. Playing something like Orcs, Necrons, or Tyranids just doesn't interest me.

Generally models first, then fluff/army design/then special rules/game power.

I bought a box of sternguard because the model with powerfist was gorgeous, and want him as a vet serge. doubt theyll ever be used as sternies in game tho.

Edit:

GW may be indeed making broken armies/units, in order to sell them to unscrupulous tournament players that gun for the win.

If an all metal sisters army had mega broke rules, how mnay peeps would suddenyl start up sisters? Same as daemons to a lesser extent, the large good models are still metal, and an army can be expensie, and the rules are sketch...

Models, Rules, Background

So for Warmachine my emphasis was on:

Warcaster, Useful Units, Fluffy units

or maybe

Special Character, Units useful to special character, fluffy units for that special character


Menoth example:

Severius, Holy Zealots with Monolith Bearer, Moar Zealots

Khador example:

Fenris, Doom Reavers, Vlad (to fill up the points with warjacks)

I pick units because I would like to field them. If I really don't like a sculpt (see: Chaos Raptors) I'll just make my own. I made two scratch-built Daemon Princes before I bought the actual model.

The miniature kit/sculpt quality but also appeal.

Examples:

I love the Snikrot fluff and character in the game and the model is obviously of quality but it doesn't appeal to me in the least. Basically, I hate the idea of a "Rambo" Ork with NVGs so I won't be buying him.

Zagstruk, I love the model but frankly, don't like the head. I almost didn't buy it just for that until I found a way to convert another head (coming soon).

The Old style Ork Kommandos vs. New style. I have both and the quality of the new style ones is obviously better than the old style ones but the appeal and personality of the old style models for me is MUCH greater.

With appeal in mind for me, I love it when GW throws in many bitz options in the way they have done with the New Style Stormboyz Kit and the Basic boyz box. The new GW Battlewagon and even the old Leman Russ kit are all good examples of this.

So I guess the answer is: No, special rules do not influence me.

I always build themed armies, so the fluff is probably the most important consideration.... next to price that is.

While I would love an army full of ogryn the price makes unobtainable.

I get so torn on the four mentioned 'influences' to the point where I end up spending 3 hours in the store only to have bought nothing.

1) Will I use it in my army?
2) If I stamp on it, glue it back together and rivet more gunz on, will I use it in my army?
3) Will it cause my mates/foes to go "What da heck is dat?"

Two out of three and I look to see if I can afford it.

ph34r wrote:I first write my army list based on rules, fluff, and models. Then I buy the models that I need.

Agree because I'm too lazy to type it out myself.

What I look at

1 rules, if the rules suck I am not going to field it so whats the point.
2. model quality if the model looks like poop even if its autowin, why spend time painting it