What type are you??

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.

**acastonguay**

After listening to a semi current 11th company podcast, it got me thinking. What is the majority of 40k players, Narrative, Power or Hybrid gamers?? Each as it's place but for me I perfer rolling dice and having fun, win or lose. I would like my games to tell a story and have units that might not be the bees knees but have a history in my game.

Please explain your anwser!

**VikingScott**

Does Power gamer mean WAAC?

**acastonguay**

VikingScott wrote:Does Power gamer mean WAAC?

Yeah kind of, I'm thinking of a player that show's up to the table with thier first priority to win.

**4M2A**

Hybrid

I used to only care about the story and it's still a big part of the game, but I am begining to actualy care about winning. I guess it's just something thats developed as I got better at playing.

I have become more open minded but I will still have difficulty justifing the use of certain builds if they just don't make sense.

**Corvus**

I consider myself a hybrid gamer. I lose far too much to be a WAAC type, and I refuse to use minis that I havent finished painting yet. I like to use units that appeal to me, even if there are better options available. However, at the same time, I like to win and don't really care too much about incorporating a story/fluff with my individual games or armies. Bottom line, Im in it to have a good time.

**Brother SRM**

I'm more of a narrative gamer - not that I don't enjoy winning though! Last game I played with my Crimson Fists, I fielded 1500 points of purely Rogue Trader models instead of taking more effective choices, just to fit a theme. As long as it's a reasonably close game where both sides have fun I don't mind if I win or lose.

**Great Unclean One**

I consider myself a hybrid, some of my armies/crews are made for playing (Lady Justice and my Iron Warriors) and some are made for painting and modelling projects (The Peacekeeper, Seamus and my future to be Mordian Iron Guard)

But I do play RPG's and GURPs a lot so that probably swings me closer to the narrative side, I love writing fluff and making a story out of things ^^

**Gorgarak**

Im hybrid. I love fluff and back story, but no one is gonna play to lose every time, over and over. If so...well, they're a more patient person than I am.

**CadianXV**

Narrative: I pick the units in my army because i like them, not because of their effectiveness. Similarly, I like to link games together, forming a narrative campaign rather than straight win/loss.

**Volkov**

I all time favourite army is Ravenwing. Winning is not a consideration with them.

**Kurgash**

Hybrid.

My armies I like to tell a tale of guts, grim satisfaction in the fight but I prefer to win that fight.

**MinMax**

Power gamers, represent!

**eldarbgamer13**

acastonguay wrote:After listening to a semi current 11th company podcast, it got me thinking. What is the majority of 40k players, Narrative, Power or Hybrid gamers?? Each as it's place but for me I perfer rolling dice and having fun, win or lose. I would like my games to tell a story and have units that might not be the bees knees but have a history in my game.

Please explain your anwser!

Hybrid here, i prefer not to WAAC, but winning is still nice, it makes me feel like I have accloplished something! (brofist anyone, no, fine, be that way

) I do however, like to make a backround story for the battle though.

**oadie**

Hybrid. I love reading fluff but hate writing it, so my "narrative" half lies more in visual aesthetics. I want a cool, well-painted army on an awesome terrain table. I want epic, almost cinematic moments to happen in the game. I've never had a chance to play one, but I think I'd love the continuity and narrative of a campaign.

Then again, when I enact my epic narrative struggle, I want to come out bloodied, but standing. I'm neither an experienced general nor a WAAC gamer, but I do enjoy the tactical aspect of playing and, while I'm not going to be crushed or enraged by a loss (or, considering my noobishness, a lengthy string of them...), the struggle for victory. I might pull a death or glory or a suicide charge against my better judgment, just for the badassery, but I'm not going to throw every match just to play fluffy. I'm a gamer, not an actor.

**Slarg232**

Corvus wrote:I consider myself a hybrid gamer. I lose far too much to be a WAAC type

That.

Though probably more towards the story type. I just love to give whatever I am using a background, even if I still haven't decided on a color scheme yet.

**FITZZ**

I'm more of a narrative gamer and definatly talor my armies to "fluff".
I just prefer using a themed army,even if I don't always win.

**imweasel**

If winning doesn't matter, then why keep score?

I play to win, so I keep score.

**Skarshak**

Naturally i'll play to win when I field my Boyz, but thats not what it is all about.. its all about enjoying the game and the story that unfolds within!

... I just happen to win most of the time!

**zane2131**

I think I could be considered a hybrid gamer. when i come to that table it is to win above all (but i don't freak out if i get terrible rolls or am just losing), but i do like to have fun, and if i can get a good story to narrate from it all the better!

**Exarch_Nektel**

i play because I think it's fun as a whole- I don't care if I win, but I don't really care about the fluff either.

**acastonguay**

imweasel wrote:If winning doesn't matter, then why keep score?

I play to win, so I keep score.

I'm not saying, don't keep score and of course everybody wants to win but I enjoy the game more and don't need to win every game

**imweasel**

acastonguay wrote:
imweasel wrote:If winning doesn't matter, then why keep score?

I play to win, so I keep score.

I'm not saying, don't keep score and of course everybody wants to win but I enjoy the game more and don't need to win every game

I'm not saying to sacrifice your own fun as the cost of winning.

However, I bring hard lists every game. My opponent's sometimes don't have the best of times due to bringing 'soft' lists.

**BobTheChainsaw**

I've never understood the 'telling a story while playing 40k' spiel. I don't, and none of my friends do it. Hmm.. maybe we should try..

EDIT: I do like the fluff, though!

**Henners91**

Atm I've been painting for a while and I read the fluff way before that... I've only recently learned the rules properly, for me it's all about seeing my opponent's army, admiring the models, asking him about it and yes, messing around...

For example, standing my Captain in front of my marines and playing Boreale's Soulstorm speech...

**Lord_Astaroth**

I am mostly a narritive gamer. My Inquisition Guard have no Ratlings or Ogryn because of this. I even have an old Rogue Trader Imperial robot as Nork. I just don't think the Inquisition would use Ogryn or Ratlings. I would however look for some proxies as I think the units themselves have use.

Advserly, if I find a unit that I just have to have, regardless of points, I become a power gamer, and make the unit fit the fluff of my army.

**Lork Skystompa**

I'd say that for the most part I'm a narrative player but sometimes the rules/codexes don't quite let me use a list how I think the fluff portrays them (i.e: Tanith) so I make the best approximation . If I'm playing Orks , I'll randomly choose between several list , say Speed Freaks, Horde , Combined , Stompa Kan Bash , etc .