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.

In the case of people I know around here, Warhammer Fantasy is pretty much looked at as a game decided by a superman on a dragon backed up by an army of troops that amount to not much more than cheerleaders.
True there are some gross things in 40k, like the Falcon tanks, etc. but at least there is a chance for the line grunt units to cripple or counter them somehow.

Just for clarification, the Fantasy aspect of Warhammer is NOT based off of Warcraft. Warcraft is based off of Warhammer. Back in the day Blizzard was supposed to make an RTS style game for GW, the deal fell through and Blizzard scrambled to put something together. Warhammer was being played long before Blizzard was even a twinkle in a Lost Vikings eye.

However, Fantasy is Fantasy. There's only so many times you can do Elves/Dwarves/Wizards and have it be something new. It's a great system and I really wish they would incorporate more of it into 40k. 40k is fairly original in it's ideas. Worshiping machines as if they had spirits to get them to work and all that. The looks of most of the armies are obviously copied, but the fluff is pretty solid.

I find it funny that most of the people attacking Fantasy are talking about how complicated the rules are. Take a look at the YMDC for 40K and Fantasy on any site. You do not get in 20 page flaming arguments about terminators not having terminator armor because the word the is not used. All you see is a question and an answer. That speaks loads for not only the rules and more importantly the ones playing Fantasy. It is why I gave up 40K, why I play games like Warmachine and AT-43 as a replacement for 40K but stick with Fantasy.

I don't see any attacks on Fantasy.

I do see people who don't like playing Fantasy compared to 40k, and not being afraid to say why they don't enjoy it as much.

Just because somebody doesn't like something, or doesn't agree, it's not an attack.

OT: It needs to be said that WHFB has several rules issues as well, altough the core mechanics are much more to my liking than in 40k. The sad thing is that most of these issues would be so easy to fix if only gw would issue a few faqs (unlike 40k which seems to need a new edition to fix things). But yeah, silly me, gw releasing faq's, lol and all that...

But why is 40k more popular? Well in the northern troll country where I live in, it isn't so I can't really comment on that.

There isn't a game in the world that doesn't have some rules issues. Even Chess has the problem with en passant.

Back on topic, what makes everyone think 40K is more popular than fantasy? Is there some real data such as numbers of entrants to GTs or are we just speculating?

Well in the US at least you see more tables at GT's allocated for 40k than WHFB.

At our Local shop 40k is the predominant game, but I can get WHFB games against people so it's not all bad.

My favorite Fantasy WTF? is the "Monster" definition - or lack thereof.

One would hope that WFB8 starts to keyword unit types and base sizes in the Army Books.

Maybe its the cynic in me, but there may be truth in the answer to the OP's question that the 10-14 year-olds who play 40k are less immune to GW's Bull-poo than the grizzled old grognards who play WFB?

Relapse wrote: In the case of people I know around here, Warhammer Fantasy is pretty much looked at as a game decided by a superman on a dragon backed up by an army of troops that amount to not much more than cheerleaders.
True there are some gross things in 40k, like the Falcon tanks, etc. but at least there is a chance for the line grunt units to cripple or counter them somehow.

Then they aren't doing it right.

I'm pretty much done with 40k. It's just....boring... compared to fantasy.

The biggest factor for me is the quality of players. The biggest reason I could be as successful as I was in 40k was because most people I'd run across were hobbyists and not players (even if they didn't think so). In this area any big fantasy tournament is going to be full of guys that can beat you. Back when I was 'into' 40k, I could literally count on one hand the number of guys from NJ or the surrounding states I would have worried about at all.

AMP187 wrote:With Fantasy having an arguably more in-depth and intricate rule system, I wonder why 40K is so much more popular. Is it the fluff? The miniatures? Do most people think a future setting is cooler than a fantasy setting? What's yall's opinions on the matter?

No doubt about it, it is because of Lumpin Crook's Fighting Cocks.

Seriously, its because of the rules. This game is the diametricly opposite to 40k. The rules are evaluted, actually given the time to play, and feedback is used to improve the game with better and better ones. Each rulebook doesn't change al that dsrasticly, and the improvements make sense.

I wasn't a big fan of what they did to the magic box set, but all in all, the fantasy box set is much better a value then the 40k one is, hands down. Magic phase is, ok, but it is a sure better game for it now then the half hour phase it turned into with all of the cards.

I feel that the new plastics, aside from being overpriced are by far the best valued minis out there quality wise. ( could have used them back in the day, but better late then never for some, i guess.)

I couldn't get over the block movement in fantasy. I bought Vampire Counts because I always loved zombie movies and made a hoard of zombies. I never lost but I never could make myself enjoy zombies marching in rank and file and having to be within 12" of the leader. It was just stupid.

Oh yeah, and the paper/rock/scissors aspect of the game is pretty lame as well. Too many armies have obvious advantages over another. If you play "X" just hope you don't get paired against "Y", but "Z" will be a piece of cake. I think this was mostly Gav's doing (see the other thread).

I sold the whole thing. I may retry it when the demon hordes book comes out just because I've already got all the models for 40k (although I'll have to change the bases).

Plus, sci-fi is just cooler than fantasy as a genre.

Mortal,

Just make movement trays that have circular holes for your 40k bases.

Actually, doesn't GF-9 already make those?

Yes, they do:

http://www.gf9.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=26&products_id=103

I agree that 40k is probably more dominant partly due to the easier rule set and less investment in time due to needing fewer models(depending on your army: Oger kingdoms).

SPASE MARIENZ HURR!

Ok, but no, really, it probably has a little to do with Space Marines. There's no one army that 50% of the player base for fantasy plays (at least not that I've ever seen). Makes for less popularity, but much more diversity.

It may also have to do with Fantasy minis. I've only fairly recently started playing Fantasy and, Emperor help me, I can't for the life of me stand anything that is older than about a year, maybe two. I've been wanting to play Vampires for almost a year now, but the models were just so gawd-awful I had to force myself to wait for the new release.

I also play Wood Elves and I find myself refusing to buy some of the best units in the army because they're just fugly and cartoony (looking at you, Treeman). They are just so cartoony, over the top, and plain butt-ugly. That being said, I think the newest stuff (I think I started noticing it with the new Orcs and Goblins) is tops. I've just about loved every plastic set they've released in the last two years, they are all awesome. Of course this may just be me, and is not an overall factor in the popularity of the game...

But for me, personally, I still like 40k more. I break it down like this:

Fantasy:
Better armies (diversity and coolness factor)
Better rules
Better strategy

40k:
Better minis
Better setting
FAR better background, history, and story.

When it comes to armies I find all the different fantasy armies to be cool, interesting, and fun. In 40k the variance between two, or even ten armies is often nothing more than who has fangs, who has robes, and who has tentacles. But even more often it's just "Your marinez are blue! Mine are aquamarine!".

But Fantasy's story is just.. guh. It's so generic and boring. I've litterally nodded off trying to read the Dwarf fluff. At least 40K gives you a fairly unique twist on their Sci-Fi universe. The dynamic of the Imperium, the Xenos threat, and the Ruinous Powers makes for interesting reading, one way or another. However, a dwarf is a dwarf. An elf is an elf. He may be high, wood, or dark, but the denominations are consistent and universal, from one world to another. And for the love of the God-Emperor! We don't effin' care how many mountains the Dwarves have lost, and how many people they hate! They are old and onnery, and apparently not as good defenders as everyone makes them out to be. They are going to lose mountains, they are going to hate people. Why the hell does anyone care?!

However, the diversity of the armies does go some way to help this. Lizardmen and Skaven are nice, at least mostly unique ideas. But even Chaos is less interesting in this world. Ok so they're just superhuman Daemon worshipers as opposed to legions of fallen brothers and traitors.

It also seems to limit how creative you can be. The Old World (and the New World I guess, for you Lizards) is only so big, and is very well defined already. The Imperium, however, is vast and undocumented, and excruciatingly vague, where people, civilzations, and even entire planets are constantly founded, destroyed, forgotten, and discovered.

I can make my Guardsmen anything I want them to be. Maybe they're axe wielding barbarians who ride horses (Stealin' some fantasy minis for that idea...), maybe they're super-high tech with improved, laser sighted (twin-linked...) lasguns, and what not. Maybe they're not even part of the Imperium! Just a local militia, or some upstart Lord-Governor who has decided to start his own empire. And I can come up with an entire rich history and background for, not just the regiment, but the entire planet and system they're from. Huge wars and battles of epic proportions, which, despite being monumental, are but small foot-notes in the history of the Imperium of Man. The fluff of 40k not only allows this, it supports and even encourages it.

When I made my Brettonians I had to decide what duchy they fought for.

I mean yeah, I can come up with my own country (and I did), and my own history, and wars, and what not, but it dosen't feel right, doesn't feel valid. I put Brettonians on the field. They are from Brettonia. I have to explain to my opponents that they aren't french, dammit, and piss on the Fleur De Lys! And my vampires have NOTHING to do with Von Carstein! They don't even know what a "Sylvannia" is, and they don't friggin' care!

That's probably just my own personal pet peeve, I hate having my background defined for me. Also why I hate special characters. Ok so I got a little off-topic. I'm sticking with the theory that it's all about the Spase Marienz.

Kustomizing!!

40K just allows for more of it.

40k definitely has the better fluff for me. Fantasy just never really did it for me, probably because there is such a wealth of better stuff to pick from. That, and all the Hard Gay Dwarves really turn me off. I don't need fat, bearded men running around half naked with silly axes.
Also, the massively open ended nature of 40k is, as others have stated admirably, much more conducive to bizzare ideas.

Never thought that the Dwarfs could be imagined as gay, like, at all.

Other then that, the 40k Universe really has some more diverse fluff. Orks, Necrons, Tau and Space Marines, they are very different in their appearance and background. Not so much in the fantasy universe. Both games are worthwhile playing, though.

Greets
Schepp himself

adamsouza wrote:Kustomizing!!

40K just allows for more of it.

Adam makes a good point here. While it's not that you can't customize or convert Fantasy minis, without the hard edges you have throughout 40k, I think converting is more challenging for Fantasy, with greater use of GS for hair, fur, and feathers to cover seams.

Schepp himself: Anything masculine can be cast as 'gay', that's sort of the point. In the specific case of Dwarfs I'd say they're a bunch of bears, but since they're so short I'll just call them "teddy bears".

I started miniature gaming with wood elves and dwarves, but by the time I had my armies ready the local gaming community had shifted focus to 40K. I had difficulties finding a group or regular gaming day for fantasy, so I started an ork Speed Kult. I had no problem at all finding multiple players of 40K at the game stores. There was open play, leagues, painting contests and more for 40K.

If I'm going to invest time and money in a hobby I want to be able to play. Fantasy struggles in our area. It's tougher to motivate folks to build and paint two or three times the number of models, then find out they don't like the Empire or High Elves or whatever. Our area has higher turnover of painted 40K armies, they're easier to find on ebay, it's simpler and faster to build a 40K army.

The rules are more forgiving than fantasy so the less sophisticated players don't get crushed (as often) in 40K.

Vehicles, bikes, walkers and other war machines are a lot of fun to build and customize, and further reduce the number of infantry needed for your force.

There are a lot more tournaments for 40K in our tri state area than any other GW game.

I like both really. I have 4 fantasy armies, because I love how each one fills a different niche in terms of playstyle (I have my Lizardmen for expensive flexibility with monsters, my Orcs and Goblins for well rounded, cheap but unpredictable blocks with fun stuff, my Beastmen for total skirmish ambush hilarity and my Dwarves which unfortunately never get played because despite being firm favourites in fluff, I find the gunpowder silly, and sitting still shooting all day is boooorring.).
I have 2 40K armies, orks and plague marines. Luckily for me, both of these armies have been recently redone and are fun to play. There was a long time when my orks were just rubbish, and boring to play. So that's a problem with 40K: Not everything works.
It's background isn't really original, since it rips off everything from dune to rambo and back again, but it's executed in an entertaining pulp fashion.

Space Marines bug the crap out of me actually, and have made me want to drop 40K more than once. I could stand one, maybe two armies of genetic supermen. but when they start outnumbering all other forces, and all metagame starts gearing towards taking them down you can just keep it. Boring, boring, boring.

Id say its the fluff. but the whole movment of of units in blocks realy apeals to me, thats why my IG all have close order drill. but the rules for whfb just doesnt hold up against 40k

Lord Lankington wrote:

but the rules for whfb just doesnt hold up against 40k

How do you mean?

I hear rather different things, depending on the playgroup.

just the extra phase, turn arks, its more complicated than 40k,

Lord Lankington wrote:


just the extra phase, turn arks, its more complicated than 40k,

That's like saying "I bought the Kia instead of the Lexus because of that annoying Nav system and complicated heated seats."

I think it's because:-

1) the 40k game is simpler
2) you can deploy tanks (which aren't powered by steam !)


On the bright side - White Dwarf is almost all Fantasy Battle and LOTR this month (March-2008). I have posted a brief summary of all the good WHFB bits on my blogsite below:-

http://battlereporter.blogspot.com/2008/02/white-dwarf-march-2008-wd339-review.html
White Dwarf March 2008 (WD339) Review

I started playing 40K (IG and old Necrons) about ten years ago in my mid 20's because my friends played 40K. I read up on the huge backstory and fluff and it was awesome so it kept me interested.

Soon after they wanted to play Fantasy and I bought a small army from a buddy that had several. I read the rules and they seemed so much more difficult and restrained. Also the history wasn't as rich. I disagree with the "you can only do so much with fantasy" idea as I thought Lizardmen and Skaven were very original. And GW seems to have pigeonholed themselves into the typical idea of what an "Orc" is or "Elf" is.

That being said I think Fantasy gives itself to WAY better painting. Most 40K armies are these uniforms that are all for the most part, one color or maybe I should say only really need to be one color. A well painted 3000 point 40K army isn't inspiring as it is imposing. A 2000pt well painted Fantasy army, especially Brettonians is inspiring. And I enjoyed the Skrimish rules they came out for Fantasy. They were small games that seemed to be a lot more flexible and even allowed for more of a personal backstory for my own fluff. But no one wants to play just skirmish games unless they are part of a bigger game and fantasy doesn't interest me on a bigger scale.

But going back to the original topic. I once talked with a GW employee that said they could keep the GW stores open on just the Space Marine (human and chaos) stuff they sold. If you think about it. They are basicaly easy to paint (though chaos is a bit harder) and you can have full games with knowing a few basic rules. Yes 14 year olds would appreciate that more than older more experienced gamers. And every year there are more 14 year olds to try it and play. I guess that on top of giant heavily armored men with big freaking guns AND the ability to buy bigger freaking guns and more heavily armored men, would push 40K ahead a bit. At least in America.

I forgot that skirmish movement could be so easy...except
for that whole roll 2d6 for difficult terrain bit. Movement
trays do add a layer of complication and restraint, but
that sort of thing just fits fantasy game....

...said the hypocritical Wood Elf player

Keh.

I've played both fanatsy and 40k, but I've never been a power gamer, I've never really had an opinion about which edition is better or which codex is a better uncarnation than another. I've pretty much always viewed rules as rules and there are always ways to beat an oponent, no matter how cheesy their list is, you just have to be smart with what you have.

But.

Fantasy is a ton harder to play, its not streamlined, its more realistic, it takes alot more thinking and strategy in-game. The list building is important too, but to me but I think fantasy revolves more around manuevers and such, just like real ancient combat.

40k is streamlined, simplified, and quick game, not so much on table stategy but more army composition. I like modelling 40k more though, because guns and powered swords and such are awesome, along with the dark, gritty background. But I don't enjoy playing it nearly a much, because it comes down to being able to buy the neccascary models to win. I can't do that alot of the time because of a very limited budget.

So when it comes down to it, I like fantasy for the gameplay and 40k for models.

Keh. I'z done.