Switch Theme:

At what point do we tell GW to GDIAF re: no model, no rules?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Paramount Plague Censer Bearer





The benefit is good will. The only issue is that Games Workshop is so big that good will might not be worth investing in until they get a decent sized competitor, but by then it might be too late.

‘What Lorgar’s fanatics have not seen is that these gods are nothing compared to the power and the majesty of the Machine-God. Already, members of our growing cult are using the grace of the Omnissiah – the true Omnissiah, not Terra’s false prophet – to harness the might of the warp. Geller fields, warp missiles, void shields, all these things you are familiar with. But their underlying principles can be turned to so much more. Through novel exploitations of these technologies we will gain mastery first over the energies of the empyrean, then over the lesser entities, until finally the very gods themselves will bend the knee and recognise the supremacy of the Machine-God"
- Heretek Ardim Protos in Titandeath by Guy Haley 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Hecaton wrote: It increases the value of their extant models to the consumer when they know they can be mixed with third party parts, or their own conversions, for effect.


And anyone can still convert or scratch build where there’s a stock model. So again…where’s the benefit?

Whether we like it or not, GW’s logic is sound for their business model. Because their business is making and selling models.

Create rules with no model, and you’re inviting 3rd Parties to fill that gap in your range.

Yes we can always convert, and I do enjoy kitbashing myself. But this isn’t the hobby as we grew up with anymore. With GW’s production capacity, there’s been less and less need to convert and kitbash. To the point where there’ll be more than a few hobbyists who don’t want to convert.

Not including things without a model doesn’t change any of that. At all.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

H.B.M.C, 27 July 2022. Suddenly the Chaos Codex doesn't seem so bad.

Not at all quote mined. 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
ccs wrote:


Isn't it the plague marine kit that doesn't come with enough bolters to make the entire squad with the basic weapon loadout?
Or am I thinking of some other kit?


unsure honestly, but i know Chaos terminators didnt come with enough copies of their default loadout in 8th (which is why they added the whole accursed weapon thing ( which i actually liked ))


honestly i've just given up on 9th edition in favor of OPR. at least with that ruleset i don't get fethed by NMNR

Might be thinking of the CSM kit. You can't do all bolters or all chainswords with it. Not sure about Plague Marines.

And I'm done with 9th edition. Gimme gimme HERESY!
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
The benefit is good will. The only issue is that Games Workshop is so big that good will might not be worth investing in until they get a decent sized competitor, but by then it might be too late.


I appreciate I’m sounding like a corporate donkey-cave here, but good will isn’t profit, is it?

And how do we weigh that potential good will, against the good will of anyone being able to pick up any model in their codex off the shelf. Because that’s what GW is aiming for these days. The complete hobby experience, all GW branded. Models, rules, paints, tools, glues, board, terrain, books, dice, measuring implements. The literal whole kit and caboodle.

But….because we’ve moved to a new page, time to stress I absolutely do not include options with existing models being are removed from Codexes. Legends Status be damned. A dick move is a dick move.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

H.B.M.C, 27 July 2022. Suddenly the Chaos Codex doesn't seem so bad.

Not at all quote mined. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 VladimirHerzog wrote:
ccs wrote:


Isn't it the plague marine kit that doesn't come with enough bolters to make the entire squad with the basic weapon loadout?
Or am I thinking of some other kit?


unsure honestly, but i know Chaos terminators didnt come with enough copies of their default loadout in 8th (which is why they added the whole accursed weapon thing ( which i actually liked ))


honestly i've just given up on 9th edition in favor of OPR. at least with that ruleset i don't get fethed by NMNR

Might be thinking of the CSM kit. You can't do all bolters or all chainswords with it. Not sure about Plague Marines.

And I'm done with 9th edition. Gimme gimme HERESY!


Could be.
It was A)something recent Chaos, B) something basic, C) something I don't really play.
It was just really weird that you couldn't build the entire squad with only the base equipment your told every member starts with.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Yeah, sounds like the CSM kit.
   
Made in us
Paramount Plague Censer Bearer





Good will is absolutely profit, for companies with competition. That's the issue, though, isn't it? No company has anywhere near enough standing to be direct competition for Games Workshop.

Good will is a huge thing for many companies, but in the tabletop world, even Dungeons and Dragons has more direct competition than Games Workshop, which only really competes with itself.

‘What Lorgar’s fanatics have not seen is that these gods are nothing compared to the power and the majesty of the Machine-God. Already, members of our growing cult are using the grace of the Omnissiah – the true Omnissiah, not Terra’s false prophet – to harness the might of the warp. Geller fields, warp missiles, void shields, all these things you are familiar with. But their underlying principles can be turned to so much more. Through novel exploitations of these technologies we will gain mastery first over the energies of the empyrean, then over the lesser entities, until finally the very gods themselves will bend the knee and recognise the supremacy of the Machine-God"
- Heretek Ardim Protos in Titandeath by Guy Haley 
   
Made in gb
Never Forget Isstvan!






Good will doesn't matter for a company that knows enough people will buy its products. For all the people who are annoyed at the lack of Bike Librarians or Palanquin Lords, there are far more who have never had them in the first place or care that they don't exist in the current ruleset.
It sucks for established hobbyists but new people are the target market for GW (as they should be) and new people generally don't care what happened before if the new thing is still cool.
   
Made in fr
Boosting Ultramarine Biker




 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So again…where’s the benefit?


Again, it doesn't matter. We don't need GW to get rid of NMNR (though it would be nice), we need to stop pretending that GW's opinion on the subject matters and stop using NMNR. GW's writers can go all "old man shakes fist at sky" all they want but if the players don't accept their nonsense then none of it matters.
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Aaaaaaaand how do we do that?

Amongst friends you can of course do Whatever You Damn Well Please. You want to invent units? Invent units. Want to 3D print your army? 3D print your army (eventually). Want to update a unit dropped from a current codex to the current edition? Go for it.

Nothing and nobody is stopping you. You do not need GW’s blessing. Never have, never will.

But. Outside of your gaming friends and clubs? Standardisation exists for a reason.

Think of it as language. English for instance has formal rules and various dictionaries. But within the U.K.? You get different dialects, vernaculars and accents - not to mention less formal slang terms.

Whilst ostensibly speaking the same language, a West Country Farmer and a Glaswegian Smackhead are going to struggle to understand each other, unless they adapt their speech to more standard English.

Even on this very Forum, I take great delight in displaying my wide knowledge of British slang to baffle and bemuse others. Why, just last night I posted about a financial dog egg hiding in the long grass of the economy, about to be hit by the lawnmower of recession, resulting in the Garden of Economic Stability being pebble dashed. Maybe you can decipher that, maybe you can’t. But I assure you it is English. And will make sense to someone with a similar (childish and filthy) vocabulary to my own.

Codexes are the same. As printed, they’re the Lingua Franca of their game.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

H.B.M.C, 27 July 2022. Suddenly the Chaos Codex doesn't seem so bad.

Not at all quote mined. 
   
Made in gb
Never Forget Isstvan!






Aecus Decimus wrote:
Again, it doesn't matter. We don't need GW to get rid of NMNR (though it would be nice), we need to stop pretending that GW's opinion on the subject matters and stop using NMNR. GW's writers can go all "old man shakes fist at sky" all they want but if the players don't accept their nonsense then none of it matters.

Except, the majority of the 40k player base clearly doesn't care. At best the majority care about Codex balance and new toys to play with each edition. If a Codex comes out that invalidates large portions of people's collections then most just move on to a different army or game. I didn't like the 9th Ed CSM Codex and with a lot less time on my plate, I just decided to stop playing 40k and focus on games I did enjoy like HH and Bolt Action.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
The benefit is good will. The only issue is that Games Workshop is so big that good will might not be worth investing in until they get a decent sized competitor, but by then it might be too late.


I appreciate I’m sounding like a corporate donkey-cave here, but good will isn’t profit, is it?
Good will can absolutely be profit. Good will means more willingness to spend, in the same way that ill will can mean people spend their money elsewhere.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote:
Basically you are asking to's to rewrite codexes. No surprise not popular. Players don"t like having to determine what set of house rules are followed where.

And not something few to's could do. Would require huge co-operation and still result in split playerbse as before when to's start to do own house rules.


^TO's did write their own rules involving secondary objectives, progressive scoring etc., in the form of the ITC rules. Lo and behold, GW adopted the model.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/29 22:01:23


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in fr
Boosting Ultramarine Biker




 Insectum7 wrote:
^TO's did write their own rules involving secondary objectives, progressive scoring etc., in the form of the ITC rules. Lo and behold, GW adopted the model.


Exactly. We used to do this kind of thing all the time. GW would print inadequate rules, the community would collectively say "that's nice, that's now how the game works" and fix the problem. So why are people falling meekly in line with NMNR?

(I'm sure it has nothing to do with major TOs suddenly having a personal financial stake in being good GW corporate yes-men.)
   
Made in gb
Never Forget Isstvan!






Because its obviously not a massive deal for most people.
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins





Tacoma, WA, USA

Aecus Decimus wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^TO's did write their own rules involving secondary objectives, progressive scoring etc., in the form of the ITC rules. Lo and behold, GW adopted the model.


Exactly. We used to do this kind of thing all the time. GW would print inadequate rules, the community would collectively say "that's nice, that's now how the game works" and fix the problem. So why are people falling meekly in line with NMNR?

(I'm sure it has nothing to do with major TOs suddenly having a personal financial stake in being good GW corporate yes-men.)
I would think the drastically higher level of involvement by GW in the health of the game has resulted in players becoming less and less willing to abandon the developer's vision of the game for their own.

You can complain about GW's execution when it comes to rules, codexes, balance, and timeliness, but you can't claim they do not respond to issues.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






It'd be useful to actually have numbers around people's assertions when it comes to how players are engaging, as it's pretty hard to know. Although what I've been seeing is more and more interest in alternative rulesets.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





Its simple. I've stopped buying gw and will probably just pick up xenos rampant.
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Aecus Decimus wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^TO's did write their own rules involving secondary objectives, progressive scoring etc., in the form of the ITC rules. Lo and behold, GW adopted the model.


Exactly. We used to do this kind of thing all the time. GW would print inadequate rules, the community would collectively say "that's nice, that's now how the game works" and fix the problem. So why are people falling meekly in line with NMNR?

(I'm sure it has nothing to do with major TOs suddenly having a personal financial stake in being good GW corporate yes-men.)


What do you mean by “falling in line”?

Do you mean no widespread adoption of a given homebrew rule? Because this is beginning to sound more like “why isn’t everyone playing my way” than something constructive.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

H.B.M.C, 27 July 2022. Suddenly the Chaos Codex doesn't seem so bad.

Not at all quote mined. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


What do you mean by “falling in line”?

Do you mean no widespread adoption of a given homebrew rule? Because this is beginning to sound more like “why isn’t everyone playing my way” than something constructive.


I think he means more like zealously protecting GW's bottom line and IP rather than the health of the community/hobby (and I mean miniatures gaming as a whole).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/30 04:29:38


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

 Gert wrote:
Because its obviously not a massive deal for most people.


Then it shouldn't be a big deal when I bring that Librarian on Bike (see Legends) that you asset doesn't exist in the current rules.
Especially in a non-tourney game.
Right?
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Aecus Decimus wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^TO's did write their own rules involving secondary objectives, progressive scoring etc., in the form of the ITC rules. Lo and behold, GW adopted the model.


Exactly. We used to do this kind of thing all the time. GW would print inadequate rules, the community would collectively say "that's nice, that's now how the game works" and fix the problem. So why are people falling meekly in line with NMNR?

(I'm sure it has nothing to do with major TOs suddenly having a personal financial stake in being good GW corporate yes-men.)


What do you mean by “falling in line”?

Do you mean no widespread adoption of a given homebrew rule? Because this is beginning to sound more like “why isn’t everyone playing my way” than something constructive.


'We used to do this All the time' is a bit inaccurate imo.

I think there was one edition (7th?) where the community collectively took the reins and put together their own (several sets of) competing rules sets for tournaments- ITC being the famous one - and the like and I remember serious friction in the community as to its officialness of which rules to follow. Not that ITC was 'better', it had plenty flaws of its own too.

Pretty much every other edition, 'the community' didn't take the reins and I'm game aware since third ed. Gamers, in general are extremely conservative when it comes to 'the rules', 'following the rules' and any deviation to the rules is usually met with vitriol and hostility.

Individuals and individual groups (im in one) have always said 'sod this' and done their own things with old models, custom rules etc. Buy this has never been an alternative 'official take' on the game.

Oh and by the way, while I'm not too bothered about maintaining every legacy option (look at pp - they just basically nuked their back catalogue, along with several factions and i can't disagree with their justification either)- sometimes its necessary for game health - I'm all for a reduction in special smowflake rules and special snowflake nounverb-bolters.samw with 'unit options should be confines to what's on the sprue in the box' is technically fine in principle, but its implemrntation, especially for some units is terrible.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/30 06:08:20


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
What do you mean by “falling in line”?
Like the TOs and other groups who fell over one another trying to be the first to adopt GW's standard/minimum board sizes.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/30 06:28:33


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in ca
Mekboy Hammerin' Somethin'




Sedona, Arizona

The issue with the whole "Good will isn't profit" thing is purely how big GW is. They dominate the market and, the only reason they didn't monopolize and strangle out the (miniscule) competition was their own incompetence when it comes to pricing.

Monopolies always result in stagnation and inferior products, because there's all of 0 reason to improve in any aspect... Which creates good will to attract, and retain, customers. This is why GW can constantly raise their prices, turn editions, Day-1 patch / DLC 50$ hard cover books, invalidate models, and operate a blatant obvious system of "Release broken rules, sell out all those models, nerf" for a majority of their releases for the past decade. This cartoonish level of customer exploitation would be dangerous in a market which had even a single competitor on equal footing, and an absolute death sentence of the space was shared by even more roughly-equal entities.

While it's unlikely GW will see a true competitor in their arena (as it's a pretty darn niche market), if one ever arose they'd be pretty swiftly put out of business. In my 20-odd years of Warhammer I've met very few people who really like GW, and even the fairly dedicated fans mostly seem to be in it because it's the only game in town.

 welshhoppo wrote:

I like my Orks how I like my Emperor, dead.
 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
What do you mean by “falling in line”?
Like the TOs and other groups who fell over one another trying to be the first to adopt GW's standard/minimum board sizes.

Nailed it.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut



Bamberg / Erlangen

No model no rule is stupid and killed alot of fun and army construction possibilities for those who are/were affected.

For my homebrew I went the complete opposite way and re-introduced the armory and even added combinations that were not available in the past. It is just more fun and flavour for everyone.

   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
What do you mean by “falling in line”?
Like the TOs and other groups who fell over one another trying to be the first to adopt GW's standard/minimum board sizes.



Right. But…how’s that GW’s problem. How is it even a particular problem overall? It’s still a standardisation. Perhaps not one to everyone’s taste (and I’m absolutely not trying to dictate what that should or shouldn’t be), but a standardisation all the same?

There’s still nothing to stop a TO etc including tweaks and house rules if they want.

OP seems to be trying to whip up a storm over nothing.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

H.B.M.C, 27 July 2022. Suddenly the Chaos Codex doesn't seem so bad.

Not at all quote mined. 
   
Made in gb
Never Forget Isstvan!






ccs wrote:
Then it shouldn't be a big deal when I bring that Librarian on Bike (see Legends) that you asset doesn't exist in the current rules.
Especially in a non-tourney game.
Right?

It isn't. I've never had an issue with Legends material because they are legal as per the rules of the game. If other people have a problem with Legends units that's their problem to have.
All I'm saying is that NMNR doesn't seem to be a concern for the majority of the player base and that there won't be a cooperative effort to amend the rules.
   
Made in us
Stalwart Veteran Guard Sergeant





Thought: the 1 of X wargear in a unit thing acts to limit the extent of small power imbalances among the wargear options resulting in OP units because someone just took all of the best option (as in 1 of X makes that less likely to occur).

While I don't personally feel particularly strongly about the rule (I find it slightly distasteful...I play via TTS, so I've got no skin in the model game), I certainly can understand the frustration others feel with changing to these rules. I just wanted to share a silver lining to this trend in unit loadout.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/30 17:07:44


 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






DeadliestIdiot wrote:
Thought: the 1 of X wargear in a unit thing acts to limit the extent of small power imbalances among the wargear options resulting in OP units because someone just took all of the best option (as in 1 of X makes that less likely to occur).

While I don't personally feel particularly strongly about the rule (I find it slightly distasteful...I play via TTS, so I've got no skin in the model game), I certainly can understand the frustration others feel with changing to these rules. I just wanted to share a silver lining to this trend in unit loadout.


For me, the issue is such a rule is applied unevenly, and can adversely affect older kits.

The alternative already kind of exists for Necromunda and Horus Heresy. Separate weapon packs. Now that is not ideal. The ideal is of course every box comes with every conceivable combo of equipment.

Which GW did do for 40K - just in a completely arse about face way with the current “if your box has 1 of X, Y and Z, and 10 dudes? Those 10 dudes can only have one of X,Y, or Z.

I think the worst example of this (there may be others, don’t crucify me for my lack of knowledge) would be the Ad Mech Skitarii, if only because Rangers want those Arqueba, and the..other ones, which need to be used more aggressively, really don’t benefit from the Arqueba.

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?

H.B.M.C, 27 July 2022. Suddenly the Chaos Codex doesn't seem so bad.

Not at all quote mined. 
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




If it was just about theme and would be applied in a consequent way I wouldn't bother that much, or at least I'd find it understandable. But since nmnr is all over the place, totally inconsistent and makes the game tedious at times (CSM and DG) for me it's the main reason to look outside of GW's 40K rules. I want rules that inspire me to build models, not rules (and models) that are: this is our 3D Puzzle for you, build it and play with it exactly as we say.
GW did good work on an army level with the subfactions and amount of rules you can slap on your army. But they took that customization away from the unit level, which is sad and made me look at One Page rules - you get more Inspiration to build new models on literally one page there than you get in a GW Codex nowadays.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: