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.

I play fantasy, and have not played 40k, I love the looks of it, but can someone tell me the differences, game wise?

No rank formations so no more flank bonuses and ranks in combat resolution. Units are generally much smaller in 40k, especially with the unit blocks in 8th. Everything is a skirmisher, shooting plays a much more integral roll as well.

The biggest difference is probably vehicles. There are a lot of tanks, skimmers and walkers in 40k. You have to build your army around being able to take these down, as well as the infantry.

Question - Should you start 40k
Answer - yes

END

The real question here is of WHEN you should start 40k.

A: now.

Actually... I would recommend against it.

The Way GW are running it into the ground recently, I would stick to Fantasy (rather than lose that investment) and stay away from buying any more GW stuff.

That being said, try and pick up a few Novels, especially the better Horus Heresy ones and CIAPHAS CAIN, HERO OF THE IMPERIUM. 40k fluff can be pretty dire, but when it is done right, it is really good.

40k and Fantasy are different. 40k for one is much simpler in it's movement rules, and there aren't things like ranks and formations and movement values to keep track of. There also aren't modifiers, just static armor piercing values of weapons that may or may not ignore armor depending on what they're shooting.

See if you can get the Black Reach rulebook on eBay, or borrow it from a friend. Reading the rules is probably the best way to figure out the differences, really.

I'm not a fantasy player (but I'm working on it!) so I can't give you my personal assessment. However, the guys I game with who play both say that 40K is a simpler game, and WFB is more of a gamer's game. But 40K is still good solid fun, since there are obviously so many people who play both.

40K started out as WFB in space back in the before times, but it has evolved a long way since then, both in terms of rules and in background. Really it comes down to a matter of taste. If you know guys who already play 40K, ask them to walk you through a 750-point game so you can get a feel for it.

Have fun!

Warhammer is more about good movement and timing. 40k seems to be about making sure your list is more uber then your oponents and target priority. Both games are fun to play just dont expect 40k to have the tactical depth of warhammer its really a META game now

Jubear wrote:Warhammer is more about good movement and timing. 40k seems to be about making sure your list is more uber then your oponents and target priority. Both games are fun to play just dont expect 40k to have the tactical depth of warhammer its really a META game now

It's only metagamey if you play with tournament players or jackasses, really.

As long as you play to have fun and don't try to min-max/game the system, the game's just fine. The bit about target priority is true though, but that is in almost any wargame.

Brother SRM wrote:

Jubear wrote:Warhammer is more about good movement and timing. 40k seems to be about making sure your list is more uber then your oponents and target priority. Both games are fun to play just dont expect 40k to have the tactical depth of warhammer its really a META game now

It's only metagamey if you play with tournament players or jackasses, really.

As long as you play to have fun and don't try to min-max/game the system, the game's just fine. The bit about target priority is true though, but that is in almost any wargame.

Yeah it just seems that everyone min/maxs in 40k these days even my regular opponent who is fairly casual seems to be making uber list now I dont mind it for tournaments but it would be nice to field more then your codex best stuff every now and then

What's the point of deliberately using crap units?

I thought the point of a game was to win?

Psychic powers work totally different than Magic, and for the most part shouldn't be bothered with. This may be changing soon, though.

You don't need as many points as you do in Warhammer Fantasy. My gaming group usually played with 2000 pts in Warhammer, but in 40k we love playing with 1000 pts. This may or may not be an isolated thing though.

Gwar! wrote:What's the point of deliberately using crap units?

I thought the point of a game was to win?

I thought the idea was to have fun that might just be me tho

40k is better by far!

Gwar! wrote:What's the point of deliberately using crap units?

I thought the point of a game was to win?

Everyone plays for different reasons. 40k is the worst tabletop game to play with the 'play to win' mentality. Play it as a hobby, and play for fun. You'll, quite unsurprisingly, find yourself actually having fun this way.

-Loki- wrote:

Gwar! wrote:What's the point of deliberately using crap units?

I thought the point of a game was to win?

Everyone plays for different reasons. 40k is the worst tabletop game to play with the 'play to win' mentality. Play it as a hobby, and play for fun. You'll, quite unsurprisingly, find yourself actually having fun this way.

Fun is for scrubs!

40k is awesome.

Play it, and don't listen to the haters. The worst place to ask if you should play 40k is a place full of internet malcontents.

40k is a lot of fun. People tend to lose sight of that while arguing the irrelevant minutia of rules and making it into a hyper-competitive second job.

It's always fun when the new people meet Gwar!

aja10000 wrote:I play fantasy, and have not played 40k, I love the looks of it, but can someone tell me the differences, game wise?

Then go for it. 40k is much more loose than fantasy is. Pretty much everyone moves 6" a turn, 12" if they're jump infantry, and in a loose skirmisher formation like skirmishers were back in the seventh edition of Fantasy. Also I wouldn't say shooting pays a more integral role as with a fair few of the armies it's still who can mash face the fastest, but there are a few that can win a game without entering close combat.

Just be thankful it's not 4th edition where one super assault unit could basically wipe out an entire army by constantly consolidating into a new unit.
But what GW game doesn't have that problem from time to time

Oh, another thing I should mention: This isn't Fantasy, your characters aren't going to be taking on entire units by themselves, and if you leave them out in the open, they will get IDed.

Slarg232 wrote:Oh, another thing I should mention: This isn't Fantasy, your characters aren't going to be taking on entire units by themselves, and if you leave them out in the open, they will get IDed.

Unless they're Ghazkull.

Although there are a few characters that can do that still. Mostly it's the Space Marines. Should try Commissar Yarrick sometime though

I had a Canoness shrug off 5 Lascannons, 4 Autocannons, and 6 Meltaguns against IG one round. Yay for 2+ invul saves.

Yeh faith points are awesome. I had two Battle Sisters with Meltaguns walk straight up to a squadron of Leman Russ Executioners and blast them in the face

As the above posters have clarified, there are exceptions to that rule, but it's still a general rule.

Yeah, sorry. I just hate Ghazkull.

Gwar! wrote:What's the point of deliberately using crap units?

I thought the point of a game was to win?

Yes, but there's more than a fine line between taking a Chaos Spawn-centric Chaos Marine army and taking an IG leafblower list. Just saying you don't need to bring the absolute nastiest thing you can every single game.

I only started playing 40k because futuristic guns 'and gak' looked too good to pass up. Granted it is expensive.

Jubear wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Jubear wrote:Warhammer is more about good movement and timing. 40k seems to be about making sure your list is more uber then your oponents and target priority. Both games are fun to play just dont expect 40k to have the tactical depth of warhammer its really a META game now

It's only metagamey if you play with tournament players or jackasses, really.

As long as you play to have fun and don't try to min-max/game the system, the game's just fine. The bit about target priority is true though, but that is in almost any wargame.

Yeah it just seems that everyone min/maxs in 40k these days even my regular opponent who is fairly casual seems to be making uber list now I dont mind it for tournaments but it would be nice to field more then your codex best stuff every now and then

I have yet to play anyone like this. Thing the internet is full of tournament players and people who like to gripe over their last loss, so you'll read about much more about it than what actually happens.

I personally don't play fantasy, but from observing the game, I believe that 40k is simplified, and a bit more, dare I say, casual. ( of course there's always waac gamers and tourneys)

If you like the look, try it. If you have some pals who play, borrow a rulebook, look through it. If you're near a gw store, I'm sure they'd be happy to give you an intro game. Most people play space marines for their first army (usually the generic codex labeled "space marines") because they are hardy, and it takes a lot to kill them. They have many different units, and I really doubt that any one isn't good. Sure, you can look up some super tournament list online, but it is really fun just to try new stuff in new combinations.

Jubear wrote:Yeah it just seems that everyone min/maxs in 40k these days even my regular opponent who is fairly casual seems to be making uber list now I dont mind it for tournaments but it would be nice to field more then your codex best stuff every now and then

Do Fantasy players deliberately take rubbish units then? Why?

Oh, I just noticed your flag - Australia, comp capital of the world.

Scott-S6 wrote:

Jubear wrote:Yeah it just seems that everyone min/maxs in 40k these days even my regular opponent who is fairly casual seems to be making uber list now I dont mind it for tournaments but it would be nice to field more then your codex best stuff every now and then

Do Fantasy players deliberately take rubbish units then? Why?

Oh, I just noticed your flag - Australia, comp capital of the world.

Actually I think you would in fantasy numbers account for way more then quality in fantasy so cheaper units make sense.

And ive no idea what the comp comment is supposed to mean