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.

First, I apologize if this is not the place to post this.

Recently there is a shift of players at my place who went from 40k to Fantasy. The reason is they feel Fantasy is more balance and fun due to the magic-phase, whereas in 40k you just move, shoot and run. There are some people who still play 40k but due to different time (and work), I don't get any chances to play with them. Also, in my place, most of the Fantasy player started the game from 40k, then migrate to Fantasy, and they never return to 40k anymore.

Me myself as a Nids player and initially my plan was to collect Nid first, then I.G so I can create that tired and yet fun 'Alamo-style' scene. Plus, I am not much a guy who likes 'magic elves and dragon' type fantasy. I am more into Sci-fi ('Railgun Vs. Extra-dimension thing or alien or robot' kinda guy).
If I play Fantasy, my choice of army would be a steam-punk type army, which , in theory not quite exist in Fantasy.

My question to any veteran GW player out there:
Do both games offer different gameplay experience?
Should I continue to collect 40k model first or should I jump into Fantasy game now (so I can still play the game)?

Technically speaking, there IS a steampunk style army.

Empire, focus on blackpowder weapons, cannons, and Steam Tanks.

Both games do offer a different gameplay experience.

The 'blocks' of Warhammer Fantasy are easy to understand because the bonuses for various moves are spelled out in the rules. Warhammer 40k is different, and regarded as more simplistic, because the advantages of position (flanking, etc) are a result of the rules rather than spelled out in them. Interestingly 40k used to have a magic phase and it got dumped in the move from 2nd edition to 3rd edition....

I think the problem is that people hop into the 40k game with all the bells and whistles, which can over-rule the basics if you let it. People tend to wade into WFB much more slowly slowly, and that means they get a better grasp of the basics, and in grasping the basics for one and not the other, rather the former as being more tactical/strategic. Whenever I introduced someone to the game I used my Imperial Guard with a Platoon a side.

In addition Warhammer 40k requires much more terrain, terrain that would make a Warhammer Fantasy game more of a hassle than fun. Warhammer Fantasy lets you get away with less scenery. It's much more of a "Let's line up and have a battle!"

Finally there's a pile of steam-punk-esque elements in Fantasy in both the Dwarf and Empire armies. Worth a look if that floats your boat. Me, I ditched WFB at around the beginning of 6th edition and haven't looked back.

Nurglitch wrote:Both games do offer a different gameplay experience.
I think the problem is that people hop into the 40k game with all the bells and whistles, which can over-rule the basics if you let it. People tend to wade into WFB much more slowly slowly, and that means they get a better grasp of the basics, and in grasping the basics for one and not the other, rather the former as being more tactical/strategic. Whenever I introduced someone to the game I used my Imperial Guard with a Platoon a side.

There is a thing that differs Fantasy from 40k is the attack modifier, which is more like a D&D game, example a model with heavy armor has 4+ armor save, if he gets strike by a S5 attack, it will minus 2 of his armor value thus he needs a 6+ for armor save. That's what I have been told and that's probably the reason they switch to Fantasy lately.

Nurglitch wrote:In addition Warhammer 40k requires much more terrain, terrain that would make a Warhammer Fantasy game more of a hassle than fun. Warhammer Fantasy lets you get away with less scenery. It's much more of a "Let's line up and have a battle!"

I do notice the lack / not much terrain in a Fantasy game. Everything just march, then charge into close combat. Not much shooting which mean not much fun for me.

Melissia wrote:Technically speaking, there IS a steampunk style army.
Empire, focus on blackpowder weapons, cannons, and Steam Tanks.

Nurglitch wrote:
Finally there's a pile of steam-punk-esque elements in Fantasy in both the Dwarf and Empire armies.

Not a favorite dwarf lover and the 'steam-pink esque' of Empire is closer to the Renaissance era rather than the Victorian Era.

Nurglitch wrote:I ditched WFB at around the beginning of 6th edition and haven't looked back.

Why is that

You never specified "victorian", you merely said "steampunk".

Melissia wrote:You never specified "victorian", you merely said "steampunk".

Yeah I should have mentioned earlier

What about skavens ? they have lot of crazy sort of steam punk stuff (actually they entirely rely on it and their numbers). And you can try to make them look more victorian with conversions, if you dare!

40K and WFB are two entirely different gaming experiences. If you like and enjoy 40K, by all means continue with it. If nothing in the WFB ranges catch your interest, you will be spending you hard-earned money on stuff you won't want to work on. I have been there, done that many times before.

Sorry to hear your locals have deserted you.

the same thing happened around here, but it was more of expanding our gaming range rather then leaving one entirely.



my reccomendation is to ask for a test game. leaf through the rule book(the big one) and read the fluff sections. if you find an army you like go for it.

you probably haven't been exposed to all the fantesy races as some arn't as popular as others. go and look on GW's web site and look at all the different model ranges.



Fantesy is fun to play, but if you don't like the whole fantesy feel we really can't help you

I haven't played WHFB since second edition, so I can't comment on the merits of both games.

I will say that starting any GW game is potentially a very expensive mistake, since you won't get back half the (lots of) money you shell out for official models.

Therefore the suggestion by Grey Templar to get in a test game is very sound. If possible, try to get several test games with different armies, so you get a good feel for all the possibilities of the rules.

Wiglaf wrote:What about skavens ? they have lot of crazy sort of steam punk stuff (actually they entirely rely on it and their numbers). And you can try to make them look more victorian with conversions, if you dare!

I do like the machinery of Skavens, but to paint those tiny models can be a really pain in the butt, I am not 14 years old xD.

gazelle wrote:If nothing in the WFB ranges catch your interest, you will be spending you hard-earned money on stuff you won't want to work on. I have been there, done that many times before.

Grey Templar wrote:Sorry to hear your locals have deserted you.

I guess the reason I am posting this question is because I need an army so I can play with my friends, and I don't think they are not deserted the whole 40k, it's just that whenever they gather around, 70% of their topic would be focus on Fantasy side.

Grey Templar wrote:
my reccomendation is to ask for a test game. leaf through the rule book(the big one) and read the fluff sections. if you find an army you like go for it.
you probably haven't been exposed to all the fantesy races as some arn't as popular as others. go and look on GW's web site and look at all the different model ranges.

Kilkrazy wrote:try to get several test games with different armies, so you get a good feel for all the possibilities of the rules.

Makes sense.

Also, I just found out another reason why they are not playing 40k now, because 80% of the players here are playing human-based army like BA, SW. Plus in their opinion the special character of 40k is too powerful like Mephiston and Abandon the Despoiler, not quite balancing as Fantasy.
Even the newbie players are starting to get Fantasy army, although their experience in 40k is pale compared to us.

Sadly everything about WHFB except the models turns me off. Not interested in huge blocks of troops to buy and paint. The general theme of lined ranks crashing into each other is boring, there is little mobility and positioning. General lack of terrain makes for more boring going on.

I really like the look of the Skaven and Dwarfs, but they are so tiny.

Mr Gold wrote:
Also, I just found out another reason why they are not playing 40k now, because 80% of the players here are playing human-based army like BA, SW. Plus in their opinion the special character of 40k is too powerful like Mephiston and Abandon the Despoiler, not quite balancing as Fantasy.
Even the newbie players are starting to get Fantasy army, although their experience in 40k is pale compared to us.

Actually, Fantesy, for years, was considered Herohammer.

8th has made the game more balanced, but there are quite a few powerful characters in the game. Telcius is one that HE players tend to cheeze out with.

40k rarely hinges on powerful characters, but fantesy does to a greater extent.

in fantesy you will have a General, and most of the time a BSB. both will usually be generic classes, but they will be massivly important as Fantesy has a great focus on Ld tests which are improved on by your general and BSB. many troops have lousy Ld, but they are able to use the General's Ld if he is within a certain distance. the BSB allows you to reroll your tests within a certain radius too.


as far as Meph and Abbaddon. Meph is powerful, but he is very easy to kill as he has NO invuln save and can't join units. just light him up with plasma. Abbadon is hard, but he is a very well costed model. his rules are good and CSM pay a premium to use him.

Fantasy turns me off, no matter how balanced it is.

I personally don't play fantasy, but whenever I see it, it looks so boring. Giant squares of (in general) really crappy soldiers, mostly just there to tie up the enemy, a few giga/mega/whathaveyoutermforamazing special models (dragons, steam tanks, plague furnaces, ect.), a crazy good, unstoppable leader, and hidden surprises (fanatics in a goblin squad, ect.). If buying extra trays is nearly essential to move your troop blocks around, then I really don't want to bother.


Every fantasy player I have met has always said "It's a more tactical game than 40k", or something along those lines. All I see is "hide the super killy unit/character in blocks of infantry and unleash him at the right time".

It isn´t more tactical than 40k. Just more strategical.

You might say that 40K is won in the Shooting and the CC phase.

Fantesy is won in the Movement phase.

if you get the right unit at the right time in the right place you will win.

And some time ago 40k was won -mostly- once you finished the list. Being deployment or luck quite secondary factors.

Mr Gold wrote:Plus in their opinion the special character of 40k is too powerful like Mephiston and Abandon the Despoiler, not quite balancing as Fantasy.

So true. The newer codexs units have quite an advantage over older ones. even just 4th ed one. It would be good if Daemon hunters and Necrons got done up after Dark elder.

micahaphone wrote:I personally don't play fantasy, but whenever I see it, it looks so boring. Giant squares of (in general) really crappy soldiers, mostly just there to tie up the enemy, a few giga/mega/whathaveyoutermforamazing special models (dragons, steam tanks, plague furnaces, ect.), a crazy good, unstoppable leader, and hidden surprises (fanatics in a goblin squad, ect.). If buying extra trays is nearly essential to move your troop blocks around, then I really don't want to bother.

I know Fantasy is based on the 'Renaissance / medieval Age' (hence the funky color outfit for Empire Spearman). I just don't get the idea of battle by just marching, declare charge, then lock in close combat for the rest of the game.
Another reason they think Fantasy is more fun due to the magic-phase. From what I know, the current 8th rulebook allows a wizard to dispel once in a turn, regarless of success or failed result, and they like it.

micahaphone wrote:(fanatics in a goblin squad, ect.).

I have to admit it, swinging a chain-ball around with unpredictable result and might cause havoc among friendly and enemy army is funny to laugh at.

Grey Templar wrote:in fantesy you will have a General, and most of the time a BSB......

So does that mean Fantasy has more Ld test element compare with 40k?

Grey Templar wrote:as far as Meph and Abbaddon......

Honestly, I have no fear when I am facing Meph. (Shadow in the Warp and DeathLeaper ) Only Abbaddon gives me a rush due to his D6+4attack to-hit roll and high Strength and Toughness.

Ledabot wrote:
So true. The newer codexs units have quite an advantage over older ones...

Such as? (newbie GW player here)

Mr Gold wrote:

Ledabot wrote:
So true. The newer codexs units have quite an advantage over older ones...

Such as? (newbie GW player here)

Well, i see my friends necrons shoved in his face dayly because of the power of space marines. In fact, im not quite shore how it happens because it happens so fast.

Ledabot wrote:
i see my friends necrons shoved in his face daily...

Rumor that a new Necron codex is coming out soon, probably next year. Now the new D.E codex is out and people are starting to pick D.E again, I see that's a good sign.

Mr Gold wrote:

micahaphone wrote:I personally don't play fantasy, but whenever I see it, it looks so boring. Giant squares of (in general) really crappy soldiers, mostly just there to tie up the enemy, a few giga/mega/whathaveyoutermforamazing special models (dragons, steam tanks, plague furnaces, ect.), a crazy good, unstoppable leader, and hidden surprises (fanatics in a goblin squad, ect.). If buying extra trays is nearly essential to move your troop blocks around, then I really don't want to bother.

I know Fantasy is based on the 'Renaissance / medieval Age' (hence the funky color outfit for Empire Spearman). I just don't get the idea of battle by just marching, declare charge, then lock in close combat for the rest of the game.
Another reason they think Fantasy is more fun due to the magic-phase. From what I know, the current 8th rulebook allows a wizard to dispel once in a turn, regarless of success or failed result, and they like it.

micahaphone wrote:(fanatics in a goblin squad, ect.).

I have to admit it, swinging a chain-ball around with unpredictable result and might cause havoc among friendly and enemy army is funny to laugh at.

Grey Templar wrote:in fantesy you will have a General, and most of the time a BSB......

So does that mean Fantasy has more Ld test element compare with 40k?

Grey Templar wrote:as far as Meph and Abbaddon......

Honestly, I have no fear when I am facing Meph. (Shadow in the Warp and DeathLeaper ) Only Abbaddon gives me a rush due to his D6+4attack to-hit roll and high Strength and Toughness.

Ledabot wrote:
So true. The newer codexs units have quite an advantage over older ones...

Such as? (newbie GW player here)

Yes, fantesy does use Ld tests alot more. it is prehaps the most important characteristic in the game(and the most modifiable)

New codexs: Space Wolves, BA, Tyranids, Space marines, and, in a few weeks, DE.

Old Codexs: DH, WH, current DE, Necrons, BT, DA.

Kinda shocked at some of the responses in this thread.

I left 40k with 5th Ed Coming out and migrated to WHFB off and on, followed by Warmachine (now there's your Steampunk!).

With 8th Edition, I'm really not liking WHFB. Don't let them kid you that it's "Balanced". It most certainly is not balanced, even with 8th Edition.

Currently as the game stands, the Magic Phase has changed the game radically and most successful armies build around it and getting off "the uber spells" which can eliminate critical enemy Characters (Characters have a massive impact on WHFB games) and units.

With the changes in WHFB, I'm finding that I can come back to 40k and give things a try. Personally I think 40k has been more balanced than WHFB for about 2 years or so.

As an aside, I'm finding Warmachine/Hordes MK2 to be far superior to either game, and involves a lot more thinking on your feet and has a greater overall balance than either GW game.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:the Magic Phase has changed the game radically and most successful armies build around it and getting off "the uber spells" which can eliminate critical enemy Characters (Characters have a massive impact on WHFB games) and units.

I wonder if they can accept the magic-phase of Fantasy, why can't they accept the psychic battle of 40k..

Voodoo Boyz wrote:I'm finding Warmachine/Hordes MK2 to be far superior

We are planning to get it here in next year. Right now everybody is busy collecting GW stuff.
Btw how superior is Warmachine compare to GW's Warhammer series?

Mr Gold wrote:

Voodoo Boyz wrote:the Magic Phase has changed the game radically and most successful armies build around it and getting off "the uber spells" which can eliminate critical enemy Characters (Characters have a massive impact on WHFB games) and units.

I wonder if they can accept the magic-phase of Fantasy, why can't they accept the psychic battle of 40k..

Magic didn't seem to be as applicable in a Sci-Fi setting so they toned Psychic powers down.

having Psychic powers simply take effect in the phase it affects(like a Power that gives Fleet to come into play in the movement phase) keeps them toned down and focuses on Technology as the driving force.

Fantesy is a setting that lends itself better to magic being a major part of the action and as such deserves a phase of its own.

Grey Templar wrote:You might say that 40K is won in the Shooting and the CC phase.

Fantesy is won in the Movement phase.

if you get the right unit at the right time in the right place you will win.

On the contrary good maneuver can also win games in 40k, but WHFB punishes poor deployment and movement decisions more than 40k..

Both are different, and both are good and enjoyable (for me)...."balance" depends on many things..in reality there is no "real" equal armies in both systems, but as long as even the so called "weaker" armies can still pull off wins then more or less there is "balance"....

yeah, movement is crucial in 40k, but mistakes are fairly easily rectified as movement is only restricted by the actual terrain.

Fantesy requires turning(which takes up movement) and then most infantry moves pitifully slow.

The main thing that prevents me from starting Fantasy is the muddled "basing", which, for me, would take forever to make. I really don't like the High School Geometry protractor style base bins for models.

Another thing I don't like is pre-measuring. For those who don't play Fantasy, you are allowed to pre-measure EVERYTHING from movement to assault.

Part of the challenge in 40K, for me, is that it is a game of inches. You're constantly asking yourself "is that enemy unit 12" away, or 13? Can I get that charge/shot off"? Judging measurements adds skill to the game. It's not a complete dealbreaker for me in regards to WHFB having it, I just don't prefer it.

Regardless, I LOVE the armies in Fantasy Battles. Vampire Counts, for me, is my favorite army in any tabletop game I have ever seen. Skaven and Tomb Kings also look really cool.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:I'm finding Warmachine/Hordes MK2 to be far superior

We are planning to get it here in next year. Right now everybody is busy collecting GW stuff.
Btw how superior is Warmachine compare to GW's Warhammer series?