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.

Bobthehero wrote:Personnally if I get declined, I'll leave and find someone else, that good enough?

Sure. Personally, that's what I'd expect. Just don't be a jerk about it - contrary to what some in this thread have said.

rigeld2 wrote:Forgeworld models, sure. (Mortis is just dual ac dread, right?)
Forgeworld units/rules, requires extra permission... And if you're polite, you'll hold back the snarky remark. Because as long as he's polite in declining, it's not justified.

Mortis is the dual ML/AC/Lascannon, purely ranged dreadnought for DA

Yes as long as he is polite, though if he see's its stats and still says overpowered, I'd be asking him if he's completely terrified of GK and standard space marine armies.

Forgeworld Rules, I'm not now going to start quoting them, it was a statement.

Now GO!, get your Praetors, Macharusususususus's, LR Achilles, Eldar Scorpions whatever you please.

Tell your little Store Owners who have objections, You make 'em, I bought 'em, The Rules are here for them in Black and White, and I'm sure as Hell Gonna use 'em to my Full Advantage... If your Army of Equal Points Value has a Problem with that, then it's quite simple, I WIN!!!

It's essentially me turning up with 200 Ork Boyz and the Marine Player deploying a Land Raider - The chances of the Land Raider spontaneously combusting are slim, so I concentrate on the stuff I can take out. The Land Raider can't shoot @ me when I'm locked in CC so whats the problem?

SamsStuff wrote:Forgeworld Rules, I'm not now going to start quoting them, it was a statement.

Now GO!, get your Praetors, Macharusususususus's, LR Achilles, Eldar Scorpions whatever you please.

Tell your little Store Owners who have objections, You make 'em, I bought 'em, The Rules are here for them in Black and White, and I'm sure as Hell Gonna use 'em to my Full Advantage... If your Army of Equal Points Value has a Problem with that, then it's quite simple, I WIN!!!

Let's stick to discussing only those units that are officially sanctioned for use in 40K, not all IA units. This topic has also just come up on The Dark City, and I will repeat here some of what I said there:

Here is FW's/GW's definition of a 40K unit as indicated by the appropriate "Warhammer 40,000" stamp in their more recent books such as Imperial Armour - Apocalypse, 2ed:

Forge World wrote:3. Warhammer 40,000 Unit: This unit is intended to be used in 'standard' games of Warhammer 40,000 within the usual limitations of Codex selection and force organisation charts. As with all our models these should be considered 'official', but owing to the fact they may be unknown to your opponent, it's best to make sure they are happy to play a game using Forge World models before you start.

Thus, these are official 40K units and it is suggested that as a courtesy you check with your opponent to see if they are comfortable playing against them. Now as admirable as that may be, no one ever asks if you agree to play a SM Thunderfire cannon for the first time, do they? Personally, I think this suggestion is something of a hangover from days of yore when FW units were more unbalanced than today's.

FW gear is often excluded because players are simply unfamiliar with it. Most of us tend to accept our opponent's word on any unfamiliar unit, and no one is ever 100% familiar with all potential opposing units. But in any decent tournament (or even regular game), as a courtesy to both the TO and your opponents, you should be bringing spare copies of your own army list, the appropriate codex and FAQ, and any special entries (such as FW's) that might also apply. So just like any other unfamiliar unit in your army, if an opponent has a question about it you have all the material readily at hand to show them.

As for FW stuff being over-costed or over-powered, looking at the latest IA Apocalypse 2nd Edition, and other recent IA publications, I find that most of it seems fairly reasonable. Certainly no more unbalanced that certain other current, 40K codexes put out by GW. Perhaps those should be refused as well? If people want to pay the points and use them, knock yourself out.

To continue to single out FW gear is just wrong. At some point, especially since they are churning out more and more product each year - due to our demand, I might add - we will have to just accept it, and the sooner the better. I, for one, actually enjoy seeing different and 'exotic' units being used. It adds variety and interest, and a new challenge, to the game.

And fun.

I just hosted a tournie that allowed IA gear, and there were no problems. Admittedly not much was utilised, but the same thing happened last year too, without any fuss. I think it is something that we should all get used to. We have just seen a new SM flyer at FW Open Day and 6ed is rumoured to be flyer-friendly, so no doubt we will all encounter more and more FW product in the future. Time to move on.

It really feels like people are trying to find a moral reason to decline games with FW models.

You always have the option of refusing a game in the first place, regardless of rules or model use. Don't like his face? Decline. Don't like his list? Decline! Don't like his paint scheme? Decline. Think using 3 psyfleman dreads is cheesy? Decline!

From the FW site:

Q1. IS FORGE WORLD PART OF GAMES WORKSHOP.
A1. Yes, but we operate as a small (but perfectly formed) separate division from the company that makes and sells the main Games Workshop range of products. We are not connected with the US company that used the same name many years back for production of resin Warhammer 40,000 vehicles under licence.

Can't get more clear than that. Produced by a sub-division of GW. With full permission. With obvious approval of their rules for standard games (where applicable) and for Apocalypse/Planetstrike/Cities of Death.

The (newer) books regard the rules as 'official' and clearly state for each model what kind of game the rules are intended for. They suggest that as a courtesy you should ask your opponent whether they are okay with it. Suggest.

Trying to find justification in the main rules or IA books or in the company structure is just wrong.

Just man up and say:
* I don't know the rules and I don't play against what I don't know
* I personally think Unit X is overpowered so I won't play
* My list isn't set up to deal with Unit Y so I won't play
* etc..

It's only took me 31 posts figure this but I now realise I need to ellaborate more, and start quoting things out of books.

Tell your little Store Owners who have objections, You make 'em, I bought 'em ;

Well essentailly, they didn't make them personally however, a subdivision of GW did, the rules have been approved by GW for me to use my models within regular games of warhammer 40,000, it also states in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook if an agreement can't be reached roll a dice.

The Rules are here for them in Black and White;

Meaning you have your Book with defining rules for that unit on hand, so when my opponent says, well what does it do? I have the answer and your interpretation of that rule.

I'm sure as Hell Gonna use 'em to my Full Advantage;

I will use them as the Rules state, just as you will use your specialist units as your rules state, assuming that Baal Predator isn't for lighting Cigars with? It is not a unit that is Indestructable, it has it's strengths but it also has it's weaknesses, so do most units.

If your Army of Equal Points Value has a Problem with that;

This is Simply stating, unless I missed something somewhere, we play games of equal points value. Everything is pointed somewhat accordingly to what it does. If you've somehow managed play a list that cannot combat one of my squads then you should concentrate on taking the squads out you can, at the end of the day this unit(s) cannot wipe out your entire list in a 6 turn game.

then I WIN...

everything to back this up is listed above I believe.

Aparently my Ork example wasn't quote worthy but a prime example of not taking a Balanced List.

never mind.

Reading the last few pages of this thread, it seems obvious to me that a lot of the arguments going back and forth are being made at cross purposes.

I think so much of it depends on the setting of the game, be it tournament or friendly, and the way in which you view 40k as an experience (and perhaps how seriously you take such experience).

As I said before, so much of it comes down to the 'social contract' that GW is so fond of mentioning. This works in both directions, but the general rule is that if your opponent did not enjoy the game at least a little, then it could be regarded as a failure on your part.
So, plonking 6 terminator squads down on the table in a PuG, when you don't know your opponent, could be regarded as a failure of that rule. As could perhaps using a super-heavy or lucius drop pods in the same manner. The game should be a fun experience for both, and unbalancing the game to this level is bound to ruin the game for your opponent. Of course, there are ways for setting up such games - I would be happy to play an opponent with 6 terminator squads, if the person spoke to me about it first.

I think it is all to do with communicating with your opponent - there is too much of the 'online FPS' mentality amongst some younger gamers today, as though there is no-one stood the other side of the table and the sole object is to win (or 'pwn' them I guess?) Those people need to move their competitive nature into another field, and realise that the experience of 40k suffers badly, and that you won't get many opponents either, if you try to apply it to a game that is inherently social in nature and also still open to abuse by people who do not realise that making a ridiculous army list might ruin the enjoyment of your opponent.

Shandara wrote:

Just man up and say:
* I don't know the rules and I don't play against what I don't know
* I personally think Unit X is overpowered so I won't play
* My list isn't set up to deal with Unit Y so I won't play
* etc..

Couldn't (Didn't) have put it better myself

So, plonking 6 terminator squads down on the table in a PuG, when you don't know your opponent, could be regarded as a failure of that rule, would be happy to play an opponent with 6 terminator squads, if the person spoke to me about it first.

Why do you hate DA terminators so? It's the best thing they have! And sure GK having troop terminators is meh with super elite terminators, but I'm not sure why they'd need your permission first

As could perhaps using a super-heavy

As a game variant, that needs to be setup beforehand with the enemy much like Planetstrike.

Please stop using Super-heavies, fliers, formations, and the like that apply only to Apocalypse in your examples, as they are not for use in standard games. If someone really tried to plonk down an apoc model and tried to call it fair it'd be rather abuseful, much like the Six Elite terminators thing (Which comes from planetstrike).

ZebioLizard2 wrote:


As a game variant, that needs to be setup beforehand with the enemy much like Planetstrike.

Please stop using Super-heavies, fliers, formations, and the like that apply only to Apocalypse in your examples, as they are not for use in standard games.

Applies to all FW. Some FW stuff can be played outside of Apocalypse, hence their differentiation to use them akin to 'standard' games (again, note the inverted comma). Any FW rule however is still a variant game that requires a beforehand good-to-go with the opponent.

Pacific wrote:

I think it is all to do with communicating with your opponent - there is too much of the 'online FPS' mentality amongst some younger gamers today, as though there is no-one stood the other side of the table and the sole object is to win (or 'pwn' them I guess?) Those people need to move their competitive nature into another field, and realise that the experience of 40k suffers badly, and that you won't get many opponents either, if you try to apply it to a game that is inherently social in nature and also still open to abuse by people who do not realise that making a ridiculous army list might ruin the enjoyment of your opponent.

Reading this I was on the understanding lists are discussed prior to gaming, this as always been my Policy. If I turn up at store for a Game I'll take a fairly large selection of slots and field them to give myself a challange. I always ask to see lists before hand, not so I can win in one turn, as my fellow gamers know, it's so I don't pull out a Tournament list to deal with 1500 points of Black Reach newcomers army to the game and wipe the board with them. This eventually puts them off of gaming, if not just against me the entire hobby and we need more newcomers =)

Winning, although rewarding, is only rewarding when you've earnt it.

Zweischneid wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:


As a game variant, that needs to be setup beforehand with the enemy much like Planetstrike.

Please stop using Super-heavies, fliers, formations, and the like that apply only to Apocalypse in your examples, as they are not for use in standard games.

Applies to all FW. Some FW stuff can be played outside of Apocalypse, hence their differentiation to use them akin to 'standard' games (again, note the inverted comma). Any FW rule however is still a variant game that requires a beforehand good-to-go with the opponent.

Until Games Workshop, in the BRB or FAQ's states that Forgeworld models are not official models and that they are a variant game if used within a game of 40k, or within the books of Imperial Armor themselves in a clear manner. I will continue to believe that standard Forgeworld models can be used just as easily as Necrons can take a unit of warriors in their army.

Until Games Workshop, in the BRB or FAQ's states that Forgeworld rules or the Imperial Armor books are to be used within a game of 40k in a clear manner, it seems rather stupid to do so. By your definition above EVERYTHING that hasn't explicitly been ruled by GW as being "not official" would, by extension, by official by default. I hope you see how this would cause some problems.

Zweischneid wrote:Until Games Workshop, in the BRB or FAQ's states that Forgeworld rules or the Imperial Armor books are to be used within a game of 40k in a clear manner, it seems rather stupid to do so. By your definition above EVERYTHING that hasn't explicitly been ruled by GW as being "not official" would, by extension, by official by default. I hope you see how this would cause some problems.

*shrug* To end this little circle-round debate, I am going to present my army list to people, if they see the Mortis dreadnought from forgeworld in there and decide not to play, that's it than. I'll find someone else to play with.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

*shrug* To end this little circle-round debate, I am going to present my army list to people, if they see the Mortis dreadnought from forgeworld in there and decide not to play, that's it than. I'll find someone else to play with.

And precisely this attitude would be the answer to the OP's original question as outlined in this thread title. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Zweischneid wrote:Until Games Workshop, in the BRB or FAQ's states that Forgeworld rules or the Imperial Armor books are to be used within a game of 40k in a clear manner, it seems rather stupid to do so. By your definition above EVERYTHING that hasn't explicitly been ruled by GW as being "not official" would, by extension, by official by default. I hope you see how this would cause some problems.

Actually, his argument is:

It says on page 3 of IAAv2 that it is official for use in standard games. So, until GW says otherwise, it is official for use in standard games.

Though it is courteous to ask your opponent first in case they are unfamiliar with the rules.

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Actually, his argument is:

It says on page 3 of IAAv2 that it is official for use in standard games. So, until GW says otherwise, it is official for use in standard games.

Though it is courteous to ask your opponent first in case they are unfamiliar with the rules.

It also says on page 1 of Zweischneid's Awsome Tank custom rules that it is designed for use in 40K standard games (with it being courteous to ask your opponent first). Also, as pointed out frequently, Forgeworld explicitly uses inverted commas to highlight that by 'standard' game they differentiate from Apocalypse, yet do not necessarily mean every single game played to the rules as written in the BRB (where it says, armies are chosen from the army lists in Codex books.. not IA, not Zweischneid's Awsome Tank custom rules or anything else btw).

Again, I see no reason to assume that game-design targeted at the inclusion in non-Apocalypse, 'standard' games equates to an all-time, universal blank pass to use them in EVERY game of 40K as a default, non-variant option. It just says that variant games using those units follow the standard rules outlined in the BRB, not the variants outlined in Apocalypse, which is the distinction that is made throughout the IAAv2.

SamsStuff wrote:

Shandara wrote:

Just man up and say:
* I don't know the rules and I don't play against what I don't know
* I personally think Unit X is overpowered so I won't play
* My list isn't set up to deal with Unit Y so I won't play
* etc..

Couldn't (Didn't) have put it better myself

Just man up and say you want to play with your FW toys and damn anyone else that might not enjoy FW for whatever reason. Their fun doesn't matter! FW über alles!

Edit: there's no reason to belittle or insult someone for choosing not to play against FW units.

Zweischneid wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Actually, his argument is:

It says on page 3 of IAAv2 that it is official for use in standard games. So, until GW says otherwise, it is official for use in standard games.

Though it is courteous to ask your opponent first in case they are unfamiliar with the rules.

It also says on page 1 of Zweischneid's Awsome Tank custom rules that it is designed for use in 40K standard games (with it being courteous to ask your opponent first). Also, as pointed out frequently,

Q1. IS FORGE WORLD PART OF GAMES WORKSHOP.
A1. Yes, but we operate as a small (but perfectly formed) separate division from the company that makes and sells the main Games Workshop range of products. We are not connected with the US company that used the same name many years back for production of resin Warhammer 40,000 vehicles under licence.

When you become apart of games workshop, I'll take your awesome tank seriously.

Edit: I'm still waiting on it's stats! Come on man, I wanna see it, don't tease us by mentioning it so much and not delivering any goods!

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Q1. IS FORGE WORLD PART OF GAMES WORKSHOP.
A1. Yes, but we operate as a small (but perfectly formed) separate division from the company that makes and sells the main Games Workshop range of products. We are not connected with the US company that used the same name many years back for production of resin Warhammer 40,000 vehicles under licence.

When you become apart of games workshop, I'll take your awesome tank seriously.

Edit: I'm still waiting on it's stats! Come on man, I wanna see it, don't tease us by mentioning it so much and not delivering any goods!

I don't need to become a part of GW. Like Forgeworld, I (small, but perfectly formed) operate fully separate from the company that maks and sells the main GW range of products. Therefore, I already enjoy the same status vis-a-vis the "the company that makes and sells the main GW range of products" as FW does.

And it doesn't change the answer to the initial question. I've tried to show you the inherent bias of your arguments on your terms. You reject them, so we agree to disagree. It more than confirms my hypothesis, already proven many times over in encounters with FW-proponents, that the reason FW is "hated" is largely due to the fact that FW seemingly attracts a disproportianal amount of players who apparently lack the most basic social skills and utterly fail to comprehend the "hobby"-side of the enterprise, trying to "legislate" their way into anything and everything at the expense of the inherent social aspect that defines the hobby.

I don't need to become a part of GW. Like Forgeworld, I (small, but perfectly formed) operate fully separate from the company that maks and sells the main GW range of products. Therefore, I already enjoy the same status vis-a-vis the "the company that makes and sells the main GW range of products" as FW does.

Are you for real?

No seriously, what. That's not how anything works.

It more than confirms my hypothesis, already proven many times over in encounters with FW-proponents, that the reason FW is "hated" is largely due to the fact that FW seemingly attracts a disproportianal amount of players who apparently lack the most basic social skills and utterly fail to comprehend the "hobby"-side of the enterprise, trying to "legislate" their way into anything and everything at the expense of the inherent social aspect that defines the hobby.

You confirm it as well, showing that the main reason Forgeworld is hated because of an irrational hatred of Forgeworld and it's players in general, as it seems that the main portion of Forgeworld haters seemingly attracts a disproportional amount of players who generally will raise high water just to prevent them from using the models at all costs because they lack the basic social skills to simply say "No, I just don't like Forgeworld" and instead have to make a varied amount of excuses to prevent it's inclusion. Failing to understand the "hobby" side of the enterprise, and trying to "legislate" Forgeworld models out of any sort of standard game at the expense of the inherit social aspect that defines the hobby.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:



You confirm it as well, showing that the main reason Forgeworld is hated because of an irrational hatred of Forgeworld and it's players in general, as it seems that the main portion of Forgeworld haters seemingly attracts a disproportional amount of players who generally will raise high water just to prevent them from using the models at all costs because they lack the basic social skills to simply say "No, I just don't like Forgeworld" and instead have to make a varied amount of excuses to prevent it's inclusion. Failing to understand the "hobby" side of the enterprise, and trying to "legislate" Forgeworld models out of any sort of standard game at the expense of the inherit social aspect that defines the hobby.

Well, i guess for people who would consider "asking politely" an insurmountably high watermark, I guess this must be the case.

Zweischneid wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:



You confirm it as well, showing that the main reason Forgeworld is hated because of an irrational hatred of Forgeworld and it's players in general, as it seems that the main portion of Forgeworld haters seemingly attracts a disproportional amount of players who generally will raise high water just to prevent them from using the models at all costs because they lack the basic social skills to simply say "No, I just don't like Forgeworld" and instead have to make a varied amount of excuses to prevent it's inclusion. Failing to understand the "hobby" side of the enterprise, and trying to "legislate" Forgeworld models out of any sort of standard game at the expense of the inherit social aspect that defines the hobby.

Well, i guess for people who would consider "asking politely" an insurmountably high watermark, I guess this must be the case.

As they can see in my list (Forgeworld Model) next to the names of the Forgeworld included models within my list, they can choose to politely bow out, rather than make a fuss that Forgeworld players are "Elitist snobs" and that Forgeworld models "Are Overpowered"

Letting them see the rules and various things for it helps as well, I would never blindside them and tell them the rules directly, I would allow them to look it over as they desired from the book itself, that way they can see for themselves. .

Was at a tourney recently where a guy ran 3 achilles in his 1850 list, looked a blast to play against until people penned it then read its rules but there wre no complaints about the use of FW models as it was all outlined at the onset, his first two opponents just wished they'd known the rules beforehand

My issue here lays with a store owner saying you can't run FW lists.

at the end of the day it's night and it's going to come down to Player Preference and if they decline for any reason you can simply ask if they'd be happy to research your units and possibly play in future games, give them a copy of your list if needs be so they can study it in detail and figure out it aint all that tough after all.

I think when you mention FW and people automatically presume Super Heavies as that is the majority of there site (exluding all the Custom Plates, etched Brass, awesome looking Predator for just a few quid more than GWs), and what's more memorable, Titan? Elysian Drop Troops? Drop Pod?

Not everyone can afford IA books so they do just literally associate FW with Apocalypse.

SamsStuff wrote:Winning, although rewarding, is only rewarding when you've earnt it.

In gaming winning is cool, but if the game is a good game it ultimately doesn't matter in the end. Why I've been loving the group I play Flames of War with. They are all such great fun to play against that winning just doesn't worry me in the least. I win my fair share of games, but the path to the win or loss is a great trip either way.

Skriker

Shandara wrote:It really feels like people are trying to find a moral reason to decline games with FW models.

You always have the option of refusing a game in the first place, regardless of rules or model use. Don't like his face? Decline. Don't like his list? Decline! Don't like his paint scheme? Decline. Think using 3 psyfleman dreads is cheesy? Decline!

From the FW site:

Q1. IS FORGE WORLD PART OF GAMES WORKSHOP.
A1. Yes, but we operate as a small (but perfectly formed) separate division from the company that makes and sells the main Games Workshop range of products. We are not connected with the US company that used the same name many years back for production of resin Warhammer 40,000 vehicles under licence.

Can't get more clear than that. Produced by a sub-division of GW. With full permission. With obvious approval of their rules for standard games (where applicable) and for Apocalypse/Planetstrike/Cities of Death.

The (newer) books regard the rules as 'official' and clearly state for each model what kind of game the rules are intended for. They suggest that as a courtesy you should ask your opponent whether they are okay with it. Suggest.

Trying to find justification in the main rules or IA books or in the company structure is just wrong.

Just man up and say:
* I don't know the rules and I don't play against what I don't know
* I personally think Unit X is overpowered so I won't play
* My list isn't set up to deal with Unit Y so I won't play
* etc..

Shandara, this isn't about "manning up" and saying that you're scared of playing forgeworld. While I have never played forgeworld, i'll take the word of people on this thread that it is not ridiculously op, with the exception of a few units. To me, it's about common courtesy. If you want to play with forgeworld, sure! It'll probably be a new and exciting experiance. Just tell me first. That's all I ask, that you inform me you will be using forgeworld units, and not belittle me if i decide i'd rather not play, for whatever reason. It's like if I was running a 4th ed. Dungeons and dragons campaign, and one of my players showed up with his character using themes and builds and powers and feats all from Dragon magazine. While that's not really a big deal, and those themes, builds, powers and feats aren't generally unbalanced (with the exception of a few, which aren't all that worse then some of the core book examples) I would have liked him to ask first. Maybe one of those feats he took nulifies the effects of some powerful plague that was in the campaign, which would totally de-rail my whole story. I can't very well tell him that now, because then he'll know about this super plague and know what effects it has and what counters it. Now, I either have to hope he doesn't metagame, or re-do my plague all together. If he had asked first, this all could have been avoided.

Of courser, that is not a perfect analogy by any means. I just think, if its not in the core books (in this case, codexes and BRB) then you should go ahead and ask, even if it's meant to be a standard add-on to the core rules. It's polite, and and it will keep you away from these long, 16-page arguments about weather you can use it or not.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't GW buy Forgeworld?

It seems that GW is slowly intergrating Forgeworld products into their pastic lines (most notably Imperial Guard with their Tanks) and probably with the Tau and Eldar, so, inevitably, Forgeworld will be ingested into the GW Juggernaut it is.

I don't really understand the sheer hatred of Forge World rules, but understand that people want to be told ahead of time.

I'm leaving a copy of my Harkoni Warhawk Army List (Quasi Elysians) and the page of the Forgeworld Models I use excplicitly for that list (and any other unmentioned things; like Iron Discipline and Auxiliary Greanade Launchers) with my local GW store for other players to look over at their leasiure.

And there's been no complaints.

But Imperial Armor does state that certain units are not aloud in a standard game of 40K; (at least in Imperial Armor 8) Flyers, Any vehicle with structure points, any monstrous creature with structure points, and certain campaign special characters as well...

There are other ways to allow IA gear into games and limit its potential for abuse. Our tournie, for example, includes the following limitation - outside of troops and dedicated transports, you are limited to 2 of any unit within an FOC slot. So, you can have 3 heavy support choices, but only 2 can be the same type. That's just one variation.

FW are producing more and more products, and they are becoming more and more "affordable" for many players, especially those in the colonies where they can be cheaper than some GW products. In some cases, you can also convert your own quite easily. My reasoning is that we should expect to encounter more and more of them, and we should be more willing in the future to find ways to integrate them into games.

Gobsmakked wrote:and we should be more willing in the future to find ways to integrate them into games.

I'm not objecting to that at all.

I object to the sense of entitlement some people seem to have, and the insulting comments made when people decline a game.