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 am new here, and ive seen references to fluff. idk wtf that is, so if anyone can tell me, PLEASE do so.

Fluff is the background/setting to 40k.

Fluff is another word for lore. as the english man above me said, Background and settin for the story behind EVERYTHING.

I second the Norwegian above. Fluff is all the setting information of the game. All of the back story for the characters in the codex, all the info on the units, and all the countless paragraphs of stories and battles and lore of the factions.

The other half of the term is crunch (Though not used as much) which refers to the actual rules and mechanics of gameplay.

I quote.

Fluff (or Lore if you want to be more polite and less demeaning) is gamer slang for the histories and colorful descriptions used for a game or game setting that have no mechanical effect on the game's rules. It is the opposite of Crunch.

Crunch is roleplaying gamer slang for the actual game mechanics of a system or setting; it is the opposite of Fluff, which describes things in an in-universe sense. For example, a special ability or feat's fluff might say that "You grew up in a school for mages, and have thus learned some of the rudiments of magic"; the associated crunch could be a +2 bonus to Spellcraft and Use Magical Device checks.

...Arguments over either lead to a reek of Skub. =)

 purplefood wrote:
The other half of the term is crunch (Though not used as much) which refers to the actual rules and mechanics of gameplay.

Crunch is an horrific word

Sorry, couldn't resist!

 tvih wrote:


Sorry, couldn't resist!

Because we want it.

 tvih wrote:


Sorry, couldn't resist!

that fluff is OTT cheese and conflicts with the wardian interpretation of the 40kiverse

On top of being a delicious Marshmellow cream.

Its lore that does not take it self very seriously

Anything taht isn't gameplay mechanics. Names, descriptions, etc.

Fluff is that thing that you ignore when building your WAAC list and brutally crushing the fun out of your opponent. Its main purpose is to describe how heroic and awesome their units are so that when your optimized spam netlist crushes it effortlessly the loss will be even more heartbreaking. Fortunately it's an entirely optional part of the game, so feel free to never think about it again.

Fluff is unimportant filler GW puts in our rulebooks to make them bigger and more expensive.

Ignore it; 40k is about winning.

 CaptainGrey wrote:
Fluff is unimportant filler GW puts in our rulebooks to make them bigger and more expensive.

Ignore it; 40k is about winning.

Without the fluff, 40k is nothing.

 Melissia wrote:

 CaptainGrey wrote:
Fluff is unimportant filler GW puts in our rulebooks to make them bigger and more expensive.

Ignore it; 40k is about winning.

Without the fluff, 40k is nothing.

Agreed.
If 40k didn't have its fluff i probably wouldn't be interested.

Fluff is the only reason a game as subpar as 40k is still around.

 purplefood wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 CaptainGrey wrote:
Fluff is unimportant filler GW puts in our rulebooks to make them bigger and more expensive.

Ignore it; 40k is about winning.

Without the fluff, 40k is nothing.

Agreed.
If 40k didn't have its fluff i probably wouldn't be interested.

Same here, everything 40k I do is centred around fluff and narative, that includes building armies and every game I have played to date.

Fluff is usually the first third of a codex or the last 4/5 of the big rule book.

 Melissia wrote:

Without the fluff, 40k is nothing.

That's your opinion. Frankly I couldn't care less about it. If I want well written science fantasy, there's a million better choices than the GW writers.

 Griddlelol wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Without the fluff, 40k is nothing.

That's your opinion. Frankly I couldn't care less about it. If I want well written science fantasy, there's a million better choices than the GW writers.

No, really, without fluff 40k wouldn't have enough players to be financially viable.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


No, really, without fluff 40k wouldn't have enough players to be financially viable.

That's a rather bold statement. It's like saying the character bios or stories in all video-games make them viable. Some people read them, some people like them, but the game is essentially about playing.
The fluff adds flavour to everything, but by no means would 40k be un-viable without it. I think there's like 1 guy at my old LGS that read into the fluff, good for him, he liked it. Everyone else played the game.

 Griddlelol wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


No, really, without fluff 40k wouldn't have enough players to be financially viable.

That's a rather bold statement. It's like saying the character bios or stories in all video-games make them viable. Some people read them, some people like them, but the game is essentially about playing.
The fluff adds flavour to everything, but by no means would 40k be un-viable without it. I think there's like 1 guy at my old LGS that read into the fluff, good for him, he liked it. Everyone else played the game.

40k is not just a game.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


40k is not just a game.

Of course not it's a way of life. /sarcasm

Seriously though, it's a game with stories to back up the arbitrary units in the game. When I was 12 I loved the stories about guardsmen and the idea of being an under-dog. Now, not so much.

You know what sells better than the novels and books? The models to use within the game.

 Griddlelol wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


40k is not just a game.

Of course not it's a way of life. /sarcasm

Seriously though, it's a game with stories to back up the arbitrary units in the game. When I was 12 I loved the stories about guardsmen and the idea of being an under-dog. Now, not so much.

You know what sells better than the novels and books? The models to use within the game.

Whoosh. That was the sound of the point going over your head. Playing is part of the hobby. So is building and painting the models. And fluff. 40k is not limited to one of these.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Whoosh. That was the sound of the point going over your head. Playing is part of the hobby. So is building and painting the models. And fluff. 40k is not limited to one of these.

Again you're missing the obvious point. All those things are for the ultimate point of playing the game.

I also never said 40k was limited to any of those parts, they all add up to capture the imagination of people for a game whereby people use static models to represent a battle. There are plenty of other models out there, plenty of other science fantasy but none of them culminate in the final game that 40k has in which it can all be represented.
The popularity of RT developed out of the rules, not out of the hobby or fluff. The speed at which it took on was because people enjoyed playing the game, while the other parts were all additions onto that. I'm well aware that some people prefer the painting/modelling or the fluff over the game, but they are the small minority.

No one goes to a GW an asks for a "fluff introduction." There are certainly painting tutorials in order to get the models on the table top. As I said before to say that 40k is nothing without the fluff is hyperbole. However, to say it's nothing without the table top game is certainly within the limits of belief.

Fluff is the reason you play with models, and not bits of paper with "A", "B", "C" written on them

I agree this game is all about fluff. The rules are so poorly written from a professional context... honestly... GW doesn't even play test codex's which creates FoTM armies and broken net armies and while I do love MOST of the models there are many that make no damn sense at all (Any SM Flyer, any IG or SM Tank, Tau... any of them, ect.) lol Love the fluff of the game and play for... how do the put it now?: Creating a Narrative?

 Griddlelol wrote:
That's your opinion.

Gee, I was thinking it was God's opinion, not mine. No gak? It's my opinion?

Wow. I'm shocked. I didn't think I had opinions.

Thanks for telling me I'd never have figured that one out by myself!

 Griddlelol wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Whoosh. That was the sound of the point going over your head. Playing is part of the hobby. So is building and painting the models. And fluff. 40k is not limited to one of these.

Again you're missing the obvious point. All those things are for the ultimate point of playing the game.

I also never said 40k was limited to any of those parts, they all add up to capture the imagination of people for a game whereby people use static models to represent a battle. There are plenty of other models out there, plenty of other science fantasy but none of them culminate in the final game that 40k has in which it can all be represented.
The popularity of RT developed out of the rules, not out of the hobby or fluff. The speed at which it took on was because people enjoyed playing the game, while the other parts were all additions onto that. I'm well aware that some people prefer the painting/modelling or the fluff over the game, but they are the small minority.

No one goes to a GW an asks for a "fluff introduction." There are certainly painting tutorials in order to get the models on the table top. As I said before to say that 40k is nothing without the fluff is hyperbole. However, to say it's nothing without the table top game is certainly within the limits of belief.

Wow, can this site go a day without people arguing the stupidest crap instead of just accepting two separate view points and moving on hahaha

Anyway, from what I have read in this thread so far it seems that a lot of people only play 40k because of the fluff. I too am one of those people, because the rules and even some of the models are pretty bad to the point that if the game wasn't in such a cool setting I wouldn't still be playing.

And the differences from video games and those character bios that people don't read for the most part, is that a video game is mostly game. Look at the BRB, how much of that is actually rules? How much of it is fluff and hobby stuff?

Anyway, we both have opinions. They aren't the same. Oh well, move on, your opinion isn't fact and neither is ours. People play the game for different reasons, so let them. Yeah, the rules make the game. But without the fluff behind those (poorly written) rules, how many people would honestly be attracted to the game in the first place.