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.

Many items in the newer Forge World books are stamped as 40K approved. What is the general feeling about using these units? Should these units be used in regular 40K games and tournaments? I just was looking for a broader base of opinions on this issue and thought this would be the place to get those opinions. Thanks in advance to all.

Uh oh.

Oh good, this debate again.

RAW they are legal and official rules published by GW for use in standard games of 40k, just like any codex or White Dwarf unit.

Some people dislike FW rules for various reasons and won't play without a house rule that FW rules are not allowed.

My personal opinion is that the game should be played according to the standard rules and therefore FW units are allowed, but since you and I are unlikely to ever play a game the only way to get a useful opinion is to ask the people you will be playing with whether they play according to the standard rules or their own house rule.

/thread

People have an issue with forgeworld because historically it has been a pay for performance option. The models and rulesets are expensive, and were often significantly overpowered. This hasn't been the case for quite some time, but the idea sticks.

Darrett wrote:
The models and rulesets are expensive, and were often significantly overpowered.

This is not true at all. For as long as I can remember FW rules have rarely been overpowered, and the vast majority of FW units have been, at best, equal to codex units. In fact, most of them have been weaker than codex options, and it's only since late 5th edition that FW has finally started revising everything to get most options at least close to codex level. Meanwhile even the most overpowered FW units haven't been any worse than the most overpowered codex units.

The origin of this misconception is probably from people who didn't understand that you were never able to use a Baneblade in a regular game of 40k, and assumed that all FW units were powerful Apocalypse things. Since then it just gets repeated over and over again by people who don't really understand the rules in question but have heard from somewhere that they're all overpowered.

This issue is hotly contested.

Please, take two things away from this;

1. Please, draw a distinction between Forgeworld models and Imperial Armour rules.

2. Please, use the Search function before posting.

Time to get some popcorn ready, I feel a flame war brewin'

No need for a flame war. Just go to the 43 pages of discussion in my signature.

baltak wrote:
Many items in the newer Forge World books are stamped as 40K approved. What is the general feeling about using these units? Should these units be used in regular 40K games and tournaments? I just was looking for a broader base of opinions on this issue and thought this would be the place to get those opinions. Thanks in advance to all.

Some tournaments allow them, but most don't. Some groups and stores play with them, and some don't. Our group is pro Forge World, and use the non-Apocalypse units in standard games. Some people prefer not to play with these rules.

If you're worried about your local store and tournaments, call them.

 Peregrine wrote:
Oh good, this debate again.

RAW they are legal and official rules published by GW for use in standard games of 40k, just like any codex or White Dwarf unit.

Some people dislike FW rules for various reasons and won't play without a house rule that FW rules are not allowed.

My personal opinion is that the game should be played according to the standard rules and therefore FW units are allowed, but since you and I are unlikely to ever play a game the only way to get a useful opinion is to ask the people you will be playing with whether they play according to the standard rules or their own house rule.

/thread

Quoting this because I feel the same way, and that the last bit is about as good as it comes when dealing with FW.

The easiest way to know is ask what people think at your local store, there are a lot of tournaments that allow it and a lot that don't.

I know some people don't like them because they don't want to play against models who's rules can be very difficult to get. Other people don't like them because they do create some imbalance by giving some armies huge amounts of options while some armies get a half dozen or less.

For example Guard and Space Marines get new units pretty much every IA book, while a lot of other armies might have a single book with unit options, somne armies haven't been in an IA book yet(for example Necron, who have 1 40k approved model(and it's pretty out of date))

Thanks all your information has been awfully helpful and most of it reflects how I feel on the issue but I'd love to hear more. One of the arguments in our area is how hard it is to get or the lack of availability on the rules. I didn't agree with that at all since finding the rules on the units is just a website away for a search if you really want to find it. As to availability it is a rare day that an enterprising person cant attempt to do a reasonable conversion of the FW model they are trying to do, and I've observed this on many occasions. I also pointed out that when we were beginners learning about new units and seeing what they could do was a huge atraction to the game in the first place. If FW models are supposed to be rare and mysterious their scarcity helps to reflect this trait. After this the idea of their strategic play was brought into question because while everyone has a particular unit they don't like if it irritates you enough you certainly figure out how to deal with it and hopefully crush it on sight.

baltak wrote:
Thanks all your information has been awfully helpful and most of it reflects how I feel on the issue but I'd love to hear more. One of the arguments in our area is how hard it is to get or the lack of availability on the rules. I didn't agree with that at all since finding the rules on the units is just a website away for a search if you really want to find it. As to availability it is a rare day that an enterprising person cant attempt to do a reasonable conversion of the FW model they are trying to do, and I've observed this on many occasions. I also pointed out that when we were beginners learning about new units and seeing what they could do was a huge atraction to the game in the first place. If FW models are supposed to be rare and mysterious their scarcity helps to reflect this trait. After this the idea of their strategic play was brought into question because while everyone has a particular unit they don't like if it irritates you enough you certainly figure out how to deal with it and hopefully crush it on sight.

I hear you man and feel your pain in regards to peoples opposition to FW, especially in regards to silly things like you mentioned. The biggest excuse I hear as well is the fact that "people should not have to learn a new book." What is dumb about that is there are realistically very few players that have memorized every current book out there and can run each book to the best of their abiliy. The sad thing is everyone at my game store is okay with me using the IA8 for Elysians. The only exception is one player and the store owner (who we know does no want Forgeworld because he wont get $ out of it). The overall answers to peoples opposition in my opinion is:

-Laziness, dont want to take time to get to know a unique army, model or rule set.
-Fear of coming across something that they view is "overpowered" (already covered that easily most FW lists and models are not overpowered). In other words they dont know how to fight it so they call it overpowered.
-No access to rules/books. You already pointed that out.
-Models are to expensive. This one annoys me the most, if YOU bought it and are wanting to run it, why does your opponent who does not care? Either envy or someone who does not realize FW is also GW is the usual case.

baltak wrote:
Thanks all your information has been awfully helpful and most of it reflects how I feel on the issue but I'd love to hear more. .

Then go to the 43 pages of discussion and debate in my signature if you really want to hear/read more. No need for the 15th thread this month on this very divisive subject. I can't say it any friendlier than that.

Everything else in that paragraph has been said over and over, man.

This thread get's started at least once a week. The big aquila stamp under the model in the rulebook lets you know its valid for regular 40K games.

kronk wrote:Then go to the 43 pages of discussion and debate in my signature if you really want to hear/read more.

Yeah, this has been talked about a lot already. I'd go through and read everything that's already been written, and only start a new topic if there is something actually new to add.

TheCaptain wrote:Uh oh.

lol

Peregrine wrote:RAW they are legal and official rules published by GW for use in standard games of 40k, just like any codex or White Dwarf unit.

You make it sound as if there is no difference between Codex and FW rules, which is simply wrong. You can also play with your own made-up rules for all that GW cares, but that doesn't make them "the same" either. What matters is the consent of your opponent. Why do you think Forgeworld is a separate division with its own designers? Why do you think GW doesn't allow FW rules at its tournaments?

Of course, your opponent can always decline to play your army even if you're fielding a standard Codex list, so it boils down to the same thing and the entire debate in this thread is pointless, or at best an opportunity for FW fans to try to have FW rules gain more acceptance by claiming a false notion of authority ("GW says you should let me play you with this!") using arguments such as the above. Ultimately, you cannot "force" anyone to play you with anything. That being said, I would assume that most people agree that a Codex is "the basis" and thus much less likely to be declined than any optional expansions or alternate army lists.

In the end, I think the best analogy is to think of the relationship between Forgeworld and GW just like Black Library and GW. It's all official, but it doesn't necessarily have to go well together. It is up to each player individually to decide if it does or doesn't fit, and what he is willing to play against.

Lastly, I'd like to point everyone to this well-written article, which puts the whole controversy into much better words than I could in the short amount of time I'm willing to invest into writing this post - and uses a few quotes to back itself up: http://theindependentcharacters.com/blog/?p=1984

First of all...



Im just gonna leave my opinion and leave, knowing this will be locked by tomorrow like most of these threads are

1: FW is 40k legal (as GW/FW have attempted, however poorly, to tell people), if people want to play FW it doesn't mean they are playing the game wrong

2: If your group decides they don't want to play FW, for whatever reason, that's their decision and it doesn't mean they are playing the game wrong.

3: No matter what GW or FW says, it will always come down into what your local group of gamers wants to do. Usually FW is legal unless told otherwise (Note: This doesn't apply to tournaments. In tournaments you will usually be told if FW is allowed or not) in casual games though.

baltak wrote:
Many items in the newer Forge World books are stamped as 40K approved. What is the general feeling about using these units? Should these units be used in regular 40K games and tournaments? I just was looking for a broader base of opinions on this issue and thought this would be the place to get those opinions. Thanks in advance to all.

LET THE BUTTHURT BEGIN!. Seriously look it up this place is littered with these threads.

 Lynata wrote:

TheCaptain wrote:Uh oh.

lol

Peregrine wrote:RAW they are legal and official rules published by GW for use in standard games of 40k, just like any codex or White Dwarf unit.

Lastly, I'd like to point everyone to this well-written article, which puts the whole controversy into much better words than I could in the short amount of time I'm willing to invest into writing this post - and uses a few quotes to back itself up: http://theindependentcharacters.com/blog/?p=1984

And it's wrong.

Lynata, how would you feel if people refused to play an army that used rules from out of print, obscure White Dwarf article? Because to me it makes at least as much sense to argue that SoB codex is not a 'proper' codex as it makes to argue that FW units are not 'proper' 40K units.

(No, I don't actually have a problem with SoB armylist, nor do I own any FW models.)

ZebioLizard2 wrote:And it's wrong.

And ... why?

Crimson wrote:Lynata, how would you feel if people refused to play an army that used rules from out of print, obscure White Dwarf article? Because to me it makes at least as much sense to argue that SoB codex is not a 'proper' codex as it makes to argue that FW units are not 'proper' 40K units.

I'd point out that GW labeled it a "Codex" themselves. If that's not enough, then I guess we can't have a game. Like I said, you can't force anyone to play you, even if you have a Codex list. (and actually, I'd be quite happy to whip out the 3E WH 'dex instead if said person would be more comfortable with that one than the 5E Minidex )

I wouldn't even point at the "Chapter Approved" stamp, because here I see it as essentially the same thing as Forgeworld units, even though it comes directly from the GW designers: it's usually used to denote an add-on, and in my opinion it should be a matter of mutual respect and interest in a fair game to ask if you can use one before the game, rather than just confronting your opponent with a fait accompli. It just has a huge risk of creating a bad atmosphere. Even if these special rules do not actually any advantage, the thought will linger in the air like a wet fart.

When I tell you I'd bring a Sisters army, would you expect me to bring anything but the Codex list?
If, however, I'd tell you to bring ... say, an IG army and then show up with DKoK, that's a bit different, is it not?
How about if I tell you to bring a Sisters list and then come with the drop-podding Elite Celestians from the Strike Force rules?
The difference between the latter two examples is, I think, negligible.

I also never said that FW units are "not proper 40k units". That's the word-twisting again.

(No, I don't actually have a problem with any FW models/rules and would play any such unit or army at least once. In fact, I'd be rather curious to do so. But I still believe the question of informing the opponent / asking permission is a matter of principles.)

until either the BRB or the regular codexes say that such and such a forgeworld unit is allowed it isnt.

i dont care what forgeworld says, i want to see it in the normal books in writing.

IMO unless both people have forgeworld stuff in their force you shouldnt use it unless your opponent says it's ok.

kb305 wrote:

until either the BRB or the regular codexes say that such and such a forgeworld unit is allowed it isnt.

i dont care what forgeworld says, i want to see it in the normal books in writing.

This really sounds like an opinion, but its worded as if stating a fact.

I'd sasy Krieg is 60% normal IG (with stubborn and WS4 for troops) and fixed artillery, the tracked vehicles are the same.

The rest is all new. But the similarities, and strategies are roughly the same.

kb305 wrote:

until either the BRB or the regular codexes say that such and such a forgeworld unit is allowed it isnt.

i dont care what forgeworld says, i want to see it in the normal books in writing.

IMO unless both people have forgeworld stuff in their force you shouldnt use it unless your opponent says it's ok.

Do the BRB or codexes allow FAQs/erratas to be used?

 Lynata wrote:


I'd point out that GW labeled it a "Codex" themselves. If that's not enough, then I guess we can't have a game. Like I said, you can't force anyone to play you, even if you have a Codex list. (and actually, I'd be quite happy to whip out the 3E WH 'dex instead if said person would be more comfortable with that one than the 5E Minidex )

FW is part of GW, FW designers are GW designers.

When I tell you I'd bring a Sisters army, would you expect me to bring anything but the Codex list?

I would assume that you might for example bring Avenger Strike Fighters, yes.

If, however, I'd tell you to bring ... say, an IG army and then show up with DKoK, that's a bit different, is it not?

DKoK are a separate list from standard IG, are they not? So that would be like saying that you're bringing Space Marines, but actually bring a Space Wolves list. I however would have no issue if you brought IG list with FW units. If you wanted to bring DKoK, you should say so, and then it would be fine too.

How about if I tell you to bring a Sisters list and then come with the drop-podding Elite Celestians from the Strike Force rules?

I'm not sure what that is, so it is hard to comment. It might be out of date.

I also never said that FW units are "not proper 40k units". That's the word-twisting again.

Normal 40K units then? I did not mean to twist your words.

(No, I don't actually have a problem with any FW models/rules and would play any such unit or army at least once. In fact, I'd be rather curious to do so. But I still believe the question of informing the opponent / asking permission is a matter of principles.)

I think it is polite to inform your opponent beforehand. That's manners. However, I do really think that refusing to play someone because they use FW rules is kinda dick move and I've little sympathy towards such attitude.

Also, it is kinda ironic how now that DftS has arrived people have loudly complained about GW not releasing flyer rules for armies that lack flyers. But they have done so a while ago. It is called Imperial Armour Aeronautica. If people refuse to use rules that are published, then it is hardly GW's fault any more.

Do the BRB or codexes allow FAQs/erratas to be used?

yes it says it on the GW site .

as for the FW is balanced or weaker argument , that is technicly true . Technicly because no man uses those recovery vehicles , nids MC upgrades etc. But man those pre nerf hellfire shells , those lucius dreads , those castus rams , gun emplacments , everyone wants those .including me , because I play IG . At the same time all of those people playing nids , sob , tau , non SW marines or chaos, which isnt different painted IG of course , get nothing or 1 unit .


I would like to point out the fact that this is also a reginal thing . Europe , not counting UK doesnt play FW , because we play smaller games then US does . You can say that 2250 or generaly 2k games are more balanced even when FW stuff is used. It is not the case when your games points stop at 1999 and 1500 is still played a lot.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0VsFRrZtHE2bmFiSmxpeGJSb0E/edit?pli=1

Here's everything everyone can currently get in a normal game of 40k.

baltak wrote:
One of the arguments in our area is how hard it is to get or the lack of availability on the rules.

The solution to this is to require each player to bring a copy of all of the rules for their army, whether those rules are in a codex, IA book, WD article, whatever. That way anyone who isn't already familiar with an army or unit can just read the rules before the game begins.

 Lynata wrote:
You make it sound as if there is no difference between Codex and FW rules, which is simply wrong. You can also play with your own made-up rules for all that GW cares, but that doesn't make them "the same" either.

The difference between my made-up rules and FW rules is that my made-up rules are not official, while FW rules are explicitly stated by GW to be part of standard 40k. Declaring them "not the same" is like declaring C:SM not part of standard 40k because Matt Ward isn't an official codex author.

Why do you think Forgeworld is a separate division with its own designers?

For the same reasons that each codex/rulebook has a different author.

Why do you think GW doesn't allow FW rules at its tournaments?

Because GW's few tournaments (none if you don't live in the UK) have one and only one goal: increase sales. Someone must have decided that it would be better to increase sales of core products, so tournaments require core products only.

In the end, I think the best analogy is to think of the relationship between Forgeworld and GW just like Black Library and GW. It's all official, but it doesn't necessarily have to go well together. It is up to each player individually to decide if it does or doesn't fit, and what he is willing to play against.

No, the best analogy is to use the relationship that GW has explicitly stated: FW rules are part of standard 40k.

 Lynata wrote:
When I tell you I'd bring a Sisters army, would you expect me to bring anything but the Codex list?
If, however, I'd tell you to bring ... say, an IG army and then show up with DKoK, that's a bit different, is it not?
How about if I tell you to bring a Sisters list and then come with the drop-podding Elite Celestians from the Strike Force rules?
The difference between the latter two examples is, I think, negligible.

Who cares? In fact, why should anyone give about advance warnings of what army they're bringing? Where I play you just show up to 40k night with an army and the first information anyone gets about what army you're playing is when you hand them your list that you'll be using.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kb305 wrote:
until either the BRB or the regular codexes say that such and such a forgeworld unit is allowed it isnt.

GW disagrees with you.

i dont care what forgeworld says, i want to see it in the normal books in writing.

Translation: I don't care what GW says the rules to 40k are, we're using my house rule!

Thanks everyone... now time to work on changing some opinions.... I appreciate the ammo sent out even though it has been said before. For the record the FW unit I was using were the Grot Bomm Launchers. I did a nice, simple conversion with the GW wartrakks, a couple of pieces for the tray building kit for Warhammer fantasy, a box of 10 standard GW grots (needed an extra runtherd anyways), and some random WWII rockets bought at a local hobby shop. The conversion took all of maybe 5 minutes a model and they look almost identical to the FW models for probably half the price. the irony in this area is the casual players are barking about the units more than tourney players so thanks again and if this is shut down I understand and appreciate your patience and indulgence on the matter.