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.

Hi, all.

Now, I'm very aware that this is a "bar fight" question, but I'll try not to be too stupid with my questioning. Forgivennuss, prease...

Right, I'm really trying to figure out Forge World, but I can't. I know that they make upgrades from GW, that I get, but what I don't get is the rest.

So, from what I can gather, please tell me if I'm wrong, what you have to do to play "Forge World" is to first of buy one of their Imperial Armour books, which contains a battle scenario and all the stats and rules for their models, which are to be used in that scenario.

So, you buy the book, and all the models that'll be in the book to play the scenarios. Ok, so baring in mind an Imperial Armour book is £50 and one squad of Death Korp is £45, how the Hell do Forge World expect you to play?

I guess what I'm really asking is; do Forge World really expect a person to spend between £200-£400+ just to play a scenario book, and then on top of that, find a second person who has bought the "enemy" army in the scenario book to play against, is that how it works?

 Tower75 wrote:

I guess what I'm really asking is; do Forge World really expect a person to spend between £200-£400+ just to play a scenario book, and then on top of that, find a second person who has bought the "enemy" army in the scenario book to play against, is that how it works?

The majority of the armies in IA books are legal for regular play. The scenarios are there for your enjoyment, and can be used with the armies in the same book, or modified to use other armies, or the scenarios may be ignored altogether.

The main draw of the IA books, IMO, is new armylists, and some darn well written fluff.

The scenerios and stuff is just in case you want to do a themed game or something.

Everything with a 40k approved stamp on it is intended to be used along with a codex army in regular gameplay. Or forms its own codex equivilent.


The DKoK seige regiment is basically a codex equivilent to be used as such. You play your DKoK against an army out of any other codex, no different from using a codex yourself.

The scenerio matchups are just for a themed scenerio game if you want to play it. The stuff FW makes is in no way intended to just be used like that. No different to seeing a GW WD battlereport or the scenerios they put in the back of the full sized rulebooks.

Uh oh...*Sigh* here we go...

The idea is to use the models, rules and army lists for regular games of 40k, with any of the existing 40k scenarios, and the ones in the books are optional. Now, whether or not you are allowed to do that or you need permission, or if the models are "legal" for 40k...well just give the thread sometime and I'm sure both sides will make themselves heard.

Think of it as a codex with extra battle missions and what not, rather than some kind of expansion-scenario book.

FW has been "legal" for normal 40k games for a while...

some people may not like FW, but I have not had to give/ask permission for FW for a long time, same with using special characters, that used to be a no go without permission.

not anymore though,

in the end, casual games do whatever you and your opponent agree on

tournies, the TO will say whats allowed and what isnt

all the Tournaments I have played since 5th came out allowed forgeworld stuff

The "legality" of Forgeworld rules has never changed. Some people just like to interpret "intended for use with" as "part of", as if both would have the same meaning.

easysauce wrote:in the end, casual games do whatever you and your opponent agree on
tournies, the TO will say whats allowed and what isnt

This is really all that matters - regardless of whether you show up with a Codex, a FW book, or your own homemade rules.

Somewhat similar to how the (at times conflicting) fluff from all the different sources works, when you think about it - not presenting a single inviolable truth but rather presenting a number of options, and then letting the players decide for themselves.

Some stuff theres a PDF for or club together with some friends at a FLGS for IA

 Tower75 wrote:

I guess what I'm really asking is; do Forge World really expect a person to spend between £200-£400+ just to play a scenario book, and then on top of that, find a second person who has bought the "enemy" army in the scenario book to play against, is that how it works?

As TheCaptain said, the scenarios are a bonus to me. What I'm getting from the Imperial Armor books are rules for new units to add to my existing armies and entirely new army lists to use with my existing models.

Tower75 wrote:I guess what I'm really asking is; do Forge World really expect a person to spend between £200-£400+ just to play a scenario book

More or less.

Think of forgeworld as providing "expansions" to 40k. They put out huge, in-depth campaigns and scenarios, and then also put out models and new units to be used in those campaigns and scenarios. To be fair to forgeworld, these are pretty massive expansions to 40k. It's not like you're plonking all that cash down for just a few extra units. It's a whole expansion to the game, including new rules, new fluff, and a whole bunch of stuff. Those books cost a lot for a reason.

That and forgeworld does make some nice miniatures for regular games of 40k as well. For example, if you want to run a guard army as a traitor guard army, they have some really great upgrade kits to turn your regular looking cadians into bad guys. They also have some new stuff out that's only tangentially related to 40k, like a new expansion that allows you to play during the time of the horus heresy.

 Ailaros wrote:
They put out huge, in-depth campaigns and scenarios, and then also put out models and new units to be used in those campaigns and scenarios.

This is a really misleading comment. None of the models FW produce are limited to just the specific campaigns, you can always use them in normal games of 40k (most stuff) or Apocalypse (superheavies/etc). The campaign missions are just a nice bit of fluff, you can use them if you want, but they aren't required. In fact some FW books don't have campaign missions at all, they're just a collection of additional rules for normal 40k.

That and forgeworld does make some nice miniatures for regular games of 40k as well.

If by "some" you mean "almost everything they produce", then yes.

Ok, cheers, guys. I think I get it now. I wasn't really asking for the legality of FW stuff, but I just didn't get how the whole scenario books work. I looked though the one with the Elysian Droop Troops in it, and there were a bunch of units that aren't in the Guard Codex, like a jeep.

I just assumed that to play that scenario book you'd need to buy an entire Elysian army.

No, but its basically functioning as Codex: Elysian Drop Troops. It has options the IG don't have, and it can't take some of the things IG have. The same with DKoK.

 Tower75 wrote:
Ok, cheers, guys. I think I get it now. I wasn't really asking for the legality of FW stuff, but I just didn't get how the whole scenario books work. I looked though the one with the Elysian Droop Troops in it, and there were a bunch of units that aren't in the Guard Codex, like a jeep.

Right. There are three types of rules in FW books:

1) Units for standard 40k. These will say something like "a Vulture gunship is a fast attack choice in a Codex: IG army". To use them you just take them in your normal list, it's no different than picking a Hellhound instead of a Valkyrie.

2) Complete army lists for standard 40k. For example, the Elysian drop troops list. These function as a separate army and contain all the rules and unit choices, you use them just like the army list in the back of a codex. So playing Elysian drop troops is just like playing Codex: IG or Codex: Orks or whatever.

3) Apocalypse stuff. Superheavies, formations, etc. The few Apocalypse-only items are specifically labeled as Apocalypse-only and/or contain no "X choice in Y army" note. These are used in normal Apocalypse games, for example, taking a Malcador instead of a Baneblade.

I just assumed that to play that scenario book you'd need to buy an entire Elysian army.

You probably would. The scenarios in the book depend on Elysian-specific units. You might be able to modify them to work with another army, but they probably wouldn't be as much fun.

However, this isn't very important since playing the scenarios is such a small part of the overall book. You can use the units/army lists in normal "show up at 40k night at your FLGS, roll book missions" 40k, the scenarios are just a nice bonus if you're able to use them.

Tower75 wrote:I just assumed that to play that scenario book you'd need to buy an entire Elysian army.

Ah, no, don't worry about it. You can play the special missions with regular 40k armies.

It's actually much more the other way around. You don't need to play Elysians to play the special missions, it's that people want to play Elysians, so FW created a module for them so that people could play them.

 Lynata wrote:
The "legality" of Forgeworld rules has never changed. Some people just like to interpret "intended for use with" as "part of", as if both would have the same meaning.

The same way that people insist that "it's probably a good idea to tell your opponent" means "REQUIRES OPPONENT'S EXPLICIT AND ADVANCED PERMISSION!!!!11!!!oneone"?

Actually, scratch that. Something intended for use in a game produced by the company that owns, makes and sells the game is obviously part of the game, whereas the above is blatantly not.

Okay, cheers, guys

I find the whole FW/GW relationship really odd, and I just couldn't figure it out.

Thanks, again.

Just wish they'd make more army lists.

Currently I remember..
3 IG regiments (DKoK, elysians, and armored regiment)
2 Traitor guard regiments (Khorne and Nurgle flavor)
1 Ork Dread Mob
1 Eldar Pirates
Several C:SM stuff (Red scorpions, Siege assault, loyalists..missing a few here)
IG/C:SM combination (Tyrant's Legion)

I think that they had a standard "renegades and heretics" traitor Guard list as well. Also, the Elysian D-99 list is a bit different from the normal one.

In which book is the Khornate Renegade Guard?

 Crimson wrote:
In which book is the Khornate Renegade Guard?

IA6 has the Servants of Slaughter traitor Guard list, although it is probably outdated by now.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In which book is the Khornate Renegade Guard?

IA6 has the Servants of Slaughter traitor Guard list, although it is probably outdated by now.

It is, but some of the units is updated on the PDF files on the forgeworld site. You just need to update a few things here and there (mainly the psyker rules)

Think it was IA5 or 6. I know the nurgle one is in 7.

This is my main issue with FW, I have never idea where the latest rules for anything are, and whether they're up to date. I wish every model would have "rules for this model are in this book, and here's link to latest errata" on their website.

I own several Forgeworld books and 1 model. Many times the rules are out of date so you simply need to print out the FAQ just like GW. The armylist are legal for 40k however because many people do not know the rules for these model it is always better to explain and ask permission. This is a courteous move that will make the game start out on the right footing.

Also if they refuse to play against FW don't play against them save yourself the headache.

Tower75 wrote:I find the whole FW/GW relationship really odd, and I just couldn't figure it out.

Well that's because it IS really odd.

If GW wanted its myriad forgeworld modules to be a part of 40k, then they would have written the 40k rules to accommodate them (or, in the very, very least, say "FW rules are part of 40k" ANYWHERE in the 40k rulebook, or have given FW anything more than literally the most passing mention possible. On the other hand, FW certainly does make associative claims, of course.

I almost get the feeling that there is infighting over at GW between their regular staff and their forgeworld staff over just what should be treated how.

There isn't really much of an issue beyond wishful thinking.

Just follow the recommendations/instructionsfrom the authors of the Imperial Armour books;

 Ailaros wrote:

Tower75 wrote:I find the whole FW/GW relationship really odd, and I just couldn't figure it out.

Well that's because it IS really odd.

If GW wanted its myriad forgeworld modules to be a part of 40k, then they would have written the 40k rules to accommodate them (or, in the very, very least, say "FW rules are part of 40k" ANYWHERE in the 40k rulebook, or have given FW anything more than literally the most passing mention possible. On the other hand, FW certainly does make associative claims, of course.

I almost get the feeling that there is infighting over at GW between their regular staff and their forgeworld staff over just what should be treated how.

If GW wanted its FAQs and Erratas to be a part of 40k, then they would have written the 40k rules to accommodate them (or, in the very, very least, say "FAQs and Erratas are part of 40k" ANYWHERE in the 40k rulebook, or have given FAQs and Erratas anything more than literally the most passing mention possible. On the other hand, FAQs and Erratas certainly does make associative claims, of course.

 Ailaros wrote:
I almost get the feeling that there is infighting over at GW between their regular staff and their forgeworld staff over just what should be treated how.

I really doubt it. Imagine the conversation:

FW: hey, our stuff is legal.
GW: no it isn't.
FW: but we want it to be legal! Look, it says so right here!
GW: *fires everyone from FW*

The fact that GW publishes the FW books as-is says pretty clearly that they approve of the "FW is part of standard 40k" statement. You can imagine some kind of very one-sided conflict, but the more likely explanation is that GW management doesn't want to deal with parents getting outraged and demanding refunds because their kid saw all the cool FW stuff in the main rulebook and begged for a $200 tank model without realizing how much harder resin models are to work with. So they print "this is official" in the actual FW books and let more experienced players find it when they're ready.

 Tower75 wrote:
Okay, cheers, guys

I find the whole FW/GW relationship really odd, and I just couldn't figure it out.

Thanks, again.

While it seems odd at first, subsidiary relationships are more common than you would think. The best way to think of it is that Forge World is a subsidiary of GW that sells the premium brand of their product. It is really no different from the relationship between Acura and Honda. Acura is owned by Honda, and sells upscale models of Honda vehicles for a premium price. FW and GW are the same, with FW producing higher quality models and (in my opinion) rules than the core of GW, and sells their product at a higher price due to the increased costs of producing a higher-quality product. The reason that they are seperate has more to do with marketing and distribution than anything else (FW's product demand, while growing, is still low enough that they need to remain a direct order only business, which doesn't mesh with GW's storefront strategy).

RegalPhantom wrote:
The reason that they are seperate has more to do with marketing and distribution than anything else (FW's product demand, while growing, is still low enough that they need to remain a direct order only business, which doesn't mesh with GW's storefront strategy).

And probably some legal/tax/accounting reasons. Some lawyer probably looked at the situation and decided it would be best to have FW be a distinct subsidiary entity rather than just being a brand name (like Citadel), but those reasons don't really have anything to do with game design.