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've been thinking about getting back into Fantasy, but I'm wondering if there's really much reason to do so over Kings of War. My original plan was to read through the Fantasy rulebook and decide if I liked it much more than KoW. However I made it to page 20 before starting to get annoyed, so I thought I'd poll the peanut gallery. Other than the fact that Fantasy has more players (at least that I know of, which is what's relevant for me,) are there any areas where WHFB really shines in comparison to KoW?

Some folks prefer WHFB fluff.
Also, as you pointed out WHFB has a lot more players; has been out much longer; and therefore is often much easier to find pick-up games.

As somebody who tried to get KoW started at Dream Wizards (I'm in Rockville and see you're relatively close) , I'd say you're facing an uphill battle at that venue.

At Glen Burnie, you have a semi-decent chance of KoW being workable. Tom, the owner, sells and backs the game+minis and the Mantic team for at least the Eastern Seaboard frequent the store.
Also if you are playing with your local gaming group and they like KoW.

If you're looking for a KoW opponent, just shoot me a PM.

-Daron

WHFB is built for crazy cinematic action. The rules encourage massive changes to the field of battle, from spells wiping out entire units to duels between very customizable heroes deciding which way the battle swings. If thats what you're looking for, and prefer the background, WHFB is better. If you want a simpler, more concise ruleset, are attracted to Mantic's fluff more or want to add the cinematic narrative in yourself or disregard it completely, KoW is probably better. Both systems contain roughly the same army choices, so aesthetics is up to you.

Kings of War is more based on skill, less based on giant monsters nuking full units by themselves, more freedom (1 20-man unit=access to one war machine and one monster/character), and is far easier to learn. That said, WHFB has VERY rich fluff that has been built for years. If you like big, crazy stuff, go fantasy. If you like a skill-based game that isn't over the top, grab KoW.

I prefer Kings of War because I like a system where the rank and file can have more of an impact. WHFB allows for extremely influential heroes, magic users and monsters to dominate the field of battle, often reducing the rank and file to just a bunch of meat shields that were costly to buy and time consuming to paint. Granted, I am presenting extremes and there are many variations on the above, so I recommend trying both systems for a while before making your choice.

Warhammer 8th edition is more trooper orientated I think. The steadfast rule makes fleeing much rarer unless it is combined with some tactical positioning (my skaven slave unit lost a combat by 38 and still didn't run due to steadfast!). That said my main gripe with Warhammer is the inconsistant points values for new units etc.. I intend playing KoW as my Wood Elf army is so overdue a new army book it's gone beyond a joke!

More players.

A larger product range.

More established background.

Basically "it has existed for 30 years" is the only real thing it has in its favour.

On pretty much every other point, KoW beats it, and is well on its way to tackling even the three points I mention above.

The KoW hardback background is small, but quite interesting, the game is getting more players all the time, and the product range is going full steam ahead.

WHFB costs MORE !! Giving you the opportunity to display you vast disposable income.

WHFB is more complicated !! Giving you the opportunity to display your vast intelligence.

WHFB is less balanced !! Giving you the opportunity to play more lopsided games.

WHFB is more widespread !! Giving you better chances to play pick up games with complete strangers who want to lord their expensive army over you, as they misinterpret special rules in their favor.

 adamsouza wrote:
WHFB costs MORE !! Giving you the opportunity to display you vast disposable income.

WHFB is more complicated !! Giving you the opportunity to display your vast intelligence.

WHFB is less balanced !! Giving you the opportunity to play more lopsided games.

WHFB is more widespread !! Giving you better chances to play pick up games with complete strangers who want to lord their expensive army over you, as they misinterpret special rules in their favor.

This is great news!

 Eldarain wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
WHFB costs MORE !! Giving you the opportunity to display you vast disposable income.

WHFB is more complicated !! Giving you the opportunity to display your vast intelligence.

WHFB is less balanced !! Giving you the opportunity to play more lopsided games.

WHFB is more widespread !! Giving you better chances to play pick up games with complete strangers who want to lord their expensive army over you, as they misinterpret special rules in their favor.

This is great news!

Now with FineExclamations!TM

Well, it took a few days before somebody took a shot a GW, not too bad.

I still haven't grabbed a game of KoW yet (I'm hopefully going to get one in next weekend) but I did play a game of Fantasy which, oof. Probably didn't help that it was 2 on 2, with 2000 points per player, but damn I was not prepared for a 5-6 hour slog. There were some fun toys that people pulled out, but nothing that Dwarves seem to have an equivalent to (yet. I'm sure come the new army book they'll get some sort of bizarre MCs or pony cavalry.)

On the upside, I *was* able to grab a game with semi-strangers (just joined a new gaming club.) I had to remind people what the heck Kings of War was, and then the reaction was 'I don't understand how they don't get sued.' soo... finding KoW players might be a bit of a challenge. That club seems to be very GW heavy though, so it's probably not a really fair view of the people in the area.

Yep. I live in Rockville and tried to get KoW started at Dream Wizards for 3 months before throwing in the towel.

I drive to Drop Zone in Glen Burnie and play on weekends instead. DZ actually carries Mantic stuff and folks are willing to play KoW and other Mantic games there.

Different areas develop different communities.
As you point out, a big advantage of GW product is walking in cold and getting in a game.

Is KOW the Mantic game where one player takes his turn and rolls all the dice: attacks, saves, and morale (for the enemy) before passing the turn over to the other player? (Or do I have it confused with another game?).

If so, that would be the biggest obstacle to playing it. While WHFB shows its age and is clunky, I would prefer to be involved in the game 'turn' in some fashion. If I've got the wrong game, apologies.

You have the right game. It makes it more simple, as it really is "I go, you go". Once one full turn finishes, the next player starts his turn.

Warhammer Fantasy does that as well. So I really don't see how that matters.

Well no one has really made an objective post why one is superior to the other. Some claims have been made but no meaningful comparisons in mechanics have been put forth.

There have also been some rather cartoonish claims made about whfb.

If you cannot find anyone to play KoW it makes the comparison rather moot. WHFB has its problems and always will but your own gaming group can adopt limitations if everyone agrees.

I have played whfb for many, many years and enjoyed most games. When it comes down to it, the quality of your opponent and their attitude will be a bigger factor in how you enjoy the game than any particular rules mechanic.

If you really want to find out what people like about whfb then you should probably ask the question on the whfb forum not this one. Here you should probably ask what it is about KoW that is good, that will help filter out some the automatic GW nerdragers.

JWhex wrote:
Well no one has really made an objective post why one is superior to the other. Some claims have been made but no meaningful comparisons in mechanics have been put forth.

The question was not which game is superior, but what virtues does WFB have over KOW.

Many have done is seriously, I did so in jest.

Your post is devoid of those comparisons

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Kings of War is more based on skill, less based on giant monsters nuking full units by themselves, more freedom (1 20-man unit=access to one war machine and one monster/character), and is far easier to learn. That said, WHFB has VERY rich fluff that has been built for years. If you like big, crazy stuff, go fantasy. If you like a skill-based game that isn't over the top, grab KoW.

I second this, and add that KoW has the major advantage that its super fast. I had a 1000 point game the other day, and it took an hour. And that was with frequent checks on the stats (notice I didn't say rules? that gak is even faster than the game)

However, personally I'd take Warhams, because players, fluff (I'm a fluff gamer first and foremost) and better models. I would just love it if Warhammer took up a few of KoW's ideas, such as damage instead of casualties, or KoW put in more background, more interesting models (they're ok but I prefer GW's heroic style) and improved the practically non-existant magic aspect.

Edit:

WHFB costs MORE !! Giving you the opportunity to display you vast disposable income.

You better believe that post got exalted today.

WHFB also has a lot better focus on individual models. If you like tricking out a single hero to go stomp things, then it'll be great. However, this focus on individual models applies to everything, not just heroes, which slows WHFB a LOT compared to KoW.

Plus, magic. If you love WHFB's magic system, KoW will be disappointing unless you go with some of the fan supplements for magic (Such as found here in the Ironwatch fan magazine! /shamelessplug). However, the other side of this is KoW magic doesn't result in wizard-nuke game ending spells either so the tactical complexity is a bit better imo there.

Finally, customizeability. KoW has fairly simple, concise army lists, which means that stuff stays balanced and competitive. You'll have a much wider array of unit selections and customizeable options with a WHFB army than you will with KoW, but with the tradeoff of likely having issues with army-to-army balance simply due to the sheer number of options and GW's glacial approach to errata releases for the various armies.

Hope this helps!

Actually... the new magic system for 8th is one of the reasons I've got bored with WHFB. Like the other elements of the latest edition it is far too random, and far too destructive. That and the changed combat system, and that the rule changes seemed entirely aimed at getting people to buy as many blocks of expensive ($ wise) infantry as possible.

I think the game is fun if you just play once a month casually (and I wonder if that's who the changes were aimed at), but if it's your regular game it's far too random and the 'nuking' with spells, while somewhat amusing at first, starts to wear thin when you just see the same combinations each time.

Hmmm as noted - number of players and the fluff.

The number of options runs both as a plus and as a minus - being prone to min-maxing, but allowing flexibility.

WHFB is more of a game, KoW is more of a wargame. The randomness of Warhammer makes it possible for blind luck to allow a less skilled or novice player a chance to beat a more experienced or skilled player - again, a double edged sword. Good for the novice, annoying to the more skilled.

Magic... has more flavor but less balance in WHFB, if you want game changing, powerful magics, where a well time spell can turn the tide of war, then WHFB. If you want magic to play a support role, then KoW.

And... I liked the High Elves in the IoB starter box. Hated the Skaven.... So if you like the pointy eared gits then it may be worth investing in the IoB box, even if you use the miniatures for KoW.

Most of the folks that I know who play KoW are also fans of WHFB 7 (not 8... dislike of 8 is what made most of the folks in the group decide to try KoB.)

So, my suggestion is to design an army that will work with both sets of rules.

My preference is KoW, but I also prefer WHFB 3... where balance was not a concern of the designers.

The Auld Grump

 scarletsquig wrote:
More players.
A larger product range.
More established background.

Basically "it has existed for 30 years" is the only real thing it has in its favour.

On pretty much every other point, KoW beats it, and is well on its way to tackling even the three points I mention above.

The KoW hardback background is small, but quite interesting, the game is getting more players all the time, and the product range is going full steam ahead.

Hahahahhah no. Not at all. On any of those three points. "Well on it's way?" No. Just no.
There's plenty of points you could have made, but on those three, you unfortunately just undermine your credibility with over-enthusiastic hopefulness.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakkamite wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Kings of War is more based on skill, less based on giant monsters nuking full units by themselves, more freedom (1 20-man unit=access to one war machine and one monster/character), and is far easier to learn. That said, WHFB has VERY rich fluff that has been built for years. If you like big, crazy stuff, go fantasy. If you like a skill-based game that isn't over the top, grab KoW.

I second this, and add that KoW has the major advantage that its super fast. I had a 1000 point game the other day, and it took an hour. And that was with frequent checks on the stats (notice I didn't say rules? that gak is even faster than the game)

However, personally I'd take Warhams, because players, fluff (I'm a fluff gamer first and foremost) and better models. I would just love it if Warhammer took up a few of KoW's ideas, such as damage instead of casualties, or KoW put in more background, more interesting models (they're ok but I prefer GW's heroic style) and improved the practically non-existant magic aspect.

Edit:

WHFB costs MORE !! Giving you the opportunity to display you vast disposable income.

You better believe that post got exalted today.

Why not use (most of) your WHFB (and compatable) models when you play KoW, and "use" (keep in mind?) the WHFB fluff when playing the KoW ruleset? Proxy in big uglies as is considered reasonable by the equivalent army lists.

 Azazelx wrote:

 scarletsquig wrote:
More players.
A larger product range.
More established background.

Basically "it has existed for 30 years" is the only real thing it has in its favour.

On pretty much every other point, KoW beats it, and is well on its way to tackling even the three points I mention above.

The KoW hardback background is small, but quite interesting, the game is getting more players all the time, and the product range is going full steam ahead.

Hahahahhah no. Not at all. On any of those three points. "Well on it's way?" No. Just no.
There's plenty of points you could have made, but on those three, you unfortunately just undermine your credibility with over-enthusiastic hopefulness.

Well, considering the KoW KS took interest in my area from completely-unknown to yeah-I-play-it-occasionally, I'd say it is gaining more players.

The KS also expanded the product range by an entire army and a bunch of assorted models for the ranges (And we have 8 armies with models for 7 of them compared to the dwarves, elves, and undead we were playing with just three to four years ago)

And the fluff is expanding, maybe not incredibly quickly or aggressively, but it is. Heck, KoW has fluff now as compared to, again, three or four years ago when all it was was a group of three armies of models and some rules to go with it.

So seems accurate.

There's a massive difference between getting started on having a bigger range, some fluff and more players and "well on it's way to tackling" them.

The WHFB3 book has more fluff in it than probably all of KoW. Not to mention the reams of WFB stuff that has come before and since then, in terms of rulebooks, fluff articles in 30 years of WD, army books since WHFB4 and such. Not to mention WHFRP, Warhammer novels and everything else.

A similar thing applies to the figure range, especially if you take into account the back catalogue and discontinued stuff thats still readily available via eBay, trading, etc.

And yeah. 30 years worth of players and ex-players, along with WHFB's market presence.

Once I sort out my Fantasy stuff, I'll be quite happy to play KoW using my WFB stuff, my LotR stuff, and indeed, my Mantic stuff (I've bought an Undead and an Ogre army.) But hopes and wishes don't change the state of reality.

I'm no Mantic hater, or indeed, GW white knight, but let's not let our desires for Mantic to do well make our heads disappear where there's little logic or reason.

Yes I'm building up an Orc army and hoping to do the same thing - mostly WFB (which is still the majority game at my club), but a few guys want to try KoW so hopefully be able to use it for that also.

 Azazelx wrote:

 scarletsquig wrote:
More players.
A larger product range.
More established background.

Basically "it has existed for 30 years" is the only real thing it has in its favour.

On pretty much every other point, KoW beats it, and is well on its way to tackling even the three points I mention above.

The KoW hardback background is small, but quite interesting, the game is getting more players all the time, and the product range is going full steam ahead.

Hahahahhah no. Not at all. On any of those three points. "Well on it's way?" No. Just no.
There's plenty of points you could have made, but on those three, you unfortunately just undermine your credibility with over-enthusiastic hopefulness.
.

Could you please actually bother to read my posts? I know that's a triviality you'd prefer to dispense with before tripping over yourself to dole out some petty forum one-upmanship, but it really would be nice.

Those three points were things I was listing in favour of WHFB, not KoW.

Unless of course, you were trying to make an argument that KoW is not improving on any of those three points, which is quite clearly false. The product range is increasing in size, more people are playing KoW (it has taken off quite nicely in the last year, especially in the UK and US), and the background was expanded massively with the release of the hardback book with maps, world mythology and background for all the factions expanded.

Also "its", not "it's". If you're going to quote me and then mock me at least have the decency to not mangle my spelling while you're doing it.

Are we really going to descend into grammar nazism when we argue back and forth now?

Now, since you seem to be unclear on my point, I'll re-quote the part I take issue with.

 scarletsquig wrote:

On pretty much every other point, KoW beats it, and is well on its way to tackling even the three points I mention above.

Mantic is not "well on its way" to tacking those points. On those points, Mantic is indeed improving. Your statement implies not improvement, which I think we can both agree is happening, but significant gains, and that the "danger" (for WHFB) is not far away. Which is clearly incorrect. It's quite likely that Mantic will never be able to even approach Warhammer in terms of things like depth of fluff and background, considering the 30 years worth of cross-media head start that Warhammer has.

Could you please actually bother to read my posts? I know that's a triviality you'd prefer to dispense with before tripping over yourself to dole out some petty forum one-upmanship, but it really would be nice.

Those three points were things I was listing in favour of WHFB, not KoW.

Unless of course, you were trying to make an argument that KoW is not improving on any of those three points, which is quite clearly false. The product range is increasing in size, more people are playing KoW (it has taken off quite nicely in the last year, especially in the UK and US), and the background was expanded massively with the release of the hardback book with maps, world mythology and background for all the factions expanded.

Also "its", not "it's". If you're going to quote me and then mock me at least have the decency to not mangle my spelling while you're doing it.

It's got nothing to do with forum one-upmanship actually. I just find that your over-enthusiasm/hopefulness for Mantic sometimes works against your more salient points. I personally don't think Mantic will ever be "well on its way" to tackling WHFB in terms of background/fluff. I'd actually be quite happy if KoW/WP became a significant player like Warmahordes. Whether it will happen or not, I'm not sure. I can tell you I'm personally more likely to be playing KoW friendlies then WHFB, though in the grand scheme of things my own preferences mean little. Miniatures? I think you'll believe that I want to see Mantic make more hits (and critical hits) than misses. It might take a lot longer than the rush to bring products to bear in the market, but I think fewer models overall if more models look like this:

Will do them more good than their current strategy.


As for the Orx background that you quoted, it made me think of the Background that Blizzard gave the Hozen in Mists of Pandaria:

The Hozen are uncannily dexterous foragers and hunters who dwell in clans among treetops and mountains of Pandaria. The hozen are a short-lived race. Their elders are typically no more than twenty years old. As a result, their relative maturity when compared to the other speaking races is quite minimal[3] and their society lacks roots (and rules) as a result. Uncouth and impulsive, Hozen nonetheless play, live and squabble together…at least until their clans grow so large that they collapse into multiple smaller groups.
In contrast to the very reserved and polite jinyu, the hozen are a passionate people that love to love, love to hate, and love to feel any emotion they can feel, as long as they feel it strongly.
The other races of Pandaria are careful to avoid Hozen hunting grounds, as their notoriously short tempers grow even shorter when their hunger pushes entire clans, including elderly and young Hozen, to ravage food sources outside of their territory, either gathering enough food or seeing enough Hozen die in the process to ensure the survivors’ continued health.[4]

(Most Hozen only live to around 13 years old, which comes up in quest and exploration gameplay.) I'm sure that neither Blizz nor Mantic were the first to use this concept, but it's an interesting one to attach to orcs. I think the bolded bit might be worth Mantic incorporating into their Orcs if they want to make them a bit more three-dimensional, as opposed to simply being "bad guys". Do you know if they're planning on doing a lot of cross-universe commonality between the KoW and Warpath universes?

I deliberately grammar-nazi'ed to highlight a point - you're taking issue with three specific words I wrote, reading too much into them, and jumping to a conclusion based on that. It's a little bit nitpicky and ridiculous when we're basically agreeing with each other.

Mantic is not "well on its way" to tacking those points. On those points, Mantic is indeed improving. Your statement implies not improvement, which I think we can both agree is happening, but significant gains, and that the "danger" (for WHFB) is not far away.

Nope, "well on its way" means "improving". At least that was the intent. And I am quite hopeful, but then I'm quite an optimistic kind of guy in general.

The idea that Mantic is somehow going to replace GW is laughable, and not what I think at all.

I mainly see Mantic's future role not as "put GW out of business", but as "That other game that you play once you've moved on from only playing games in a GW store and buying everything from GW". Or, more realistically "that other game you start playing once you, rather than your parents have to start paying for the damned minis".

GW is still useful for the wider hobby in that the bulk of new people wargaming are GW dropouts. But they need an easy-to-find, good quality, affordable replacement for the exact kind of gaming experience that they're used to with GW to make it easier for them.

Which means Mantic needs hard plastics, large model kits and other things that garage companies don't generally offer. Privateer Press doesn't offer that, no-one offers that currently, only GW. Only Mantic and Dreamforge seem to be serious contenders to creating a viable mass-battle gaming system with minis as of right now.

So, "well on its way" basically means that I see Mantic as being around halfway along the road to a "privateer press in the US" level of popularity.

Mantic has been around for nearly 4 years, another 4 years will see them in a strong position. It took Privateer Press around 8 years to properly "take off", too.

And if Mantic is able to get more ex-GW players staying in the wargaming hobby rather than just wandering off to play magic instead, that's a very good thing, which will help out other smaller companies once Mantic has opened up the "huh, so there's wargames that aren't GW?" door. Warmachine has already done a great job of showing people that a company other than GW can exist and is worth playing, the more "middle tier" companies out there that can better retain people in the wargaming hobby, the better. I have a bunch of friends who were into 40k, but now don't game at all. They play yu-gi-oh or magic whatever CCG is in favour where they used to play 40k.

Most common complaints I heard from them weren't actually pricing, but rather "it's just for kids these days, look at the new minis", "they cancelled veterans night", "they never released anything for my army/ new codex was crap".. these areas are actually GW's larger failings IMO... they market themselves as a "service" and "hobby experience" company, but don't offer the service to match their price tags, in terms of either support for their product lines, rules, or their players. Half of GW's stuff feels like abandonware, and they've fired loads of their staff.

If Mantic is able to offer full rules + army lists + good balance with regular updates *and* give it all away for free, I have absolutely no idea why GW is completely incapable of doing the same thing with an exponentially higher amount of resources to hand.

The WoW Hozen background sounds very interesting! I'm not going anywhere near that game for good reasons (I see it as the world's most dangerous timesink), but that's some cool background.

-A lot of people have minis in a box thrown in the closet for years.

-New designs are cool.

-The fluff which in my opinion I don´t care.

-The option to use your minis in Kings of War. LOL

 Capt. Camping wrote:
-A lot of people have minis in a box thrown in the closet for years.

-New designs are cool.

-The fluff which in my opinion I don´t care.

-The option to use your minis in Kings of War. LOL

More than half of the KoW players in my group use WHFB miniatures for the bulk, or entirety, of their KoW armies....

It was the rules of the new edition of Warhammer that pushed most of them over - but then a lot of the folks that are playing WHFB in my group are using KoW figures for the bulk,but generally not entirety, of their armies.... (Undead and dwarfs most especially.)

Unconnected to much else... I saw a KoW Goblin Mincer today.... Wow - that is a pretty danged sweet model! It reminds me of that thing in Labyrinth, with the blades and the grinders, and the goblins....

The Auld Grump