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.

Just to settle this ridiculous on going argument, here's an extract from one of the FW pdf downloads:

"As with all our models these should be considered ‘official’, but owing to the fact that 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."

Just thought that needed putting out there.

That quote has been around since 2008. People still don't listen to it, for various torturously contrived reasons.

Sucks doesn't it

/shrug

People know the quote. The problem is, a certain minority seems to confuse "official" with "appropriate-at-all-times-and-in-all-circumstances-in-all-games-without-exception".

That is not the case.

There is a tiny, tiny number of games, where people will not be happy with using Forge World.

There is also an infinitely larger number of games, where people will not be happy with using Forge World, if it's "jumped" on them without head-notice.

 Zweischneid wrote:
/shrug

People know the quote. The problem is, a certain minority seems to confuse "official" with "appropriate-at-all-times-and-in-all-circumstances-in-all-games-without-exception".

That is not the case.

I haven't seen anyone arguing for that, Zwei. I usually see people asking for it to have the same perceived officiality as any given codex, which is what I personally am asking for.

I think the gap is narrowing though with all the supplements, formations, and allies going on that I think it'd be in poor taste to jump just about anything on your opponent.

Then again, I think discussing the inclusion of FW before a game falls under the same category of discussing points values.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
/shrug

People know the quote. The problem is, a certain minority seems to confuse "official" with "appropriate-at-all-times-and-in-all-circumstances-in-all-games-without-exception".

That is not the case.

I haven't seen anyone arguing for that, Zwei. I usually see people asking for it to have the same perceived officiality as any given codex, which is what I personally am asking for.

There is no "perceived officiality"

All GW products are official. Kill Teams to Fantasy to Apocalypse.

But a common practice is that standard GW studio Codexes are used in most games, while things like Apoc, Kill Teams, Forge World, etc.. are played less often and would, among reasonable people, be preceded by a courtesy notice along the lines of "I am thinking about bringing some Forge World rules to the club tomorrow, you ok with this? If not, let me know!"

It's a common (but not universal) social convention in the 40K-gaming scene that has nothing at all to do with "official" / "not official"

Nothing new, here. I think more people are warming up to FW, though.

 Blacksails wrote:
I think the gap is narrowing though with all the supplements, formations, and allies going on that I think it'd be in poor taste to jump just about anything on your opponent.

Then again, I think discussing the inclusion of FW before a game falls under the same category of discussing points values.

This is true. I had a pair of games yesterday, each of which had a pre-game conversation:

Game 1:
"Hey Matt! Glad you showed up! I'm using my Marines; do you mind if I use the Clan Raukaan supplement? It's in my list already, as is Vaylund Cal."
"No, man. I'll be breaking out my Dark Eldar though."

Game 2:
"John! Did you want to play a game?"
"Sure, whatcha got?"
"I'll be bringing my Armored Battlegroup."
"Ah, that's a lot of tanks. Mind if I bring my Tyranids?"
"Not at all!"

 Zweischneid wrote:


It's a common (but not universal) social convention in the 40K-gaming scene that has nothing at all to do with "official" / "not official"

But then couldn't it follow that if more people accept is a 'standard practice' that it would become common social convention and not be an obstacle to jump over?

Just saying, it seems like one of the problems is that people just don't want to start accepting it as common for fear of it becoming common. Its self defeating. The only way for FW to become a regular thing is for people to accept that its a regular thing.

Mind you, this is probably going to apply to many of the new supplements and formation and what not, so we'll see what the internet wisdom of the community has to say about that in time.

*Edit* Though I'm assuming you'd talk with your opponent before the game about anything relevant, being polite, and all the usual things I would expect of a person.

I allow forgeworld and I will use forgeworld - my opponent gets a heads up once I agree to a game with them.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
/shrug

People know the quote. The problem is, a certain minority seems to confuse "official" with "appropriate-at-all-times-and-in-all-circumstances-in-all-games-without-exception".

That is not the case.

I haven't seen anyone arguing for that, Zwei. I usually see people asking for it to have the same perceived officiality as any given codex, which is what I personally am asking for.

There is no "perceived officiality"

All GW products are official. Kill Teams to Fantasy to Apocalypse.

But a common practice is that standard GW studio Codexes are used in most games, while things like Apoc, Kill Teams, Forge World, etc.. are played less often and would, among reasonable people, be preceded by a courtesy notice along the lines of "I am thinking about bringing some Forge World rules to the club tomorrow, you ok with this? If not, let me know!"

It's a common (but not universal) social convention in the 40K-gaming scene that has nothing at all to do with "official" / "not official"

The perception against which I am arguing is that FW rules are in the same category as Planetstrike / Cities of Death, where pre-game planning (beyond simply asking about lists) is necessary, because the FOC is different, the terrain is different, et cetera.

Agreed. I think the "pre-game conversation" is (and should) become more common.

Even with "only" the "regular" Codexes.

There difference between "hey, I wanna give my Screamerstar a test-run before the next tournament" and "wanna play a ("narrative") Rynn's World last stand-style scenario" is huge.

Good pre-game communication will safe everyone a lot of headaches.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


The perception against which I am arguing is that FW rules are in the same category as Planetstrike / Cities of Death, where pre-game planning (beyond simply asking about lists) is necessary, because the FOC is different, the terrain is different, et cetera.

The perception against which I am arguing is that there is such a thing as "categories". Even the normal Space Marines Codex as "A Warhammer 40.000 Supplement" printed on it. "Officially" it requires the same consent as Planetstrike does. A lot of people "waive" that consent for the Space Marines Codex though, possibly more than do so for Forge World. Just the way it is.

Brother Payne wrote:


"As with all our models these should be considered ‘official’, but owing to the fact that 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."

Right, the bolded work needs attention. Either way, it doesn't matter, forge world isn't GW, it's forge world. Their books are different. Unless GW releases something saying X is allowed in general play, it doesn't matter how much FW nudges you to think that so you will buy more of their underpriced and overpowered crap.

You kids try too hard. It's a game, play and have fun.

 Zweischneid wrote:


The perception against which I am arguing is that there is such a thing as "categories". Even the normal Space Marines Codex as "A Warhammer 40.000 Supplement" printed on it. "Officially" it requires the same consent as Planetstrike does. A lot of people "waive" that consent for the Space Marines Codex though, possibly more than do so for Forge World. Just the way it is.

I think there is a difference between Planetstrike and "normal" 40k, if only because, say, I bring a "normal" Guard Codex list with 3x Stormtroopers and 3x Veterans in Carapace armor to represent six squads of Stormtroopers as best I can. Whereas, if I brought a Planetstrike-compliant list, I could have simply had six squads of Stormtroopers (provided I was the attacker). If I was the defender, the latter list would be illegal, and if we weren't playing planetstrike, the latter list would be illegal as well.

So I guess the line could be drawn thusly:

1) If you can make a list at several points levels (for example, I have 500, 1000, 1500, 1750, 1850, and 2000 point lists for my ABG) ahead of time, and just whip it out when someone says you're playing 40k, then you're playing "official" 40k.

2) If you need to discuss gameplay before you make your list (such as when the breaks will be in an Apocalypse game, or who the attacker/defender is in Planetstrike), then you are playing "expanded" 40k.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 juraigamer wrote:

Brother Payne wrote:


"As with all our models these should be considered ‘official’, but owing to the fact that 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."

Right, the bolded work needs attention. Either way, it doesn't matter, forge world isn't GW, it's forge world. Their books are different. Unless GW releases something saying X is allowed in general play, it doesn't matter how much FW nudges you to think that so you will buy more of their underpriced and overpowered crap.

You kids try too hard. It's a game, play and have fun.

ForgeWorld is GW. Their books are the coming from the same company. GW has released X saying it is allowed in general play - they've released the Imperial Armor volumes.

Games Workshop "DBA" ForgeWorld is different from Forgeworld being some sort of separate company.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


So I guess the line could be drawn thusly:

Sure. Or you could draw the line at the Brand Names printed on top of the books (e.g. Forge World vs. Games Workshop).

Lots of people have different ideas, preconceptions and "lines". Thus, it's better to ask and make sure your opponent is happy with you bringing Forge World.

And the company has nothing to do with it. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell are the same company. I still expect different things from them, because they are different brands, just like Games Workshop and Forge World are different brands.

Again?

Seriously?

AGAIN!?!

[MOD EDIT - Absolutely not. Do not post pictures like this on Dakka Dakka. - Alpharius]

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


So I guess the line could be drawn thusly:

Sure. Or you could draw the line at the Brand Names printed on top of the books (e.g. Forge World vs. Games Workshop).

Lots of people have different ideas, preconceptions and "lines". Thus, it's better to ask and make sure your opponent is happy with you bringing Forge World.

And the company has nothing to do with it. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell are the same company. I still expect different things from them, because they are different brands, just like Games Workshop and Forge World are different brands.

Actually, GW isn't a brand, GW is a company. Citadel and Forge World are brands within GW.

To say that Forge World isn't GW is to say that Citadel isn't GW, which is even more patently false.

And the argument you would get from me on that count, Zwei, is that people who draw the lines in places I wouldn't expect to find them need to explain why, as I have, and if they can't come up with a reasonable explanation, I would ask them to reexamine their position.

Brother Payne wrote:"As with all our models these should be considered ‘official’, but owing to the fact that 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."

Unit1126PLL wrote:That quote has been around since 2008. People still don't listen to it, for various torturously contrived reasons.

That quote has been around since 2008. It still has never been relevant to the discussion of forgeworld legality.

 Ailaros wrote:

Brother Payne wrote:"As with all our models these should be considered ‘official’, but owing to the fact that 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."

Unit1126PLL wrote:That quote has been around since 2008. People still don't listen to it, for various torturously contrived reasons.

That quote has been around since 2008. It still has never been relevant to the discussion of forgeworld legality.

Why not?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


And the argument you would get from me on that count, Zwei, is that people who draw the lines in places I wouldn't expect to find them need to explain why, as I have, and if they can't come up with a reasonable explanation, I would ask them to reexamine their position.

Games Workshop is a brand. It happens to be named similarly to the company, which is Games Workshop PLC. It's still a brand. It's on display at the stores, etc.. And it is a Brand distinct from other Brands such as Citadel or Forge World, correct.

Whether you understand where other people draw a line (or whether other people understand where you draw the line) is a nobel endeavour, but ultimately secondary.

First comes respect, tolerance and decency. The very reason why they printed those lines into the books "best make sure your opponent is happy" Not "ok". Not "grudgingly I accept it". Happy!

After that, ask away to your heart's content to improve the mutual understanding.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
/shrug

People know the quote. The problem is, a certain minority seems to confuse "official" with "appropriate-at-all-times-and-in-all-circumstances-in-all-games-without-exception".

That is not the case.

I haven't seen anyone arguing for that, Zwei. I usually see people asking for it to have the same perceived officiality as any given codex, which is what I personally am asking for.

Same here. Somebody not wanting to play against it? That's completely fine but it should be treated like denying that of a tau codex or imeprial guard codex for being that book or those specific units. Nothing wrong with somebody not wanting to play against it. My problem stems from it almost seeming like people believe it isn't an official part of the standard 40k game (and people often go on claiming it is op when frankly that's not a good argument)

Also I'm rather perplexed by the claims of dividing GW and forgeowrld especially when GW produces stompas and baneblades themself that can only be played with the other book (and at many gw shops that I know of Forgeworld books are sold. ALso you can order forgeworld at gw if memory serves me)

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


And the argument you would get from me on that count, Zwei, is that people who draw the lines in places I wouldn't expect to find them need to explain why, as I have, and if they can't come up with a reasonable explanation, I would ask them to reexamine their position.

Games Workshop is a brand. It happens to be named similarly to the company, which is Games Workshop PLC. It's still a brand. It's on display at the stores, etc.. And it is a Brand distinct from other Brands such as Citadel or Forge World, correct.

Whether you understand where other people draw a line (or whether other people understand where you draw the line) is a nobel endeavour, but ultimately secondary.

First comes respect, tolerance and decency. The very reason why they printed those lines into the books "best make sure your opponent is happy" Not "ok". Not "grudgingly I accept it". Happy!

After that, ask away to your heart's content to improve the mutual understanding.

If GW and Forge World are different brands, why is there a GW logo on the back of my Forge World book? That'd be like Pizza Hut, except with the little hut/hat thing having a Taco-Bell bell thingy (lol!).

I agree with you there, about tolerance and decency - but then why do I feel discriminated against when I use my ABG list?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


I agree with you there, about tolerance and decency - but then why do I feel discriminated against when I use my ABG list?

I don't. I feel discriminated if I am not asked and informed ahead of time.

It's a question of manners and social skills, not a question of toys.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


I agree with you there, about tolerance and decency - but then why do I feel discriminated against when I use my ABG list?

I don't. I feel discriminated if I am not asked and informed ahead of time.

It's a question of manners and social skills, not a question of toys.

Well, yes, but you would probably feel put upon if someone didn't tell you what codex they were using either.

That's just holding FW to the same standard as the codex, which is all I am looking for.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


I agree with you there, about tolerance and decency - but then why do I feel discriminated against when I use my ABG list?

I don't. I feel discriminated if I am not asked and informed ahead of time.

It's a question of manners and social skills, not a question of toys.

Well, yes, but you would probably feel put upon if someone didn't tell you what codex they were using either.

That's just holding FW to the same standard as the codex, which is all I am looking for.

Depends. In my regular group, where we "know" how most people approach the game, the pre-game talk can be skipped.

Against a new opponent or in a new environment, yes, I would have (and strongly encourage) a pre-game chat. Not just about the Codex, but also about the "mode" of gameplay and the use of the Codex, Supplements, etc.. . (Screamerstar vs. 5 Riptides or a more casual story-driven game?).

The point is not whether or not "Codex" and "Forge World" have the same standard. I couldn't care less how people "classify" or "categorize" all that stuff in their head. The point is to ask and make sure your opponent is happy because other people will inevitably fill their little mental boxes differently.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


I agree with you there, about tolerance and decency - but then why do I feel discriminated against when I use my ABG list?

I don't. I feel discriminated if I am not asked and informed ahead of time.

It's a question of manners and social skills, not a question of toys.

Well, yes, but you would probably feel put upon if someone didn't tell you what codex they were using either.

That's just holding FW to the same standard as the codex, which is all I am looking for.

Depends. In my regular group, where we "know" how most people approach the game, the pre-game talk can be skipped.

Against a new opponent or in a new environment, yes, I would have (and strongly encourage) a pre-game chat. Not just about the Codex, but also about the "mode" of gameplay and the use of the Codex, Supplements, etc.. . (Screamerstar vs. 5 Riptides or a more casual story-driven game?).

That's fine with me. I feel that the pre-game discussion is necessary (with exception - if it's a friend and you know what to expect, sure). During that pregame discussion, I will not hesitate to mention that I am using a Forge World list. However, I would do the same were I playing Codex: Space Marines, and would expect a similar reaction to both admissions.

I find the timing of this weeks FW thread kind of funny when you consider that GW has FW in the WD Daily blog today: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/wnt/blog.jsp?pid=12100010

Odd how GW doesn't market FW as needing "special permissions" for use in the game too:

WD Daily wrote:All the units include a full set of rules, updated for the current edition of Warhammer 40,000, enabling you to use them in your battles.

Seriously I'm just going to sit back and watch this one unfold, I just wanted to share the coincidence and that sentence from the blog because I found it interesting.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


That's fine with me. I feel that the pre-game discussion is necessary (with exception - if it's a friend and you know what to expect, sure). During that pregame discussion, I will not hesitate to mention that I am using a Forge World list. However, I would do the same were I playing Codex: Space Marines, and would expect a similar reaction to both admissions.

That defeats the point.

Of course reactions can be different.

You might meet somebody who will enjoy playing against your Forge World list, but turn down a game against Space Marines, maybe because that's the last 5 games he (or she) played.
Or you might meet somebody, who would enjoy playing against a Space Marines Codex, but is not happy with Forge World.

You either adjust your list so that everybody is happy, or, if there's no common ground to be found, you don't play.

 Zweischneid wrote:


Depends. In my regular group, where we "know" how most people approach the game, the pre-game talk can be skipped.

Against a new opponent or in a new environment, yes, I would have (and strongly encourage) a pre-game chat. Not just about the Codex, but also about the "mode" of gameplay and the use of the Codex, Supplements, etc.. . (Screamerstar vs. 5 Riptides or a more casual story-driven game?).

I agree with Z for the most part. With my normal group of 6 players, we were forgeworld friendly, and didn't need that conversation.

Now that I've moved away, I've had the pre-game conversation on a number of points with new opponents, and not just FW. It's good manners.

1500 points?
Do you want to run tournament competitive lists, balanced take-all-comers, or want a more narrative game?
Forgeworld or no?
Do we want to tell each other what armies we're bringing or just show up with 1500 points?

It's a social game. Open your pie hole and have a conversation with your opponent.