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.

Stumbled upon this gem the other day, some guy has made full army books for most of the Armies of Renown and then some! They seem really neat and all a lot of fun. As players, how would you feel about letting an opponent use one of these books? (in a friendly game of course)

http://warhammerarmiesproject.blogspot.com/

I've used the Dogs of War army book before and it was fun. If I had enough points I would of used the Bronzinos Galloping guns as well. For me I'm perfectly fine with my opponent using the unofficial army books so long as my opponent shows me the book in question and also it has to be up to the current GW standard of which the warhammer armies project guys have done wonderfully.

Looks like such a fun army book. I'd certainly want to play against it.

I'm kind of torn on unofficial lists, personally. My general rule of thumb is that I don't play them unless I really want a game of Warhammer. I realize that the folks making these lists put alot of work into it, but it always leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I have enough trouble wrapping my head around the rules with the 15(+1) armies that are already out there and all the variant lists that they have.

The few times that I've played against homebrews, I always felt like I was playing a game that didn't mean anything. I play to have fun, for sure. But at the same time I want to take something away from the game that makes me a better player or I learn new tactics. Against these unofficial lists it always feels like I wasted my time.

Tournament comp rules and related FAQs are the only unoffical adjustments I like to the game.

With that said, kudos to all of the folks that put effort into these unofficial lists, they are all pretty well done.

 nels1031 wrote:
I'm kind of torn on unofficial lists, personally. My general rule of thumb is that I don't play them unless I really want a game of Warhammer. I realize that the folks making these lists put alot of work into it, but it always leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I have enough trouble wrapping my head around the rules with the 15(+1) armies that are already out there and all the variant lists that they have.

The few times that I've played against homebrews, I always felt like I was playing a game that didn't mean anything. I play to have fun, for sure. But at the same time I want to take something away from the game that makes me a better player or I learn new tactics. Against these unofficial lists it always feels like I wasted my time.

Tournament comp rules and related FAQs are the only unoffical adjustments I like to the game.

With that said, kudos to all of the folks that put effort into these unofficial lists, they are all pretty well done.

While I totally understand your sentiments (I want a fun game, and the warhammer and 40k games are complicated enough as it is) the site in question here is quite well respected, and when compared to the way Forgeworld handles its lists in 40k, these guys make it considerably more easy to wrap your head around fighting one of these lists, and Forgeworld is to be considered official.

I would also never play a power gamer that managed to find some way to game one of these unofficial lists. If I were to play against these, it would be with the understanding that we're gonna try and have a different but fun game. Not that they are trying to see how powerful an army they can make from an unofficial list.

Thanks for posting this link. I'd love to play with or against these. I particularly like the Cathayan book.

 nels1031 wrote:
I'm kind of torn on unofficial lists, personally. My general rule of thumb is that I don't play them unless I really want a game of Warhammer. I realize that the folks making these lists put alot of work into it, but it always leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I have enough trouble wrapping my head around the rules with the 15(+1) armies that are already out there and all the variant lists that they have.

The few times that I've played against homebrews, I always felt like I was playing a game that didn't mean anything. I play to have fun, for sure. But at the same time I want to take something away from the game that makes me a better player or I learn new tactics. Against these unofficial lists it always feels like I wasted my time.

Tournament comp rules and related FAQs are the only unoffical adjustments I like to the game.

With that said, kudos to all of the folks that put effort into these unofficial lists, they are all pretty well done.

It's allowed at adepticon so yeah

 pities2004 wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:
I'm kind of torn on unofficial lists, personally. My general rule of thumb is that I don't play them unless I really want a game of Warhammer. I realize that the folks making these lists put alot of work into it, but it always leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I have enough trouble wrapping my head around the rules with the 15(+1) armies that are already out there and all the variant lists that they have.

The few times that I've played against homebrews, I always felt like I was playing a game that didn't mean anything. I play to have fun, for sure. But at the same time I want to take something away from the game that makes me a better player or I learn new tactics. Against these unofficial lists it always feels like I wasted my time.

Tournament comp rules and related FAQs are the only unoffical adjustments I like to the game.

With that said, kudos to all of the folks that put effort into these unofficial lists, they are all pretty well done.

It's allowed at adepticon so yeah

Wait, really? You can play any of these armies at Adepticon? Legit?

eeyup, I've seen them allow the Chaos Dwarf lists before (well before Tamurkhan at least)

I've played an older version of the Dogs of War and RoR books (not sure what changes were made to these newer ones). Those two books were basically an up-to-date version of the old army lists with adjusted points costs to match the edition and some of the clunky rules gone, so I didn't see a problem using it in line with the other WHFB books. The Kislev book seemed to be extrapolated book that added newer units to the ones you could take back in Storm of Chaos, and was always interesting to me to try to hunt down more Kislev models to finish out that army (once again, not sure if there were changes from an older version).

The guy does a lot of work and play-testing on these, so its not a hodge-podge IMO. It's just not easy convincing others to play with them.

Totally would. Those books are really cool and a nice job. It makes me want to collect one.