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.

 Stormphoenix wrote:
People seem to forget that 40k is not sci-fi, it's pure high fantasy in a space opera setting. It's *supposed* to be over the top, it's supposed to have larger than life characters and improbable, cinematic battles, that's the entire point.

If it was just pure grimdark with nothing to temper it, the only people who would play it would only shop in Hot Topic.

There's nothing wrong with those people.

Commissar Benny wrote:
One thing that always surprises me in this hobby is how many people play WH40K, but have no interest in the story. Are there parts of the story that are poorly written or could have been done better? Of course. I largely believe however WH40K has one of the most interesting futuristic sci-fi settings out there. Why does one play WH40K if they have no interest in the setting? Like, what specifically draws them to WH40k when there are hundreds of other tabletop games out there that are far less expensive? Have you met player like this?

That makes me sad, as I find the lore to be the most enjoyable part.

But, it takes all kinds of eggs to make an omelet or something.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
If you don't like the lore then I don't really understand how you can like 40K.

I mean, without the lore, 40K is just a game. And it's not a good game. It's a poorly written, convoluted game and there are other TT games out there with objectively better rules and cheaper models.

It is, however, for many folks the only table top game that was played or is played on a large enough scale to know you can find a game.

I do like the minis, and some of the fluff is okay. However, if I could find players for Saga and or a good historical game I probably wouldn't play it at all. I'd probably pick up a different scifi game if it could catch on.

On the whole, the fluff is ok in some places, outright stupid and bad in others (at least to me). I feel like it's a bit of a retred of Battletech in some respects (the idea that war has eliminated the ability to create new technology, when war has always been proven to be an incredible innovator, at least in terms of military technology with a dysfunctional humanity).

When it's general 'scifi' I can enjoy it, but chaos just drags the enjoyment out of it, as it tends to come across as crass for no reason other than to be crass.

 Maniac_nmt wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
If you don't like the lore then I don't really understand how you can like 40K.

I mean, without the lore, 40K is just a game. And it's not a good game. It's a poorly written, convoluted game and there are other TT games out there with objectively better rules and cheaper models.

It is, however, for many folks the only table top game that was played or is played on a large enough scale to know you can find a game.

I do like the minis, and some of the fluff is okay. However, if I could find players for Saga and or a good historical game I probably wouldn't play it at all. I'd probably pick up a different scifi game if it could catch on.

On the whole, the fluff is ok in some places, outright stupid and bad in others (at least to me). I feel like it's a bit of a retred of Battletech in some respects (the idea that war has eliminated the ability to create new technology, when war has always been proven to be an incredible innovator, at least in terms of military technology with a dysfunctional humanity).

When it's general 'scifi' I can enjoy it, but chaos just drags the enjoyment out of it, as it tends to come across as crass for no reason other than to be crass.

War's great for innovation in small amounts. It's terrible for a duration of ten-thousand years that erodes your culture and civilization until war's all it knows. Plus the Imperium is a dogmatic dictatorship with R&D being the most dangerous job possible with it typically resulting in 'suddenly, daemons'. Doesn't help either they're downright terrified of technology after the Men of Iron during the Age of Strife.

It's a combination of a total war lasting for over ten thousand years and magitech being the main source of technological advancement, that also can result in your planet being invaded by extra dimensional eldritch abominations. The Imperium hasn't really advanced because it almost always ends up with a lot of people dying because of it going wrong or a lot of people dying from going dungeon delving for STC's. It's the most crapsack scenario imaginable for technological advancement.

Forget the lore, I prefer the art. Specifically, the old art, which captures a very different and distinct *feel* for warhammer compared to the current day one - which feels way more generic and honestly has a Cawaduty like aftertaste to it

They've collected 200 such images here



Infinitely more character and far more interesting that gak like "herp derp the blood ravens will use xenos artefacts, marines will ally with tau" etc etc

 da001 wrote:


I was told FoW got neat rules and it definitely has good-looking models. Never attracted me since, while I love History, I prefer some sci-fi. So I was curious about your opinion as a 40k player & history lover.

Flames of War has solid rules but I wish they'd simplify them just a little bit. 40k could learn a *lot* from it, as its a game with a lot of big guns, fliers, tank hordes etc which have to be used intelligently instead of *point and erase*

those old school pics look awesome, tattoo worthy even.

Adrian Smith is Emprah level awesome


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ian Miller's stuff is gonna give me nightmares though...

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Adrian Smith is Emprah level awesome


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ian Miller's stuff is gonna give me nightmares though...

Them old stuff haz karakter!

 Dakkamite wrote:
Forget the lore, I prefer the art. Specifically, the old art, which captures a very different and distinct *feel* for warhammer compared to the current day one - which feels way more generic and honestly has a Cawaduty like aftertaste to it

They've collected 200 such images here

A large number of the 40k-specific Adrian Smith images on that site have colored versions of them that were then used in the various Dark Heresy books.

The OP question is akin to asking "Why do people eat peanutbutter ice cream instead of a stale peanut butter sandwhichs?" Besides tasting really good and being nice on a hot day your trying to find a behavioral 'motivator' in the psychology of an individual or group. Go eat some ice cream and you would learn more about the multitude of actual explanations and reasoning's (not answers) then were, or could ever be provided by this thread.

I admit it was the lore that first really drew me in. The 2nd ed Eldar codex painted a woeful tale of a dying race. But since then my focus on it has waned. Maybe it's because through the years not a huge amount changes, after all Chaos still have the same motivators as when I started as do the bulk of the races. Maybe it's because I've grown to enjoy other parts of the hobby more.

The only lore that I've really enjoyed over the last decade has been the Tau because they are so different to everything else out there, it's good to have a little hope, and the Tyranids because they are just despair incarnate.

I haven't read 70% of the BRB outside of the rules themselves but that's just me. I can't knock anyone who thinks otherwise.

If the lore doesn't interest you with your 40k hobby you got serious issues. Otherwise it's an insanely overpriced tabletop game with gak unbalanced rules run by a company that hates you. The lore is literally the only positive thing I see about 40k.

 Harriticus wrote:
If the lore doesn't interest you with your 40k hobby you got serious issues. Otherwise it's an insanely overpriced tabletop game with gak unbalanced rules run by a company that hates you. The lore is literally the only positive thing I see about 40k.

The way i see it if the lore is the only thing that you like why dont you just read books on the topic?

I personally enjoy the game a lot. I haven't read more than the rules in my rulebook, I haven't even read my eldar codex besides the rules. I think the lore is garbage. I hate 90% (or more) of the lore.

But with the game i can make whatever I want out of it and have a ton of freedom in what I field and what models i use and so on. The rules are the only thing keeping me in the game.

If you enjoy the lore i think that you are weird, i mean its awful

It's the main reason I enjoy it in adulthood and because my friend group also love the fluffy aspects and might try and incorporate that in their models and armies. There's gonna be lots of stuff you don't like; as there is lots of stories in general; but the scope you're given to create your own stories in practically unlimited.

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
If the lore doesn't interest you with your 40k hobby you got serious issues. Otherwise it's an insanely overpriced tabletop game with gak unbalanced rules run by a company that hates you. The lore is literally the only positive thing I see about 40k.

The way i see it if the lore is the only thing that you like why dont you just read books on the topic?

I personally enjoy the game a lot. I haven't read more than the rules in my rulebook, I haven't even read my eldar codex besides the rules. I think the lore is garbage. I hate 90% (or more) of the lore.

But with the game i can make whatever I want out of it and have a ton of freedom in what I field and what models i use and so on. The rules are the only thing keeping me in the game.

If you enjoy the lore i think that you are weird, i mean its awful

No the lore is great. I love it and it is the only thing keeping me in the game.
The rules are awful however.
If you only play for the rules than I think you are weird
Why not just stick to FoW? It has your much beloved historicity and the rules are much, much better than 40k.
Also, it has KV-tanks. KV-tanks are even more awesome than the CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT because you do not have to wonder about what to put in it.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
If the lore doesn't interest you with your 40k hobby you got serious issues. Otherwise it's an insanely overpriced tabletop game with gak unbalanced rules run by a company that hates you. The lore is literally the only positive thing I see about 40k.

The way i see it if the lore is the only thing that you like why dont you just read books on the topic?

I personally enjoy the game a lot. I haven't read more than the rules in my rulebook, I haven't even read my eldar codex besides the rules. I think the lore is garbage. I hate 90% (or more) of the lore.

But with the game i can make whatever I want out of it and have a ton of freedom in what I field and what models i use and so on. The rules are the only thing keeping me in the game.

If you enjoy the lore i think that you are weird, i mean its awful

No the lore is great. I love it and it is the only thing keeping me in the game.
The rules are awful however.
If you only play for the rules than I think you are weird
Why not just stick to FoW? It has your much beloved historicity and the rules are much, much better than 40k.
Also, it has KV-tanks. KV-tanks are even more awesome than the CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT because you do not have to wonder about what to put in it.

I do play Flames of War and love it. But 40k rules let me do anything. If im just looking for fun and not feeling competitive then 40k is one of the best rule sets. I couldnt care less if the lore for 40k said anything. I just dont look at it ever anymore. I know nothing of the history and if i know anything lore related its a little bit of eldar an imperial guard. Even then most of the fluff is just crap, none of it that i hear of makes sense and its just like a kids book with adult themes behind it.

the 40k rule book is like an RPG rule book. You have rules but ultimately you can do what you want with it. There is so much freedom involved i can do whatever i want and not have to know anything about its "extensive and rich background" (which is all crap and mostly a bunch of small paragraphs with minimal info and bogus statistics) and have a whole heap of fun.

Lore = maybe my future 4 year old kid would love it, but i find it odd that many people who have left primary school like it. In short, lazily written rubbish.

Rules = ultimate freedom and changes, all catered to be done as you wish at your whim. In short, excellent. Added bonus, i only need the rules because knowledge of the lore or anything even remotely real (besides guns shoot, swords hit. Thats about the only thing in 40k lore thats even remotely believable. The rest is crap) to have a good time playing it. Dont even need GW models.

I personally love the setting since it uses so many classic motives (Space Marines=Knights/Legionairres, Demons, Space Elves, the Imperium as combination of a fascist state/the Roman Empire, Religious Purging etc...) and puts them into a science fiction universe thus creating something truly unique. Much of it is over the top of course (e.g.Marneus Calgar fighting of a bazillion Orks by himself; the brain torture that is Kaldor Draigo) but I don't think that makes it all that much less of an intriguing setting. Especially since you always have the option to create your own mental image of the universe.
So all in all I can't understand why someone would just play the game (that in itself isn't terribly well balanced and full of convoluted rules) and completely neglect the fluff.