Switch Theme:

Named characters a mistake?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in fi
Ye Lord of The End Times (and a good guy)





And this is why people shoucd stop trying to twist 40k against what it was designed for. 40k wasn't designed to be story to be followed but setting to make your owe stories.

Will Yarric live or die? You decide on tabletop. 40k was supposed to encourage creativity. "40k as a story" group wants to kill off creativity.

2021 painted/bought: 538/575 
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






mrFickle wrote:
I started a thread some time ago about the time line and mortal characters like Yarrick that seem to have been around for hundreds of years especially as we have moved on a couple hundred years cos through the indomitus crusade.

Most responses were that you are not necessarily playing in the same year, 40K battles could be from various times

But doesn’t make sense if they are killing characters off and if you had a old mortal characters playing vs new primaris characters

But 40K doesn’t make sense


But it makes sense for an army of Imperial fists or salamnders or <insert imperium faction> fighting an army of <insert imperium faction> and all of thier current special characters?

Yes it doesnt make sense from a narrative perspective. But then you just wouldn't take those options if you were running a narrative game would you?
For a pick up game thought which is like 90+% of how 40k is played it makes zero deifference.

I played a CWE v CWE game and we both took eldrad. We decided that one of the armies is a doppleganger chaos spawn and the winner is the real Eldrad.
This is a very wierd self imposed limitation.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

Eldar- 4436 pts


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "


 Eonfuzz wrote:


I would much rather everyone have a half ass than no ass.


"A warrior does not seek fame and honour. They come to him as he humbly follows his path"  
   
Made in us
Sneaky Sniper Drone




Les Etats Unis

A lot of people are mentioning characters such as Tycho and Yarrick that have died within the story as counterpoints to the idea that characters with models don't die in 40k, but it's important to note that every single one of these examples is still in resin. I think it's pretty self-evident that killing characters with models is a choice that GW used to make, but doesn't anymore.

Iracundus wrote:
Spoiler:
 Flipsiders wrote:
It's been said before, but it just doesn't make sense that GW prevents named characters from dying in the story.

I can play a game of Magic: The Gathering in which I cast a Planeswalker card, and my opponent follows up with a Planeswalker who canonically died centuries earlier.

I can run a D&D campaign in which my players' characters fight against a canonically-murdered Forgotten Realms deity, complete with official stats.

Why can't Warhammer 40k be the same?



In either of those 2 examples, it's not clear what the time is so it might be set in the past.

The same would have to hold true if you play 40K featuring characters from the past. However there are also some matchups that could never happen at least if attempting to keep it vaguely in universe. Macharius could never face off against Aun'va for example.

Sure you can have completely anachronistic games with such impossible matchups. However it seems many 40K players want to play in the present and have games with living characters.


This is incorrect. Both D&D and Magic: The Gathering allow anachronistic matchups.

Dudeface wrote:
 Eldarain wrote:
Is there another game where players consistently blame each other for the failings of the creator?

If you want to get existential, life for some.
 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Flipsiders wrote:
A lot of people are mentioning characters such as Tycho and Yarrick that have died within the story as counterpoints to the idea that characters with models don't die in 40k, but it's important to note that every single one of these examples is still in resin. I think it's pretty self-evident that killing characters with models is a choice that GW used to make, but doesn't anymore.

Iracundus wrote:
Spoiler:
 Flipsiders wrote:
It's been said before, but it just doesn't make sense that GW prevents named characters from dying in the story.

I can play a game of Magic: The Gathering in which I cast a Planeswalker card, and my opponent follows up with a Planeswalker who canonically died centuries earlier.

I can run a D&D campaign in which my players' characters fight against a canonically-murdered Forgotten Realms deity, complete with official stats.

Why can't Warhammer 40k be the same?



In either of those 2 examples, it's not clear what the time is so it might be set in the past.

The same would have to hold true if you play 40K featuring characters from the past. However there are also some matchups that could never happen at least if attempting to keep it vaguely in universe. Macharius could never face off against Aun'va for example.

Sure you can have completely anachronistic games with such impossible matchups. However it seems many 40K players want to play in the present and have games with living characters.


This is incorrect. Both D&D and Magic: The Gathering allow anachronistic matchups.


What's incorrect? I admitted that D&D and Magic allow for anachronistic setups. Just that that particular example had an unspecified time so it was not necessarily anachronistic.
   
Made in us
Sneaky Sniper Drone




Les Etats Unis

Iracundus wrote:

What's incorrect?


Me, apparently. Sorry about that.

Dudeface wrote:
 Eldarain wrote:
Is there another game where players consistently blame each other for the failings of the creator?

If you want to get existential, life for some.
 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




There's tons of Guard characters that had models in the past, but don't have rules anymore.

- Captain Al'Rahem (Tallarn Desert Raiders): Previously had a model.
- Captain Obadiah Schfeer (Varolian): Previously had a FW model.
- Colonel-Commissar Ibram Gaunt (Tanith First and Only): Previously had a model and also now has a new kit.
- Colonel Schaeffer (13th Penal Legion): Previously had a model.
- Colonel Stranski (Cadian): Previously had a FW model.
- Commander Chenkov (Valhallan Ice Warriors): Previously had a model.
- General Grizmund (Narmenian): Previously had a FW model.
- Marshall Karis Venner (Death Korps of Krieg): Previously had a FW model.
- Lieutenant Kage (13th Penal Legion): Previously had a model.
- Fortress of Arrogance (Officio Perfectus): Previously had a model, though I think this may have been a kit bash from memory.
- Lord Solar Macharius: Previously had a model.
- Maximillian Weisemann (Mortant): Previously had a FW model.

Guard characters that had models but never had rules:

- Commissar Ciaphas Cain (Officio Perfectus): Previously had a limited BL model.
- Sergeant "Ripper "Jackson (Catachan): Limited edition model.

Guard characters that never had models but had rules:

- Mogul Kamir (Attilan Rough Riders)
- Sergeant Lukas Bastonne (Cadian)

I'd love to see at least the old school characters to come back in the 9th edition Guard codex. The other named regiments have no characters.

Other characters should definitely be added to legends. It's a shame they disappeared before legends was a thing so they missed out.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 04:31:22


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I'm a special character snob. I really like some of them and get rather annoyed with the ones that don't meet my arbitrary criteria.

I feel like they're best utilized when they're used to explore their own little corner of the setting and provide a familiar face and interesting personality to a series of connected stories. I feel like the Asurmen and Jain Zar novels are a decent example of this. The PLs are likable enough. If they showed up in a future novel with the same character voice, I'd be happy to see them. Their stories mostly small in scale (the far reaching impacts of their stories feel distant; they're not blowing up the death star to save the galaxy). Basically, it's fun to look over their shoulders.

Similarly, the special characters that show up in the Lukas the Trickster novel are oozing with fun personality that increase my enjoyment both reading the novel and playing my faction on the tabletop.

Where named characters get to be a pain is when they get "Star Warsy"; that is, when every character has to be involved in every major plot thread in a way that makes an enormous setting feel tiny.

But really, I think that has more to do with the major plot events than with the named characters themselves. Like, any narrative that hinges on two named characters facing off is almost always going to end with both of them still being alive, so it's that much harder to make such conflicts interesting/satisfying. And any big event that basically boils down to character X stopping event Y or else the setting gets blown up tends to be pretty lame. Either because the protagonist is almost inevitably going to stop event Y in a boring fashion, or because event Y being the thing that blows up (a chunk of) the setting would just be kind of lame.

But give me a small-scale story about two named characters running into each other at a bar, and I'm totally there for it. Actually, that's kind of what worked so well in The Infinite and the Divine. Both named characters had entertaining personalities, bounced off of each other well, and were embroiled in events that, while significant to them personally, weren't threatening to wipe out all of humanity if things went poorly. (At least no right away.)
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut





mrFickle wrote:
I started a thread some time ago about the time line and mortal characters like Yarrick that seem to have been around for hundreds of years especially as we have moved on a couple hundred years cos through the indomitus crusade.

Most responses were that you are not necessarily playing in the same year, 40K battles could be from various times

But doesn’t make sense if they are killing characters off and if you had a old mortal characters playing vs new primaris characters

But 40K doesn’t make sense


Depends how old they were when the timeline moved, a baseline human can live to be about 300-400 with rejuv treatments, and war heroes get the best of those. On top of that, with all the years and dates a matter of suspect to say the least, and transit in the warp messing with time, there are a lot of ways to explain away the inconsistencies lore wise.

That all being said, I do think that not killing off lore characters is a mistake. Let the old ones die and still keep current rules for them, like Aun'Va got. The downside to this means that they are likely to eventually run out of design space for unique characters, but Forge World manages to keep pumping them out without too much trouble, so it shouldn't be that big a deal so long as they only do a few at a time, at least for the foreseeable future.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jarms48 wrote:
There's tons of Guard characters that had models in the past, but don't have rules anymore.

- Fortress of Arrogance (Officio Perfectus): Previously had a model, though I think this may have been a kit bash from memory.

Other characters should definitely be added to legends. It's a shame they disappeared before legends was a thing so they missed out.


Yeah, FoA was a kitbash. I miss the days when that was actively encouraged.

I had originally assumed when Legends came out that we would get a Legends update for all the old models, really sad that hasn't happened yet.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/28 14:39:38


15000 4000 3500 2500 :tyranid: 2500 1000 1000
1000 1000 1000 1000  
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






A note about the "current timeline", it's never explicitly been stated when the Indomitus Crusade begins or ends and that is the premise that BL authors work off. While the initial premise was that the Battle of Raukos was 100 years after the opening of the Rift, that got changed because it was dumb. The Indomitus Crusade is now "ongoing" and the Triumph at Raukos was the end of Phase 1.
As for Yarrick specifically, it depends on what counts as old for his nickname "The Old Man", which he had at the time of the 2nd War for Armageddon. Being generous and saying he was maybe 60-70, after becoming an Imperial hero and the 3rd War only being 50 years later, Yarrick could still easily be alive in Current Year.M41 because of rejuve and cybernetic treatments.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I think current timeline is only meant to be a 12 year shift?

It still creates some oddities. The 3rd Sphere of expansion I believe lasted 2000 years, starting in M38. In the 12 years following the end of M41 we see the beginning and end of the 4th sphere and then starting a 5th!
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






The 4th Sphere was specifically thought to be a failure though, that's why the 5th exists. The T'au thought the 4th Sphere had been annihilated in the Warp Engine disaster and the 5th was to expand the Empire, secure the Startide Nexus and to find the 4th Sphere if they were alive.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I thought the 4th specifically returned as a gibbering xenophobic mess.
So they reconditioned all it's members then just launched again. Which seems a bit reckless.

I also generally believe spheres of expansion are more eras than crusades to the Tau, they try and take as much extra territory through diplomacy as direct military action. That doesn't really work in the timescales GW has imposed on these new ones.
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






The 5th found the 4th on the other side of the Startide Nexus where Shadowsun assimilated the forces into her own. It then became clear the 4th had become massively Xenophobic and organised massacres of prisoners and Auxiliaries. After this many 4th Sphere T'au were sidelined or sent for reconditioning and their Auxiliaries reassigned to 5th Sphere exclusive units. There is no more 4th Sphere of expansion.
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight






New Hampshire

Jarms48 wrote:
There's tons of Guard characters that had models in the past, but don't have rules anymore.

Spoiler:
- Captain Al'Rahem (Tallarn Desert Raiders): Previously had a model.
- Captain Obadiah Schfeer (Varolian): Previously had a FW model.
- Colonel-Commissar Ibram Gaunt (Tanith First and Only): Previously had a model and also now has a new kit.

- Colonel Schaeffer (13th Penal Legion): Previously had a model.
- Colonel Stranski (Cadian): Previously had a FW model.
[spoiler]- Commander Chenkov (Valhallan Ice Warriors): Previously had a model.

- Colonel Halon Tanz (Mordian Iron Guard): Requires a new model.
- Mogul Kamir (Attilan Rough Riders): Previously had a model.
Spoiler:
- General Grizmund (Narmenian): Previously had a FW model.
- Marshall Karis Venner (Death Korps of Krieg): Previously had a FW model.
- Lieutenant Kage (13th Penal Legion): Previously had a model.
- Fortress of Arrogance (Officio Perfectus): Previously had a model, though I think this may have been a kit bash from memory.
- Lord Solar Macharius: Previously had a model.
- Maximillian Weisemann (Mortant): Previously had a FW model.

Guard characters that had models but never had rules:

- Commissar Ciaphas Cain (Officio Perfectus): Previously had a limited BL model.
- Sergeant "Ripper "Jackson (Catachan): Limited edition model.

Guard characters that never had models but had rules:

Sergeant Lukas Bastonne (Cadian): I think he's the only one.

I'd love to see at least the old school characters to come back in the 9th edition Guard codex. The other named regiments have no characters.

Other characters should definitely be added to legends. It's a shame they disappeared before legends was a thing so they missed out.


Mogul Kamir never had an actual model and I have never heard of Mordian Colonel Halon Tanz, I'm not aware of a model nor rules for him.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/29 16:08:20


"Elysians: For when you absolutely, positively, must have 100% casualties" 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut





Mogul Kamir never had an actual model and I have never heard of Mordian Colonel Halon Tanz, I'm not aware of a model nor rules for him.


Colonel Halon Tanz is a background lore character. I wrote a Google Doc of previous characters and potential characters for Regiments that have either had them or needed them. Must have missed him when I copied the list.

Oh yes, I think you're right on Mogul Kamir. I vaguely remembered a picture of him from the 5th Guard codex, but they may have been just an ordinary Rough Rider. I'll edit that and put him with Sergeant Lukas Bastonne.

   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

If GW wrote the Lord of the Rings Boromir would have survived Amon Hen, Theoden would have survived the Battle of Pelennor Fields, The Witch King of Angmar would have managed to escape before Eowyn could kill him and the story would end just as the Orcs began to march out of the Black Gate to face the army of men.

The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If GW wrote the Lord of the Rings Boromir would have survived Amon Hen, Theoden would have survived the Battle of Pelennor Fields, The Witch King of Angmar would have managed to escape before Eowyn could kill him and the story would end just as the Orcs began to march out of the Black Gate to face the army of men.


If GW wrote LOTR the fellow ship never would have happened because before the meeting started the elves and dwarves would have gone to war. and Bormir would have had a tentacle for an arm due to the proximity of mordor


Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

BrianDavion wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If GW wrote the Lord of the Rings Boromir would have survived Amon Hen, Theoden would have survived the Battle of Pelennor Fields, The Witch King of Angmar would have managed to escape before Eowyn could kill him and the story would end just as the Orcs began to march out of the Black Gate to face the army of men.


If GW wrote LOTR the fellow ship never would have happened because before the meeting started the elves and dwarves would have gone to war. and Bormir would have had a tentacle for an arm due to the proximity of mordor



Also, the Hobbits would have been cut out in book 2 to make more room for Aragorn and Boromir repeatedly polishing their swords in excruciating detail. The writers would then get increasingly annoyed at people asking what happened to them until in the appendix of Book 15 it would be revealed they were all massacred by a random army of orcs that turned up in the Shire.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/08/01 11:01:38


The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 A Town Called Malus wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If GW wrote the Lord of the Rings Boromir would have survived Amon Hen, Theoden would have survived the Battle of Pelennor Fields, The Witch King of Angmar would have managed to escape before Eowyn could kill him and the story would end just as the Orcs began to march out of the Black Gate to face the army of men.


If GW wrote LOTR the fellow ship never would have happened because before the meeting started the elves and dwarves would have gone to war. and Bormir would have had a tentacle for an arm due to the proximity of mordor



Also, the Hobbits would have been cut out in book 2 and the writers would get increasingly annoyed at people asking what happened to them until in the appendix of Book 15 it would be revealed they were all massacred by a random army of orcs that turned up in the Shire.


and frodo wouldn't exist at all, they'd just use Bilbo.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Giggling Nurgling





I have a love hate relationship with named characters. On one hand, love the lore and all and I love the detail on my Mortarion and how intricately I can paint him up. On the other hand... I never really, 100% liked them. Partially due to me liking to custom make stuff, partially because back in the day I had people run like... bajillions of special characters in one army because roflstomp. Was back in the day when special characters were shifting from opponents to permission to open play. The lawless days lol
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut





 Flipsiders wrote:
It's been said before, but it just doesn't make sense that GW prevents named characters from dying in the story.

I can play a game of Magic: The Gathering in which I cast a Planeswalker card, and my opponent follows up with a Planeswalker who canonically died centuries earlier.

I can run a D&D campaign in which my players' characters fight against a canonically-murdered Forgotten Realms deity, complete with official stats.

Why can't Warhammer 40k be the same?



That would literally drive me crazy. Can't stand that type of stuff. If it's dead, it's dead and can't fight something that came after it or long before it that as ceased to be. Fair as an 'ask your opponent' type scenario, sure but otherwise no.

Static setting, named characters are fine. If the setting moves forward then there needs to be changes to how those characters work and feel to represent a similar development or they need to die and not come back. Characters die all the time in fictional settings. People die all the time in reality and life goes on. Not saying it's not tremendously tragic or sad but such is a natural part of reality. The benefit of it being a fictional setting with magic and advanced tech is that some characters can live past their typical sell-by dates or survive things they wouldn't normally but these deus' should be used sparingly and not without consequence imho. In the same breath, though, there needs to be a story outside of the fan made ones. So there should always be an official 'big bad' and a 'hero' that do have plot armour and are very survivable. Some factions would likely only have one or two (such as IG, Tau, Orks, SM, Custards), others (such as Eldar, Crons and CSM) may have more and others would have none (Tyranids) - in short i'm saying there should be named characters but less of them.

One thing I do agree on though is that there should be MORE customisation for home-brewed characters so that players can forge a home narrative. I'm talking near (but not quite) 3rdEd level of customisation. I fondly remember the days when you could pay 15pts to add 1 Attack or 20pts for a wound to a basic chaos lord. It needed toning down but the idea had merit.

- 10,000 pts CSM  
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Magic: The Gatherine had an "out" sort of, in that the original conception way back at the beginning of MtG of Planeswalkers were more like gods, and they could have had many avatars at once. Players playing a game were meant to be 2 planeswalkers duelling. The loser was defeated and maybe banished from a plane, but they were not killed. So even "dead" planeswalkers might not really be dead, merely banished and passed out of memory for all those on a certain plane. Casting a "dead" planeswalker could be rationalized perhaps as them (or an avatar of them) making a return.
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

I never was a fan of the "must have permission to use characters" rule, mainly as there were some real dicks in my gaming circle who would just say no out of spite. I think the points limit was a better idea however, like some characters you had to have 1500 or even 2k lists to run.

As for killing characters off, who cares? The point of the game is you can represent any timescale. I'd rather have characters not die than GW killing them off and removing them from the game full-stop.

   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Part of the problem with characters is that they're basically just generic characters, with maybe an extra stat or minor special rule.

Which means they compete directly with generic characters and they're either better (thus always used by everyone) or worse (thus almost never used by anyone).
   
Made in gb
Enginseer with a Wrench





Northumberland

I think named characters made much more sense in WHFB and that there was usually a much greater likelihood for their appearance in a battle, made sense to have them in larger games. Not so much the case with 40k.

Part of the good thing with 9th and crusade is that they're at least giving people an option of creating their own special characters in game as the narrative progresses. I mean that was the origins of a lot of the special characters from WD.

What I dislike is that if they are so intrinsic to an army on the field that you can't play a game without them. I'd much rather they could be used if you wanted but it's not the be all and end all.

I don't think I ever bought or used a special character in 40k. I always homebrew stuff so it was never an issue.

One and a half feet in the hobby


My Adeptus Mechanicus Painting Log:
# The Explorator Fleet of Labrunnia IX #

 
   
Made in gb
Mighty Vampire Count






UK

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I wouldn't mind if some named characters died every now and then.

Warhammer Fantasy had quite a few dead named characters (Vlad, Isabelle and Konrad von Carstein, Gorbad Ironclaw, Grom the Paunch, Repanse de Lyonesse and perhaps others I am forgetting about) and it worked just fine. There is no reason why there couldn't be rules for "dead" characters.


Yep - same in Total War: Warhammer with interactions between "people" who lived and died (or were destroyed) centruies apart

Plus 40K has time travel - remember that Ork Warboss who travelled back in time and sought himself to kill him to get a second copy of his gun

I AM A MARINE PLAYER

"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos

"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001

www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/528517.page

A Bloody Road - my Warhammer Fantasy Fiction 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 Olthannon wrote:


What I dislike is that if they are so intrinsic to an army on the field that you can't play a game without them. I'd much rather they could be used if you wanted but it's not the be all and end all.

.


except it's quite possiable to play a game without using a special character.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Crazed Troll Slayer




Charlotte, NC

Cannon wise I do tend to agree that we generally see special characters treated with kid gloves by the writers. A prime example is the wrap-up of the SOC back in WFB. The OP's argument in a practical manner that you will piss off your base if you kill off a popular character sounds solid. Albeit, Gee Dubs seems to have no problem pissing off their base on a regular basis on a number of fronts. Having said that, one of the reason why I picked Crimson Fists for a Space Marine army is due to Pedro Cantor.

Game wise it is a little different story for me. I don't remember where I saw it , but it was written in an older editions BRB, that a "Kill" means that the model is in-capacitated and thus unable to continue on with the battle. Therefore, even regular grunts are not exactly killed outright every time they get removed from the table. It was also part of some of the supplemental Campaign rules that was used back in WFB, but with more attrition than what I would expect from Sci-Fi It is a sentiment that I continue to use to this day in almost all of my gaming, unless the model is supposed to already be dead.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I know the "they're not necessarily killed" is a common justification, but it doesn't actually make sense. You don't get ripped apart by a Genestealer who proceeds to use an ability to eat your brain without being dead.
I think it's better to just not take the tabletop as canon.
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!






Another way to make a model redundant is to bring out a new bigger model of the character. One day though i'll bring 2nd ed Ghaz to a tourney on a huge base just for the lulz.

Some great posts in this thread. Well said Karak. 40k is what you make it.

I have a blog on the Warhammer Tournaments website:

There Will Always be Chainswords

My painting and modeling blog:

PaddyMick's Chopshop: Converted 40K Vehicles 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Background
Go to: