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.

 Paradigm wrote:
40k (braces himself) is very good, for what it is. As a fun, casual, Saturday afternoon game, it's absolutely fine. It's the Action Blockbuster equivalent of games, good for a laugh and a couple of hours' fun with some friends.

Just because you personally enjoy playing it doesn't mean that it is an objectively "good" system. Most any rule set on the market could be described in exactly those terms.

Fun, casual, Saturday afternoon game. In other words, don't take it too seriously because the system doesn't really work very well. If you ignore the problems it has and only play with friends it's entertaining.

But what actually makes a game "casual?"

Personally, I don't think 40K is very "casual" at all. The rule set is byzantine and clunky. You would be hard pressed to teach the system to someone over a game and have them walking away from the table proficient in it's use. Many games slow down or grind to a halt because a rules issue comes up, even among die-hard veterans. Most games at the recommended point values take far more than an hour to play. Reference materials for the game are spread across multiple different formats, are difficult to access, and are filled with typos and ambiguous language.

None of that says casual to me.

Dreadball is an example of a casual game. Whether or not one 'likes' the system, it is very simple, easy to learn, doesn't require much, and plays quickly.

If you can walk up to a table with a beer in your hand in the middle of a game you've never played before and jump right into the middle of it, that's a casual game.

Take board games, for example. Eclipse is a great game. But it is the antithesis of casual. On the other hand, Firefly: The Game is very casual. BANG! is very casual. Cards Against Humanity is the epitome of casual. Your eighty year old grandmother can roll up to a game of Cards Against Humanity, get dealt in, and be laughing about Obama eating gak out of a bucket in ten minutes.

That's casual.

It's casual mostly because the rules aren't just simple; they work. There's no confusion. The system functions without a hitch. That isn't any game that GW produces.

In 40K, players mostly have fun despite the rules, not because of them.

 pretre wrote:
Jumping in on Deadzone, as well. I love me some Deadzone.

I also lol'd at Firefly being casual.

I'd list 40k as well, just because despite the problems it is really one of the best out there. I will not go hide to avoid the backlash.

Why isn't Firefly casual?

To me the game seems like a very casual game. The rules can be picked up in the midst of playing and consist of the same basic mechanic being repeated over and over and over again. the turn sequence is flexible and overlapping. The system easily handles a missed turn here and there without much adverse impact.

There's lots of cards and things, and the game takes an inordinate amount of table space to play comfortably, but in terms of the rules, it's a pretty casual game.

 pretre wrote:
Table space, time and emotional investment. The last game we played took quite some time to complete.

Lol, yea. Ours just kinda go until somebody wonders what the mission was supposed to be and then does it. It's got a Heores of Might and Magic sort of feel to the game play.

40K is a glorified skirmish game. Most armies only consist of a handful of units which are discrete elements with discrete rules. Even horde armies typically don't have a wide assortment of units.

Just because there are 100 models on the table doesn't mean the game is massively more complex, or that it gets a pass on clunky rules because it 'does so much more.' A squad of 10 Space Marines is one discrete thing. Functionally not much different from a warjack in Warmahordes, a character in Malifaux, a TAG in infinity, etc.

Saldiven wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

Saldiven wrote:


We're discussing games with good rules. People have brought up 40K as having "good rules." If the rules set for 40K does not succeed at "what it tries to do," then obviously the rules are not good.

Perhaps.

But people have also said that X-Wing or Infinity are "better" rules, even though they aim to achieve very different things.

That is obviously wrong.

I would argue that ... say ... X-Wing is vastly inferior at achieving what Warhammer 40K is trying to achieve (and vice versa).

?????

X-wing achieves its attempted goal better than 40K achieves its attempted goal.

That's why X-wing has better rules.

The only reasonable measuring stick is how well the respective games achieve what that system wishes to achieve. We're discussing relative rule sets, not game genre.

Exalted for brevity.

 Zweischneid wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

The 40K experience places heavy emphasis on narrative game-play

What rules does 40k have that emphasize or promote narrative gameplay over, say, X-Wing (to quote another game that you say that you play)?

The "mission-statement" of the designers, as communicated through the books, White Dwarf, etc.., and therefore (among other things) the relative importance "the rules" as such have in the game.

LOL...LOL...LOL

I'm sorry guy, but this is hilarious. In a thread about which wargaming rule sets on the market are 'the best', you are saying that a set of rules is good because the game designers tell you that the rules of their game aren't important? Really?

 Zweischneid wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

So the reason the 40K rules are good at what they do, is because the designers tell you the rules aren't important?

Not in the "written-in-stone" sense they are used in other games.

Of course the 40K rules are important, but trying to communicate that they are trumped by other, more relevant factors to people who aren't used to that kind of mature gaming and have no experience outside of games that hold your hand for every little step is often abbreviated (and best achieved) by initially communicating that people should worry less about the rules and get the important things right first.

Give it up Zwei, you just torpedoed your position and have lost all semblance of credibility.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Red Viper wrote:

Just started getting into Song of Blades and Heroes and I like it a lot. Easily my favorite fantasy skirmish game I've played.

Ok, I keep hearing about this game and I need to know more about it! I have a bunch of Confrontation Wulfen sitting pretty in my shelf that I wan't to plop on a table for any reason...

Are the rules for this in a physical book or are they PDF only? And is the game really as customizable as people say? Could I, for example, build a gang from my Wulfen to use with these rules?

Paperback or PDF.

It's a Ganesha Games title. Ganesha produces lots of different games, and there's several expansions for Songs. It is a very customizable system.

 Easy E wrote:


Also, how is this thread different than a "best game" thread?

I think the thread is supposed to be about the rules, just the rules, and not the whole package, including community, play aids, cost, accessibility, etc. and so forth. Just rules in a vacuum...ostensibly.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I think CB now makes the most detailed, imaginative, animated and beautiful miniatures out there. (And they can make females look like females.)

Well...Infinity does have a bit of 'Anime Ass' syndrome. Fully dressed women, sure...with round, sexy anime asses and painted on pants.

That's not all female models CB does, but 'women looking like women' is pretty darn relative. I mean, CB doesn't make a single model that looks anything like my mother, or like women in modern battle dress for that matter, under which women look like...well...like a human underneath layers of gear, ballistic fabric, armor plates, and ammo.

Yea, so's she:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/acontecimento-regulars-2/

And her, 'cause why not:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/orc-troops/

And these gals:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2013/miniatures/dire-foes-mission-pack-dark-mist-2/

And this lovely chica:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/tiger-soldiers-2/

She's having a nice time out at the mall with her giant machine gun. Military chic is really in this season!:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/metros-2/

And that's not even plucking the low-hanging fruit...Which would have been unfair:

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2011/miniatures/caledonian-volunteers-2/

You get those bad guys honey! I love it when you walk away to war...

Infinity isn't a terrible offender or anything, but CB aint no stranger to cheesecake, and likes a lady with certain...proportions. CB likes a nice, tight, round anime ass and a tiny waist. Credit them with putting clothes and armor on the ladies, but what I was most interested in was the 'real women' bit.