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.

Asuron wrote:If the direction they are taking is invalidating the entire background by having characters perform feats of such insane ludicrousy, overshadowing what the Emperor himself could do , then what the hell kind of direction is that to take.

That just comes down to how you choose to look at it.

You can take it as GW being inconsistent, sure. Or you can take it as a hint that the Imperial legends telling everyone of just how mind-numbingly awesome the Emperor was were written by someone a little biased on the subject. Or that Space Marines have simply become better fighters over the intervening 10 milllenia. Or that, as I already mentioned, any given story may or may not be an actual, true and unbiased account of what 'actually' happened.


The background of Warhammer 40K isn't intended to be a factual treatise on the future history of the galaxy. It's a bit of quite seriously over-the-top propaganda to make whichever army is currently being discussed look good.

As 'CATACLYSMUS' pointed out, those of us who have been around long enough have learnt to accept that fluff changes, and is generally not particularly consistent. That's just the nature of the game... and people have been screaming about it ruining the game for as long as GW have been re-writing things.

insaniak wrote:

Asuron wrote:If the direction they are taking is invalidating the entire background by having characters perform feats of such insane ludicrousy, overshadowing what the Emperor himself could do , then what the hell kind of direction is that to take.

That just comes down to how you choose to look at it.

You can take it as GW being inconsistent, sure. Or you can take it as a hint that the Imperial legends telling everyone of just how mind-numbingly awesome the Emperor was were written by someone a little biased on the subject. Or that Space Marines have simply become better fighters over the intervening 10 milllenia. Or that, as I already mentioned, any given story may or may not be an actual, true and unbiased account of what 'actually' happened.


The background of Warhammer 40K isn't intended to be a factual treatise on the future history of the galaxy. It's a bit of quite seriously over-the-top propaganda to make whichever army is currently being discussed look good.

As 'CATACLYSMUS' pointed out, those of us who have been around long enough have learnt to accept that fluff changes, and is generally not particularly consistent. That's just the nature of the game... and people have been screaming about it ruining the game for as long as GW have been re-writing things.

Thats the problem
It's not propaganda
Grey Knights are a secret organisation, who is going to write propaganda for them? Who would read it
Is it for themselves to read? That would make next to no sense.

Even if it was anyway, thats not the way its written
Its written as actual factual statements of what these characters acheived
Looking at it any other way isn't possible, because of the way its written
If I did try to do that, I would just be trying to justify poor writing.

You could certainly make arguments like that for Calgar or any other character hes written in other books
It does not apply to Grey Knights however

If you really wanted to get all pissed off at how your game's story changes with time, just look at MtG and D&D, where essentially the whole concept of the "story" has been shelved for marketing and profit.

Seriously, all they've done for DnD since 4th ed. is rehash some of the old stuff from billions of years ago. The changes they have made are mediocre at best (I do give them props for advancing the Forgotten Realms storyline, but little else has been as good as this world of their own creation).

And MtG has recently been shirking their storylines for the focus on the cards themselves and ignoring the rich history they have to build upon.

The fluff I can try to ignore. If he changes everything about the army considering the rules, then I'll get damn upset.

WarOne wrote:If you really wanted to get all pissed off at how your game's story changes with time, just look at MtG and D&D, where essentially the whole concept of the "story" has been shelved for marketing and profit.

Seriously, all they've done for DnD since 4th ed. is rehash some of the old stuff from billions of years ago. The changes they have made are mediocre at best (I do give them props for advancing the Forgotten Realms storyline, but little else has been as good as this world of their own creation).

And MtG has recently been shirking their storylines for the focus on the cards themselves and ignoring the rich history they have to build upon.

+ over 9000

Awesome comparison, it seems more people are here to play and less are here to read the story. The days of tall tales of the 40k universe arent dead, but I will admit I am playing blood angels AND HAVE NOT READ A SINGLE STORY IN THEIR CODEX YET. There are so many rules competitive players have to memorize, a lot of stories tend to go unread. I'll get around to reading the fluff eventually, as a lot is still fun to read, but Ive got my nose in the BRB and the faqs on GW lot of the time.....

The last fluff type thing Ive gotten into was Rites of War way back in the day before I actually played the game....and the 3rd edition Necron codex. I read it all the way the way through the day I bought it.

Asuron wrote: Who would read it

Most of the people in this thread, for starters.

You get that the 40K setting isn't real, right?

Looking at it any other way isn't possible, because of the way its written

It's a fictional setting for a game of toy soldiers. You can look at it whichever way you please.

Personally, I'm going with the 'It's all just make believe, and not worth getting all hot under the collar over' approach.


Edit: Seriously, I get that some people would prefer a consistent and believable setting. The thing is, you're not going to get that. 40K has never had that, and is unlikely to ever have it in the future.

And yet people think that this cobbled-together, constantly evolving little soap opera science fantasy setting for a game of toy soldier is such serious business that it's worth calling for someone's job because they don't agree with his (presumably completely endorsed by the company that employs him) personal take on it?

Seriously?


If that's really where people are coming from, I would heartily recommend some time away from the keyboard. Go take a walk. Pat some children and play with some puppies, or something to regain a little perspective.

insaniak wrote:Personally, I'm going with the 'It's all just make believe, and not worth getting all hot under the collar over' approach.

Indeed. It's a means to the ends of playing with toy soldiers/man dollies.

Personally, the main gripe I have with the fluff, having been keeping up for 22 years, is that it doesn't seem to move forward. In Wm/H, or WHFB, there is a story line, in which things begin, progress, and end. It has been 999 M41 for about 12 years, now, and they have foreshadowed about everything they can. I can understand that, in an Imperium with 1M+ planets, ALOT of things can happen within 1 year, but I kind of want them to move the story to the next evolution of humanity, or the Awakening/Death of the Emporer, or the Great Necron Arising, or whatever. Just...DO.....SOMETHING!

Oh, and by the way, I'd love to have Matt Ward's job! He is one of the 12 people at GW that make a liveable wage!

insaniak wrote:

Asuron wrote: Who would read it

Most of the people in this thread, for starters.

You get that the 40K setting isn't real, right?

Looking at it any other way isn't possible, because of the way its written

It's a fictional setting for a game of toy soldiers. You can look at it whichever way you please.

Personally, I'm going with the 'It's all just make believe, and not worth getting all hot under the collar over' approach.


Edit: Seriously, I get that some people would prefer a consistent and believable setting. The thing is, you're not going to get that. 40K has never had that, and is unlikely to ever have it in the future.

And yet people think that this cobbled-together, constantly evolving little soap opera science fantasy setting for a game of toy soldier is such serious business that it's worth calling for someone's job because they don't agree with his (presumably completely endorsed by the company that employs him) personal take on it?

Seriously?


If that's really where people are coming from, I would heartily recommend some time away from the keyboard. Go take a walk. Pat some children and play with some puppies, or something to regain a little perspective.

In their universe? Who will read it in their universe? Thats what I meant, thats what propaganda is for
I'll chalk that up to a misunderstanding on your part

His writing can't be looked at in another way, because of standard writing conventions
You can't just ignore them because of what you want to see, thats not dealing with the reality of whats written

I also don't understand why its not worth discussing because its based on toy soldiers?
The background drew us here, made us play the game because we enjoyed it, this guy ruins it
Discussion of it is perfectly fine and for you to somehow think that because its based on toy soldiers, that its somehow not worthy of discussion is strange to say the least

If your not interested in the background though, may I ask why aren't you playing games with a stronger ruleset?
Certainly much better games in that regard wouldnt you say?

Asuron wrote:In their universe? Who will read it in their universe? Thats what I meant, thats what propaganda is for

In this context, the 'propaganda' is simply a way of selling the army. Whether or not anyone in the 40K universe reads it, or is even aware of the existence of the army in question is largely irrelevant.

His writing can't be looked at in another way, because of standard writing conventions

Sure it can. We're not talking about literature here. We're talking about a few paragraphs of fluff text, the sole intention of which is to give a bunch of toy soldiers a bit of a background for those who care about such things.

You can take that however you please. Me, I take it as a starting point. It sets the basic scene... and a part of that basic scene is that nothing is certain... so almost anything goes.

You can certainly try to take it as something that is set in stone, and that should be consistent and comply with your own personal view of what the 40K universe is about. But that way lies madness.

I also don't understand why its not worth discussing because its based on toy soldiers?

I never said it wasn't worth discussing. I said it wasn't worth getting as worked up about it as some people seem to be getting... and that a handful of people on an internet forum disagreeing with his vision of Grey Knights isn't worth his job.

If your not interested in the background though, may I ask why aren't you playing games with a stronger ruleset?

I also never said I wasn't interested in the background. I love the background of 40K. It's one of the reasons I've been playing it for, what? 17 years now.

I just don't expect it to be anything more than what it is... which is a bit of fluff.
I also don't expect it to never change, or to only ever change in ways that I personally like. If it ever gets to a point where the direction that GW are taking the fluff in is a direction that no longer interests me, then I'll just carry on using the fluff I do like.

That's the brilliant thing about this game... We've had a functional game for 20 years now. Keeping up with the changes that GW make to it is a personal choice... not a requirement.

insaniak wrote:

Asuron wrote:In their universe? Who will read it in their universe? Thats what I meant, thats what propaganda is for

In this context, the 'propaganda' is simply a way of selling the army. Whether or not anyone in the 40K universe reads it, or is even aware of the existence of the army in question is largely irrelevant.

His writing can't be looked at in another way, because of standard writing conventions

Sure it can. We're not talking about literature here. We're talking about a few paragraphs of fluff text, the sole intention of which is to give a bunch of toy soldiers a bit of a background for those who care about such things.

You can take that however you please. Me, I take it as a starting point. It sets the basic scene... and a part of that basic scene is that nothing is certain... so almost anything goes.

You can certainly try to take it as something that is set in stone, and that should be consistent and comply with your own personal view of what the 40K universe is about. But that way lies madness.

I also don't understand why its not worth discussing because its based on toy soldiers?

I never said it wasn't worth discussing. I said it wasn't worth getting as worked up about it as some people seem to be getting... and that a handful of people on an internet forum disagreeing with his vision of Grey Knights isn't worth his job.

If your not interested in the background though, may I ask why aren't you playing games with a stronger ruleset?

I also never said I wasn't interested in the background. I love the background of 40K. It's one of the reasons I've been playing it for, what? 17 years now.

I just don't expect it to be anything more than what it is... which is a bit of fluff.
I also don't expect it to never change, or to only ever change in ways that I personally like. If it ever gets to a point where the direction that GW are taking the fluff in is a direction that no longer interests me, then I'll just carry on using the fluff I do like.

That's the brilliant thing about this game... We've had a functional game for 20 years now. Keeping up with the changes that GW make to it is a personal choice... not a requirement.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagee on this

Altough I do contend your point on it not being literature
It is written work, therefore it has follow the basic principles of writing ad all its forms

While I also think if this was a one off thng, based solely on Grey Knights, then you would be right
But its not an isolated case
His writing across the board, has been consistently terrible
I can't comment on rules however, I don't play enough to make those judgement calls
But it seems to me, if you do something terrible cosistently,then thats grounds to get fired and I think we both can agree, he has written really awful codexes

Asuron wrote:...and I think we both can agree, he has written really awful codexes

Yeah... I don't think we can, actually.

But then, it's quite possible I just have lower expectations. I survived the transition from 2nd to 3rd edition. Codexes would have to plummet an awful long way to top that experience.

You do understand Ward does not make the final call on what he writes. He has to submit it, then its checked over by the lawyers, accountants (IE the business guys not the Gamer guys) and who ever else at GW Corprate who want to have a read and mabye imput/notes.
So I dont think GW will fire him for doing the job they gave him and aproved of.
Now if the bean counters see enough of a drop in revenue from something writen by him, they may let him go then. But from what I can tell, it looks like GK's are going to to a BIG seller. So look forward to more works by Matt.

insaniak wrote:

Asuron wrote:...and I think we both can agree, he has written really awful codexes

Yeah... I don't think we can, actually.

But then, it's quite possible I just have lower expectations. I survived the transition from 2nd to 3rd edition. Codexes would have to plummet an awful long way to top that experience.

Wasn't around that era unfortunately lol
What was it like exactly?

I think this whole thing is getting blown way out of proportion. You know what the GW Game lovers of the world will continue to say to GW?

Here's a hint..

Redemption wrote:I have never in my entire life see an internet petition amount to anything.

I have! I once joined the noble and honorable cause to have the banana-filled chocolade confectionary returned to the Twist brand.



And lo and behold, it is now a regular fixture again. Behold the power of the sweeth tooth!

I have to say this is a pretty pathetic thread even for the usual nerdrage standards

Asuron wrote:While I also think if this was a one off thng, based solely on Grey Knights, then you would be right
But its not an isolated case
His writing across the board, has been consistently terrible

to be fair, he did a decent job in C:SM.
IMHO, the only bad codexes he wrote were C:BA and a few bits in C:GK.
The rules were balanced, and the stupid things he's done, IMO, consist of:
-DS-ing land raiders. I don't care if you have more than anyone else, you don't just chuck land raiders around!
-mephiston. 'Nuff said.
-"ghost knights". LOTD in GK form.
-castellan crowe. If there's one thing I've learnt about heretics and daemons, it's that they corrupt ALL who they touch.
-Jokaero. What's gonna happen to all the fluff about them being extinct? If you're gonna wipe out a species, stick with it.
Not that many bad units, a lot of his hate comes from other people- he isn't the only one writing the fluff and designing the models.
This petition will never go anwhere, they never do, and this is just a big rant IMO.

well i to be honest its just the fluff in all fairness its not going to wreck how the game is played if you dont like the fluff dont read it

shrike wrote:
to be fair, he did a decent job in C:SM.
IMHO, the only bad codexes he wrote were C:BA and a few bits in C:GK.
The rules were balanced, and the stupid things he's done, IMO, consist of:
-DS-ing land raiders. I don't care if you have more than anyone else, you don't just chuck land raiders around!
-mephiston. 'Nuff said.
-"ghost knights". LOTD in GK form.
-castellan crowe. If there's one thing I've learnt about heretics and daemons, it's that they corrupt ALL who they touch.
-Jokaero. What's gonna happen to all the fluff about them being extinct? If you're gonna wipe out a species, stick with it.
Not that many bad units, a lot of his hate comes from other people- he isn't the only one writing the fluff and designing the models.
This petition will never go anwhere, they never do, and this is just a big rant IMO.

Allowing BA to deep strike Land Raiders in the Codex was, admittedly, going too far. But Thunderhawk Transporters have been present in the game for quite some time and are perfectly able to carry Land Raiders. Sloppy rules writing though, yes. Mephiston makes sense however, as he's meant to be an utter badass. Also, as far as I know, Jokaero have never been extinct.

Edit: As a side note, no BA player in any game I've played so far has dared deep strike his Land Raiders. The risk is just too great.

So Matt Ward is the new Jervis Johnson?

shrike wrote:

Asuron wrote:While I also think if this was a one off thng, based solely on Grey Knights, then you would be right
But its not an isolated case
His writing across the board, has been consistently terrible

to be fair, he did a decent job in C:SM.
IMHO, the only bad codexes he wrote were C:BA and a few bits in C:GK.
The rules were balanced, and the stupid things he's done, IMO, consist of:
-DS-ing land raiders. I don't care if you have more than anyone else, you don't just chuck land raiders around!
-mephiston. 'Nuff said.
-"ghost knights". LOTD in GK form.
-castellan crowe. If there's one thing I've learnt about heretics and daemons, it's that they corrupt ALL who they touch.
-Jokaero. What's gonna happen to all the fluff about them being extinct? If you're gonna wipe out a species, stick with it.
Not that many bad units, a lot of his hate comes from other people- he isn't the only one writing the fluff and designing the models.
This petition will never go anwhere, they never do, and this is just a big rant IMO.

We can also add Daemons and Orcs to the list
As I understand it Orcs and Goblins were severely nerfed or something to that effect and Daemons broke the entire edition of 7th, requiring a new edition entirely to bring them back in line somewhat

Asuron wrote:We can also add Daemons and Orcs to the list
As I understand it Orcs and Goblins were severely nerfed or something to that effect and Daemons broke the entire edition of 7th, requiring a new edition entirely to bring them back in line somewhat

I don't play regular warhammer so I wouldn't know.

Regardless of it being badly written (and all fluff is of variable quality because a lot of is written by people who are wargamers first, and professional writers..er..never.) or even cheapening the previous material (which the constant creation of uber-demi-God-Heroes is bound to do) there is another perspective to thinking this fluff is bad.

Its not exactly child-friendly, is it? And for a company with a target market that are only just out of Gormiti/Bakugan/Pokemon its a little bit hard-core to say the least.

I started on GW when I was 8/9, back when the target market was somewhat older, and they still used to play Cannibal Corpse in the shops, and I only got away with it because my parents never read Real Of Chaos: Slaves To Darkness, or Inquisitor. (which was written by a proper novelist.) Now I'm a parent, and whilst I'm not sqeamish (obviously) and I'm certainly not a card-carrying member of "Fathers Against Swearing" or whatever, and I do have an extensive old-school Slaaneshi army, I also have a good enough grasp of child psychology to know that the moral ambiguity and adult content of a lot of GW product is a) exactly the kind of thing that gets "Upstanding of Cromley in a tizzy on the letters page of the Telegraph and b) not a good move if they want to promote themselves as family-friendly hobby-land.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:I started on GW when I was 8/9

damn, I wish I could of started that early...I went into GW a few days shy of my 9th year on this planet, and they said it's for 12 years and over.
I started playing once the tight-up guy left and the other staff let me play when I was 11.

shrike wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote:I started on GW when I was 8/9

damn, I wish I could of started that early...I went into GW a few days shy of my 9th year on this planet, and they said it's for 12 years and over.
I started playing once the tight-up guy left and the other staff let me play when I was 11.

Yeah, I think I just avoided there being an official "rule". I did however get some ridiculous questions like "What are you going to use the superglue for" whilst buying fifteen blisters of multi-part metal models. Even 9 year olds can do a pretty good dead-pan stare. In fairness, they may not have realised how young I was though.

Ravendove wrote:

shrike wrote:
to be fair, he did a decent job in C:SM.
IMHO, the only bad codexes he wrote were C:BA and a few bits in C:GK.
The rules were balanced, and the stupid things he's done, IMO, consist of:
-DS-ing land raiders. I don't care if you have more than anyone else, you don't just chuck land raiders around!
-mephiston. 'Nuff said.
-"ghost knights". LOTD in GK form.
-castellan crowe. If there's one thing I've learnt about heretics and daemons, it's that they corrupt ALL who they touch.
-Jokaero. What's gonna happen to all the fluff about them being extinct? If you're gonna wipe out a species, stick with it.
Not that many bad units, a lot of his hate comes from other people- he isn't the only one writing the fluff and designing the models.
This petition will never go anwhere, they never do, and this is just a big rant IMO.

Allowing BA to deep strike Land Raiders in the Codex was, admittedly, going too far. But Thunderhawk Transporters have been present in the game for quite some time and are perfectly able to carry Land Raiders. Sloppy rules writing though, yes. Mephiston makes sense however, as he's meant to be an utter badass. Also, as far as I know, Jokaero have never been extinct.

Edit: As a side note, no BA player in any game I've played so far has dared deep strike his Land Raiders. The risk is just too great.

Wait a second, your actually defending the stats/rules for Mephiston? Really? Hes a chapter master, THATS IT. Yet his rules look something like a fething Primarch. Thats going way over board if you ask me. Bad ass sure, a tuned up chapter master is fine. A Primarch in the making, no frigging way

KingCracker wrote:Wait a second, your actually defending the stats/rules for Mephiston? Really? Hes a chapter master, THATS IT.

Er... No he's not...

Yet his rules look something like a fething Primarch.

To which Primarch rules are you comparing him?

Wargames should never be aimed at children full stop. A human needs a reasonable grasp on whats real and whats not before embarking on something like this. I'm not a parent yet, but we're expecting our first in a few months and I'll not be introducing my child to wargaming for a long time......

Back on point, I was just re-reading the Dune saga, great books (not sure why it isn't a wargame to be honest!)...now, obviously Frank Herbert is unfortunately dead, and his son and another guy have taken over. While some people complain about what they have "done" to the story line, it's clear, they have gone to great pains to keep up the tradition Frank Herbert started, and without becoming mired in "history", in some way put their own stamp on the Dune universe.....

My point is, there is obviosuly ways in which you can move a story line on without trashing what has gone before, we see it in Dune and we see it in Star Wars. Imagine the Expanded Universe suddently re-writing the past so that Luke, Han Solo etc never existed? Would that be acceptible? if not, then why is it acceptible for WH40K.....call it nerd rage if you want, but to me, if you're going to sell a compelling story, you have to stick with the age old formula, beginning, middle and end....if the middle is always rewriting the beginning then god knows what to expect of the ending....something bad I bet.

KingCracker wrote:Mephiston makes sense however, as he's meant to be an utter badass.

Lysander is an utter badass.
Yarrick is an utter badass.
Ghazghkull is an utter badass.
It doesn't justify that he has stats of an MC. Here's his life story:
-chief libby of the BA.
-Succumbed to the black rage.
-Got trapped under a collapsed building.
-Popped out, with his newfound ability to kill carnifexes and greater daemons with his bare hands.

KingCracker wrote:Also, as far as I know, Jokaero have never been extinct.

They have.
http://members.fortunecity.com/pangolinsaloon/fl/deadraces.html