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.

 Barksdale wrote:
No I mean a house-rule which allows people use units which are not in the official codices, such as a FW unit.

What house rules? Page 108 in the core rulebook clearly says players can take an army list from a codex, an altered army list (which is what FW's additional unit options give us) or their own system (again, FW's army lists or homebrew).

Where's the rule that explicitly says FW isn't meant for actually playing in games though?

Rumbleguts wrote:
Can we agree however that "experimental rule" FW should not be allowed on the table except in friendly games?

I second this Statment

Rumbleguts wrote:
Can we agree however that "experimental rule" FW should not be allowed on the table except in friendly games?

No.

You are assuming that a "not friendly game" exists. I think you mean "tournament games", correct me if I am wrong. In this case, it is up to the tournament organizer. My opinion in this matter, and yours, mean nothing. "Should not be allowed" sounds really harsh.

Personally, I will gladly play with an "experimental rule" if it is balanced and properly written, both in tournaments and in friendly games, yet refuse to play with a completely broken unit even if it is not branded "experimental". But that´s just my opinion.

Forge world is allowed at my meta, with the exception of totally op things like the r'varna and old lucius pods, the New lucius pod rules are fine so it's allowed again.

On the debate, the argument that "I don't have access to the rules" is an idiotic one these days, internet, smart phones, iPads, all of these give us ways to find rules if we choose to.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
No I mean a house-rule which allows people use units which are not in the official codices, such as a FW unit.

What house rules? Page 108 in the core rulebook clearly says players can take an army list from a codex, an altered army list (which is what FW's additional unit options give us) or their own system (again, FW's army lists or homebrew).

Where's the rule that explicitly says FW isn't meant for actually playing in games though?

The suggestion that players can use FW rules is right there together with a suggestion for using homebrew rules. That says it all right there. So if if people want to make a house-rule stating allowing the use of FW rules or homebrew rules, that's okay.

But isn't it arguable to note that the fact that they are distinctivly divided into homebrew and FW no matter how slight mean there is to some extent a distinct difference.

The main topic is the same as always. Are Forgeworld legal to play? Most certainly. GW agrees with it, the WD releases information about Forgeworld, the SHOPS sell forgeworld, etc. They are not unbalanced op broken monger bits. Yeah they have a few but it is arguable they have more models that are inferior than superior. That being said, whether something is legal or not means little to groups of people from the tournies to groups of players. In such hobbies, you are not entitled to a battle. Deploy 3 riptides? Watch as your foe leaves. Deploy 5 wave serpents you long ago owned and they just happened to get buffed? Watch as your foe leaves. Your models aren't painted? They leave. You have female SM that are well painted? They leave. We all have our opinions and nobody is required to play a game with anybody else. If a tournament maker decides that they don't want forgeworld, supplements, or 3 riptides than for better or worse you simply can't do that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

After all, FW and GW are one and the same thing, aren't they?

Just like Taco Bell, KFC and Pizza Hut are all the same thing (Yum! Brands).

Looking to play Warhammer 40K and having somebody deploy Forge World across the table is like ordering a peperroni pizza in a red-roofed pizza-joint and getting a bucket of Chicken with Guacamole.

Sure, it's the same company, and it's all "food stuff". Just not the flavour one was expecting.

Except for the fact that the models are all generally the same, the tastes are generally the same, and the differences are usually as dramatic a change from one loyalist codex to the next

Looking at GW's new Escalation expansion rumors, most of the super heavies are forge world models. But does that not mean ... wait no ... GW does not support forge world. *smacks head*

In all seriousness looka like the new GW money maker has arrived and forge world is in it.

I don't see the issue here, banning fw is the same as banning tau or space marines, were all free to play whatever we like of course but saying that Elysian player isn't allowed when the guard dex is more powerful in almost every way is simply being belligerent for no good reason

 da001 wrote:
On topic again: what really baffles me is when someone who uses Forgeworld because it enriches the game (and not because he is a powergamer) then refuses to play house-rules, all of them, claiming that they are not "official". Do you want to enrich the game or not?

That happens because many people play pickup games with random strangers and it's important to have a common "standard game" that you can play without having to have a long discussion with your opponent to negotiate all the house rules you want to use. The simple fact is that most player-made units/armies are awful and not worth playing against, so if you have a policy of accepting everything without question you're not going to have very much fun. So what including player-made stuff means is having to spend time studying the new rules, negotiating what is acceptable and what needs to be changed, etc. That's just too much effort for a random pickup game so it makes a lot more sense to default to playing with the standard rules as published by GW (with maybe the occasional very simple house rule like "let's set up terrain before rolling for table sides").

Fragile wrote:
Who says? FW says.. which means nothing. I can make a company and create a model and say this figure is fully 40k legal and is to be used at a HS choice in X codex. That does not mean that it is.

Do you really not understand the difference between GW saying "this is legal" and you as a random player saying "this is legal"?

And look.. those supplement are produced by "Games Workshop". Still no mention from GW that FW is legal to use.

Every single FW book is produced by Games Workshop, as I've already demonstrated. You just keep inventing this absurd idea that FW is some kind of separate company when it clearly isn't.

Show me the rules from GW that supports your claim. So far in this entire argument you have shown nothing other than your opinion.

I just quoted rules from GW. The fact that you believe, despite indisputable evidence to the contrary, that FW is not "real GW" does not mean that they aren't rules from GW.

So you have no citation? Nothing from Games Workshop? Anything? Concession accepted.

Again, that was from Games Workshop. Your argument here is about as reasonable as insisting that unless you get a personal letter signed and hand-delivered from the CEO of GW himself it isn't "real GW".

Lets look at FW's stuff.

It's a GW department (not a separate GW owned company) with GW employees that write books with a GW copyright and that say "Published by Games Workshop", with GW's logo on the books, located at GW HQ, making models with a GW copyright, that exist in GW's universe, with a clear statement in such books/rules saying they are for use with the standard GW 40k rules.

Sounds pretty legit to me.

This isn't a 3rd party or homebrew thing. it's not like Fantasy Flight Games where the stuff is is noted as being published by Fantasy Flight Games and has no Games Workshop stamp on the product, where the nod to Games Workshop shows up in the copyright section spelling out what trademarks they own.

Citadel paints are not gw, therefore any model painted useing them isn't legal so cannot be used in games, fluffy logic at its best

Some players will abuse any rules and models, it does not matter whether they are FW or GW branded. The problem with FW is that the majority have no idea what they offer. Case in point, where to look for as a BA player? Oh, I know, Codex Blood Angels of course... With FW I have no idea what they have, despite browsing their site.

Heck, I've seen people model Riptides in crouching positions. Should I order kneeling scouts and use their legs for my normal models? This is the second problem. A WAAC player does not care for fluff, he only cares on how to make his OP army more OP. Can't blame TO's for not allowing FW models..

Of course FW are legal in 40k world, but you can't force anyone play an army or opponent. The gain wider acceptance one of these two must happen:

1) GW to actually acknowledge in writing that they do endorse FW
2) Tournaments start allowing FW models by default

 Peregrine wrote:

 da001 wrote:
On topic again: what really baffles me is when someone who uses Forgeworld because it enriches the game (and not because he is a powergamer) then refuses to play house-rules, all of them, claiming that they are not "official". Do you want to enrich the game or not?

That happens because many people play pickup games with random strangers and it's important to have a common "standard game" that you can play without having to have a long discussion with your opponent to negotiate all the house rules you want to use. The simple fact is that most player-made units/armies are awful and not worth playing against, so if you have a policy of accepting everything without question you're not going to have very much fun. So what including player-made stuff means is having to spend time studying the new rules, negotiating what is acceptable and what needs to be changed, etc. That's just too much effort for a random pickup game so it makes a lot more sense to default to playing with the standard rules as published by GW (with maybe the occasional very simple house rule like "let's set up terrain before rolling for table sides").

Which is exactly the same reason people give for not playing with Forgeworld, isn´t it? They are difficult to get and expensive. Most players know nothing of them but the fact that some of them are utterly broken. Sure, others are not, but if you accept it without question against a stranger you will usually find yourself being abused by a power gamer. It is the same problem.

If someone comes with 4 Riptides or 4 Heldrakes against my fluffy list I will not play with him, because I know what is coming and it is not fun. If someone comes with Forgeworld or a House Rule, I will study the rule, negotiate what is acceptable and what needs to be changed, etc... A little talk is needed. It is something new, and the player pushing on the new unit should explain what it does.

And my point still stands: if someone wants to use something out of the basic books (that are many and very expensive) this person should be open to other ideas. I will like to think of the Forgeworld player as someone who want to try something new, and is willing to do the effort and pay the cost for it. I welcome this 100%, I love trying new things, but I will expect a similar approach to the ideas of others.

Naw wrote:
Heck, I've seen people model Riptides in crouching positions. Should I order kneeling scouts and use their legs for my normal models? This is the second problem. A WAAC player does not care for fluff, he only cares on how to make his OP army more OP. Can't blame TO's for not allowing FW models..

How does giving an example of MFA with codex units have anything to do with whether or not FW should be allowed?

1) GW to actually acknowledge in writing that they do endorse FW

They have.

2) Tournaments start allowing FW models by default

Which will only happen if FW gains wider acceptance, making it a circular argument. Plus, who cares what tournaments do?

Fragile wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Forgeworld is not Warhammer 40K

Care to prove this statement? I don't have a personal agenda or anything, nor do I care that most people disallow FW, but that's straight up wrong.

Forgeworld is not GW. No more than Dewalt is Black and Decker. They are both owned by a similar parent company but produce their own products.

Someone has already mentioned that the trademark GW appears on the forgeworld resin. That alone disproves what you just said.

Forgeworld's products are designed to be used by the 40k market, but you do not find them in the 40k codices or rules, hence they are not 40k.

Lol, what rules do they use then? Do they use the Infinity rules? Do they use the Warmachine rules? Here is a clue, they use the 40k rules. When you look at a Hazard Team unit and you see they have Hit and Run where do you look to find out what that does? You look at the 40k rulebook, thats where you look.

 da001 wrote:
Which is exactly the same reason people give for not playing with Forgeworld, isn´t it?

It's not the same reason at all. My reason for not wanting to play against player-made units/armies in a random pickup game is because the "what rules will we use" negotiation gets too complicated once you consider things that aren't published by GW. To make pickup games work you have to have a common set of rules provided by a neutral third party, preferably the people who make the game. And according to those people FW rules are part of the game. Some random player's own unit/army rules aren't.

They are difficult to get and expensive.

Not really. Many codex units are at that price level, and they're no more difficult to get than any other GW product (since let's be honest, the only reason not to order from an online store is if you're giving charity donations to a FLGS you like).

Most players know nothing of them but the fact that some of them are utterly broken.

How is this different from codex units? Many players are pretty clueless about anything that isn't in their own codex, other than some third-hand stories about how overpowered X codex unit is.

Sure, others are not, but if you accept it without question against a stranger you will usually find yourself being abused by a power gamer. It is the same problem.

That's not the same problem at all.

Allowing FW only makes you vulnerable to the same "abuse" that happens with codex units. A "power gamer" with a FW list isn't going to be any worse than that same person playing with re-rollable 2++ death stars, 4-5 Riptide Tau, etc.

Allowing player-made units by default makes you vulnerable to "power gamers" since they can invent their own broken stuff instead of being stuck with what the neutral third party has created, AND you have to deal with the unbelievable incompetence of the average player in designing new rules. Seriously, the average player-made rules make GW look like a shining example of balance and clarity. I don't want to have to spend a bunch of time before a game explaining to someone why their cool new character completely breaks the game and needs to be toned down significantly before I'll play against it, and then even more time negotiating the exact changes.

And my point still stands: if someone wants to use something out of the basic books (that are many and very expensive) this person should be open to other ideas.

You're defining "basic books" in a way that GW doesn't. GW defines "basic books" as the codices, codex supplements, and FW books, with everything else being new game type expansions (Apocalypse, etc) or house rules.

I will like to think of the Forgeworld player as someone who want to try something new, and is willing to do the effort and pay the cost for it.

Why should trying something new have to be part of it? I'm not trying anything new with my IG army (which often includes FW units), I've played it for years and I know exactly what the FW models I'm buying do and why I want to use them. I don't see why this should be any different from someone doing the same thing with codex units.

 EVIL INC wrote:
I'm not gonna "get into" the who GW/FW thing beyond saying that there might be loopholes that are arguable but to all OUR intents and purposes, They are different aspects of the same machine.

I see FW as the "rich mans" addition to the hobby.
1. Models that have GW counterparts such as infantry, dreadnoughts and so forth have never had to have permission so long as the GW rules/stats were used (for example the krieg models using the rules out of the guard codex).
2. Most TOs do it this way because some FW rules and models can seriously unbalance a tournament where they guy with the most money just buys a titan and autowins. It is general practice for TOs to make this call but if they so desire, they don't have to.
3. In normal games most players simply don't care or can turn down the game against someone who has the FW stuff if they don't want to face it just as they could turn down a game against that odd smelly guy with the booger hanging out of his nose. If the stuff is reasonable (im not facing a titan), I'll take the game anyway just to see the cool stuff.

I play apocalypse every week and the guy who brings his Reaver Titan down actually does shockingly poor with it. For the last few weeks he hasn't even used it and its doesn't always take another Tian or anything to bring it. It can just be Bright Lances, Dark lances, Hammernators, Meltas, etc, etc. Farsight bomb with fusions took it out just fine.

Fragile wrote:


No, FW creates their own units, nothing is "added" to a codex. And since armies need a codex, per the rulebook, show me a FW model in a 40k codex.

Imperial Guard Vendetta.

Imperial Guard Griffon Mortar.

Warhound Titan (although Apocalypse isn't strictly a codex, it's in the rulebook, too).

 Lynata wrote:

BarBoBot wrote:FW is as legit as anything else GW makes.

As long as GW itself differentiates between its own rules and FW's, I would disagree with this assessment.

They don't. In order to find out what a FW unit does you need to look at the BRB to see. For instance take Tau Hazard Suits. Their entry specifically mentions they are a Fast Attack choice in the Tau Codex. They have Hit and Run, they have Jet Packs, they have a stat line, etc, etc. In order to find out what any of that means you need to consult the 40k rulebook. They can also take upgrades from the Tau codex. i.e. Stim Injectors, Early Warning Overide, etc, etc.

Add in the fact that GW is trademarked on all the Imperial Armour books and they are property of GW then I don't see how anyone can claim that they are differentiated by the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Not really. The actual 40K rules are on par with homebrew rules. Inferior, in fact.

Hes not talking about the quality of the rules Martel. i.e. Can you make better rules than GW. He is talking and impartiality. FW and GW are impartial entities and are different from some guy making his own rules for his own army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

. . . I'm not sure you understand what a "strawman argument" is. A strawman argument is when you say your opponent is making an argument that they are not, and then provide a counter-argument to that fictitious argument.

Actually I had the wrong word in head, I was meaning Logical Fallacy.

By any chance did you mean Non-sequitur?

DeadWingman wrote:
Looking at GW's new Escalation expansion rumors, most of the super heavies are forge world models. But does that not mean ... wait no ... GW does not support forge world. *smacks head*

In all seriousness looka like the new GW money maker has arrived and forge world is in it.

forgeworld, an existing optional add-on, being included in another optional add-on, doesn't really mean anything.

Anyway, i'm going to start working on forgeworld thread bingo.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Furyou Miko wrote:

Fragile wrote:


No, FW creates their own units, nothing is "added" to a codex. And since armies need a codex, per the rulebook, show me a FW model in a 40k codex.

Imperial Guard Vendetta.

only the lascannons are from forgeworld, the model itself (valkyrie) is on gw site.

 da001 wrote:
Which is exactly the same reason people give for not playing with Forgeworld, isn´t it? They are difficult to get and expensive. Most players know nothing of them but the fact that some of them are utterly broken. Sure, others are not, but if you accept it without question against a stranger you will usually find yourself being abused by a power gamer. It is the same problem.

If someone comes with 4 Riptides or 4 Heldrakes against my fluffy list I will not play with him, because I know what is coming and it is not fun. If someone comes with Forgeworld or a House Rule, I will study the rule, negotiate what is acceptable and what needs to be changed, etc... A little talk is needed. It is something new, and the player pushing on the new unit should explain what it does.

And my point still stands: if someone wants to use something out of the basic books (that are many and very expensive) this person should be open to other ideas. I will like to think of the Forgeworld player as someone who want to try something new, and is willing to do the effort and pay the cost for it. I welcome this 100%, I love trying new things, but I will expect a similar approach to the ideas of others.

The only reason you know that 4 Riptides are bad news is because you have either played against it or witnessed someone else play against it to start off with. You don't know what FW units are overpowered or not because people refuse to play against them to begin with. If they played against FW then they would know and find out what units are bad news and what units were not. You would then know that the R'Varna Riptide is bad news and not to play against it. On the other hand this means that players who take normal FW units that are not overpowered will be able to take them since players will be able identify that they are fine.

 Peregrine wrote:

Naw wrote:
Heck, I've seen people model Riptides in crouching positions. Should I order kneeling scouts and use their legs for my normal models? This is the second problem. A WAAC player does not care for fluff, he only cares on how to make his OP army more OP. Can't blame TO's for not allowing FW models..

How does giving an example of MFA with codex units have anything to do with whether or not FW should be allowed?

Did you actually read what I wrote?

1) GW to actually acknowledge in writing that they do endorse FW

They have.

No, they still have not. Otherwise we would not be having this argument again.

2) Tournaments start allowing FW models by default

Which will only happen if FW gains wider acceptance, making it a circular argument. Plus, who cares what tournaments do?

One argument has been that not even tournaments allow FW. There you have it then, nr 1 must happen.

As taken from Forge World's FAQ page:

"Q1. Is Forge World part of Games Workshop.

A1. Yes, but we operate as a small (but perfectly formed) separate division from the company that makes and sells the main Games Workshop range of products. We are not connected with the US company that used the same name many years back for production of resin Warhammer 40,000 vehicles under licence."
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Home/Frequently_Asked_Questions.html

There's nothing on there about the official use of FW models, but this is the only official model of a GW Codex:IG unit:
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Imperial_Guard/Imperial_Guard_Tanks/HYDRA-FLAK-TANK.html

I got to the FW website by following the link on GW's main page.

My understanding is that all "Approved for 40k" units and items are perfectly fine for use in standard 40k games. This is as long as the player has the rules for them, from official GW/FW sources.

Naw wrote:
No, they still have not. Otherwise we would not be having this argument again.

Gather round everybody. This is what is called a Non-sequitur. Basically this argument boils down to saying "If you were actually correct then it would be common knowledge that you are correct and so therefore there would be no argument because everybody would agree".

Now the argument fails because it is quite evident that people can still disagree with each other even in the face of facts. So its a Non-sequitur.

One argument has been that not even tournaments allow FW. There you have it then, nr 1 must happen.

And what exactly is this supposed to prove? Is this another Non-sequitur drummed up by you to make some sort of point that doesn't make sense. Once again we have yet another Non-sequitur. This one basically boils down to saying "FW can't be made by GW becasue it isn't allowed in tournaments"

This is akin to saying that the song Jeremy isn't a Pearl Jam song because they didn't play it at one of their concerts.

 DarthOvious wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
I'm not gonna "get into" the who GW/FW thing beyond saying that there might be loopholes that are arguable but to all OUR intents and purposes, They are different aspects of the same machine.

I see FW as the "rich mans" addition to the hobby.
1. Models that have GW counterparts such as infantry, dreadnoughts and so forth have never had to have permission so long as the GW rules/stats were used (for example the krieg models using the rules out of the guard codex).
2. Most TOs do it this way because some FW rules and models can seriously unbalance a tournament where they guy with the most money just buys a titan and autowins. It is general practice for TOs to make this call but if they so desire, they don't have to.
3. In normal games most players simply don't care or can turn down the game against someone who has the FW stuff if they don't want to face it just as they could turn down a game against that odd smelly guy with the booger hanging out of his nose. If the stuff is reasonable (im not facing a titan), I'll take the game anyway just to see the cool stuff.

I play apocalypse every week and the guy who brings his Reaver Titan down actually does shockingly poor with it. For the last few weeks he hasn't even used it and its doesn't always take another Tian or anything to bring it. It can just be Bright Lances, Dark lances, Hammernators, Meltas, etc, etc. Farsight bomb with fusions took it out just fine.

When he plays with his titan, do you know ahead of time or does he take it to the local shop in random pick up games with strangers who are not allowed to tailer to suit? Does he play it in tournaments? I already know the answer to both questions is no.
This is why I specifically differentiated models that already have rules (such as dreadnoughts, rhino parts and so forth that are designed for "normal" games and models that are not designed for normal games.
Flat out, if I don't feel like playing against a couple of reaver titans with my infantry platoon based army (if I just happen to bring that list), I don't have to if I don't want to. the store owner is not gonna lock me into the store, pull out his shotgun and tell me that I must play or die. Has ANYONE here had that happen to them. I already know the answer to that question too. It is no.

You guys can argue "po-tay-to" and po-tah-to" till the cows come home on "legal" issues and who owns what company and blah blah blah but at the end of the day, the FINAL word it that 1. TO can decide what is legel in their tourneys or not, 2. shops can decide what is legal or not in side their walls and on their tables and 3. if you don't want to play against something you don't have to.

 Peregrine wrote:

 da001 wrote:
Which is exactly the same reason people give for not playing with Forgeworld, isn´t it?

It's not the same reason at all. My reason for not wanting to play against player-made units/armies in a random pickup game is because the "what rules will we use" negotiation gets too complicated once you consider things that aren't published by GW. To make pickup games work you have to have a common set of rules provided by a neutral third party,(...)

I still see it as the same problem: it is the lack of communication and the feeling that the other player is trying to get the upper hand by using something only he knows about. And there is no difference in the amount of time needed, since Forgeworld has released full Codexes and some House Rules are one-line fixes to something.

The question is: if you want to play with a DKoK list and I want to use Legion Traits for my no-heldrake CSM list, why should I do the enormous effort of reading a full book about an army I know nothing of while you don´t care about reading less than 10 sentences for my house rule?

And according to those people FW rules are part of the game. Some random player's own unit/army rules aren't

Wrong.

GW has always encouraged house rules. House Rules are part of the game. Page 108 specifically says so, and pages 339 to 400 actually exist, even if most players skip them. Not only that, it is the way the game is supposed to be played, the game is supposed to encourage creativity and creating new stuff with your friends: campaigns, heroes, chapters, missions... You may skip this part of the game in you wishes so, just like some people ignores the background or pay other people to paint their models, but it is still part of the hobby as it is intended. Claiming that in your opinion House Rules are not part of the game is fine, but GW does not share your opinion. And neither do I. You could also say that Tau are not part of the game, or Forgeworld...

They are difficult to get and expensive.

Not really. Many codex units are at that price level, and they're no more difficult to get than any other GW product (since let's be honest, the only reason not to order from an online store is if you're giving charity donations to a FLGS you like).

This game has become so ridiculously expensive that I am tempted to concede this one... but I will not. If you play by the Codex and the Rulebook that´s all you need. If you start adding things then it gets even more expensive.

Most players know nothing of them but the fact that some of them are utterly broken.

How is this different from codex units? Many players are pretty clueless about anything that isn't in their own codex, other than some third-hand stories about how overpowered X codex unit is.

Oh come on. Many people have easy access to most codexes, either because they own them or because they know someone who plays the army. There is a lot of information about them, something that it is not the case of Forgeworld. And we are still talking about a single book about a full army, not countless books.

Sure, others are not, but if you accept it without question against a stranger you will usually find yourself being abused by a power gamer. It is the same problem.

That's not the same problem at all.

Allowing FW only makes you vulnerable to the same "abuse" that happens with codex units. A "power gamer" with a FW list isn't going to be any worse than that same person playing with re-rollable 2++ death stars, 4-5 Riptide Tau, etc.

But you know these units. You avoid the players that use them and that´s all. A Forgeworld power gamer will try to convince you that his units are not broken at all, and then in turn 2 use a brutal rule combo or point out a special rule and break the game

Allowing player-made units by default makes you vulnerable to "power gamers" since they can invent their own broken stuff instead of being stuck with what the neutral third party has created, AND you have to deal with the unbelievable incompetence of the average player in designing new rules. Seriously, the average player-made rules make GW look like a shining example of balance and clarity. I don't want to have to spend a bunch of time before a game explaining to someone why their cool new character completely breaks the game and needs to be toned down significantly before I'll play against it, and then even more time negotiating the exact changes.

If you use Forgeworld, and you use a unit nobody has ever heard of, you should explain it in length. The GOOD thing of Forgeworld and House Rules is that they force you to communicate with the other player, thus turning this into the social game it is intended to be. If you are the type of player that do not have time to talk with your opponent, you should limit yourself to the most basic units, because it is quite suspicious that you expect people to adapt to new stuff when you are unwilling to do the same.

And my point still stands: if someone wants to use something out of the basic books (that are many and very expensive) this person should be open to other ideas.

You're defining "basic books" in a way that GW doesn't. GW defines "basic books" as the codices, codex supplements, and FW books, with everything else being new game type expansions (Apocalypse, etc) or house rules.

And you are doing exactly the same: expansions and house rules are part of the game. My definition of "basic rules" (the rulebook and the only one Codex for your army) may differ from yours (the rulebook, the only one Codex for your army and scores of other books written by Forgeworld almost nobody knows about), but
both are opinions, nothing else.

I will like to think of the Forgeworld player as someone who want to try something new, and is willing to do the effort and pay the cost for it.

Why should trying something new have to be part of it? I'm not trying anything new with my IG army (which often includes FW units), I've played it for years and I know exactly what the FW models I'm buying do and why I want to use them. I don't see why this should be any different from someone doing the same thing with codex units.

Well, I thought that if you got a book with lots of units that allow you to play an army and you buy another book with additional units it was because you wanted something new. I stand corrected.

 DarthOvious wrote:

The only reason you know that 4 Riptides are bad news is because you have either played against it or witnessed someone else play against it to start off with. You don't know what FW units are overpowered or not because people refuse to play against them to begin with. If they played against FW then they would know and find out what units are bad news and what units were not. You would then know that the R'Varna Riptide is bad news and not to play against it. On the other hand this means that players who take normal FW units that are not overpowered will be able to take them since players will be able identify that they are fine.

Agreed.

You need to talk with the other player and explain what your units do. There is a "social contract" between the two. And the goal should be to enjoy the game, which will not happen if you take broken units the other player know nothing about. However, given that some players have used Forgeworld as a way to get unfair advantages through the use of broken units that the normal player didn´t even know they existed, the use of Forgeworld as a whole has taken a bad reputation.

 DarthOvious wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Not really. The actual 40K rules are on par with homebrew rules. Inferior, in fact.

Hes not talking about the quality of the rules Martel. i.e. Can you make better rules than GW. He is talking and impartiality. FW and GW are impartial entities and are different from some guy making his own rules for his own army.

No way.

Most GW creators do not consider balance as an objective, and they do what they think is best for their favorite armies. Look at the Adepta Sororitas Codex and compare it with the Space Marine Codex. Or compare SM with CSM. Or Daemons with GK during the last year of 5th edition.

And Forgeworld is the same in this regard: whoever wrote the rules for the R'Varna Riptide was not impartial in any way: he was 100% sure he was creating an absolutely broken unit. GW and FW do not care about impartiality. Never have. They have stated it many times. The players are supposed to fix that problem by themselves and find some common ground.

Zoat, that isn't strange at all. You don't buy a new Toyota with the owners manual explaining to you to go to TRD for your performance upgrades. But Toyota clearly makes it offical for you to place them on your vehicle, even maintaining a warranty.

Place those same concepts into this situation, and you can easily see...without cry-baby bias...that FW was intended for general use in 40k quite plainly.

 DarthOvious wrote:

Naw wrote:
No, they still have not. Otherwise we would not be having this argument again.

Gather round everybody. This is what is called a Non-sequitur. Basically this argument boils down to saying "If you were actually correct then it would be common knowledge that you are correct and so therefore there would be no argument because everybody would agree".

Now the argument fails because it is quite evident that people can still disagree with each other even in the face of facts. So its a Non-sequitur.

One argument has been that not even tournaments allow FW. There you have it then, nr 1 must happen.

And what exactly is this supposed to prove? Is this another Non-sequitur drummed up by you to make some sort of point that doesn't make sense. Once again we have yet another Non-sequitur. This one basically boils down to saying "FW can't be made by GW becasue it isn't allowed in tournaments"

This is akin to saying that the song Jeremy isn't a Pearl Jam song because they didn't play it at one of their concerts.

I am sorry, but your patronizing attitude does not help your agenda. And if you also read my message you would have noticed I am pro-FW.

Nothing to see here, move on..

 Barksdale wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
No I mean a house-rule which allows people use units which are not in the official codices, such as a FW unit.

What house rules? Page 108 in the core rulebook clearly says players can take an army list from a codex, an altered army list (which is what FW's additional unit options give us) or their own system (again, FW's army lists or homebrew).

Where's the rule that explicitly says FW isn't meant for actually playing in games though?

The suggestion that players can use FW rules is right there together with a suggestion for using homebrew rules. That says it all right there. So if if people want to make a house-rule stating allowing the use of FW rules or homebrew rules, that's okay.

It's not really a house-rule to use them when the rulebook itself gives you the ability to do so. The same permission to play an altered army list also works on codex supplements but we don't have people running around saying you have to house rule those to play them.

Seriously, the game isn't that closed off. There is a lot more freedom than people are giving it credit for here.

 EVIL INC wrote:
When he plays with his titan, do you know ahead of time or does he take it to the local shop in random pick up games with strangers who are not allowed to tailer to suit? Does he play it in tournaments? I already know the answer to both questions is no.

He does own other things as well. He owns a Hierophant Biotitan which he sometimes uses. However I think the Reaver is his favourite. If you think he has done poorly because people have planned for it then I can see there is some merit to your argument. However our store also brought out the Warlord Titan one week for a game and we didn't know. Two teams were arranged with two games. The team with the warlord lost on both occassions. Same as usual. Dark Lance, Bright Lances, etc, etc. Although granted there was a Shadowsword on the other side.

This is why I specifically differentiated models that already have rules (such as dreadnoughts, rhino parts and so forth that are designed for "normal" games and models that are not designed for normal games.

I never said it was a normal game. I stated it was an apocalypse game and it is an apocalypse unit. However in a game of apcalypse you can take Vortex Grenades and Orbital strikes which are D weapons. Nobody here is arguing that people should be able to take Titans in normal games, just that you're not entiely useless if you are up against a Titan and you don't have any Forgeworld stuff.

Flat out, if I don't feel like playing against a couple of reaver titans with my infantry platoon based army (if I just happen to bring that list), I don't have to if I don't want to. the store owner is not gonna lock me into the store, pull out his shotgun and tell me that I must play or die. Has ANYONE here had that happen to them. I already know the answer to that question too. It is no.

I never said you had to play it. You don't have to play against anything if you don't want to.

You guys can argue "po-tay-to" and po-tah-to" till the cows come home on "legal" issues and who owns what company and blah blah blah but at the end of the day, the FINAL word it that 1. TO can decide what is legel in their tourneys or not, 2. shops can decide what is legal or not in side their walls and on their tables and 3. if you don't want to play against something you don't have to.

Yes, thats true, but that doesn't mean we can't talk about what Forge World is intended for. This is like saying we are not allowed to talk about what our favourite flavours of Pizza are because you personally don't eat Pizza. For instance:

"You guys can argue "po-tay-to" and po-tah-to" till the cows come home on "pizza" issues and who likes what flavour and blah blah blah but at the end of the day, the FINAL word it that 1. pizza stores can decide what flavours they sell or not in their shops, 2. shops can decide what pizza to sell or not in side their walls and on their tables and 3. if you don't want to eat something you don't have to".

That makes just as much sense as your argument. So by your almighty reasoning none of us can talk about what pizza is the best pizza and none of us should have an opinion about what flavours a pizza store should sell or not.

Forge World players have an opinion. Get used to it and we are not automatically just going to be forced to not being able to enjoy our FW units just because you personally don't want them to appear down at your local store. If you don't want to play against them yourself then fine but don't moan and whine about how we should just accept that they are blanket banned at some places.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:

I am sorry, but your patronizing attitude does not help your agenda. And if you also read my message you would have noticed I am pro-FW.

Nothing to see here, move on..

Sorry if I was patronizing and I admit that i was but I pointed out soundly that the arguments you were using do not work. They do not help the conversation in any way either but you don't hesitate to state them in the first place.