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 gb
Enginseer with a Wrench





Northumberland

BrianDavion wrote:
 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.


Right but for say Cawl and Ad Mech in 8th edition, how many armies were there that didn't use him because of the meta?

That's what I meant in my post, it's fine when you can happily not take them.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/06 09:33:57


One and a half feet in the hobby


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

 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 Olthannon wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 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.


Right but for say Cawl and Ad Mech in 8th edition, how many armies were there that didn't use him because of the meta?

That's what I meant in my post, it's fine when you can happily not take them.


well it's a flaw of the game when you're basicly forced to take ANY unit because your army is massivly worse without it. be it a special character, a special unit or a tank

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in de
Hungry Ghoul



Germany

Not sure if anyone mentioned it in this thread already, but looking at other systems, especially warmachine/hordes, there seems to be quite more progression in the setting and in the evolution of characters...

There exist different iterations of the characters, with different abilites, stats and equipment, that can be brought to any game. Such a game might be questionable, in terms of a narrative event, but they are absolutely fine in terms of matched / competitive play.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Insectum7 wrote:
Imo this named character stuff worked so much better when:
A: They were used "with opponents permission" only.
B: When GW didn't really advance the setting.
and
C: When you had more freedom to build your own characters.

I dislike the importance given to named characters these days, both on and off the tabletop. This makes the game less about "your dudes" and more about "GWs dudes TM", which is sad.


Exactly this. Not to mention that these named characters turns the.game, and the story, into a superhero comic

lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039 
   
Made in ca
Kroot Carnivore





Up until 7th edition when we were essentially stuck in time, I didn't mind this, but now, yeah I totally agree.

What I think an elegant solution would be would be that every characters general wargear profile (the weapons and things like jump packs they use) should be accessible in some way by standard marines. They should still have their specials and such, but there should be vannila versions.

Take everybody's favorite emo marine Kayvaan Shrike. If you could use the model also as a Primaris Captain in Phobos armor with Lightning Claw / Heavy Bolt Pistol and a Jump Pack, then there's no issue. They could kill of Shrike in the story, but people could still use his model in game, either in campaigns from before he died, or just as a regular Captain.

I don't think that by any means major characters getting killed off would make people that upset. I mean, there are some people who just like to get angry at anything, but overall, especailly compared to many other complaints GW gets thrown at them, I think it would make little if any impact sales wise and make the lore far more interesting (which could then quite possible push BL sales).

15000 4000 3500 2500 :tyranid: 2500 1000 1000
1000 1000 1000 1000  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

Part of why I liked 40K thematically more than Warmachine back in the day was because I could play as a regiment I invented, led by officers I invented. Meanwhile in Warmachine my forces were organized around Magnus The Traitor and were narratively constrained as a result.

40K has gradually shifted much more in the Warmachine direction. You're much more heavily incentivized to take special characters, and they're no longer the 'with permission only' entries intended for narrative play.

Competitively, it was more interesting for Warmachine because the entire game was designed around you picking one character to lead your force, and those characters had attendant strengths and weaknesses that shaped how your army played. In 40K characters tend to just supercharge their respective subfaction, and it makes for a less interesting dynamic.

   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




Nibbler wrote:
Not sure if anyone mentioned it in this thread already, but looking at other systems, especially warmachine/hordes, there seems to be quite more progression in the setting and in the evolution of characters...

There exist different iterations of the characters, with different abilites, stats and equipment, that can be brought to any game. Such a game might be questionable, in terms of a narrative event, but they are absolutely fine in terms of matched / competitive play.


Eh... no. No they aren't.
I broke a league with Epic Vlad (way back, end of first edition or beginning of 2nd). First turn victories and absurd shenanigans for buffing even basic infantry to god tier. It would have been abandoned entirely had I just not stopped bringing him.
Others were bad enough to struggle getting out of a wet paper bag.

Warmachine is heavily about tier rankings for various pieces, especially including warcasters/warlocks.
From a narrative perspective, the old versions shouldn't even exist, which is problematic for a game that's explicitly on a timeline, not just questionable. There are entire factions that the 'original versions' of the warcasters never met because they didn't exist as fighting forces in the world when the younger versions of those characters were running around.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 02:26:07


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in pt
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

Insectum had it right for me, first response post page one, exalted.

   
Made in fi
5th God of Chaos (O'rly?)





 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

But when there are physical models to sell? Not so much. Given special characters attract a premium price (mostly because peeps will only buy one of each), it would genuinely and understandably irritate folks to have something they just spent a decent slice of money on, and time painting, snuff it..


Ah yes the Solar Macharium was sooooo alive and kicking when the model was sale wasn't he

2021 painted/bought: 857/1043 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 streetsamurai wrote:


Exactly this. Not to mention that these named characters turns the.game, and the story, into a superhero comic


I remember speaking to jervis one time and he explained how back in third, they made a 'bare boned' lore with the explicitly aim to give players and hobbyists space to make ^their^ individual forces and heroes.

What happened was people kept asking for more stories of ^named chapter^ and ^named hero^ and the idea to have ^your own personally created hero^ as the driving force of the game was quietly replaced with more focus on Names. This has been true since at least 5th edition.theyve not gotten rid of 'make your own hero' but they have acknowledged its more of a niche request.

Basically gw went in a direction that a lot of players were asking for and where they saw business potential.

Having a small cast drive the entire narrative can be annoying at times but it's narrative 101 for a lot of modern media, not just superhero stuff, whether tv's game of thrones, vikings etc. I presume it's easier to write for or something like that.


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

Yep. I've also observed that the more character focused, comic book style stuff is really popular. Just look at how popular the primarchs are, the way they are presented is full on comic book style right down to having them die and come back. And they're by far and away one of the most popular aspects of the background.

I think lots of people really like that kind of stuff. It's not really my cup of tea, but I recognise now that I'm in the minority and can't really begrudge GW for pursuing the main audience.

   
Made in gb
Enginseer with a Wrench




Bath

its not really a "comic book" thing, though. Most Soap operas have small casts, and even the larger ones normally have only have 10-20 characters actually active, and normally focused on a subset of the full cast for a given storyline. Most wrestling (which, lets face it, is just a macho soap opera*) is similar, with each story only having a few active characters and others dipping in as bit players.

History often gets this treatment as well, as people will describe history in terms of the Great Men(tm) who were the able to shape history. How many WW2 documentaries talk about "Rommel vs Monty" like it was the two of them in the ring for a boxing match, and not "Afrika corps vs 8th army", for example? the further back you go in history the more pronounced this is. pretty much all most people know about the Romans is Caesar, Augustus and maybe Pompey. Almost everything we know form the historical record about those times is framed through the actions of these Great Men(tm).

and its present in many other areas of life, as well. how many people talk about politics like the parties consist of JUST the party leaders and no one else? discussion of sports teams often devolves in to a game of "<my star player> is better than <your star player>", and how many people talk about "Zuckerberg" as shorthand for "the whole of Facebook's corporate apparatus"?

I dont think its fair to blame comic books, or GW, for something thats present and widespread in our society as a whole.


rant over, back to just 40K:

I think the issue with special characters is, personally, in the context of 40k lore, they lower the stakes. I know that if, say, Ahriman and Logan Grimmar are thrown together in a ULTIMATE SHOWDOWN OF ULTIMATE DESTINEY, its nothing of the sort. Nothing Meaningful is going to change. both those guys are going to walk away with no lasting harm, no great change to the setting will happen, their will be no real consequence to the fight, because the writers of these fights dont have the authority to make major changes to the overarching plot. They can't kill or seriously cripple a character, they cant have one faction suffer a major setback, etc.

because i know the end result is "status quo", it really takes the tension out of the fights.

* and I must stress that THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. I enjoy watching wrestling sometimes, i'm not taking a cheap shot at it, just pointing out that it really is, at its heart, built around the personal dramas of a small set of peers, like soap operas are.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, 'ow's yer soul? "
But it's " Thin red line of 'eroes " when the drums begin to roll
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's " Thin red line of 'eroes, " when the drums begin to roll.
"Tommy", Rudyard Kipling
Exporitor force kappa-Tercia 500pts Coven of XVth 1000pts
Western Host 1000 pts
 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






xerxeskingofking wrote:
its not really a "comic book" thing, though. Most Soap operas have small casts, and even the larger ones normally have only have 10-20 characters actually active, and normally focused on a subset of the full cast for a given storyline. Most wrestling (which, lets face it, is just a macho soap opera*) is similar, with each story only having a few active characters and others dipping in as bit players.

History often gets this treatment as well, as people will describe history in terms of the Great Men(tm) who were the able to shape history. How many WW2 documentaries talk about "Rommel vs Monty" like it was the two of them in the ring for a boxing match, and not "Afrika corps vs 8th army", for example? the further back you go in history the more pronounced this is. pretty much all most people know about the Romans is Caesar, Augustus and maybe Pompey. Almost everything we know form the historical record about those times is framed through the actions of these Great Men(tm).

and its present in many other areas of life, as well. how many people talk about politics like the parties consist of JUST the party leaders and no one else? discussion of sports teams often devolves in to a game of "<my star player> is better than <your star player>", and how many people talk about "Zuckerberg" as shorthand for "the whole of Facebook's corporate apparatus"?

I dont think its fair to blame comic books, or GW, for something thats present and widespread in our society as a whole.


I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day. They slid into it somehow, by culture or creed, and it's a negative for the setting and hobby.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Insectum7 wrote:


I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day. They slid into it somehow, by culture or creed, and it's a negative for the setting and hobby.


Hmm, I think ^blame^ is probably the wrong word. They've done nothing particularly wrong in focusing on Names.

They slid to it because its what most of the fan base wanted, ultimately- so if you want to ^blame^ anyone, it's on us, the fan base, as well. And I personally dont think it's a particularly fair criticism to level. People are not wrong for subjectively liking stories about Names. Gw are not wrong for catering to that.

They did the focus on 'letting players make the story theirs' back in third and earlier and it went down like a lead balloon. Even then it was the Names that People were drawn to. People weren't interested in making the story 'theirs'. People want stories about their favourite heroes. Its that simple. Gw is not wrong by targeting what they see as what the fanbase wants, especially when they still leave space there for those that do want to do that. And clearly, in this particular case they're not far off the mark.its been a huge success over the last 15 or 20 years. The direction has been vindicated.

It's as true for 40k as season whatever of Sons of Anarchy or whatever show, series or story you care to name. Or warmachine. People get behind Names.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 15:02:30


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in us
Warp-Screaming Noise Marine




Aw. The biggest appeal to me for 40k is the chance to explore the universe through the eyes of my own unnamed characters and write their own stories of victory and defeat. Even the idea of doing the equivalent of rolling up another character should a previous character die on the table top would have been cool and kept me at the end of my seat. I guess I am just that weird that I’m not like the fan base clinging to the named dudes. I liked them for inspiration though. Also their minis can be pretty cool, but I’ve been more interested in making the named mini my dude than anything else.

Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut 
   
Made in gb
Enginseer with a Wrench




Bath

 Insectum7 wrote:

I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day.



But they did.

2nd edition, the codexes were still full of stories about the named characters. Gaz vs Yarrick, the Phoenix Lords, the Primarchs and the basic plot of the Heresy, thats all lore form the early to mid 90s. it was all well established stuff when I started playing back in '98. maybe not as prominent, but it was always their.

And as to the more recent prominence? well, like others have said, its clearly worked for them, so "the customer is always right" in its original meaning is clearly in effect here.

As much as you or I dislike the way they've taken over the narrative, it has clearly helped GW grow the business to far beyond what it was before by any pretty much any metric you choose to name. Does that make us grognards who liked 40K "before it was cool"? Maybe, hell probably, but its clear that it works for them and is going to continue, dispite however much i might wish for some changes to that (like killing off a few characters in the lore, etc).

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, 'ow's yer soul? "
But it's " Thin red line of 'eroes " when the drums begin to roll
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's " Thin red line of 'eroes, " when the drums begin to roll.
"Tommy", Rudyard Kipling
Exporitor force kappa-Tercia 500pts Coven of XVth 1000pts
Western Host 1000 pts
 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






xerxeskingofking wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:

I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day.



But they did.

2nd edition, the codexes were still full of stories about the named characters. Gaz vs Yarrick, the Phoenix Lords, the Primarchs and the basic plot of the Heresy, thats all lore form the early to mid 90s. it was all well established stuff when I started playing back in '98. maybe not as prominent, but it was always their.
They existed, yes. But there were good stretches of time where they were "by opponents permission only" and occasionally disallowed in tournaments.

At the same time there were far more ways to build your own characters up, through Wargear cards etc.

Since then they've removed options from building your own characters, as well as occasionally using named characters to build-unlock, making them necessary for some armies.


And as to the more recent prominence? well, like others have said, its clearly worked for them, so "the customer is always right" in its original meaning is clearly in effect here.

As much as you or I dislike the way they've taken over the narrative, it has clearly helped GW grow the business to far beyond what it was before by any pretty much any metric you choose to name. Does that make us grognards who liked 40K "before it was cool"? Maybe, hell probably, but its clear that it works for them and is going to continue, dispite however much i might wish for some changes to that (like killing off a few characters in the lore, etc).
Well for starters it's good to remember that correlation doesn't mean causation. And it's not like I think these characters shouldn't exist. All we're asking is for there to be less focus on them in the "grand narrative" and more space used for "character without immediately purchaseable model", as well as potentially more options for building our own (specifically Chaos Lords and Eldar Exarch/Autarchs from my point of view, because they've lost a lot over the years.)




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deadnight wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:


I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day. They slid into it somehow, by culture or creed, and it's a negative for the setting and hobby.

. . .
They did the focus on 'letting players make the story theirs' back in third and earlier and it went down like a lead balloon. . .

I seem to recall that 2nd ed was a definite period of growth, so I'm not sure I'd say it went down like a lead balloon.

And I knew a lot of people who quit at the start of 3rd ed, and not a single one of them called out being unable to take special characters. There was a radical shift in paradigm that didn't jibe with people that had nothing to do with characters. In fact, I could argue that one of the potential things driving people away was the inability to make and customize their own characters as much!

. . .
Like I said, it's fine that they exist. Just try not to name drop them all the goddamn time.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/27 18:42:47


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in es
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

Deadnight wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:


I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day. They slid into it somehow, by culture or creed, and it's a negative for the setting and hobby.


Hmm, I think ^blame^ is probably the wrong word. They've done nothing particularly wrong in focusing on Names.

They slid to it because its what most of the fan base wanted, ultimately-
Spoiler:
so if you want to ^blame^ anyone, it's on us, the fan base, as well. And I personally dont think it's a particularly fair criticism to level. People are not wrong for subjectively liking stories about Names. Gw are not wrong for catering to that.

They did the focus on 'letting players make the story theirs' back in third and earlier and it went down like a lead balloon. Even then it was the Names that People were drawn to. People weren't interested in making the story 'theirs'. People want stories about their favourite heroes. Its that simple. Gw is not wrong by targeting what they see as what the fanbase wants, especially when they still leave space there for those that do want to do that. And clearly, in this particular case they're not far off the mark.its been a huge success over the last 15 or 20 years. The direction has been vindicated.

It's as true for 40k as season whatever of Sons of Anarchy or whatever show, series or story you care to name. Or warmachine. People get behind Names
.
How has this been established? I must have missed that…

Seems that some people responded to the support to make your own dudes with requests for more of what wasn’t there, per the Jervis anecdote above. Now, we see the same. Shouldn’t we expect similar support for your dudes and not so much for named characters in every game, if this is the case?

Besides, named characters were always around. Their use in gams was discouraged. They were too point heavy and too powerful, and required a narrative reason and typically prior agreement with opponents. These days, it is difficult to find batreps on YT that don’t use named characters… I think that this is boring bad for the game, and has more to do with corporate control than that it was what “most” people wanted… else we should see a similar swing in the other direction, now.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 18:58:10


   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 jeff white wrote:
Deadnight wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:


I think it's totally fair to blame GW because they didn't do this back in the day. They slid into it somehow, by culture or creed, and it's a negative for the setting and hobby.


Hmm, I think ^blame^ is probably the wrong word. They've done nothing particularly wrong in focusing on Names.

They slid to it because its what most of the fan base wanted, ultimately-
Spoiler:
so if you want to ^blame^ anyone, it's on us, the fan base, as well. And I personally dont think it's a particularly fair criticism to level. People are not wrong for subjectively liking stories about Names. Gw are not wrong for catering to that.

They did the focus on 'letting players make the story theirs' back in third and earlier and it went down like a lead balloon. Even then it was the Names that People were drawn to. People weren't interested in making the story 'theirs'. People want stories about their favourite heroes. Its that simple. Gw is not wrong by targeting what they see as what the fanbase wants, especially when they still leave space there for those that do want to do that. And clearly, in this particular case they're not far off the mark.its been a huge success over the last 15 or 20 years. The direction has been vindicated.

It's as true for 40k as season whatever of Sons of Anarchy or whatever show, series or story you care to name. Or warmachine. People get behind Names
.
How has this been established? I must have missed that…

Seems that some people responded to the support to make your own dudes with requests for more of what wasn’t there, per the Jervis anecdote above. Now, we see the same. Shouldn’t we expect similar support for your dudes and not so much for named characters in every game, if this is the case?

Besides, named characters were always around. Their use in gams was discouraged. They were too point heavy and too powerful, and required a narrative reason and typically prior agreement with opponents. These days, it is difficult to find batreps on YT that don’t use named characters… I think that this is boring bad for the game, and has more to do with corporate control than that it was what “most” people wanted… else we should see a similar swing in the other direction, now.


My friend, if you say the words "Corporate Control" and think anything other than "What makes the Corporation the most money from the most people" then you would be....uh...wrong.

You would be wrong. Sorry. The guy youre responding to is correct here. the 40k setting became an all-marines-all-the-time ensemble cast battle anime because that is the thing people bought more of and wanted more of.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






^Coorperate control has more options at it's disposal than chasing the lowest common denominator for $$$

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






xerxeskingofking wrote:
its not really a "comic book" thing, though. Most Soap operas have small casts, and even the larger ones normally have only have 10-20 characters actually active, and normally focused on a subset of the full cast for a given storyline. Most wrestling (which, lets face it, is just a macho soap opera*) is similar, with each story only having a few active characters and others dipping in as bit players.

History often gets this treatment as well, as people will describe history in terms of the Great Men(tm) who were the able to shape history. How many WW2 documentaries talk about "Rommel vs Monty" like it was the two of them in the ring for a boxing match, and not "Afrika corps vs 8th army", for example? the further back you go in history the more pronounced this is. pretty much all most people know about the Romans is Caesar, Augustus and maybe Pompey. Almost everything we know form the historical record about those times is framed through the actions of these Great Men(tm).

and its present in many other areas of life, as well. how many people talk about politics like the parties consist of JUST the party leaders and no one else? discussion of sports teams often devolves in to a game of "<my star player> is better than <your star player>", and how many people talk about "Zuckerberg" as shorthand for "the whole of Facebook's corporate apparatus"?

I dont think its fair to blame comic books, or GW, for something thats present and widespread in our society as a whole.


rant over, back to just 40K:

I think the issue with special characters is, personally, in the context of 40k lore, they lower the stakes. I know that if, say, Ahriman and Logan Grimmar are thrown together in a ULTIMATE SHOWDOWN OF ULTIMATE DESTINEY, its nothing of the sort. Nothing Meaningful is going to change. both those guys are going to walk away with no lasting harm, no great change to the setting will happen, their will be no real consequence to the fight, because the writers of these fights dont have the authority to make major changes to the overarching plot. They can't kill or seriously cripple a character, they cant have one faction suffer a major setback, etc.

because i know the end result is "status quo", it really takes the tension out of the fights.

* and I must stress that THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. I enjoy watching wrestling sometimes, i'm not taking a cheap shot at it, just pointing out that it really is, at its heart, built around the personal dramas of a small set of peers, like soap operas are.


This is 10000% accurate and also really really funny coming from a guy whose username is 'xerxes, king of kings.'

I'd also once again like to point out that, hilariously, EVERY BAD GUY* FACTION IN THE 40K UNIVERSE HAS A RESURRECTION MECHANIC so that the good guys can safely win and kill the bad guys any time the writers want them to. Tyranids Necrons Dark Eldar Chaos and Orks are all narratively designed to lose, every. single. fight.

(*yes I know Um Ackshually Everyone In 40k Is The Bad Guys I mean the factions that have the obvious cackling saturday morning cartoon villain spikey sinister monster aesthetic)

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in ca
Hauptmann




Hogtown

I've noticed the change in GW's philosophy affecting my behaviour on the tabletop. When modelling an army, I used to always take the "generic" HQ option and kit him out as I liked from the wargear options, modelling a bespoke "my dude" to fit my fluff.

These days, I'm still kitbashing and converting my own bespoke dudes, but I almost always use them as "counts as" named-characters because the armies are so clearly designed around their use. The edge on the tabletop has overcome the head-canon rationalization needed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 19:40:52


Thought for the day
 
   
Made in es
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

Yeah, that is what I see on batreps a lot too. That and just using the named character…


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^Coorperate control has more options at it's disposal than chasing the lowest common denominator for $$$

Right. Truth is, after a decision is made, one cannot know that it made the most money. This is presumed. And controlling IP and how it gets used may be part of a strategy to do that, one that might seem to work as it might appear to tap into untapped potential, but, again, wouldn’t the people wishing for a return of convertibility and ones own dudes represent such an untapped market now, if profits were the only object? Is it possible that stock evaluations are related with profits but also how a company controls IP so that competitors cannot take this market?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 19:50:43


   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 the_scotsman wrote:
xerxeskingofking wrote:
Spoiler:
its not really a "comic book" thing, though. Most Soap operas have small casts, and even the larger ones normally have only have 10-20 characters actually active, and normally focused on a subset of the full cast for a given storyline. Most wrestling (which, lets face it, is just a macho soap opera*) is similar, with each story only having a few active characters and others dipping in as bit players.

History often gets this treatment as well, as people will describe history in terms of the Great Men(tm) who were the able to shape history. How many WW2 documentaries talk about "Rommel vs Monty" like it was the two of them in the ring for a boxing match, and not "Afrika corps vs 8th army", for example? the further back you go in history the more pronounced this is. pretty much all most people know about the Romans is Caesar, Augustus and maybe Pompey. Almost everything we know form the historical record about those times is framed through the actions of these Great Men(tm).

and its present in many other areas of life, as well. how many people talk about politics like the parties consist of JUST the party leaders and no one else? discussion of sports teams often devolves in to a game of "<my star player> is better than <your star player>", and how many people talk about "Zuckerberg" as shorthand for "the whole of Facebook's corporate apparatus"?

I dont think its fair to blame comic books, or GW, for something thats present and widespread in our society as a whole.


rant over, back to just 40K:

I think the issue with special characters is, personally, in the context of 40k lore, they lower the stakes. I know that if, say, Ahriman and Logan Grimmar are thrown together in a ULTIMATE SHOWDOWN OF ULTIMATE DESTINEY, its nothing of the sort. Nothing Meaningful is going to change. both those guys are going to walk away with no lasting harm, no great change to the setting will happen, their will be no real consequence to the fight, because the writers of these fights dont have the authority to make major changes to the overarching plot. They can't kill or seriously cripple a character, they cant have one faction suffer a major setback, etc.

because i know the end result is "status quo", it really takes the tension out of the fights.

* and I must stress that THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. I enjoy watching wrestling sometimes, i'm not taking a cheap shot at it, just pointing out that it really is, at its heart, built around the personal dramas of a small set of peers, like soap operas are.


This is 10000% accurate and also really really funny coming from a guy whose username is 'xerxes, king of kings.'

I'd also once again like to point out that, hilariously, EVERY BAD GUY* FACTION IN THE 40K UNIVERSE HAS A RESURRECTION MECHANIC so that the good guys can safely win and kill the bad guys any time the writers want them to. Tyranids Necrons Dark Eldar Chaos and Orks are all narratively designed to lose, every. single. fight.

(*yes I know Um Ackshually Everyone In 40k Is The Bad Guys I mean the factions that have the obvious cackling saturday morning cartoon villain spikey sinister monster aesthetic)
Riiight. . But it's that whole "Ressurection excuse" that makes it a comic book thing. Alexander the Great in RL died. Patton died. When character hero/villain comes back from the dead to fight another day so we can get the rematch. . . that's the comic book thing.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






Jesus supposedly came back from the dead though. Wasn't aware the New Testament was a comic.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 Gert wrote:
Jesus supposedly came back from the dead though. Wasn't aware the New Testament was a comic.
Uhhhhhhh. . .

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran




I don't mind named characters in the narrative or the tabletop. What I do mind is how common they are.

They might as well be teleporting everywhere fighting against the monster of the week. Instead they should really stick to their areas of the galaxy.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Gert wrote:
Jesus supposedly came back from the dead though. Wasn't aware the New Testament was a comic.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga_Bible_(series)
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

 Gert wrote:
Jesus supposedly came back from the dead though. Wasn't aware the New Testament was a comic.


Did Jesus come back from the dead after an epic battle against Judas, where he displayed his themed superpowers and narrowly lost the fight?

I'd probably still have left the catholic church if that was the case for all the other excellent reasons, but I'd remember more of the bible I'm pretty sure.

   
Made in gb
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant






There should be 1x special character in each army who breaks the standard rules of what a character should be able to do - Robby, Mortarion, Gaz, swarmlord etc etc, but they should pay the cost for it, and it shouldn't be so cheap it's an auto take - and arguably should be locked to 2000+pt games.

Every other special character should be based on a standard character but with additions that are paid for, be that stats, weapons, extra rules (that are standard rules - marine captain acting as a lieutenant also with re-roll 1's to wound as well). Good but not game breaking and based off the standard 'special rules' of that faction, and they should be paid for.

This is where I liked USC's in the past to be honest.

Also, named characters are fine, but like in 2nd/3rd edition, a lot of them should be for legacy battles... As they are dead.

My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance
My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Background
Go to: