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.

Hmm, messed up that last paragraph... Let me redo it.

What I meant to say is some events are more focused on winning and a crazy combo might be the ace up your sleeve, Some events refine the rules with their own house rules or FAQs. That's fine but I could deal without the nerdrage. Ok so you got beat by a combo you never saw before or your dice really did suck. I'd like to see less of the whining articles that will drive new players away and more of the articles that will promote the hobby.

Also, RiTides, you refer to NOVA a lot for your examples but didn't they change the rules (their own missions and house rulings which GW clarified with the opposite of their interpretations the following week)? Isn't that even more of an effect on game outcomes that the permission to use Forge World? I don't knock it, just pointing out that your examples do not refer to "GW - Official" tournament rules.

lots of people seem to be getting this horribly wrong or are simply ignoring it.

Word for word

"this unit is intended to be used in "standard" games of warhammer 40,000, within usual force organisation charts. as with all our models these should be considered "official", but owing to the fact they may be unknown to yout oponent, its best to make sure they are happy to play a game useing forge world models before you start"

now the models are official, permission is not needed to use them, but is polite and damn good manners to inform him before hand, not drop a lucius pod with a contemptor on him and troll lololol, as with ALL 40k games you need to agree on things before hand.

FW is official, permission not needed, be polite and inform your oponent before hand, its all good manners.

 RiTides wrote:
The thing is, it's going to be different at every event, too. I read (in this thread?) that the missions you guys use, Reecius, seem to allow flyers to dominate a bit more than the ones used at some other events, such as Nova.

So, maybe Sabers make it a close game in your format where flyers were a bit more powerful, but in the Nova format (where table quarters were emphasized a bit more as the primary, or something?) maybe the Sabers just wreck face.

It's going to be a different for each event depending on tons of factors... but I don't think we'll truly know until folks have had time to build for FW events now that allies are in. The more events allowing full-on FW, the larger the effect will be.

And maybe it will work out fine but it's definitely worth considering the alternatives or possible problems that could arise with such a shift in the general tournament meta.

Edit: Found the quote I was thinking of regarding flyers and the BAO, spoilered below for reference/context to what I said above:

Spoiler:

Phazael wrote:3) Fear of Flyers- Here is where I think the core issue is with Reece. I consider Reece a friend and respect him a lot, but I think he is overly paranoid about flyers in the game. I will even take it a step further and say that the BAO scenario inadvertantly favors flyers more than the standard book scenarios and that were he running scenarios more closely aligned to the book his playtest results would not be scaring the hell out of him in regards to the Cylon Death Fleet army list. I think its pretty telling that with or without FW, no one has won an event since 6th began with a flyer heavy list of any kind, despite all the irrational fear placed on them.

I feel that the game designers want flyers to be strong (they frankly should be, from a realism standpoint) but not game busting. Any army (except the poor nids) can ally the best parts of guard air defense on the cheap and most armies can spam multishot S6-7ish weapons on the cheap, as well. People just want an easy way out and FW gives them that with cheap twin linked Skyfire/Interceptor artilery and hydra guns with the interceptor rule added. Frankly, its frustrating because if I want to take just a couple flyers, some skimmers, or god forbid some jetbikes I am basically handicapping myself in formats that allow forgeworld. In essence, with this much flyer hate you HAVE to spam them to get use out of them. This leaves entire army builds out in the cold, just to punish one or two builds that have not actually won anything yet.

Our missions are almost exactly the book missions, we just play 3 at once. There is little to no deviation from the book. I honestly don't think our format favors Flyers more than any other.

I do fear flyers no doubt, and for good reason. In our test games they are dominating. Just devastating, and require very little skill to play well. Introducing AA (which FW offers a ton of) helps to mitigate this a lot.

@Phazeal

No worries brotha, you can criticize me. I know you you're not being personal and I appreciate your input as a very experienced TO and a good player.

One thing that has not been mentioned is that many tournaments are going for battle point scoring only for most of the top prizes. If it was still like the old RTT's used to be where soft scores counted then FW stuff would be much more acceptable, you could get high marks for your awesome models while still not spamming or playing like TFG. All the spamming of only the best units and lists that are just no fun to see on the other side of the table would go down if there were tournaments that rewarded you for modeling, painting, sportsmanship, etc. Now it's all about tabling the guy for max battle points so you can win prizes. The painting and other soft scores are an afterthought now and if they are included in overall scoring the competitive crowd goes ballistic... unless you give them a best (at tabling people) general award that overshadows all the others. IMHO that is why GW has washed their hands of tournaments. Spamming and playing to table people has never been what 40k was supposed to be like to them... or me.

If it was a 1/3,1/3,1/3 with Battle Points, Painting, Sportsmanship for the top prizes at tournaments I think you would see people using FW units in a way that is deemed more acceptable by others. I know this doesn't have as much to do with FW as it does the entire culture of competitive 40k but I was sad to see how tournaments have changed over the past 5-10 years. I think everyone would be willing to see FW units anytime if they were given a way to penalize TFGs who "do it wrong" while still rewarding the hobbyists that are "doing it right". You should be a great all around player, hobbyist, and person to win a tournament... not just the guy with the deepest pockets and greatest knowledge of loopholes in rules.

 RiTides wrote:
My point was that there's a lag between FW units getting updated and GW FAQs being released. We all know there are old codexes, but they get FAQ'ed at the same time as every other codex. FW books are on their own schedule.

Except they don't get updated. GW's 6th edition updates have been better, yes, but the past trend has been for GW to ignore problems for years at a time and update them inconsistently, if at all.

If you were to run a tournament next week, with full FW allowance, do you see yourself as having to make any special provisions... or do you anticipate it being identical to allowing all codex armies to be used? I am curious if you really perceive there to be no additional challenges, or if you are perceiving those challenges, what steps you would take to deal with them.

The only difference for allowing FW would be that my FAQ would have to be a bit longer.

 RiTides wrote:
The argument of "GW is broken, too" doesn't make FW less broken.

No, but the point is that the "broken" state of FW is no more broken than the "broken" state of codex stuff, and they're both equally official and intended to be used in normal 40k games. If there's no compelling argument to exclude FW (since it's no worse than the stuff you already allow) then it should be included just like all other official stuff.

Adding more problematic rules, without FAQs, and units to the mix does indeed add problems.

So why don't we ban everything but the starter set marine army? After all, that would mean even fewer problematic rules to worry about. I see no reason to ban some official rules for being problematic but then allow others that are equally problematic.

Oh hey, here's an even better idea. To keep the level of problematic rules the same we can ban all the non-marine armies and then add all the FW marine units. It'll be awesome!

 Dozer Blades wrote:
So this is basically a laundry list of excuses why it is okay to use FW... like I said it is not fixing anything in the game... just creating more issues. When GW gives it the official green light I will be fully behind it but not until then. This crops up every time a new edition begins.

GW has given the official green light, many times. The only problem is that people refuse to accept that green light and demand their own personal signed and notarized letter from the CEO of GW informing them that it's ok to use FW units in normal 40k.

Why not just make FW units 0-1 if you just want to play with a cool FW toy? What's the drawback? It's worked well for Adepticon, and would be a good stepping stone to more FW acceptance in tournies.

Because I've paid for more than one Vulture gunship, and I'd like to use them? Why should I have to spend another $100+ on buying more Vendettas to replace them with?

I would like to see a statement from GW condoning FW for regular games of 40k. Truth be there isn't one. There has been a lot of talk that they will release such a statement but it is just more talk at the end of the day.

 RiTides wrote:
I'll state the obvious response to that- most Indy GTs don't allow FW, or allow it but in limited measure.

Reecius' event(s) are the only GT(s) I know of who allow full, unrestricted FW use in the main event. Are there others?

As mentioned before, Adepticon has a tradition of allowing FW, but with restrictions (or unrestricted, but not in the main event).

Edit: To reiterate, I'm talking unrestricted FW use at the main event of a GT... not local tournies. Are there other examples I'm missing?

As I state every time this thread comes up. In Vegas at our Ironman series 1-18 of GT's we always allowed forgeworld including the army lists. In all of the GT's I ran in Flagstaff AZ (Warmaster Series1-5) we allowed Forgeworld. There was never a problem from the use of these rules.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I would like to see a statement from GW condoning FW for regular games of 40k. Truth be there isn't one....

Except the one right there in the Games Workshop-published Imperial Armour books, written by staff employed by Games Workshop in their capacity as staff writers, and sold to players through Games Workshop stores.

Seriously, the only reason people can get away with this stupendous case of willful blindness when it comes to FW's status is because they have a separate online storefront to handle their orders.

Quote it.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Quote it.

"this unit is intended to be used in "standard" games of warhammer 40,000, within usual force organisation charts. as with all our models these should be considered "official", but owing to the fact they may be unknown to yout oponent, its best to make sure they are happy to play a game useing forge world models before you start" Imperial Armor Apocalypse Page 3. (Thanks to the poster above who typed it first.)

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Quote it.

This is becoming a wee bit pedantic, FW is legal and a part of 40k. You may dislike it however this thread has shown little compelling reason to ban FW or something of that nature.

- The fact is FW brings exciting and varied options to many armies, especially Tau and Eldar who gain a slew of options. This hobby is about nice toys and FW has a great selection. They are purchasable elements usable in legally sanctioned games..

- It's cognitive dissonance to not allow the full range of current models in a game, people pay good money for these models, money which directly supports the hobby we are all a part of. They have current rules and are more widely available at the moment than the current rules for Sisters of Battle or specific Daemon units. Cost and unfamiliarity cannot be a limiting factor.

- The 'problem' choice hit upon by many is the Sabre defense platform.... PLUS an aegis defense line. The defense line is the force multiplier here. Without it the platforms a bit more naked. Coupled with the fact they are a bit more expensive point wise, this is not as much of an issue. Again think of the top 10 most broken FW units.... then compare them to the top 10 most broken things in the Imperial Guard codex, or the Necrons or Grey Knights. You have these platforms, maybe Breeching Drills, maybe Warp Hunters and Finally Tetras? The list is short and they pale in comparison to things found in every book. People would just about riot if a new FW unit were to come out, one called... Long Fangs, or maybe Grey Hunters.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I would like to see a statement from GW condoning FW for regular games of 40k. Truth be there isn't one....

Except the one right there in the Games Workshop-published Imperial Armour books, written by staff employed by Games Workshop in their capacity as staff writers, and sold to players through Games Workshop stores.

Seriously, the only reason people can get away with this stupendous case of willful blindness when it comes to FW's status is because they have a separate online storefront to handle their orders.

This gets argued over again and again.

People would like to see Games Workshop give the OK for Forge World, not Forge World giving the OK for Forge World. And yes, everyone is aware that FW is owned by GW. So why doesn't the GW part of GW give the OK for FW then? And again, if GW is one big happy family why is FW not allowed in official GW tournaments since they are official GW rules?

To give you a real world example: Marijuana is legal in California for medicinal use so you could say that the government is approving marijuana usage. The problem is that it is a federal crime and you will be arrested for marijuana possession because federal law takes precedence over state law. So on one hand you have a government entity saying it is OK to do something, but the larger entity saying that it is not OK to do it.

 Blackmoor wrote:
People would like to see Games Workshop give the OK for Forge World, not Forge World giving the OK for Forge World. And yes, everyone is aware that FW is owned by GW. So why doesn't the GW part of GW give the OK for FW then?

Because they don't need to. They printed it in the FW books, that's all that they need to do. It's not their fault that a few stubborn people refuse to accept it no matter how many times it's said unless they have a personal signed and notarized letter from the CEO of GW.

(And if you think FW could independently approve their stuff without GW agreeing, that's just absurd. The same people that approve every codex also approved that "this is legal" statement.)

And again, if GW is one big happy family why is FW not allowed in official GW tournaments since they are official GW rules?

Why does the only current US tournament run by GW only allow 500 points of allies? Why do they have weird scoring that has nothing to do with anything in any rulebook or codex? Should we also limit allies to 500 points in every other tournament because that's what GW does in their tournament?

To give you a real world example: Marijuana is legal in California for medicinal use so you could say that the government is approving marijuana usage. The problem is that it is a federal crime and you will be arrested for marijuana possession because federal law takes precedence over state law. So on one hand you have a government entity saying it is OK to do something, but the larger entity saying that it is not OK to do it.

Except the California law is in direct contradiction to the federal law, as it is very clear that federal law takes priority. Not only is there no such hierarchy in GW's rules, but there's also nothing at all saying that FW is illegal. FW is just never mentioned at all outside of the FW books, and the only statement on its legality is that it is 100% official and intended for standard 40k.

I'm in the US, and I own a few Forgeworld upgrade bits but none of the full models they have available. Now here is how I look at it. I have two armies painted up to 2000 points, 1 space marine and 1 tyranid, and I have models for each that I'm still working on to allow flexiablity in my builds.

Now with the cost of FW parts I have very few of them. WIth that alone in mind it's like the rest of my units, as much time and money I put into building my armies I want to be able to field all the units at one time or another and if I have gone out and bought one the boutique FW models for the same monetary cost as my families weekly grocery bill I wanna be able to play it on the table. I'm sorry that you may not have seen the model or ever heard of it before but that's not my issue.

Besides war gaming is all about adapting to the situation at hand. If you know how to play your army then a quick look at the stat line and war gear of an unfamiliar model should be all you need to say, well that's a priority because it can do this or this, or well that is a tertiary target for me because this unit and this unit can do this or that to nullify it or blah blah...

Learn your army well enough and a random FW model will not toss you off your game.

vhwolf wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Quote it.

"this unit is intended to be used in "standard" games of warhammer 40,000, within usual force organisation charts. as with all our models these should be considered "official", but owing to the fact they may be unknown to yout oponent, its best to make sure they are happy to play a game useing forge world models before you start" Imperial Armor Apocalypse Page 3. (Thanks to the poster above who typed it first.)

Which requires an opponent's (or TO's) permission to use... Hence the purpose of this thread, to allow them or not, and if so, when and how much!

Thanks for the many great replies to my comments. I am flying out of town (which is why I'm posting this at 4am lol), so this is all I will add: I love a variety of events, and don't necessarily prefer Nova above others.

Despite my position in this thread (which was originally a reaction to folks pressuring ALL TOs to allow full FW, as if it were a codex, instead of encouraging a variety of events), my favorite event that I played in this year allowed FW: the Adepticon team tourney. My team even won a prize (not for placement!) at it . I am by no means anti-FW... just anti "You MUST allow" FW! Variety in events is a great thing

The team tourney, in particular, was limited FW, which I personally prefer, for all the reasons previously stated.

Again cheers for the thoughts all particularly the TOs who shared their valuable experience on this and the last page

 blood lance wrote:
Why is it such a big issue just reading the unit profiles before the match? Not to sound aggressive or anything, but from your article, I cant help but think you seem to think everyone in tournaments knows all the rules. I know there are at least 4 armies in this game I know nothing about. The same effect is formed here, but I don't ask to read through the player's codex before the match.

Not to sound aggressive, but I imagine that you don't win many tournaments

To be fair, I myself have never played in one...

The bottom line is that people who are for using Forgeworld in tournaments thinks it would be a great addition to the competitiveness and variety of such an event (or whatever). People who do not want it argue that it may be too expensive, too alien in new rule sets, or simply too imbalancing (or whatever).

Guys, this is a game where we want to have fun even if it is a competitive event. If the majority of players want FW in a tournament and the TOs are okay with it, I'd say challenge yourselves to get others who are not on the bandwagon to see for themselves casually first hand how FW can be a neat addition to an army, especially one that may be limited it what it can do. Proxy models, help build FW orders to get the models in their hands, whatever. If you want FW in tournaments, then you have to work at it.

And don't say it is not your responsibility. We've all tried introducing this game to others and maybe even to Apocalypse level games or to drag a mate or two to a tournament. Think of this as an exercise in making others see a different perspective to the game they never thought of before.

Also, if the majority of players locally along with TOs do not allow FW, then you have to suck it up. A TO ultimately decides to want or not want FW in his or her tournament. The way I see it, it offers a challenge when you have to think outside the box when competitive events are not monotonous, kinda like how MTG has Elder Dragon Highlander, Standard, Extended, ect..

In summary, this is a game and we want to have fun. Talk to TOs and respective players about what you want to play with and then play with what is agreed. There are more things to do than bicker over this particular subject that few want to positively influence.

People would like to see Games Workshop give the OK for Forge World, not Forge World giving the OK for Forge World. And yes, everyone is aware that FW is owned by GW. So why doesn't the GW part of GW give the OK for FW then?

It is simple ... because there is no clear upside for them to do so.

Right now you have:
1. Some folks opposed to the inclusion of FW in standard games of 40k
2. Some folks favor the inclusion of FW in standard games of 40K.
3. The vast majority of people do not care one way or another.

As it stands, those opposed are “happy” because FW is not “official” and those in favor are still buying FW and “happy” because they are “official”. The onus is then not on GW to be the decider but rather the opponents and event TO’s. It is the same reason GW is happy to get out of the “event” game and the blame associated.

GW prints the simple little statement that those opposed require and you have a vocal negative reaction from the “opposed” crowd, threats of rage quitting, cries of how the game is now broken, they can no longer afford to be in the hobby, and every time they would lose to an opponent with FW models they would curse under their breath for GW allowing them etc. The added bonus is right now those in favor have to buy basically more models to cover off on games that they can play with FW and those games in which they can not.

If Forgeworld was “standard” in games of 40K. That would certainly mean more Forgeworld sales but it might also mean less Games Workshop sales. Games Workshop makes more profit on those core Games Workshop sales then they make on whatever percentage Forgeworld is obligated to give them. Just because it is all one big company and all the same pool of money doesn’t mean management does not care how that pool is divided.

They won’t print it until there is a discernible upside for them to do so. Right now that does not exist.

I've found over the past decade plus running events ... If you wait on Games Workshop to officially do something you might be waiting along time. Sometimes you have to seize the opportunity and decide for yourself.

BladeWalker wrote:One thing that has not been mentioned is that many tournaments are going for battle point scoring only for most of the top prizes.

I'm not sure about this. The names of the people winning the battle point race are publicized more, because people want to know what armies are winning games, but I think most RTTs and GTs still offer significant prizes for sportsmanship, appearance, and some other categories. So, no, they're not just about winning and some people still knowingly take inferior models because they look better. I know I do.

Blackmoor wrote:
This gets argued over again and again.

People would like to see Games Workshop give the OK for Forge World, not Forge World giving the OK for Forge World. And yes, everyone is aware that FW is owned by GW. So why doesn't the GW part of GW give the OK for FW then? And again, if GW is one big happy family why is FW not allowed in official GW tournaments since they are official GW rules?

GW now sells the FW books in their own stores. If I buy a book at a GW store and it tells me that it's legal for use in games of 40k, what reason do I have not to believe this?

GW Official tournaments? Few, far between, generally poorly organized, and really not relevant. It's a big company. I don't know what half the divisions at my company are up to at any given time. The people running the "official tournaments" are usually not happy to have been given the task and want to get it over with as quickly as possible, with as little effort as possible. A few years ago they had a debacle where the official tournament ruled one thing when the printed FAQ said something else. I wouldn't get too wrapped up in anything the official tournaments do, because really, other than being run by the company, they're not that official, and their rules aren't written with any great deal of thought. (Actually, it does sound like the rest of the company)

To give you a real world example: Marijuana is legal in California for medicinal use so you could say that the government is approving marijuana usage. The problem is that it is a federal crime and you will be arrested for marijuana possession because federal law takes precedence over state law. So on one hand you have a government entity saying it is OK to do something, but the larger entity saying that it is not OK to do it.

Except that there's nothing published saying they're not legal, and there is something published saying they are. So your analogy doesn't hold up.

I am running a 40K tourney in Atlanta in November, and we are planning on allowing FW models and army lists.

Why are we going it? Because we want to have fun, and what better way to have fun than allowing everyone to play with all their toys.

Edit: We asked our club members first, and around 70% said "Allow it all (with the exception of super heavies and gargantuan creatures)"

Having the rules for the Vraks campaign, and the breaching drills, they have the one shot and yes they can be a surprise, but they are limited in how they get to be used, they do their pop out of the ground once, and then have to survive enemy fire like any other vehicle. So maybe they seemed so potent as they have a multi-melta and were a surprise the first time a player had to deal with being on the receiving end.

Sabre gun platforms, in a tourney? really? those are emplacement platforms for forts and such, I can imagine horde players not liking the ones with multiple heavy volume weapons like the quad of Heavy stubbers and Heavy Bolters, otherwise the other weapons are simply twinlinked for the IG, just a bit better than normal heavy weapons,,,,,,Oh wait, the special order of "Bring it down" make my weapons already twinlinked.

So, these can be killed. The majority of FW stuff I hjave seen in the past were turret upgrades for Chimeras, and I was never afraid to play a guy with twin-linked HB's or an autocannon on a transport, the Eldar codex has scarier weapons on waveserpents.

And I doubt anyone would try to use a titan in a regular tournament fight, that would be nearly all they had on the table is allowed. some FW units are meant as Apoc units.
Others can be used to suck up a slot, like my Valdor, and i would still take and use it as it is a good weapon when it works right, but it also has that feedback issue built in so on top of paying 300+ points for the one tank, I also risk it wrecking it's main gun. Yes, some FW stuff for the points costs are very effective and good,

But now with GW making 50dollar codexes, I may be out of the game anyway.

 shasolenzabi wrote:
Sabre gun platforms, in a tourney? really? those are emplacement platforms for forts and such, I can imagine horde players not liking the ones with multiple heavy volume weapons like the quad of Heavy stubbers and Heavy Bolters, otherwise the other weapons are simply twinlinked for the IG, just a bit better than normal heavy weapons,,,,,,Oh wait, the special order of "Bring it down" make my weapons already twinlinked.

Just a bit better eh? You forgot things like interceptor and skyfire and toughness 7. It is a big advantage in being twin-linked because you are going to be needing your orders for "Get back in the fight" after your went to ground to get your 2+ cover save.

So, these can be killed.

Sure they can be killed, but at toughness 7 and a 2+ cover save they won't be.

The majority of FW stuff I hjave seen in the past were turret upgrades for Chimeras, and I was never afraid to play a guy with twin-linked HB's or an autocannon on a transport, the Eldar codex has scarier weapons on waveserpents.

If that is what people take to a tournament then sure go ahead, but that is not what people use the IA books for.


Also isn't it possible to go and make almost entire Tau army from the IA books? So that means you have 5 minutes to learn a whole new army?

 Blackmoor wrote:
Sure they can be killed, but at toughness 7 and a 2+ cover save they won't be.

You mean the same 2+ cover save that gives you a 40% chance of failing to shoot effectively next turn? Let's not forget about that part.

Also isn't it possible to go and make almost entire Tau army from the IA books? So that means you have 5 minutes to learn a whole new army?

Yes, if you're dumb enough to go into a tournament and not bother to learn all of the legal armies/units in advance. Should we also ban the entire Tyranid codex because some guy hasn't bothered to read it yet?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 shasolenzabi wrote:
And I doubt anyone would try to use a titan in a regular tournament fight, that would be nearly all they had on the table is allowed. some FW units are meant as Apoc units.

There's exactly zero chance of using a titan, since they don't occupy a FOC slot and no army can take them. Unless you're playing Apocalypse (so no FOC and army limits are gone) or specifically agree to allow a titan they can not be used in standard 40k.

I have a large tourny to attend at the end of the month, it does allow for FW units and I am taking some, what am I taking, hyperios defence launchers, gives me some anti tank and anti air which is most needed, I am using the FW models to plug a gap in my army and to be fair I should have took more.

 Peregrine wrote:
Should we also ban the entire Tyranid codex because some guy hasn't bothered to read it yet?

I know that this point has already been made earlier in the discussion, but if they're so comparable then why does GW ban IA units at its own tournaments yet not ban the Tyranid Codex?

 Rampage wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Should we also ban the entire Tyranid codex because some guy hasn't bothered to read it yet?

I know that this point has already been made earlier in the discussion, but if they're so comparable then why does GW ban IA units at its own tournaments yet not ban the Tyranid Codex?

thats an easy one

The Nid book is more widespread, so more people have acess to it on the ground level, the FW books are just as official but not as widespread, so its less work for the T'O to organise.
GW tourny's are not what I would call competative either, there more aimed at a younger player base, I even know of a time where a friend of mine was told off by the T'O for bringing a competative army, GW tourny's are a
bad example so I would stick to the bigger ones, and ask why they ban FW.

 Formosa wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Should we also ban the entire Tyranid codex because some guy hasn't bothered to read it yet?

I know that this point has already been made earlier in the discussion, but if they're so comparable then why does GW ban IA units at its own tournaments yet not ban the Tyranid Codex?

The Nid book is more widespread, so more people have acess to it on the ground level, the FW books are just as official but not as widespread.

And there we go. It's not a case of being too lazy and not bothering to read the IA books, it's that they aren't very accessible.

You can get them online, like anything else in the 21st century.

You can also get them at GW stores, at least in the US, which oddly makes them more available than any 'direct order' item.

They're considerably more available than the SoB rules, which were spread between two White Dwarves, now oop, and not reprinted anywhere else.

 Rampage wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Rampage wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Should we also ban the entire Tyranid codex because some guy hasn't bothered to read it yet?

I know that this point has already been made earlier in the discussion, but if they're so comparable then why does GW ban IA units at its own tournaments yet not ban the Tyranid Codex?

The Nid book is more widespread, so more people have acess to it on the ground level, the FW books are just as official but not as widespread.

And there we go. It's not a case of being too lazy and not bothering to read the IA books, it's that they aren't very accessible.

were talking kids here at GW tourny's, with a smattering of adults, the adults will have easy acess to the rules, kids not so much (unless its little timmy), we as adults can find anything we want online and/or buy it from the source, I have personally bought all the FW books and scanned them onto my pc so i can make a PDF and put them on my Ipod, in a normal game of 40k I see no reason why I cannot use my FW units (within reason), at a tourny I can understand to a certain extent, but as i have said before its all down to the T.O

I was going to say I thought that they were available for the Ipad and then remembered you have to then get an Ipad too. EDIT: And they're not even available for Ipad anyway.

Also, surely saying that you are going to use Forge World in your tournament because those that don't want to buy the book can just access it online is condoning such activity, and I'm pretty sure that that's not what TOs are going to want to be promoting.

They may also be more available than other things simply because they are on the shelves but then it comes back around to the issue of price, and the fact that it will cost you a heck of a lot more to then purchase all of the Imperial Armour books as well. Plus, seeing a unit entry in a book is often very different to actually encountering it on the table, and very few people actually use Forge World at the minute.

Then it could come back to maybe the reason that we aren't seeing as much Forge World is because it is not accepted by the community at large, and a big part of that is the tournament scene. I could possibly understand tournaments saying that they are going to use Forge World but only from one book to start off with, that way no-one has to break the bank to learn all of these new unit entries, just get one book, then we might start to see the units from that book appearing more commonly and people getting more familiar with them, and then if it can be decided whether or not it is a good thing for the community and whether we want to start including more Forge World.

I'm personally on the fence, but I definately don't think that suddenly implementing a huge number of Forge World units into a tournament is the right way to go, I think if Forge World is going to happen it'll have to be a transitional thing.