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.

 Hulksmash wrote:


Sci-Fi isn't based in hard, gritty reality. In fact, it's generally pretty campy as a whole. There is an aspect of Sci-Fi that tries very hard to ground itself as much in reality as possible but 40k isn't part of it. However 40k is sci-fi.

the fact that 40k has "sorcery", and essentially "magic" precludes it from having anything other than a veneer of sci-fi about it. Quite a lot of sci-fi is grounded in hard reality (hard sci-fi) buit for the most part, the entire genre-whilst imaginary, it is fundamentally plausable and rational to some lesser or greater degree. this hardly apply to 40k. bar a veneer, 40k is essentially a fantasy setting, with some sci fi/space opera dressings. which is fine! there is nothing wrong with fantasy. Regarding sci-fi, in my ind games like dropzone commander, and infinity epitomise sci-fi.

 Hulksmash wrote:

Warmachine is a game that seems to an outsider to be primarily about giant steam mechs beating each other. Does it have other aspects to it? Sure, but several Warmachine and even 1-2 Hordes factions have a steam punk vibe and certainly the steam mechs can't really be classed as anything else. The inclusion of hordes shifted things I'll grant you but it's still very steam punky to me personally.

Like i said, there are elements, but thats about it. jacks are war machines but they're not WARMACHINE. PP have done enough of a twist on the basic premise that it is its own unique setting - personally i feel the best description of the iron kingdoms is as a fantasy setting undergoing the industrial revolution.

 Hulksmash wrote:


You do like to tar entire waves of people don't you. I give a free pass on things like the Storm Raven because unknown tech could make them work. I don't spend a lot of time though scrutinizing models and dimensions though. I'm a nutter for a lot of GW products due to them being plastic and extremely customizable. I can build an army to match ideas in my head. It's something that PP doesn't bring to the table for me so I am probably more forgiving due to my passion for conversion and modelling. As for PP getting more criticism for not being GW it's possible. But I feel that many people who don't play 40k or collect the models and have moved onto many other systems do enjoy tearing new GW models here on Dakka. I almost never see people diving on new PP models to tear them down.

oh, irony, how i love thee. kinda funny saying that, considering in my next paragraph i pointed out how plenty PP players have a go over quite a few PP sculpts, myself included.

I can understand the appreciation for the customisaton afforded by GW kits - in my mind, its their sole redeeming feature (up until recently, i'd have added "the fluff" to that list, but everything since codex:grey knights has been beyond woeful and utterly unsalvageable in my mind) - in fact, when it comes to conversions, i am quite happy to buy GW kits in order to use their bits to customise my PP and Corvus Beli bits. that said though, PP stuff can be converted - it does take a bit more effort though.

Now, i feel there is a subset of the "beyond 40k" players that enjoy nothing more than blasting the game they used to play due to a jumped up sense of entitlement-the recently converted anti-GW fanboy. there are few things worse than those. then again, there are plenty of the "beyond 40k" players that have moved on, for a variety of reasons. when they say why they moved on, why they feel what they're moving on, why they didnt want to stay, and why they feel doing what they do now is "better", there is also a subset of the "still playing" 40k community who, as a reaction see it as nothing short of the prelude to an all out flame war, with themselves as the victims (everyone tearing on GW!) when in reality, it is just people explaining their position from a different POV.

(to be honest, i think a large part of the GW player base as a whole has a bit of a victimized mentality about it - competition, and "pushing" yourself as far as you can go. rather than "push myself forward", its "push him back". "try to win" is frowned on. as winning means there is a loser. its "winning is bad. hey, if no one wins, no one loses. and i hate being the loser!" criticisms are magnified, taken to heart as personal attacks, and these reinforce the victim mentality. i think this has a huge part in the attitude that the beyond 40k crowd are always having a go and doing so unfairly. but hey, thats ot)

Honestly, moving beyond 40k taught me a lot of things. I no longer see the hobby from a GW-centric POV. and im thankful for that, because in my mind, it has opened me up to so much more thats out there. it doesnt stop me appreciating GW. but i see it now for the narrow viewpoint that is is. fair enough if that narrow viewpoint is either all you know, or all you want to know, or all you like, but it doesnt mean that me having my POV is somehow wrong, or different, or if me explaining my POV equates to blasting yours.

 Hulksmash wrote:

There is no doubt that PP has plenty of people that enjoy their product. I can understand why without sharing that enjoyment. The models are enough for me not to want to even play the system. Granted, if I was a teenager again and just getting into wargaming and playing just to play I might have considered PP games. But for me the universe and modeling opportunities provided by GW and hopefully some others like Sedition Wars keep me away.
As for the Chaos codex I like it. I like the models and feel the book is gorgeous and well thoughtout.

Ironically, appreciating the models isnt the only "gateway" to a game. plenty people get into WM because of the gameplay. the models get appreciated as part of the journey. trust me - give the game a shot - have a go.

as for the chaos codex - the chosen are nice, but thats about it. i dont get the dinosaur/dragon vibe all of a sudden. plus, i wasnt too fond of the "chaos literally grows on/in you" vibe throughout the book. as for the fluff - yeah, lets just say i expected much better.

 Hulksmash wrote:

indeed, each to their own. *tips hat*

But the problem is that you're unlikely to start an army with models you hate.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
But the problem is that you're unlikely to start an army with models you hate.

then dont hate!

"hate" is a strong word though. its a different style, a different aesthetic, nothing more. then again, i suppose im used to seeing the hobby from outside the GW-centric point of view. for me, its the gameplay that draws me in. for example, as much as i like quite a few of the models from malifaux, i found the gameplay disinteresting. same with 40k. with warmachine, at first, i couldnt stand the models. then i looked at them on their own merit, and found that i could deal with them. what drew me to khador and circle was the fluff. it grew from there. Now, i "get" and like the look. *shrug* ymmv, and all that.

Dont say "hate". hate is bad, m'kay.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
But the problem is that you're unlikely to start an army with models you hate.

I think that ExNoctemNacimur has an excellent and clearly stated point. His reasoning is precisely the reason that I did not start Malifaux.

I'd like to ammend his statement though: One is unlikely to start an army with models you don't like the aesthetic of - when considered a vacuum. (i.e. absent any other external forces influencing the decision)

There are extenuating circumstances though that may push players past that hump where you don't like the models. I probably would never have started Warmachine, had GW not treated its veteran hobbyists with such open disdain. At the time, Warmachine was a distant second, model wise, but I picked a faction that had a few models I liked - Butcher of Khardov, Man O Wars (saddly fairly ineffective, game-wise) and Iron Fangs (which I never owned throughout MKI). Once I did try it, the gameplay sucked me in completely. I have a huge half-built (i.e. armless models on bases) Menoth army that I bought for games only. I love the gameplay of the army, but I think that most of their range looks like garbage and I dislike the studio paint scheme - (Sisters of the Flame aside!). Another circumstance might be that one begins playing because of their friends / peer group / significant other etc. I know some players who started Warmahordes purely on gameplay (transitioning from Magic The Gathering) because they like the competitive tournament scene. These players initially care nothing for how the army looks - only how it plays.

YMMV of course.

I own and have played 40k, Warhammer Fantasy, and Warmahordes. Too be honest I probably would have just stayed with GW if not for the ridiculous price increases and the latest Chaos Dex at $50 was really the last straw for me.

As far as comparing the two they really are two totally different games. One Army, the other skirmish. Don't kid yourselves though, it's cheaper to get into WarmaHordes. No matter what anyone tells you WarmaHordes is cheaper. GW has the fluff and the models advantage. PP has the rules/gameplay advantage in my opinion. At the end of the day though if you want fun your going to go with the system that appeals to you. What's sad for me was that Warhammer Fantasy was really my favorite setting but the game just got too big, too expensive, and just does not have the appeal of 40k.

Currently I am looking to give Malifaux a shot. The fact that I don't need dice and can use a regular poker deck to play intrigues me. I suppose in a strange way I should be thankful for the price increases as it has allowed me to expand into other game systems.

If you're looking to not use a normal Malifaux deck, get the Malifaux cheat sheet.

@Deadnight

I never said aesthetics were the only "gateway" to a game. In fact I mentioned that if I was still a teenager the aesthetic might get a handwave for playability. But for me the aesthetic is something I have to enjoy for me to touch and I just can't find enough models in any one line to enjoy the possibility of picking up PP.

Ok I have read all 15 pages of this insanity...

1. I have moved my gaming dollars from GW to PP. I like the rules better. The models have grown on me except a few factions (but didn't like the whole GW range either).

2. I have several of the PP side games and love them. Heap is fun to play with my kids, and Level 7 really draws me and my friends in. As a by product I have started to search out other non-mainstream bored games and it truly has opened a new world to me.

3. It's ok to like GW, it's ok to like PP. Heck it's even ok to like both.

 darefsky wrote:

3. It's ok to like GW, it's ok to like PP. Heck it's even ok to like both.

The Inquisition of the Emperor and the Church of Menoth would like to have a word with you

 Alfndrate wrote:

 darefsky wrote:

3. It's ok to like GW, it's ok to like PP. Heck it's even ok to like both.

The Inquisition of the Emperor and the Church of Menoth would like to have a word with you

And that's why I play Eldar and Khador.....

 darefsky wrote:
Ok I have read all 15 pages of this insanity...

It's ok to like GW, it's ok to like PP. Heck it's even ok to like both.

Then you learned nothing!
Choose your incongruously large weapon and engage in incoherent combat. Nobody leaves until everybody feels terrible about their hobby choices!

 darefsky wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 darefsky wrote:

3. It's ok to like GW, it's ok to like PP. Heck it's even ok to like both.

The Inquisition of the Emperor and the Church of Menoth would like to have a word with you

And that's why I play Eldar and Khador.....

Many Khadorians are Menites. SHAKUSE!

Deadnight wrote:

the fact that 40k has "sorcery", and essentially "magic" precludes it from having anything other than a veneer of sci-fi about it. Quite a lot of sci-fi is grounded in hard reality (hard sci-fi) buit for the most part, the entire genre-whilst imaginary, it is fundamentally plausable and rational to some lesser or greater degree. this hardly apply to 40k. bar a veneer, 40k is essentially a fantasy setting, with some sci fi/space opera dressings. which is fine! there is nothing wrong with fantasy. Regarding sci-fi, in my ind games like dropzone commander, and infinity epitomise sci-fi.

Clarke's Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

I'd personally consider 40k 'Space Opera' as there's a lot of greek-style tragedy and general boisterousness and rule of cool in the setting, but that may just be me.

To be picky, doesn't Infinity have some tech that really messes with conservation of mass with the werewolf characters?

Still, Infinity and Dropzone Commander do look pretty hard, especially as compared to 40k.

 Balance wrote:
Still, Infinity and Dropzone Commander do look pretty hard, especially as compared to 40k.

More people should play Infinity. It's the idea backup game. Buy a starter pack and a few other figs you like from the faction you like the look of. Use the official free army builder to make sure it's a legal army. Download the completely free rules.

The game has no startup costs outside of a few figs, and maybe a template set from MAS if you don't want to use printed out templates.

Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

 Pacific wrote:
Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I do enjoy that like WM/H, 40k and other of the larger games, the various factions of Infinity have their own aesthetic within the overall aesthetic of the game... My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

What? Is it really that hard to go to the local game store or an online store and pick up 4-5 d20s?

Also, to the general discussion, as someone who doesn't play any of PP's or GW's games, I feel a little left out at times...

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I do enjoy that like WM/H, 40k and other of the larger games, the various factions of Infinity have their own aesthetic within the overall aesthetic of the game... My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

Fine, add 4-5 D20's to the startup cost. It's still dirt cheap.

Don't confuse it with other tabletop games - you won't be rolling buckets of D20's.

Ohh, don't get me wrong, I have I think 4 different d20s... however, 3 of them are parts of "sets" and therefore are "unusable" in Infinity, because like most gamers, my dice will hate me for using them "wrong" (doesn't really stop me, really)

It's just that I have had at least one fellow gamer from my unit blatantly not want to even TRY Infinity because it doesn't use a d6, like he's used to.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I do enjoy that like WM/H, 40k and other of the larger games, the various factions of Infinity have their own aesthetic within the overall aesthetic of the game... My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

If the number of sides of the dice used scares you, but putting together models, painting, memorizing rules and tables and large numbers of dice used doesn't... well then I have nothing else to say.

 Surtur wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I do enjoy that like WM/H, 40k and other of the larger games, the various factions of Infinity have their own aesthetic within the overall aesthetic of the game... My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

If the number of sides of the dice used scares you, but putting together models, painting, memorizing rules and tables and large numbers of dice used doesn't... well then I have nothing else to say.

It doesn't bother me personally, it bothers me in that it specifically has "scared" away gamer friends of mine from trying the game, I have the book, and some models, dice and everything to play, except an opponent.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Surtur wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I do enjoy that like WM/H, 40k and other of the larger games, the various factions of Infinity have their own aesthetic within the overall aesthetic of the game... My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

If the number of sides of the dice used scares you, but putting together models, painting, memorizing rules and tables and large numbers of dice used doesn't... well then I have nothing else to say.

It doesn't bother me personally, it bothers me in that it specifically has "scared" away gamer friends of mine from trying the game, I have the book, and some models, dice and everything to play, except an opponent.

I didn't necessarily mean you in the specific, I meant more of in the general sense. It's quite silly to latch onto GW style d6 imo. The probabilities are broken up in 16% intervals, that's quite a steep difference that +1 to a roll will make. Auto success and failure on d6 is also quite stark and aberrant. It's why I like PP/Btech's 2d6 system in many ways because of it's parabolic scalar nature and Mongoose's d10 for nice intervals of 10% or Infinity/D&D for d20 creating even smaller margins or FFG's RPG system. I just find that d6 is too sensitive to modifiers. It's why hammerhand and rad grenades break melee combat, because they shift the odds so significantly compared to any other game with just adjustments with a value of 1. In a 2d6 system +1 can give you anywhere between 3% and 16% depending on where you are on the curve allowing a more in depth odds system. In a d10 or d20, +1 is more marginal allowing greater control on the impact of a modifier allowing for better balance.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

It doesn't bother me personally, it bothers me in that it specifically has "scared" away gamer friends of mine from trying the game, I have the book, and some models, dice and everything to play, except an opponent.

We now have to try and find out what the scientific term is for a fear of dice with more than 6 sides?

Seriously though, force your mate into a demo game, even with proxies - the inhibitions will disappear the moment a guy gets hit by a sniper rifle while running in-between 2 buildings!

 Pacific wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

It doesn't bother me personally, it bothers me in that it specifically has "scared" away gamer friends of mine from trying the game, I have the book, and some models, dice and everything to play, except an opponent.

We now have to try and find out what the scientific term is for a fear of dice with more than 6 sides?

Seriously though, force your mate into a demo game, even with proxies - the inhibitions will disappear the moment a guy gets hit by a sniper rifle while running in-between 2 buildings!

Polyhedraphobia?

 Balance wrote:
Clarke's Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

I'd personally consider 40k 'Space Opera' as there's a lot of greek-style tragedy and general boisterousness and rule of cool in the setting, but that may just be me.

IMHO, that quote is a poor one when applied to 40k, considering that anything warp based in 40k, is essentially magic. It is my personal feeling that 40k disqualifies itself from falling back onthe "high tech" crutch, since the writers stupidly try and explain how their technology works, throwing around rule-of-cool buzzwords like Gauss, Fusion and Plasma, while clearly having zero understanding of the actual meaning of the terms. i.e. plasma = superheated gas, and somehow based on the fluff, reactors based on superheated gas (likely conversion of fuel to highest energy state - but still retaining mass!) have better energy efficiency than matter/antimater reactions (i.e. mutual annihilation converting ALL mass to energy). It's like how we could make a super high tech steam engine now in the 2000's, but it's power output still limited by the fact that its underlying technology is limited.

-edit- DISCLAIMER: I LOVE THE 40K BACKGROUND... I HATE WHAT IT HAS EVOLVED INTO.

40k's mythos is tired, disjointed and rapidly decending into self-parody. Anything, even the best concepts, become lame if they fail to innovate and evolve. This happened with mighty brands like IBM and Blackberry. The 40k background is built on a solid foundation, but it has 5 MAJOR strikes against it:

1. It doesn't advance. It's always the same thing all the time.
2. The depth of fluff accompanying the game is much reduced. Once, there was more emphasis on background and theme lists. The world was dark with ambiguity. These days, the feel of the setting has been distiled down to "IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE, THERE IS ONLY WAR". For example: Old fluff would go in depth into the motivations of the Chaos Legions. These days, their motivations have been pared down to the oft quoted "KILL MAIM BURN".
3. 40k appears neither to have a "Style Bible" nor a "Continuity Bible", leading to sloppy retcons (i.e. Necrons), contradictory equipment descriptions (MULTILAZORS) and disjointed fluff in general. This is generally exacerbated by the Black Library publications - which vary greatly in quality, and sometimes outright contradict previously established storylines.
4. Over-reliance on rule of cool. Bigger explosions, huger weapon yields. Giant armies. The nuanced fluff of the old days has been replaced by a Michael Bayish bigger = epic mentality designed to cater to 12 year olds.
5. GW's protectionist stance on their IP stifles external innovation.

2. The depth of fluff accompanying the game is much reduced. Once, there was more emphasis on background and theme lists. The world was dark with ambiguity. These days, the feel of the setting has been distiled down to "IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE, THERE IS ONLY WAR". For example: Old fluff would go in depth into the motivations of the Chaos Legions. These days, their motivations have been pared down to the oft quoted "KILL MAIM BURN".

This right here is the extent of my friends' knowledge of 40k. A majority of them don't play, and my long time friends only say, "THERE IS ONLY WAR" when talking about 40k.

I don't like the cogs and steam look of the PP models. I'm not into the steam punk genre and the War Machine models radiate that vibe, unfortunately.

GW does make some derpy models, but I like the BOG standard Space Marine with a boltgun a lot. I also am a big fan of the Black Library books, most notably the Horus Heresy, Helsreach, and the Night Lords trilogy.

If you disagree, then your opinion is obviously different.

 Surtur wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Surtur wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Definitely second that!

Regarding the above conversation, Infinity is also one of the few games that I have seen played by people who don't have any of the correct miniatures, but the rule mechanics are so strong that some people are prepared to do that. It's not uncommon for people to proxy in IG, Space Marines or whatever just to play the game.

Even though the miniatures are insanely detailed, and beautiful sculpts (name another company matching them at the moment for consistent quality), they nevertheless follow a particular aesthetic template - and there will always be the situation where that isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I do enjoy that like WM/H, 40k and other of the larger games, the various factions of Infinity have their own aesthetic within the overall aesthetic of the game... My only downfall of the game, is that it uses d20, which may be a bit of a turn off for those gamers who have never done an RPG, and own nothing more than d6.

If the number of sides of the dice used scares you, but putting together models, painting, memorizing rules and tables and large numbers of dice used doesn't... well then I have nothing else to say.

It doesn't bother me personally, it bothers me in that it specifically has "scared" away gamer friends of mine from trying the game, I have the book, and some models, dice and everything to play, except an opponent.

I didn't necessarily mean you in the specific, I meant more of in the general sense. It's quite silly to latch onto GW style d6 imo. The probabilities are broken up in 16% intervals, that's quite a steep difference that +1 to a roll will make. Auto success and failure on d6 is also quite stark and aberrant. It's why I like PP/Btech's 2d6 system in many ways because of it's parabolic scalar nature and Mongoose's d10 for nice intervals of 10% or Infinity/D&D for d20 creating even smaller margins or FFG's RPG system. I just find that d6 is too sensitive to modifiers. It's why hammerhand and rad grenades break melee combat, because they shift the odds so significantly compared to any other game with just adjustments with a value of 1. In a 2d6 system +1 can give you anywhere between 3% and 16% depending on where you are on the curve allowing a more in depth odds system. In a d10 or d20, +1 is more marginal allowing greater control on the impact of a modifier allowing for better balance.

I knew there was something that's been bugging me about GK

 kronk wrote:
If you disagree, then your opinion is obviously different.

Deadnight wrote:

the fact that 40k has "sorcery", and essentially "magic" precludes it from having anything other than a veneer of sci-fi about it. Quite a lot of sci-fi is grounded in hard reality (hard sci-fi) buit for the most part, the entire genre-whilst imaginary, it is fundamentally plausable and rational to some lesser or greater degree. this hardly apply to 40k. bar a veneer, 40k is essentially a fantasy setting, with some sci fi/space opera dressings. which is fine! there is nothing wrong with fantasy. Regarding sci-fi, in my ind games like dropzone commander, and infinity epitomise sci-fi.

By that definition, Star Wars isn't Sci-fi either, even though it is considered one of the penultimate Scif-Fi movies ever. The force is essentially "magic" as well.

On an interesting note, a couple people have commented to me that Warmachine isn't steampunk, but industrial sci-fi. I agree slightly with that since I don't recall seeing one of signature traits of steam-punk like dirigibles and a Victorian style setting. People more familiar with the WMH setting can correct me if wrong and those elements are there. Thought that I had given we were disputing genres.