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.

Hey guys, I've been a 40k player for some time now, and I just recently returned to the hobby after a sizable hiatus. I've been a painting up a storm and loving the new rules for 5th and now 6th edition (before 5th I played around 2000-ish). And with my love of well painted miniatures I've found an attraction to WHFB. So I went ahead and bought the rulebook, and it is beautiful. I'm trying to decide what kind of army I want to collect. I was thinking undead, (not TK) but at the same time it would be nice to have something a bit different as I play the "undead" race in 40k, Necrons. So what advice would you have for someone getting into the fantasy game from 40k? Skavens perhaps? THey look cool anyway, though I'd have to buy more brown paints haha. Love to hear about people's favorite experiences with their armies and what not

Pick the army that you like the fluff of the best.

As for Skaven, they are a strong army in the game currently(although 8th is very balanced overall)

Just keep in mind you will be painting ALOT of models in a Skaven army. Fantesy has more models then 40k generally, and Skaven have alot for Fantesy(as do Vampire Counts)

So you will be spending alot of time painting a hundred or so 2.5 pt rats, and thats not close to what you could be painting if you took lots of slaves.

For VCs you actually need tons of zombies that are worth zero points, because you will be casting a spell that makes more zombies.

Yes, Templar is correct. There is a lot more balance between armies in Fantasy when compared to 40k. With only a few exceptions, any army is more than capable of beating any other army. So really, it comes down to picking the army whose playstyle and fluff most appeals to yo uand you will probably find success.

The only army that is truly bad is Wood Elves, and they can still do very well if played by a good player. But the curve for them is very steep.

If you want Skaven, go for it. Plus, you don't need to paint skaven with lots of browns
The clothes of mine are a dark blue for instance.

Hmm, I normally pick the army for the fluff perspective, but I dunno, despite being a Necron player, I honestly don't play "the Bad Guys" that much in any game. Full Paragon you might say. In 40k it doesn't quite matter because you could argue that pretty much everyone is the bad guy in some form or another, but I'm finding that the line between good and evil is much more defined in WHFB. I'm only ankle deep in the fluff so correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't have a problem with painting tons of models, I'm a practiced speed painter, but the fact that they are "Chaos" kinda gets me down. Before I knew any better I thought the Beastmen were cool, but I was expecting them to be akin to Woodelves, hyper-naturalists and turns out they're the opposite :(

Anyone with fun Anecdotes concerning their army? I'd love to hear about some memorable battles/skirmishes. And of the armies, are any of them near the line of Chaotic good or Chaotic neutral or something like that? Orks perhaps?

Ogres are neutral. Skaven are evil, but have saved the world. the rest is clear, and well, orcs are same as those in 40k. Evil


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Ive had very fun games with both my skaven and WoC. Skaven are to me more fun thanks to their randomness. Alk armies can be very fluffy. Check out the dakka fiction part of the forum. You're bound to fibd some whfb, next to mine

Good:

Empire, High Elves, Wood Elves, Brettonia, Dwarves, and Lizardmen

Neutral:

Ogres and Tomb Kings

Evil:

Vampire Counts, WoC, Chaos Dwarves, Skaven, Chaos Daemons, Beastmen, and Dark Elves.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Good:

Empire, High Elves, Wood Elves, Brettonia, Dwarves, and Lizardmen

Neutral:

Ogres and Tomb Kings

Evil:

Vampire Counts, WoC, Chaos Dwarves, Skaven, Chaos Daemons, Beastmen, and Dark Elves.

As listed in the rule book indeed.
But I find Tomb Kings evil.
'KILL EVERYWUN!'

As far as the character of the good armies in WHFB:

Empire - These are pretty lawful good, to use your terms. They support order, cities and the rightful rule of whatever Emperor has to be on the seat at the time (note, this is not the 40k Emperor, or anything like that). That said, politics is part of the Empire, and infighting and scheming has led to major disasters to that culture.

Bretonnia - These, too are lawful good, but they have a little more fraying along the edges society wise. Bretonnia represents the Arthurian style, with many resplendent knights who are well-armed, well-trained and in the very best, but alongside them are downtrodden and abused peasants. It is like that in the fluff too, Bretonnian peasants are very, very low and are treated that way by the nobility.

High Elves - They are cowardly pretenders to the true throne of Ulthuan (oops! Sorry, Dark Elf bias here! ). But in all seriousness, High Elves are probably the most "good" of the armies. They are lawful too, though in this case, the good outweighs their lawful nature.

Wood Elves - These guys are more of a neutral or neutral good. For the most part, their motivation is making sure that their forest homes are not disturbed. Sometimes this makes them hyper aggressive on the defense, but they do form alliances (namely with Bretonnia) and live alongside them in relative peace and harmony. They don't do trade or anything, but they tolerate one another.

Lizardmen - I'd mostly say these are a lawful neutral. They are ancient and were created for a specific purpose by the Old Ones. That purpose is to protect the world from Chaos and they do that job very well. But they do not buddy buddyw ith anyone, though they will unite for common purposes.

Dwarves - They are pretty solidly Dwarves as you expect.

Hmm, Dwarves is actually sounding more and more like my ideal Fantasy army. They have the engineering like aspect I like about the Skaven that I see. How are they plastic wise? Lots of models? Any Dwarf Players here? What's their playstyle like?

Unfortunatly, the only competitive Dwarf playstyle is gunline. Which people, mostly those that fight against dwarves, will tell you is Boring and Annoying.

It consists of as many warmachines and handgunners as possable, a couple melee units, and an Anvil of Doom to slow people down.

The game invariably ends up being, dwarves shoot and anvil the enemy, the enemy runs as fast as possable towards the dwarves(not very fast due to anvil), repeat untill the enemy is either dead or manages to make it into combat and kill the dwarves.

 curran12 wrote:
As far as the character of the good armies in WHFB:

Empire - These are pretty lawful good, to use your terms. They support order, cities and the rightful rule of whatever Emperor has to be on the seat at the time (note, this is not the 40k Emperor, or anything like that). That said, politics is part of the Empire, and infighting and scheming has led to major disasters to that culture.

Bretonnia - These, too are lawful good, but they have a little more fraying along the edges society wise. Bretonnia represents the Arthurian style, with many resplendent knights who are well-armed, well-trained and in the very best, but alongside them are downtrodden and abused peasants. It is like that in the fluff too, Bretonnian peasants are very, very low and are treated that way by the nobility.

High Elves - They are cowardly pretenders to the true throne of Ulthuan (oops! Sorry, Dark Elf bias here! ). But in all seriousness, High Elves are probably the most "good" of the armies. They are lawful too, though in this case, the good outweighs their lawful nature.

Wood Elves - These guys are more of a neutral or neutral good. For the most part, their motivation is making sure that their forest homes are not disturbed. Sometimes this makes them hyper aggressive on the defense, but they do form alliances (namely with Bretonnia) and live alongside them in relative peace and harmony. They don't do trade or anything, but they tolerate one another.

Lizardmen - I'd mostly say these are a lawful neutral. They are ancient and were created for a specific purpose by the Old Ones. That purpose is to protect the world from Chaos and they do that job very well. But they do not buddy buddyw ith anyone, though they will unite for common purposes.

Dwarves - They are pretty solidly Dwarves as you expect.

I disagree about the Wood Elves. In the WEs you have a race of feral spiteful folk who would happily butcher an orphanage if it saved a glade from being desecrated. They also dont get along with each other at all and routinely go on murderous rampages in the lands of Bretonnia (wild hunt? cant remember what its called but its in the army book)

And as a HE player had any success invading Ulthuan of late? Now best you head back north to your cold bleak lands while I enjoy another glass of fine elven wine or I shall have to call upon my homie Teclis to teach you all some respect =)

I'm hearing some great discussion here. Just out of Curiosity how which army would I want if I wanted to field the smallest amount of units for the most amount of points? I'm weighing my options as far as how much I want to spend and its definitely something I'd like to know.

 Jubear wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
As far as the character of the good armies in WHFB:

Empire - These are pretty lawful good, to use your terms. They support order, cities and the rightful rule of whatever Emperor has to be on the seat at the time (note, this is not the 40k Emperor, or anything like that). That said, politics is part of the Empire, and infighting and scheming has led to major disasters to that culture.

Bretonnia - These, too are lawful good, but they have a little more fraying along the edges society wise. Bretonnia represents the Arthurian style, with many resplendent knights who are well-armed, well-trained and in the very best, but alongside them are downtrodden and abused peasants. It is like that in the fluff too, Bretonnian peasants are very, very low and are treated that way by the nobility.

High Elves - They are cowardly pretenders to the true throne of Ulthuan (oops! Sorry, Dark Elf bias here! ). But in all seriousness, High Elves are probably the most "good" of the armies. They are lawful too, though in this case, the good outweighs their lawful nature.

Wood Elves - These guys are more of a neutral or neutral good. For the most part, their motivation is making sure that their forest homes are not disturbed. Sometimes this makes them hyper aggressive on the defense, but they do form alliances (namely with Bretonnia) and live alongside them in relative peace and harmony. They don't do trade or anything, but they tolerate one another.

Lizardmen - I'd mostly say these are a lawful neutral. They are ancient and were created for a specific purpose by the Old Ones. That purpose is to protect the world from Chaos and they do that job very well. But they do not buddy buddyw ith anyone, though they will unite for common purposes.

Dwarves - They are pretty solidly Dwarves as you expect.

I disagree about the Wood Elves. In the WEs you have a race of feral spiteful folk who would happily butcher an orphanage if it saved a glade from being desecrated. They also dont get along with each other at all and routinely go on murderous rampages in the lands of Bretonnia (wild hunt? cant remember what its called but its in the army book)

And as a HE player had any success invading Ulthuan of late? Now best you head back north to your cold bleak lands while I enjoy another glass of fine elven wine or I shall have to call upon my homie Teclis to teach you all some respect =)

Wood Elves = homocidal hippies

High Elves = squishy

Both = Tasty, High Elf for the main course. Chopped Wood Elf makes the salad.

Sorry, I'm an Ogre

Jubear wrote:

And as a HE player had any success invading Ulthuan of late? Now best you head back north to your cold bleak lands while I enjoy another glass of fine elven wine or I shall have to call upon my homie Teclis to teach you all some respect =)

So out of curiosty, how's that whole "keep the Phoenix King from dying" thing going for ya? I mean you're on what #8 now? You know you CAN try to stop the assassins from time to time.

I love fluff banter.

 curran12 wrote:

Jubear wrote:

And as a HE player had any success invading Ulthuan of late? Now best you head back north to your cold bleak lands while I enjoy another glass of fine elven wine or I shall have to call upon my homie Teclis to teach you all some respect =)

So out of curiosty, how's that whole "keep the Phoenix King from dying" thing going for ya? I mean you're on what #8 now? You know you CAN try to stop the assassins from time to time.

I love fluff banter.

Hey one even got to die in his sleep once =)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NakedSeamus wrote:
I'm hearing some great discussion here. Just out of Curiosity how which army would I want if I wanted to field the smallest amount of units for the most amount of points? I'm weighing my options as far as how much I want to spend and its definitely something I'd like to know.

Chaos using a chaos warrior heavy build.

Hmm, are chaos warriors a more close combat oriented army? Sorry for obvious questions.

Yes, the only shooting they have is the Hellcannon, and throwing spears/axes on marauder horsemen(very short range)

Plus whatever magic ranged attacks you end up with. which really isn't all that reliable or impressive.

Ogres are definitely cheaper money wise; they have a similar model count feel to say Deathwing in 40k. Basic units have 3 wounds and 3 attacks, with impact hits and stomps. Their disadvantages are small model count (of course), low initiative, and not great leadership.

I was wondering if the ogre battalion was worth it, didn't seem like I got very much in it for >$100.

Grey Templar wrote:Unfortunatly, the only competitive Dwarf playstyle is gunline. Which people, mostly those that fight against dwarves, will tell you is Boring and Annoying.

Heck, the reason I no longer play dwarves is because gunline is that boring.

NakedSeamus wrote:I was wondering if the ogre battalion was worth it, didn't seem like I got very much in it for >$100.

Its Great. You can build it to have close to 1000 points, in a game where most games run at 2000-2500 points. Buy two, grab/convert a couple characters, and a few specialized unit, and you will probably have reached 3000 points.

2 Ogre Battalions, a firebelly or butcher/slaughtermaster, 2 Ironblasters, 2 boxes of Mournfangs, and a pack of Sabretusks will get you a 2500 point army right there. You just use 2 of the leadbeltcher bodies to make a BSB and a butcher/slaughtermaster.

Ogres are the cheapest army to build to competitive levels. Mainly because characters can be converted off of regular ogre bodies with such ease.

 NakedSeamus wrote:
I was wondering if the ogre battalion was worth it, didn't seem like I got very much in it for >$100.

Nah, the Ogre Battalion is one of the better ones out there. As Grey Templar says, you really don't need that many models to get a decent sized , fairly competitive army if you're willing to kitbash a bit. Ogres certainly are a very quick and easy army to collect.

But I would personally collect the army you like the look of. Yeah, fluff's cool, but if you are appauled by the models, chances are you won't like using them in the flesh, despite how cool their background is. However, if an army is cool looking, but has bad fluff, well, you can ignore that bit. Just my opinion

if fielded as what units are on the box with max unit upgrades, the Ogre battalion contains 732 points. Which is less then other battalions.

But, the untold story is that you can easily make characters out of the models, and you actually have more bits to make different core.

There are enough IG weapon and armor sprues to actually make 8, not the 6 advertised. and all the bodies can be made into Ogre Bulls.


So unlike other battalions, there are no useless models in the box AND you have extreme versitility between them. This is because IGs, Bulls, and Leadbeltchers are all based on the same body. A box of leadbeltchers is the parts to make 4 bulls, plus a leadbeltcher sprue to make 4 leadbeltchers. The same with IGs.


Our boxes in general are a good value. a box of bulls will get you a 222 point unit(with command) but you can also use the bodies along with any bits you have left over from other boxes to convert characters etc. And its easy weapon swaps and glueing. No major conversion work.

A box of chaos warriors gets you around the same point value, but the models can't be used for anything else really without some major conversion.


When the army book for ogres was released, we were all dreading that GW might update our basic core boxes. Thankfully they didn't. Only the battalion was changed, and it mearly swapped the gnoblars for 2 more IGs.

Skaven are a great army!!! I played them for quite awhile before taking a break from WHFB they can get expensive, but IOB sets are great kits! I was able to convert a lot of stuff from them.

DarkWind wrote:Skaven are a great army!!! I played them for quite awhile before taking a break from WHFB they can get expensive, but IOB sets are great kits! I was able to convert a lot of stuff from them.

I think that i'm torn between the empire and skaven. I'm leaning more towards skaven because while it may be a bitmore expensive if i were to buy them retail, more and more people are willing to sell theirs secondhand for less. So if anyone out there is listening and has a skaven army for sale cheap (preferred unpainted and assembled or new on sprue) then post here or pm me!