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.

Qui-Gon Jinn- Post exalted because it was brilliant.

Lol at the irony of people complaining and cursing GW for the Warp Storm Table because of "random" stuff in a game that uses dice.

I don't take the "Plastic Space Army Game" seriously enough to be bothered by the Warp Storm table all that much. I''ll use my daemons and if something good happens i'll cheer. Something bad, I'll swear. Something neutral, I will be content.

"Chaos Daemons are to chaotic!!!!!"

 Psienesis wrote:
So we should also remove MSS, Warp-Quake, Eternal Warrior, Force Weapons, ID, Longfangs, TH/SS, uh... lemme think... I know I can come up with a few other things that people have QQ'd about on the forums in the past year or so.... that one Doom of Malatai power that eats brains or something through force-fields.... oh, someone kvetched about their melee-Tyranids getting shot to pieces by an IG gunline, so we should remove IG gunline armies, too. In fact, just remove the BS stat from IG entirely. They're now old-school Infantry... all cloth and leather armor with swords and a wood shield. Actually, there's been enough kvetching about both GK and SW over the last year that allows us to say, you know what? let's just rub those two Chapters out entirely. *Poof!* Gone.

You possess an unnatural ability to completely miss the point.

Again, Chaos =/= Random.

All the things you've mentioned are choices made by players, and players have ways of interacting with them during a game (avoiding them, countering them, using them, etc.). The Warp Storm table has no such counter. It exists apart from the players as something that neither of them have any control over. That's bad game design, whether you think there should be more random or not...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
So we should also remove MSS, Warp-Quake, Eternal Warrior, Force Weapons, ID, Longfangs, TH/SS, uh... lemme think... I know I can come up with a few other things that people have QQ'd about on the forums in the past year or so.... that one Doom of Malatai power that eats brains or something through force-fields.... oh, someone kvetched about their melee-Tyranids getting shot to pieces by an IG gunline, so we should remove IG gunline armies, too. In fact, just remove the BS stat from IG entirely. They're now old-school Infantry... all cloth and leather armor with swords and a wood shield. Actually, there's been enough kvetching about both GK and SW over the last year that allows us to say, you know what? let's just rub those two Chapters out entirely. *Poof!* Gone.

You possess an unnatural ability to completely miss the point.

Again, Chaos =/= Random.

All the things you've mentioned are choices made by players, and players have ways of interacting with them during a game (avoiding them, countering them, using them, etc.). The Warp Storm table has no such counter. It exists apart from the players as something that neither of them have any control over. That's bad game design, whether you think there should be more random or not...

I dunno, chaos seemed pretty random back when it first dropped in Realms of Chaos.

The nameless wrote:
Lol at the irony of people complaining and cursing GW for the Warp Storm Table because of "random" stuff in a game that uses dice.

Lol at the people who lack the reading comprehension skills to understand that that's not what's being complained about.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I must defer to a recent article from Taco Bell (one that was surprisingly critical, given the usual “Rah! Rah! Everything is wonderful!” mantra of their ‘reviews’):

[The] Warp Storm table. The major thing to note here is that it happens at the start of each of your shooting phase, and some of the results are just unwanted and overdone. The ones that really stand out is the 11, which basically picks an enemy psyker and makes him test 3D6 for leadership. If he fails, he's killed outright and you get a free Herald of your choice. Now, I don't know about you guys, but I've never found anything that just does something to you, without any player control, for free, to be good game design. Things like Dante's mask and this just makes you start off the game angry, and frustrates the other player who has no protection against pure luck and zero skill. As you make your way through the table, you'll find that almost every roll has a consequence for a particular god, so if you have a heavily chromatic-god army, you'll be rolling a D6 every turn just in case you get hate on by a rival god. Sure, you need a 6 for something to happen, and it can very well effect your enemy more than you, but this is completely out of the player's control. Sometimes you you gain +1 to your invulnerable save army-wide, sometimes you -1 to your invulnerable. And sometimes, like the enemy psyker, you just blow up. You literally blow your up own Greater Demon before the game even starts.

Can't really disagree. I think things like the Warp Storm table are bad for 40K. All of this "cinematic gaming" and "forging a narrative" nonsense is starting to take the game away from the players, and leave it all to the random whims of some cubed objects. I'm sorry, I'd like to play the game, not watch my army get fethed over because of a bad roll on a single table each turn.

So what?
If I take a mono Tzeentch army, then I know I could be shooting myself in the foot should Nurgle decide to take a giant crap all over the battlefield. Guess what's super shocking about this? I made an outright personal choice and am well aware of the risk involved! (hard to believe, but it's true - your own army comp can screw you over!)

How is this any different than a Daemon player running into a GK army rocking Strikes & Intercepters under the old codex? Or an IG armoured company/mech list running up against MSU melta-spam? Or a Deathwing army facing off against ap2 spam?
Here's a thought; when you theme and army, you're already potentially handi-capping yourself. The God-specific rolls are no different in this regard. It's something every single Daemon player understands.

Same deal for the chart potentially screwing over psykers. Guess what? Daemons have potent anti-psyker abilities. So either don't hinge your entire battleplan around a single psyker, or else bring more of them to help off-set the chance of your key psyker getting nobbled by some angry warp entity.

You fear the roll of 12 on the final turn? Fine, let the Daemon player go first. Guess what? Even if they get that 'free' unit on the last turn, you still have a turn to try and deal with it.

Daemons might spend a turn with buffed invulns? Bring more anti-infantry guns to help put more wounds on them instead of relying on the same old melta or plasma spam all the fething time.

And IF a Daemon player explodes their entire army (or a good chunck of it) on turn 1 because they rolled snake eyes and then a bunch of boxcars. Well, I dare say their dice were completely fethed and you'd have spanked them no matter what they did. (we ALL have those games!)



What I'm ironically not hearing however are any Daemon players bemoaning the fact we can pooch our own army, or get one of our own psykers om-nom'ed, or be forced to take a bunch of Instability tests on turn 1...
Hell, my first game I rolled up -1 save, then had Nurgle crap on my Tzeentch units, followed by Slaanesh tap dancing all over my Bloodletters and the Warpstorm going ADD and doing nothing for a turn. Did I b**** about how 'unfair' this was? Nope, my opponent and I simply got a laugh out of the whole thing and figured it was Tzeentch's idea of a good joke!

All we're getting here is just a bunch of whiney mathhammerers crying about how the game is no longer completely predictable.
Go figure.

Experiment 626 wrote:
So what?

Experiment 626 wrote:
All we're getting here is just a bunch of whiney mathhammerers crying about how the game is no longer completely predictable.

These two comments alone tell me just how little you understand what this topic is about and how your only real rebuttal is a broad ad hominem to call anyone who disagrees with you a "whiney mathhammer", no better than those immediately calling anyone who doesn't like the table a WAAC'ing TFG.

Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Qui-Gon Jinn wrote:
This thread is long in the tooth as it is. And we are fighting about something that is truly so inconsequential as this.

I find it fascinating that you people who cry that this Warp Storm table is bad for 40k.

It has been stated that you agree to play Daemons? You agree to play with their rules. INTACT!
The same goes to GK, Necrons, DA, BA, Tyranids, Tau, SM, CSM, Eldar, DE, Orks, Sisters, IG, THE WORKS PEOPLE!!

Forget what the results are. Forget what the comparative lists are, abilities, etc. etc.
This has become a giant shouting match of ONE TINY F-ASPECT of a NEW AND UNTRIED CODEX!

The Warpstorm Table is good because it has done EXACTLY what it was intended to do, and that is this: force people out of their comfort zones, force people to THINK, force people to REACT, force people to PLAY THE GAME. If you wanted to just run your comfortable lists of mathhammered to the result of victory because of the rules, then you, sir or madam, can go and shove your head where the sun don't shine, because you are being asinine. You have the right to either play by the rules, with the rules, or you can sell your army and not play, or you can just be TFG for being a scumbag, and then don't be surprised when people refuse to play you because of it.

Games change, get over it. Things change, get over it. The warp storm table is good because it has changed the nature of the game from being "predictable" to being "fun."

Then again, if we want to just agree my Daemons have +1 to all ++ and an additional 2000 points to make up for the lack of my special rules and my shooting, and because I say so because you say you don't want to play with the table, sure, I'll do that.

Seriously, you people who are complaining, get a life. You make me sick because you want to be TFG with the WAAC because you want to be comfortable with your win streak and never lose. *stepping down off my *

*slow clap*

Well said sir!
If someone were to try and tell me they'd only play if I dropped my "randomly game-wrecking & unfun Warpstorm table", I'd tell 'em to p-off and instead I'd go find a real opponent to play against.

But you're fine with list tailoring. Guys got to lay off the crazy pills.

Experiment 626 wrote:

All we're getting here is just a bunch of whiney mathhammerers crying about how the game is no longer completely predictable.
Go figure.

Nope.

Let me explain something: I like the game. I like winning. I like losing. I like winning because it makes me feel like I've succeeded, and I like losing because it makes me think on what I did wrong and how I could improve my game.

Randomly rolling a die and having a model simply taken off of the board, whether mine or my opponents, is not fun. There is no way for me to improve my game unless I get loaded dice or disregard the table altogether, which are two things I would rather not do. I don't care if it is a small chance for it to happen; it WILL happen eventually. It is not just that it is unpredictable; I predicted that my Ravager with 3 Dark Lances would hit a Fortification sometime within the last 5 turns of the game, but I was proven wrong when my Deldar proved to have the BS of a monkey with down syndrome.

It is not a weapon that you fire, it is not a melee attack that slices a model up. It is a magic "did someone lose a model this turn" roll. It takes away control from the player. Getting a bad roll on the table and losing because of it does not offer the chance for me to improve my generalship.

What ARE those complaining the table really complaining about, and what are they proposing if anything? I'm honestly confused. Given the Chaos Boon Chart for CSM I don't see this as unprecedented, and I don't see that one anti-psyker fluke Warp Chart result as any different than a fluke lascannon shot taking out a land raider. How is that fun either? It isn't for the land raider.

I want to point out that the free missle launcher on a single Space Marine Tactical squad is more likely to take out a vidicator in a single shot. than for you to loose a single psyker to my warpstorm table.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Exalted.

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Exalted.

He has an excellent point. Exalted as well.

I like the idea of the chart not some of the higher and lower results on it though. Random buffs and debuffs to the chaos army its self would have been taking it far enough, kept it in fluff and added flavour. Even slight debuffs to the enemy army would have been acceptable but I think they have gone too far on the upper and tail ends of the charts. It's really way more game changing than it should have been.

Would I refuse to play against it? No way, its fun and I'd have a laugh about it but I do get that people who play more competitive matches might be irked by the more game changing chart results. I'd be willing to compromise for a game if someone wanted to change some of the more drastic results. I could see this been abandoned or modified by TO's.


Not as bad as turn 1 flying carpet + power scroll purple sun bombs were in fantasy :@.

HBMC wrote: Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Pretty much this.

Also, knock it off with the "Exalted" posts, folks. It's spam by essentially any measure, which is ALSO against Dakka rules. If you don't have anything substantive to add, you don't need to post, either.

 Janthkin wrote:

HBMC wrote: Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

Pretty much this.

Also, knock it off with the "Exalted" posts, folks. It's spam by essentially any measure, which is ALSO against Dakka rules. If you don't have anything substantive to add, you don't need to post, either.

I think people use it as as short hand for what you said. Although it is in red, so I can't tell if that is Janthkin the mod or Janthkin the poster posting.

The red is Janthkin the mod borrowing HBMC's words & putting my imprimatur behind them.

The second is Janthkin the mod giving some friendly advice before I have to make it more official.

 Janthkin wrote:
The red is Janthkin the mod borrowing HBMC's words & putting my imprimatur behind them.

The second is Janthkin the mod giving some friendly advice before I have to make it more official.

Thanks for the clarification. I will keep that in mind for the future.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

The nameless wrote:
Lol at the irony of people complaining and cursing GW for the Warp Storm Table because of "random" stuff in a game that uses dice.

Lol at the people who lack the reading comprehension skills to understand that that's not what's being complained about.

Really? You don't see it in any of the previous posts. I see 7 pages of "I hate the W.Storm table" vs. " I like the W.Storm table" which is based off
rolling a 2d6 and has effects that can help/hinder/cripple your or your opponents army. This game is based on dice rolls, playing Daemons means you face the most fickle gods of all- the Dice Gods, and the unholy 4 bow even to them. I find humour in that, like grots being sent in to tie up terminators and they beat the crap out of said terminator, dice are funny.

The "warpstorm table" is a gimmick/mechanic of Codex Daemons and a multi god list can suffer, I will give that to the op but we carry on.
5Th edition wound shenanigans-some people complained, people carried on.
Gray Knight warp quake, Necron Mss, Long Fangs,etc people complain, people carried on.
Transition from 5th/6th after we looked at our armies people complain, people carried on.
GW's price increases, we all face palm and rage and make sure we're not on the Australian site, but people carried on.
GW changes the game at their leisure and your only alternative is to love it or leave it or possibly house rule it.


Besides in a month or two this will all begin with a new codex, that's something we can all agree on.

The "warpstorm table" is a gimmick/mechanic of Codex Daemons and a multi god list can suffer, I will give that to the op but we carry on.

Don't people know you can use instruments from those that are based on those gods to avoid it?

If you have a DoK unit with an instrument, you re-roll khorne's wrath for example. You can even use it to reroll an enemies result to try and better hit with it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
All the things you've mentioned are choices made by players, and players have ways of interacting with them during a game (avoiding them, countering them, using them, etc.). The Warp Storm table has no such counter. It exists apart from the players as something that neither of them have any control over. That's bad game design, whether you think there should be more random or not...

I disagree. Randomness /= bad game design. Randomness, in the form of the Warp Storm table, is here to represent a particular fluff concept, of fighting Daemons in proximity to a warp rift. Some crazy stuff may happen. Lighting bolts will shoot out and hit people. Psykers may die. Daemons themselves may grow tougher or weaker. These are all reasonable and fluffy effects which players will need to adapt to and play around. Most of them can be adapted to and compensated for to a greater or lesser extent. Certainly as much or more than stuff like Warp Quake, Jaws of the World Wolf, or Runes of Witnessing, all of which have reliably and consistently screwed various armies over the last few years, and all of which folks have compensated for and adapted to deal with.

HBMC wrote: Come up with a cogent argument that doesn't just attack your opponent but rather attacks the points he is making, and show some understanding of what those against the table are saying (it's not about 'Lol complaining about a random table in a game about dice'), or leave the damned thread.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think it's neat, and gives the feel of fighting in a warp storm.

Remember that the odds of rolling an 11 and potentially killing a random enemy psyker are exactly the same as rolling a 3 and potentially killing a random character with Daemonic Instability. An opposing player who is not fielding any psyker is totally immune to this result. The army which has all psykers for its HQs is Grey Knights, who have plenty of other psykers in the list, so massively reduce the chances that the expensive HQ will be selected. They also, of course, have plenty of other benefits against Daemons. The army this hurts most is Eldar, as Phoenix Lords aren't all that great for most builds; most folks field a Farseer. But Eldar can also field warlocks to reduce the risk to the Farseer, and they're overdue for their codex anyway, and perhaps they'll get some other protection when it arrives.

The random hits ones have a low probability of hitting an important and vulnerable unit. The 12 result can be mitigated by surrounding objectives, making it harder or impossible for the Daemon player to Deep Strike a new unit into range to hold the objective, or at least increasing the chances that they'll mishap if they try.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I'm a competitive player.

This chart is less of an issue for competitive play than the current flyer disparity, or runes of warding, or the WD screamer and flamer rules.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

The "warpstorm table" is a gimmick/mechanic of Codex Daemons and a multi god list can suffer, I will give that to the op but we carry on.

Don't people know you can use instruments from those that are based on those gods to avoid it?

If you have a DoK unit with an instrument, you re-roll khorne's wrath for example. You can even use it to reroll an enemies result to try and better hit with it.

Sweetness! Didn't know that. Thanks

I like the warpstorm chart.

As far as gameplay, I can see why people don't like it, I suppose. It is true that it does random, crazy things and requires no input from the players.

On the other hand, I think it is a wonderful way to represent the reality-tearing, mind-blowing, psyker-eating systemwide disaster that is a warp storm, which always accompanies Daemonic armies.

For me, that fits the background quite well, and I do play 40k to win (I don't deliberately try to lose, or make bad tactical decisions, or anything) but I appreciate that the background should ultimately govern how the battle goes, and if the reality-tearing warp-storm feths something up, then that is the background that I love being made manifest on the tabletop. It does mean that every win or loss may not be based on my skill alone, but the same is true in real war.

The nameless wrote:
Really? You don't see it in any of the previous posts. I see 7 pages of "I hate the W.Storm table" vs. " I like the W.Storm table" which is based off
rolling a 2d6 and has effects that can help/hinder/cripple your or your opponents army.

There is, unfortunately, a lot of that too. But the core discussion is an interesting one, and it's not about if the effects are good or not, or what armies are affected. The heart of the issue is whether a table like this one, where significant game-altering events are triggered by a single die roll out of the control of either player, is "good" for a game like Warhammer 40k.

No choice by either player, aside from one of them playing the army. No meaningful ability to mitigate the effects available to the opponent, and only marginally for the Daemons player (Fateweaver, or else another random roll for the right Warlord trait). No ability for either player to stop the effect.

As mentioned before, it's a game design question. Trying to dismiss the entire discussion as whining for/against particular outcomes or effects is dismissing the possibility of a lot of interesting discussion that could be going on here, if we weren't bogged down in the details of if it's fluffy or in some subjective sense a good rule for daemons. The question is whether it is objectively a good rule for the game.

I disagree that there's no meaningful ability to mitigate the effects available to the opponent.

Not fielding psykers is an option to remove the danger of the 11 (just as it already was to remove the danger of Runes of Warding).

Fielding fewer, tougher units, and/or Reserving vulnerable/fragile units is a way to mitigate the danger of the random hits effects.

Surrounding objectives and cordoning them off is a way to prevent a 12-summoned scoring unit from taking or contesting one late game.

---------

Obviously it's too early to tell for sure but I don't think we can reasonably conclude yet that the rule is bad for the game. It changes the way games with and against daemons go, to make that a unique experience, in a different way than their previous unique (all DS, half on turn 1) way of playing. Both are/were interesting ways of portrating the fluff in tabletop effects. I enjoyed the other, and I'm looking forward to playing with this one too.

I think this issue is a microcosm of the WAAC vs FAAC debate. From a WAAC perspective it is terrible. The inherent randomness of 40k is bad to begin with and can potentially punish excellent tactical decisions while rewarding poor play. Granted, the distribution of rolls probably follows a bell curve so it's not as though the game is excessively random, but it's there. Adding another table that has a significant impact on the game only serves to take control out of the hand of the players.

Meanwhile from a FAAC (fun OR fluffy) it is great. Chaos is fickle. The table reflects that.


I think the heart of the problem is that people want 40k to be something its not and its not a well balanced and developed competitive game.

I think part of the problem is armchair analysts who aren't actually good at and don't really understand the game, but enjoy screaming hyperbole on the internet* and pretending that the sky is falling. Good competitive players rise to challenges, accept that 40k contains significant amounts of randomness, and consistently win anyway. When we’re wearing our big boy pants we also don’t cry too much at the occasional dice meltdown.

*: Also bloggers who may or may not understand the game, but who derive ad revenue from stirring up controvery and arguments, driving pageclicks, and who thus have a vested interest in employing hyperbole and freaking out periodically.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I disagree. Randomness /= bad game design. Randomness, in the form of the Warp Storm table, is here to represent a particular fluff concept, of fighting Daemons in proximity to a warp rift. Some crazy stuff may happen. Lighting bolts will shoot out and hit people. Psykers may die. Daemons themselves may grow tougher or weaker. These are all reasonable and fluffy effects which players will need to adapt to and play around. Most of them can be adapted to and compensated for to a greater or lesser extent. Certainly as much or more than stuff like Warp Quake, Jaws of the World Wolf, or Runes of Witnessing, all of which have reliably and consistently screwed various armies over the last few years, and all of which folks have compensated for and adapted to deal with.

I'll disagree with your disagreement, to a point, and it's mostly about results 2, 3, 11, and 12. In any game that approaches tactical play, I believe that the choices the players make should meaningfully influence the outcome. It doesn't have to be determinative - I like dice! - but the choices my opponent and I make should provide a bounding condition for what the dice can do. I think several of the entries on the chart violate that basic principle in an annoying fashion.

2 - due to nothing but playing Daemons, the Daemon player finds himself disadvantaged. This will come up about once every 5-6 games; possible outcomes are widely variable, but it's likely to cost you 1-2 wounds per unit (not evenly distributed, of course), with the potential outliers hitting smaller units/solo models harder. The only potential mitigation, aside from Fateweaver, is to build your army list around the idea that you will need to be prepared for this outcome - fewer, larger units maybe? Always keep a Herald in every unit, for that extra point of survivability? (About 1 in 36 games, assuming you always use the Daemons Warlord chart, you will likely avoid this scenario - that game where you happen to have the right trait and roll double 1's; that may be offset by the times you reroll a different result, and end up with double 1's.)

3 - due to nothing but playing Daemons, you've got a decent chance of getting a character whacked about 1 in 3 games. Fairly easy to mitigate - just buy the character upgrades for every unit, and you're less likely to lose something valuable. It's about on par with Perils for psykers.

11 - due to nothing but playing AGAINST daemons, your opponent has a 50-50 chance of losing a psyker, few of whom are cheap. No mitigation possible. You can't build an army to prevent it (short of bringing no psykers at all, or switching to Grey Knights), and the chances are slim enough that you shouldn't try. But 1 in every 3 games played against Daemons is likely to see this result.

12 - this is the odd one. Your opponent can play an essentially perfect game, and you can still find yourself in possession of a scoring unit at just the right minute to alter a game's outcome. Impossible to plan for; impossible to mitigate ahead of time (unless you're winning so handily that you can properly bubble-wrap every objective, in which case it's a meaningless outcome).


By contrast, Jaws is a bad mechanic because it has such a disproportionate effect on different armies, but if I'm playing against it, I can mitigate it, up to and including killing the models who can cast it. If my opponent gets it off anyway, it's because he made some choices that put him in a position to do so. Cleansing Flame is another example like that - WAY disproportionate against certain armies, but choices by myself & my opponent are involved for it to become significant.

Runes of Warding is a much closer example, but if I run into Runes on the table, at least I can choose not to cast psychic powers, or work to kill off the wearer. Since Runes is an "always on," you can have a plan and expect to deal with it. You can't really build your army around a 2.7%/turn possibility that only comes up against Daemon opponents (unless, of course, you've prearranged a game or have several lists to choose from).

I like random. I like the Warlord traits, I like the random psychic powers, I like the random gifts. But I want my random to have SOMETHING to do with what's going on, either in list building or on the tabletop, and not just random because it's cool.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I think part of the problem is armchair analysts who aren't actually good at and don't really understand the game, but enjoy screaming hyperbole on the internet and pretending that the sky is falling. Good competitive players rise to challenges, accept that 40k contains significant amounts of randomness, and consistently win anyway. When we’re wearing our big boy pants we also don’t cry too much at the occasional dice meltdown.

Reposting from the "WAAC" thread:

Good dice-based games involve randomness, but done in such a way that the randomness follows a nice bell curve (for example, shooting bolters with a full tactical squad) which allows you to intelligently make decisions based on risk vs. reward. The outcome of a given individual event is in doubt, but complete surprises are rare and in the long run everything converges on the average with the player who makes better decisions winning the game.

Bad dice-based games involve randomness with wild swings (which threaten to impact the game more than player decisions), lack of predictability (you can't make strategic plans beyond "roll the dice and hope they like you"), or things that should be player choices (picking warlord traits). The stronger these elements are the less player skill and decisions matter and the more the game becomes little more than an exercise in throwing dice and seeing what happens.

The warp storm table is the second kind of randomness and, like many of the "cinematic" random things in 6th, bad for the game.

I think there's some confusion here as what bad for the game actually means, too.

Because some people seem to think that, to quote Peregrine, "dice-based games [which] involve randomness with wild swings" are bad for the game.

I personally think that the Warp-Storm table is good for 40k, not because it is random but because it follows the background so well and deliciously.

It can be good and bad at the same time.

It is a well known fact that GW is a miniatures company first and gaming company second. Expecting good rules and a balanced, competitive environment is a mistake. You can choose to play it that way and that is your right as a paying customer, but complaining when GW introduces "cinematic" (more like Rule of Cool imo) elements into the story is a bit silly.