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.

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I'm leery of any viewpoint that refuses to even acknowledge the possbility that another view could be valid

I quite agree. I prefer an argument that demonstrates a viewpoint's lack of actual rather than potential validity. Hence I conclude that the purported distinction between 40k and this other game people think FW publishes is meaningless rather than arguing from that conclusion.

I'm glad you enoy a certainty about a decision GW has made that I would rarely enjoy about anything. I really am. It's been my experience that they couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel, and so I assume that they do everything in a sort of fog.

 Polonius wrote:
I'm glad you enoy a certainty about a decision GW has made that I would rarely enjoy about anything. I really am. It's been my experience that they couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel, and so I assume that they do everything in a sort of fog.

So what you're saying is that the last remaining anti-FW argument is "you can never be absolutely 100% sure about anything"?

 Purifier wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Of course. Polo's quote didn't take any sides and I wholeheartedly agree with him. I took yours because I thought it was the sharpest core of what Polo was talking about. It was short, concise and the aim of it seemed not to prove a point but to simply say "you're wrong, prrrrrrt!"

Only the non-contextual part of the post you used though. In full context I'm arguing that his stated interpretation of the rules are incorrect and why I belive so, out of context I'm just being an ass.

True, but in context you still were. You weren't just being an ass in context, but you still sorta were.

Perhaps, but taking me out of context like that just paints an unfair pictures of a child with their fingers in their ears screaming that they're right and the other person is wrong when the tone of the original post was different.

I also used "" because I was trying to be light-hearted with that statement and not brow beat anyone. But that doesn't always come across well online.

 Purifier wrote:
However, I didn't even understand that Forgeworld was anything but awesome replacement models until I was a few hundred euros into this hobby. I don't think I'm alone in this. So we've invested into something thinking we saw the whole picture, and we liked that picture. Then comes these 12 books, and you're like "maaaan, I already worked my way through that heavy ass rulebook!"

It's a lot to take in, and the fact that you thought it was the best 1½ weeks of your life getting into this stuff doesn't mean everyone else will agree.

Which is potentially a reason to have a no-FW house rule. It doesn't, however, mean that the house rule is the way the game as published by GW works. It's no different than refusing to play against flyers because you've spent lots of money on your 5th edition army and don't want to have to spend even more money on buying your own flyers and AA units to compete.

Also: Sponsoring our FLGS is a large part of this hobby for a lot of us. They lend us store space for games and we show loyalty back.

Your personal decision to pay more for a product to thank your FLGS doesn't make it difficult to buy FW stuff.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I'm glad you enoy a certainty about a decision GW has made that I would rarely enjoy about anything. I really am. It's been my experience that they couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel, and so I assume that they do everything in a sort of fog.

So what you're saying is that the last remaining anti-FW argument is "you can never be absolutely 100% sure about anything"?

Nope, not even close.

I'm saying that arguments that excude absolute certainty annoy me. Only zealots are 100% certain of anything, and I don't argue with zealots.

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying you claim to be right in a way that makes me ignore you.

And as a person who is persuasive for a living, it bugs me watching somebody take the achingly easy claim of "FW is meant for all 40k play" and botch it.

 Polonius wrote:

Nope, not even close.

I'm saying that arguments that excude absolute certainty annoy me. Only zealots are 100% certain of anything, and I don't argue with zealots.

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying you claim to be right in a way that makes me ignore you.

And as a person who is persuasive for a living, it bugs me watching somebody take the achingly easy claim of "FW is meant for all 40k play" and botch it.

I'm 100% certain that electricity works by the movement of a charge between atomic particles, does that make me a zealot?

Seriously though, ignoring people because you don't like their tone doesn't make you gain any sort of high ground but instead means you willfully and intentionally ignore arguments you don't agree. That doesn't make you better, it makes you close-minded which is just as bad as being a zealot.

 Polonius wrote:
I'm glad you enoy a certainty about a decision GW has made that I would rarely enjoy about anything. I really am. It's been my experience that they couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel, and so I assume that they do everything in a sort of fog.

I think you have us mixed up. You're the one saying they have carefully maintained a distinction between what's published under the GW and FW imprints for the sake of sound business strategies. Meanwhile I'm saying they never really intended such a thing and have been fumblingly clarifying as much for a long while now.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Nope, not even close.

I'm saying that arguments that excude absolute certainty annoy me. Only zealots are 100% certain of anything, and I don't argue with zealots.

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying you claim to be right in a way that makes me ignore you.

And as a person who is persuasive for a living, it bugs me watching somebody take the achingly easy claim of "FW is meant for all 40k play" and botch it.

I'm 100% certain that electricity works by the movement of a charge between atomic particles, does that make me a zealot?

Seriously though, ignoring people because you don't like their tone doesn't make you gain any sort of high ground but instead means you willfully and intentionally ignore arguments you don't agree. That doesn't make you better, it makes you close-minded which is just as bad as being a zealot.

I don't ignore their argument, I ignore them. As people. Rarely is only one person making an argument for any given point.

And it's not just tone... it's attitude. A person that is 100% certain isn't looking for a discussion, they are looking for converts. that's fine, and go forth, but I'm not gonna engage on it.

The real question whether tournaments can still ban FW. As long as tourneys can legally ban FW, I won't consider playing with it.

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I'm glad you enoy a certainty about a decision GW has made that I would rarely enjoy about anything. I really am. It's been my experience that they couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel, and so I assume that they do everything in a sort of fog.

I think you have us mixed up. You're the one saying they have carefully maintained a distinction between what's published under the GW and FW imprints for the sake of sound business strategies. Meanwhile I'm saying they never really intended such a thing and have been fumblingly clarifying as much for a long while now.

I think that I'm not sure how seperate they want them to be. I think they've maintained distinctions in some ways, and blurred them in others. I think the decision to have FW books print "for official 40k use only" could have involved a formal meeting with pros and cons, or the FW team may have asked Jervis in the hall if it was cool.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
The real question whether tournaments can still ban FW. As long as tourneys can legally ban FW, I won't consider playing with it.

Tournaments could ban anything they want. I wouldn't hold your breath on that.

Martel732 wrote:
The real question whether tournaments can still ban FW. As long as tourneys can legally ban FW, I won't consider playing with it.

Tournaments can do whatever they want. There's no law against banning rules.

 Purifier wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
I'm getting this general gist - 'you can't use forge world because it's too expensive and there are too many sources to keep on top of them all for it to be considered fair.'
Ok may I remind you how rediculously expensive GW models are anyway? And there are THIRTEEN (i think I got that right), core codices, not to mention other supplements. So if you are a dedicated gamer you will have come across characters and units which you are not totally used to. Also you will have already invested a substantial amount into the hobby. So I don't really see these arguments being valid.
Furthermore, just a friendly piece of advice to those saying that if you cannot buy it at your local gw store it is not accessible... stop buying from your local gw store - its 30% cheaper elsewhere! Imagine you're army 30% larger. Bet you could get plenty of fw models with what you save ;-).

"It's already taking up almost all of your time and money, might aswell take the rest of both too"

That's one way to look at it.

However, I didn't even understand that Forgeworld was anything but awesome replacement models until I was a few hundred euros into this hobby. I don't think I'm alone in this. So we've invested into something thinking we saw the whole picture, and we liked that picture. Then comes these 12 books, and you're like "maaaan, I already worked my way through that heavy ass rulebook!"

It's a lot to take in, and the fact that you thought it was the best 1½ weeks of your life getting into this stuff doesn't mean everyone else will agree.

I think the arguments are perfectly valid and disagree completely with what you are saying.

Also: Sponsoring our FLGS is a large part of this hobby for a lot of us. They lend us store space for games and we show loyalty back.

If it took you only one and a half weeks to get your head around the rules I am amazed. I've been playing since 1999 and I still screw up loads (admittedly I had a 7 year break)! Plus with books, supplements and magazines coming out all the time, it is constantly evolving!
It's brilliant in that respect as it always keeps you on your toes. Admittedly it makes it uncomfortable for those who don't like change. But everybody has a different preference I suppose.
I do not own a single FW model, however, I am considering investing in some, and if an opponent won't let me use what I've bought with my hard earned cash, then I will personally consider them a total b*ll end! But thats just an opinion based on subjective emmotions. I know next to nothing about DE or Deamons but I'd love to find out about them by playing them, not be quaking in my boots because they have unknown aspects for me (not saying you would so don't take that personally). Yes I know they are without argument legitimized by gw, but the end result would still be the same - a player facing an unknown aspect, and I like it - very realistic in a battles sense.
I admire your loyalty to your FLGS.

 Polonius wrote:
I think the decision to have FW books print "for official 40k use only" could have involved a formal meeting with pros and cons, or the FW team may have asked Jervis in the hall if it was cool.

Sure, but if "ask Jervis in the hall" is GW's policy for determining whether new releases are official or not then that's just how it is. You can't argue for "ambiguity" in the situation because GW's decision-making process isn't the one you want them to use.

Martel732 wrote:
The real question whether tournaments can still ban FW. As long as tourneys can legally ban FW, I won't consider playing with it.

Tournaments can legally ban anything they want. What do you think GW is going to do, sue a TO for not running their tournament the way GW wants? The ability of third-party TOs to change the rules for their events is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

(And of course by that standard you can't play 40k at all since every codex army can be banned by tournaments.)

 Polonius wrote:
I think they've maintained distinctions in some ways, and blurred them in others.

As far as I know, the HH books are a great example of this in contrast to the recent IA books/new editions.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
However, I didn't even understand that Forgeworld was anything but awesome replacement models until I was a few hundred euros into this hobby. I don't think I'm alone in this. So we've invested into something thinking we saw the whole picture, and we liked that picture. Then comes these 12 books, and you're like "maaaan, I already worked my way through that heavy ass rulebook!"

It's a lot to take in, and the fact that you thought it was the best 1½ weeks of your life getting into this stuff doesn't mean everyone else will agree.

Which is potentially a reason to have a no-FW house rule. It doesn't, however, mean that the house rule is the way the game as published by GW works. It's no different than refusing to play against flyers because you've spent lots of money on your 5th edition army and don't want to have to spend even more money on buying your own flyers and AA units to compete.

Also: Sponsoring our FLGS is a large part of this hobby for a lot of us. They lend us store space for games and we show loyalty back.

Your personal decision to pay more for a product to thank your FLGS doesn't make it difficult to buy FW stuff.

1) It's a good thing I never said it was!
2) Well, then I guess it's lucky I have never claimed it was!

I've stated in this thread, quite specifically my opinion on FW, and those two things are just something you seem to have labeled me with which I have never said nor even entertained the thought of.
You see things in black and white, Peregrine. Try not to.

He said those were bad reasons to not want to play against FW. I say they're not bad reasons, but rather quite good reasons.

Honestly, my opinion is that the page 108 rule isn't as obviously in their favour as the yay-sayers want it to be. It clearly allows for additions to the game, but FW still falls into this weird self-inflicted (and, I think, intentional) grey zone.

The real question seems to be "when I say Let's Play 40K, what is included in that statement per default and what isn't."
And that's gonna be different from group to group in hundreds of ways, so how is this one different in any way?

When I say that to my friends, it's understood, for example, that it's gonna be at my friend Filip's house. It's not in the rulebook, but that's where our table is. If I want to play at the FLGS, I'm gonna have to say that, as they will otherwise assume at Filip's house.

Martel732 wrote:
The real question whether tournaments can still ban FW. As long as tourneys can legally ban FW, I won't consider playing with it.

Tournaments can also flyers, that doesn't stop me from buying them.

Tournaments can declare that you can take no more of 1 of any unit that is not a Troops choice. It doesn't make it represntitive of the game as a whole in terms of what is or is not "legal" to play.

I like how no one has argued contrary to the point that codex supplements and FW use the same permissions to be playable in normal games.

And if it where really the case that GW realized they didn't give you permission to play with codex supplements in the rules we'd see an erratta to make it possible. The lack of such a thing is rather telling I believe as it shows that they didn't feel the need to say "you can use this now", but instead knew we understood that already. So why are we arguing different about the IA materials?

In my crew FW rules have always been accepted as part of the game.

*shrug* We like cool gak, what can i say ?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Tthe main rule book actually mentions that you can play with things other than an army list from a codex (to include a modified army list).

For anyone who doubts me, just flip back to page 108 in the main rulebook and look under the section that says "The Army List":

The Rules wrote:With the points limit agreed, players need to pick their forces. The best way to do this is to make use of the army list in the relevant codex, although, of course, players are free to either adapt the army lists or use their own system as they wish...

Does that mean you will let people use whatever fandex's, rewrites, or whatever that they chose to do because the rule you quoted most definitely allows that.
As a note, I don't care if people use forgeworld or not, but you cannot say people must allow it just because a forgeworld publication says it is allowed.

I mean, the way I see these arguments being presented seems to be
1) You MUST let me use forgeworld
2) Nope, I don't have to play against anything I (or the TO in the case of a tournament) don't feel like.

Banbaji wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Tthe main rule book actually mentions that you can play with things other than an army list from a codex (to include a modified army list).

For anyone who doubts me, just flip back to page 108 in the main rulebook and look under the section that says "The Army List":

The Rules wrote:With the points limit agreed, players need to pick their forces. The best way to do this is to make use of the army list in the relevant codex, although, of course, players are free to either adapt the army lists or use their own system as they wish...

Does that mean you will let people use whatever fandex's, rewrites, or whatever that they chose to do because the rule you quoted most definitely allows that.
As a note, I don't care if people use forgeworld or not, but you cannot say people must allow it just because a forgeworld publication says it is allowed.

I'm not against playing fandexes. If you see my signature I've got an article on why homebrew is legal.

I look at FW and codex supplements falling in the "...players are free to... adapt the army lists..." portion of that rule as they both change the way the army lists work through new rules and models.

Banbaji wrote:
I mean, the way I see these arguments being presented seems to be
1) You MUST let me use forgeworld
2) Nope, I don't have to play against anything I (or the TO in the case of a tournament) don't feel like.

My argument is that FW is legal. I won't force anyone to play anyone to play anything, but we have rules that support allowing FW so claiming it to be "illegal" is pointless (at least in my mind). That said, tournaments can do what they want, and most of them do and that's fine. House rules are just as valid as everything else in the game.

 Peregrine wrote:
FW rules are part of the game, and your house rule against them is no less of a house rule than your house rule about having no more than one flyer per army.

You are wrong. I will offer nothing of substance to back up my assertion. You're also a hater and/or a WAAC tournament player, I guess (?).




That about cover it?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

My argument is that FW is legal. I won't force anyone to play anyone to play anything, but we have rules that support allowing FW so claiming it to be "illegal" is pointless. That said, tournaments can do what they want, and most of them do and that's fine. House rules are just as valid as everything else in the game.

I can agree with this. Though, you almost make this sound like a game designed to allow people to make modifications they feel are appropriate to maximize the fun they have.

Banbaji wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

My argument is that FW is legal. I won't force anyone to play anyone to play anything, but we have rules that support allowing FW so claiming it to be "illegal" is pointless. That said, tournaments can do what they want, and most of them do and that's fine. House rules are just as valid as everything else in the game.

I can agree with this. Though, you almost make this sound like a game designed to allow people to make modifications they feel are appropriate to maximize the fun they have.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what they tried to do with this game actually.

Page 8, "Spirit of the Game" (bold parts are mine for emphasis):

The Rules wrote:Warhammer 40,000 may be somewhat different from any other game you have played. Above all, it's important to remember that the rules are just a framework to support an enjoyable game. Whether the battle ends in victory or defeat, your goal should always to be to enjoy the journey. What's more, Warhammer 40,000 calls on a lot from you, the player. Your job isn't just to follow the rules, it's also to add your own ideas, drama and creativity to the game. Much of the appeal of this game lies in the freedom and open-endedness that this allows; it is in this spirit that the rules have been written.[/b]

 Polonius wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

They sell supplements through the ipad store, which is a different source with a totally different business model. Yet somehow we don't see complaints about how Farsight Tau aren't "official" and you need special permission to use them.

Well, they are distributed through a different channel, but they are promoted on the main GW webpage:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22200010a

I couldn't find a link to FW on the webpage at all.

I guess I see a concious attempt by GW (as a whole) to keep FW distinct, which is why IMO a zealous approach to GW legality is ill advised.

Well, GW owns FW, they don't need to sue, so that's a bit of a silly point. I think GW execs are worried about the value of the brand, not the nature of the rules.

They wouldn't sue, but they would tell FW to stop doing it. And yes, it potentially hurts the value of the brand if you have people randomly adding statements about what is and isn't official.

Maybe, but I really doubt it. Nobody cares what if their rules are theoretically official, they care if they can actually use them.

The link to Forgeworld is at the very bottom of the page.

As a lowly and poor newbie who averages a model every three months (buying. I paint like crazy, even though my paint job is nothing to sneeze at) was Forge World really a problem or is this an arena for the Devout and Tournament Ridden?

I can't say I've played a game that was completely "official" in scope, particularly because I've yet to meet an opponent who has been 100% in the know about the rules going on. So, by default, we're playing some kind of house rules.

That said, in my house, I play almost no rules and more of a framework. For example, I proxy like mad because I'm poor. I also have invented my own hazards for my (badly made) home table (it's made out of bird feeders. Pretty funny). Which brings me to above's post, in bold:

Above all, it's important to remember that the rules are just a framework to support an enjoyable game.

And think about it for a moment....this is a WAR game. What rules exist in WAR?

I think if there are pro's out there getting bent out of shape, they should start a circuit tour to compete in, where each shop has it's own boards, it's own "House Rules" etc. etc. and if at the end of the season you've got the best record, consider yourself Season Leader because you were not only flexible to all the shenanigans of individual players and their rules, not just what the game could "legally" roll out.

And to me, that's a champ right there.

"What? Garden of Nurgle has a jungle full of Razorwing Nests and Brainleaf Fronds? BRING IT ON!!!"

Seriously though, where's the fun in these last 5 pages? lol

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
And the same blog that promoted the ipad supplements also promotes FW releases.

Not to mention the monthly catalog, WD.

And at Games Day, and it's sold at Warhammer World and they do their events there too...

It's almost as if they're supported by the rest of GW.

As far as I'm concerned I agree with you and that Forge World is part of the game.

Firstly, Forge World units are put into the codex. i.e. IA3 Taros book puts the Tau units into Codex: Tau Empire and even gives them and FOC slot.

Secondly, GW stores allow the use of FW models. Sometimes I take my FW models to GW and even use the rules for them. None of the staff bat an eyelid and they all say that this is allowed and is offical GW policy. Notice that any other models from any other company are strictly banned from store and cannot be used. So in essence FW models and rules meet the requirements for fielding GW models in a GW store.

As far as I'm concerned, this is end of argument and FW is official.

Didn't want to post this before confirming by looking at my books last evening but all the FW (IA and HH) books I have are marked with the GW logo on the base of the spine. All the IA books are also marked with the 40k logo.

 Peregrine wrote:

Tournaments can legally ban anything they want. What do you think GW is going to do, sue a TO for not running their tournament the way GW wants? The ability of third-party TOs to change the rules for their events is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

(And of course by that standard you can't play 40k at all since every codex army can be banned by tournaments.)

Exactly, its just considered a house rule which is fine and dandy and is allowed under the 40k rulebook. The only distinction is that in order to play in that tournament you need to abide by their house rules.

Yeah. Just gotta try to find a tournament that doesn't have craptastic house rules.



... good luck with that. Haven't found any local tournies that didn't have SOME houserule or other I hated.

...so what's the issue here?

"In a casual game, my opponent can run his Minotaurs chapter and there is nothing I can do about it! Tomorrow, I'll probably have to play against armored company IG and Contemptor dreads! This is how the world ends! Woe is me!"