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.

 Peregrine wrote:
Well, you just missed the point completely. I have no problem with house rules. What I have a problem with is people presenting their house rules as if they were official rules provided by GW.

I missing where tournaments and TOs have said this?

What you apparently want is every tournament that does not want FW to label their event as a lesser non-official comped event, and to be able to deride the winners for playing a lesser game....like I said move on. If you want to attend events with FW go and do it....if you don't want to go to those without it don't. If there are none near you start one. If what you want is to deride events, or force everyone else to play the way you want....as I said move on no one cares. No events will publish packets that say come play our tournament with our house rules, they will say here are the rules for this event come and play.

xruslanx wrote:
FW-cheese

You are just a ceaseless font of comedy.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Naw wrote:
Well said. This is what I meant above. It should not take much effort from GW to come out and in plain text say that they endorse the use of FW. This also requires FW to get their sith together and publish proper catalog.

Perhaps GW doesn't feel the need to say "this brand of models and rules we make are completely valid in normal games". I don't see why we can't just accept things when we already have a rule that gives us all the permission we need. This kind of goal post moving, is getting ridiculious.

I don't have any problem with that, but I can understand the other point of view. GW _could_ come out and say it clearly, but they don't. Don't you wonder why?

We have a rule right now that says you can adapt your army list. The Imperial Armour books do just that by providing alternate units, FOC shifts, new rules, ect. So were is this need for more endorsement coming from? At this point I don't think I get it.

Wait, what? You would play me when I fielded my monstrous creature dreadnought with a cool twin-linked heavy 6 myowninvention and Riptide's resiliency, all for a bargain price? Of course it might need some balancing, but that is what our game would be for..

And why would FW need a catalog? I mean yeah, they send you one when you order stuff or if you request one, but they have a website, why would they need a catalog?

It is good business when a customer wonders which books he might need to know what options are available for him. Been there, done that, can't be arsed anymore.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
People probably would not be so hesitant to allow FW at competitive events if people were doing it for a reason beyond obtaining a competitive edge over what their chosen codex allows.

These models are pretty.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well this thread's going about as well as expected.

I said this to someone earlier and I've yet to be convinced that it's not true:

People who don't want to use FW and won't allow people to use in their games are just afraid of losing, but are too proud to admit it.

Nah, I'm BA. I'm beyond caring about that now. Sure, I've put in some stuff from the new book, but it hasn't really changed that much.

Naw wrote:
It should not take much effort from GW to come out and in plain text say that they endorse the use of FW.

They already did.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
It's simply the lack of such a note in the core rulebook that some players disapprove of.

So I have read. But this same note of disapproval does not apply to supplements, which shows the argument is a disingenuous rationalization.

 Manchu wrote:

Naw wrote:
It should not take much effort from GW to come out and in plain text say that they endorse the use of FW.

They already did.

And then I say "where?" and we start from the beginning

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
It's simply the lack of such a note in the core rulebook that some players disapprove of.

So I have read. But this same note of disapproval does not apply to supplements, which shows the argument is a disingenuous rationalization.

And to this "but the supplements are from GW". Btw, you don't need to reply to this..

When does a FW book become obsolete? I mean if a FW book is made for a 40K codex that was in 4th edition, then a new codex comes out in 6th edition, doesn't that mean the FW book should be obsolete as well sine the 4th edition book is invalid now?

So would this mean I can come in and play with IA 4 and use Gargantuan creatures then? Wouldn't that be totally unfair for someone who can't counter it or expect it?

*edit* don't know nothing about FW, trying to learn the other camps PoV. Just trying to learn.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
It's especially a good idea because the most likely reason for the separation has to do with marketing the different model kits, not the rules.

"Most likely"? Perhaps. But "most likely" isn't knowing. It may also be the other way around. It's a possibility at least. Or they may fully intent a separation of both (!) models and rules. Again, it's a possibility. It seems a bold claim to make, putting yourself up on that pedestal as the one prophet who truly knows what GW truly intents (and that's not even accounting for the fact that GW occasionally does make decisions that aren't ... um ... smart).

I've always assumed the FW branding was done intentionally so they could cater to the people who want more specific stuff from the setting (the Heresy, events like the Badab War, Vraks, ect) while the Studio focuses on the big picture setting instead. By branding it we know what to expect from each side and it works really well that way.....and bites FW in the butt because then people try and say it's not part of the game because of branding.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Naw wrote:
Well said. This is what I meant above. It should not take much effort from GW to come out and in plain text say that they endorse the use of FW. This also requires FW to get their sith together and publish proper catalog.

Perhaps GW doesn't feel the need to say "this brand of models and rules we make are completely valid in normal games". I don't see why we can't just accept things when we already have a rule that gives us all the permission we need. This kind of goal post moving, is getting ridiculious.

I don't have any problem with that, but I can understand the other point of view. GW _could_ come out and say it clearly, but they don't. Don't you wonder why?

Because it's the same company who says the rules are just a framework and the point of the game is to have fun. They likely don't feel to the need to be that explicit.

Naw wrote:

We have a rule right now that says you can adapt your army list. The Imperial Armour books do just that by providing alternate units, FOC shifts, new rules, ect. So were is this need for more endorsement coming from? At this point I don't think I get it.

Wait, what? You would play me when I fielded my monstrous creature dreadnought with a cool twin-linked heavy 6 myowninvention and Riptide's resiliency, all for a bargain price? Of course it might need some balancing, but that is what our game would be for..

Seeing as I play with Exorcists and have a couple of Avengers, yeah. Sisters are a pretty decent anti-mc force. Seriously though, if you brought homebrew and I thought it was broken I'd likely talk to you about it before hand and try to reach and agreement about it.

You missing the point that I've been making though. It's not if someone will play you though, but the fact that it's a valid part of the game as per the rules. I don't like this pretending that FW is somehow less valid because it's insulting everyone who wants to play with it.

Naw wrote:

And why would FW need a catalog? I mean yeah, they send you one when you order stuff or if you request one, but they have a website, why would they need a catalog?

It is good business when a customer wonders which books he might need to know what options are available for him. Been there, done that, can't be arsed anymore.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

I've always assumed the FW branding was done intentionally so they could cater to the people who want more specific stuff from the setting (the Heresy, events like the Badab War, Vraks, ect) while the Studio focuses on the big picture setting instead. By branding it we know what to expect from each side and it works really well that way.....and bites FW in the butt because then people try and say it's not part of the game because of branding.

Got any source of for that?

GW has always been a models first, rules second, fluff third kind-of-company. To assume that they created sub-brands on the least of their priorities, the fluff and setting, seems exceptionally far-fetched.

Either way, you assume it to be this way. Other people might assume it differently, not least assuming that they created the Forge World brand to keep the rules separate and distinct from the main game (e.g. Forge World as "test-bed").

Not saying that this is how it must be. But as long as you can't exclude that option 100%, you shouldn't universally claim people are "wrong" that go into this with assumptions different than your own.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

I've always assumed the FW branding was done intentionally so they could cater to the people who want more specific stuff from the setting (the Heresy, events like the Badab War, Vraks, ect) while the Studio focuses on the big picture setting instead. By branding it we know what to expect from each side and it works really well that way.....and bites FW in the butt because then people try and say it's not part of the game because of branding.

Got any source of for that?

GW has always been a models first, rules second, fluff third kind-of-company. To assume that they created sub-brands on the least of their priorities, the fluff and setting, seems exceptionally far-fetched.

Either way, you assume it to be this way. Other people might assume it differently, not least assuming that they created the Forge World brand to keep the rules separate and distinct from the main game (e.g. Forge World as "test-bed").

Not saying that this is how it must be. But as long as you can't exclude that option 100%, you shouldn't universally claim people are "wrong" that go into this with assumptions different than your own.

The separation of rules rather falls apart with FW saying that their stuff is intended for either standard games or Apoc. If the intention was a seperation of rules, wouldn't they then have to stay separate? But IA 1-3 where all books that added options to a few armies, and were definitely not promoting this idea of "keeping it separate".

I came to the idea of branding because of this presentation and how GW approaches the models and fluff books. All the money goes to the same place but they create sub-departments for their different work, and the only reason that really fits is "branding" and likely was an idea that came into the company with Kirby.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

The separation of rules rather falls apart with FW saying that their stuff is intended for either standard games or Apoc. If the intention was a seperation of rules, wouldn't they then have to stay separate? But IA 1-3 where all books that added options to a few armies, and were definitely not promoting this idea of "keeping it separate".

I came to the idea of branding because of this presentation and how GW approaches the models and fluff books. All the money goes to the same place but they create sub-departments for their different work, and the only reason that really fits is "branding" and likely was an idea that came into the company with Kirby.

So?

Yes, the separation is branding, because branding is separation. If there were to be no separation, there wouldn't be differences in branding.

And what does it matter from whom or where the idea came from? Would it be more legitimate if the original idea was from Jervis Johnson or Jes Goodwyn, than from Kirby?

Yes, Forge World tells you how to use their rules in games (Apoc or not) when you use Forge World, but nothing there (that I know of) implies that the how-to-use-Forge World-instructions, whether for Apoc or regular games, say that they apply 100% of the time and with no difference at all to a non-FW-branded element of the game (e.g. a Codex), neither to regular or Apoc 40K.

Precisely because FW is branded differently, the latter seems highly improbable to me.

So your argument is the rules only apply when using the rules? I'm not following that line of logic there.

It's like arguing that the rules for Necrons don't apply when you aren't playing with Necrons. Of course not.

I think you're intentionally overlooking that FW has been since their first book geared towards providing an expansion to the game,as well as covering events that are frankly too narrow in scope for the main studio to handle. There is nothing there to actually imply that the intention was to keep FW out of the game or separate it from the main game that way and the argument that it was seems to be reaching even more than anything I've said about the branding.

You're acting as if I'm saying one MUST play with FW, and I'm not. That has not once been my stance. My stance is to get people to actually show some respect to people who choose to play FW and stop treating it as somehow being less a part of the game. No one has to play with it 100% of the time, just like no one has to play with anything 100% of the time, but when it comes to claiming it's a less valid or official or legal or less of a part of the game just because of a brand name? Yeah, that's where I draw the line.

This whole thread is pointless.

Forgeworld is official when you and your opponent agree on it beforw hand or did we all forget THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME?!?

As for tournaments, if the TO says forgeworld units are allowed (usually with pre aproval or within set guidlines, who am i, or any of us for that matter to dissagree? Dont like it then dont pay your entree fee and enjoy hours of playing what i consider my favorit game off all time and arguably the best edition of 40k iv ever played.



I feel like im taking crazy pills!

Spirit of the game people, spirit of the game.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
So your argument is the rules only apply when using the rules? I'm not following that line of logic there.

My argument here is that your version of things is based on a lot of rather convenient assumptions that all fit and support your take on things, but cannot themselves be verified. They are all tea-leaf reading of what "GW intended to do and did not intend to do" with their sub-brands (such as Forge World).

If you cannot prove your basic assumptiosn with 100% certainty, you should at least allow for the possibility that alternative assumptions / explanations for why GW choose to publish these rules under the Forge World brand, and not under the GW brand, could be true.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
So your argument is the rules only apply when using the rules? I'm not following that line of logic there.

My argument here is that your version of things is based on a lot of rather convenient assumptions that all fit and support your take on things, but cannot themselves be verified. They are all tea-leaf reading of what "GW intended to do and did not intend to do" with their sub-brands (such as Forge World).

If you cannot prove your basic assumptiosn with 100% certainty, you should at least allow for the possibility that alternative assumptions / explanations for why GW choose to publish these rules under the Forge World brand, and not under the GW brand, could be true.

Again. Spirit of the game.

Renegade_commander wrote:
This whole thread is pointless.

Forgeworld is official when you and your opponent agree on it beforw hand or did we all forget THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME?!?

As for tournaments, if the TO says forgeworld units are allowed (usually with pre aproval or within set guidlines, who am i, or any of us for that matter to dissagree? Dont like it then dont pay your entree fee and enjoy hours of playing what i consider my favorit game off all time and arguably the best edition of 40k iv ever played.



I feel like im taking crazy pills!

Spirit of the game people, spirit of the game.

Please enlighten me. What is the "spirit of the game"?

Not trying to be daft CWZ. Thanks for the replies greatly appreciated. I just don't know. I haven't played 6th edition, never encountered FW (except for my flyrant I have) so really don't know what you can take, why or why not.

That is why I asked.

Probably one of the most important rules in my opinnion.

The spirit of the game is to remember to that this is an open system that allows us to be creative and add our own ideas, stories and creativity to the game, but most importantly, to have fun! This IS a game after all. I understand most people take this hobby very seriously (i being one of them. Heh) but this is silly.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
So your argument is the rules only apply when using the rules? I'm not following that line of logic there.

My argument here is that your version of things is based on a lot of rather convenient assumptions that all fit and support your take on things, but cannot themselves be verified. They are all tea-leaf reading of what "GW intended to do and did not intend to do" with their sub-brands (such as Forge World).

If you cannot prove your basic assumptiosn with 100% certainty, you should at least allow for the possibility that alternative assumptions / explanations for why GW choose to publish these rules under the Forge World brand, and not under the GW brand, could be true.

Your assumptions work the same way you know. Mine are based on the pattern of what FW has done, your's are based on an idea that a company who makes games and models would turn down potential profits by saying "nope, don't use that".

 Happyjew wrote:

Renegade_commander wrote:
This whole thread is pointless.

Forgeworld is official when you and your opponent agree on it beforw hand or did we all forget THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME?!?

As for tournaments, if the TO says forgeworld units are allowed (usually with pre aproval or within set guidlines, who am i, or any of us for that matter to dissagree? Dont like it then dont pay your entree fee and enjoy hours of playing what i consider my favorit game off all time and arguably the best edition of 40k iv ever played.



I feel like im taking crazy pills!

Spirit of the game people, spirit of the game.

Please enlighten me. What is the "spirit of the game"?

sorry, new user. I got excited and missed the quote button. My reply is above.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Your assumptions work the same way you know. Mine are based on the pattern of what FW has done, your's are based on an idea that a company who makes games and models would turn down potential profits by saying "nope, don't use that".

They do.

I did not put forward the alternatives I did because I believe them to be right.

I put forward the alternatives I did because I believe they could be possible.

You're right. I cannot make a convincing argument that they are "right", nor have I tried. I have simply tried to show you different ways of looking at this issue that may be possible and thereby provide a reasonable doubt concerning the absolute veracity you claim for your take on things.

 Happyjew wrote:

Renegade_commander wrote:
This whole thread is pointless.

Forgeworld is official when you and your opponent agree on it beforw hand or did we all forget THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME?!?

As for tournaments, if the TO says forgeworld units are allowed (usually with pre aproval or within set guidlines, who am i, or any of us for that matter to dissagree? Dont like it then dont pay your entree fee and enjoy hours of playing what i consider my favorit game off all time and arguably the best edition of 40k iv ever played.



I feel like im taking crazy pills!

Spirit of the game people, spirit of the game.

Please enlighten me. What is the "spirit of the game"?

Page 8 of the main rulebook (it's even in "THE RULES" copy, so yes, it looks like this is intended to be a kind of rule, or at least a note of intent by the Devs). Emphasis mine:

The Rules wrote:Warhammer 40,000 may be somewhat different to any other game you have played. Above all, it's important to remember that the rules are just the framework to support and 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 to just follow the rules, it's 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.

I want to note that nothing in there even suggests restricting players from choice.Everything in that rule is about allowing the player the ability to play the game as they see fit. Now how would a game, written in that spirit restrict players from having the option from FW? It's quite plainly written to allow freedom for creativity and the Army List rule section even supports this.

Again, as I keep having to say, I don't want to force people to play FW if they don't want to, I just want FW to be recognized as the valid part of the game it actually is.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

Renegade_commander wrote:
This whole thread is pointless.

Forgeworld is official when you and your opponent agree on it beforw hand or did we all forget THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME?!?

As for tournaments, if the TO says forgeworld units are allowed (usually with pre aproval or within set guidlines, who am i, or any of us for that matter to dissagree? Dont like it then dont pay your entree fee and enjoy hours of playing what i consider my favorit game off all time and arguably the best edition of 40k iv ever played.



I feel like im taking crazy pills!

Spirit of the game people, spirit of the game.

Please enlighten me. What is the "spirit of the game"?

Page 8 of the main rulebook (it's even in "THE RULES" copy, so yes, it looks like this is intended to be a kind of rule, or at least a note of intent by the Devs). Emphasis mine:

The Rules wrote:Warhammer 40,000 may be somewhat different to any other game you have played. Above all, it's important to remember that the rules are just the framework to support and 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 to just follow the rules, it's 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.

I want to note that nothing in there even suggests restricting players from choice.Everything in that rule is about allowing the player the ability to play the game as they see fit. Now how would a game, written in that spirit restrict players from having the option from FW? It's quite plainly written to allow freedom for creativity and the Army List rule section even supports this.

Again, as I keep having to say, I don't want to force people to play FW if they don't want to, I just want FW to be recognized as the valid part of the game it actually is.

you sir are somone i would love to play a game of warhammer 40k with.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I just want FW to be recognized as the valid part of the game it actually is.

It is. Forge World is fully recognized as the Forge World part of the game.

Just don't try to ask people to recognize it as the non-Forge World part of the game, when it clearly says Forge World on the cover.

I knew it was somewhere in the rulebook, just couldn't find it.

And I agree, the point of the game is to have fun (except at tournaments where the point is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women ). As such, my group has one simple rule regarding FW: You must have the model in question (conversions are OK).

I wana note that i just noticed on the back of my chaos space marine codex that it says, and i quote "a supplement for warhammer 40,000"


So are all codexes becomming just supplements?

Renegade_commander wrote:
I wana note that i just noticed on the back of my chaos space marine codex that it says, and i quote "a supplement for warhammer 40,000"


So are all codexes becomming just supplements?

A supplement is everything that is not a self-contained game. They are required to inform you that "you need the Warhammer 40.000 rulebook to play". Everything with that requirement is a supplement.

M

 Happyjew wrote:
I knew it was somewhere in the rulebook, just couldn't find it.

And I agree, the point of the game is to have fun (except at tournaments where the point is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women ). As such, my group has one simple rule regarding FW: You must have the model in question (conversions are OK).[/oequote]

Conan!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zweischneid wrote:

Renegade_commander wrote:
I wana note that i just noticed on the back of my chaos space marine codex that it says, and i quote "a supplement for warhammer 40,000"


So are all codexes becomming just supplements?

A supplement is everything that is not a self-contained game. They are required to inform you that "you need the Warhammer 40.000 rulebook to play". Everything with that requirement is a supplement.

I ser what your saying. Its confusing because my 5th ed codexes dont say it, and with the release of all the "official" supplements... well you see where im going with this im sure lol

 Zweischneid wrote:
Forge World is fully recognized as the Forge World part of the game.

Just don't try to ask people to recognize it as the non-Forge World part of the game, when it clearly says Forge World on the cover.

Pretty much this. The The GW 40k BRB may blather on about a framework etc, but that also allows for house rules and all kinds of other things. That doesn't make them "official." The GW 40k BRB doesn't say "treat FW units as if they were official codex units in terms of status" or anything even near that, and therefore players will keep having these arguments forever. As long as there's a brand distinction with the "main brand" not directly addressing the sister brand in the rules there's going to be a division between the two product lines.

And just for the record I wouldn't mind playing against FW, though I don't think anyone locally even has FW stuff. But as it is, there are so many broken "official" units that it really doesn't matter whether or not FW is broken, too.