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.

the game is about having fun. Encouraging "home brew" rules and special scenarios and wild conversions. heck, the hello kitty marines were very popular (among some crowds more than others of course lol).
I see nothing wrong with using FW or home made units.
My only view is to address it in a positive manner where the other person will WANT to play using them instead of throwing the word legal about to intimidate or make them feel obligated to try something that they might just not be prepared for.
I grew up where this was the mentality and jervis played a more active role and andy chambers was still around and all, new stuff was the name of the game (Anyone remember the rtb01 dalek kitbash conversions shown in white dwarf? Back then, it was about what would be fun or cool and 'legal" was waaaay back in the rear of the pack of reasons to play or try something while nowadays, its the first word spoken in these instances. I'm all for going back to the good old days when it was about having fun playing with cool "army men".

 EVIL INC wrote:
I'm all for going back to the good old days when it was about having fun playing with cool "army men".

It still is. That doesn't mean that everyone has to have fun the same way that you do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EVIL INC wrote:
Back then, it was about what would be fun or cool and 'legal" was waaaay back in the rear of the pack of reasons to play or try something while nowadays, its the first word spoken in these instances

If by 'nowadays' you're including most of the last 20 year, I would agree.

Rogue Trader was a much looser game. Didn't it generally call for an 'umpire' to preside over the game? That's how a more casual game keeps things fair. Inquisitor did the same thing...

From 2nd edition onwards, though, as much as GW have always (up until 6th edition) encouraged conversions, home-brew rules have really never been as well received by the masses. 2nd edition changed the game to a much more commercial, and subsequently much more widespread game... so the focus changed to using the standardised rules provided in the books in order to maximise your chances of the person you wanted to play actually playing the same game as you.

The push for 'official' rules isn't a sign of people wanting to suck the fun out of the game. (If it wasn't fun, we wouldn't play it.) It's a natural consequence of a gaming environment that revolves so strongly around playing games with people you don't know well.

Evil inc and Lynata,the next time you have a thought on this site let it go.There is a saying[I thought you a fool then you spoke and proved my point].

eldar 1 wrote:
Evil inc and Lynata,the next time you have a thought on this site let it go.There is a saying[I thought you a fool then you spoke and proved my point].

'si tacuisses philosophus mansisses' - loosely translated as 'If you'd kept your mouth shut we might have thought you were clever'
As someone once said to me on dakka 'This post is highly ironic'.




I'm impressed this thread got as many pages as it did - imo, the FW debate boils down to 'don't be a dick. If you're being a dick, then stop.'

Most people don't mind playing against it. I bring FW regularly - so do my friends. If I play someone new, I'll show them my army list before we play (even weeks in advance) If they have a problem, I'll re-work my list.
If we all approached it in that manner, then we'd all be allowed nice things

All I'm going to say is, Titans. You can't by them in store. Only from forge world. Are they in the apocolypse rule book, whic you can but in store? Yes. That to me says forgeworld ok.

I have a decimator deamon engine which no one has refused me to use, that, and I see contemptor dreadnuaghts all the time.

PredaKhaine, Eldar 1 is just trying to get his post count up and couldn't think of anything on topic to say and as the outsider I'm the easiest victim. lol

True, in RT, it did usually call for am "umpire" or whatever you want to call the person arbitrating the game. I can say that many game clubs still use them to this day at least on occasion to set up and run fun cinematic games where the participants just don't know what is in store for them. heck, they might even have ruins that when you enter them, you find they are full of hormagaunts (and neither player plays bugs). These can be some of the most entertaining games. It is not all official legal rules and tournaments. This is why most players have no issues with FW so long as the subject is broached in a positive manner where all players can see and appreciate the benefits.

For those who mentioned Forgeworld and GW are the same company, i can confirm: my forgeworld models are stamped with GW markings:

Anti-FW: Let's ban an entire section of the game because I don't like it and deem it overpowered.

Pro-FW: Let's make everyone play FW even if they don't like it.

Me: If it's OP then you can bugger off mate. If it's not then welcome, friend, let's have a game. There's no problem here.

Forge World is part of GW and the player has the right to deny any game they want. If a player denies your game just because you have Forge World, please feel free to educate them, so they can tell others that Forge World isn't overpowered. Indeed, many Forge World units are underpowered, and people tend to use them for fluff purposes, and not because they are a powergamer, so please stop trying to tell people that everyone who uses Forge World is a powergamer, because we're not. I use a Stormblade in apocalypse, does that make me a powergamer? Should I not be able to use my Stormblade because you deem it overpowered? (even though, not gonna lie, I wish I'd got a Stormlord :c) Because if you think so then please explain to me why, because all you're saying is that people have the right to reject games -_- Of course they do.
EDIT: Nobody's tying you down to a chair and going: "BUAHAHAHAHA, NOW YOU HAVE TO PLAY MY FORGEWORLD!"

 BrotherOfBone wrote:
Anti-FW: Let's ban an entire section of the game because I don't like it and deem it overpowered.

Pro-FW: Let's make everyone play FW even if they don't like it.

More like

Reasonable people: Let's be polite to each other and ask nicely before bringing Forge World.

Idiots: How dare you suggest I should exercise social skills... Forge World in your Face! Even if it kills your love for the Hobby foreva... GRHRAGAASDFDAFAgRRRR

I love how the Pro-FW side is always mentioned along words like "force" and "have".

Even if FW is treated the same as codexes no one has to play it. It's really about removing the stigma of FW being somehow "less" of a part of the game so people aren't afraid of buying it because they won't get games. Will it change anything about needing to ask? Not really, but then again that's something you should be doing unless you know what kind game you're going to be playing just based on who your opponent is.

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to mass ban stuff because they don't like it and allow people to bring their toys if they want too. It's about stopping the No-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not inhibiting their choices just because some don't like them.

But no, it's never, for me at least, been about making any person play anything. It's been about getting FW to be treated like it should: a valid part of the game that is no less valid than any other (like codexes).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 BrotherOfBone wrote:
Anti-FW: Let's ban an entire section of the game because I don't like it and deem it overpowered.

Pro-FW: Let's make everyone play FW even if they don't like it.

More like

Reasonable people: Let's be polite to each other and ask nicely before bringing Forge World.

Idiots: How dare you suggest I should exercise social skills... Forge World in your Face! Even if it kills your love for the Hobby foreva... GRHRAGAASDFDAFAgRRRR

You forgot the part where people who say over and over again they have no issues with asking and only with the outright mass banning that some people do get lumped in with the strawman that somehow magically makes people play a game by force without threats, violence or generally breaking any laws.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to mass ban stuff because they don't like it and allow people to bring their toys if they want too. It's about stopping the No-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not inhibiting their choices just because some don't like them.

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to force-include stuff because they think they have some god-given right to bring it and allow people to exclude the toys they don't enjoy playing with. It's about stopping the Pro-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not forcing everyone to play with certain choices just because some people like them.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to mass ban stuff because they don't like it and allow people to bring their toys if they want too. It's about stopping the No-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not inhibiting their choices just because some don't like them.

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to force-include stuff because they think they have some god-given right to bring it and allow people to exclude the toys they don't enjoy playing with. It's about stopping the Pro-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not forcing everyone to play with certain choices just because some people like them.

Yet you don't seem to mind the Anti-FW crowd controlling how the game is played for everyone...

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to mass ban stuff because they don't like it and allow people to bring their toys if they want too. It's about stopping the No-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not inhibiting their choices just because some don't like them.

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to force-include stuff because they think they have some god-given right to bring it and allow people to exclude the toys they don't enjoy playing with. It's about stopping the Pro-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not forcing everyone to play with certain choices just because some people like them.

Yet you don't seem to mind the Anti-FW crowd controlling how the game is played for everyone...

This ^

Zwei - your characterisations are so far off base

It's more like:

Pro-FW- FW has equal standing as any codex, supplement, data slate, WD Update, et al. Treat it the same, because in every way IT IS the same.

Anti-FW - I don't know it, so I am against it. Or I have heard it is OP, so I'm against it. Or I've heard it's only for rich folk (when for years a ful DKOK army was cheaper than a vostroyan, or Mordian guard army) so I'm against it.

Again, it is the subtle mindset change you don't seem to understand, which is that it goes from asking peromission to requesting denial. It is an important distinction.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to mass ban stuff because they don't like it and allow people to bring their toys if they want too. It's about stopping the No-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not inhibiting their choices just because some don't like them.

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to force-include stuff because they think they have some god-given right to bring it and allow people to exclude the toys they don't enjoy playing with. It's about stopping the Pro-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not forcing everyone to play with certain choices just because some people like them.

Yet you don't seem to mind the Anti-FW crowd controlling how the game is played for everyone...

I don't mind people having the right to walk away from games they don't enjoy.

If I don't like green, I will not play against Orks

If I don't like Speehss Marinez, I will not play against Space Marines.

If I don't like Spearhead, I will not play Spearhead.

If I don't like Forge World, I will not play against Forge World.


The problem is, that (in my experience), declining the former tends to be well accepted. If I tell an Ork-Player, or Spearhead Player etc.. .. "sorry. not for me". I tend to get a shrug and a "whateva".

If I tell a Forge World player... "sorry, not for me". I get a 60 minute kindergarden-tantrum akin to this thread.

You really wanna be treated like everyone else? Than grow up and learn to take a "no" for an answer like everybody else. Only than will the "yes, awesome" answer you want to hear come eventually.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Again, it is the subtle mindset change you don't seem to understand, which is that it goes from asking peromission to requesting denial. It is an important distinction.

It's a subtle nature of human psychology you don't seem to understand. By trying to "legalize" Forge World into the game, you are working at cross-purposes with what you are trying to achieve. Being lectured to breeds resistance.

If .. in the long term .. you want Forge World to truly become "like everything else" (which it isn't in the mind of many people, just the way it is), you need to work with humility, not arrogance.

 Zweischneid wrote:
You really wanna be treated like everyone else? Than grow up and learn to take a "no" for an answer like everybody else. Only than will the "yes, awesome" answer you want to hear come eventually.

This.

In addition, I'd love to get more options with FW. Alas, they have decided to near completely ignore my chosen codex - even for fluff.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to mass ban stuff because they don't like it and allow people to bring their toys if they want too. It's about stopping the No-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not inhibiting their choices just because some don't like them.

It's not about "forcing" people to play with it or against it. At least not for me. It's been about removing the option for people to force-include stuff because they think they have some god-given right to bring it and allow people to exclude the toys they don't enjoy playing with. It's about stopping the Pro-FW crowd from trying to control how the game is played for everyone. It's been about respecting player choice and not forcing everyone to play with certain choices just because some people like them.

Yet you don't seem to mind the Anti-FW crowd controlling how the game is played for everyone...

I don't mind people having the right to walk away from games they don't enjoy.

If I don't like green, I will not play against Orks

If I don't like Speehss Marinez, I will not play against Space Marines.

If I don't like Spearhead, I will not play Spearhead.

If I don't like Forge World, I will not play against Forge World.


The problem is, that (in my experience), declining the former tends to be well accepted. If I tell an Ork-Player, or Spearhead Player etc.. .. "sorry. not for me". I tend to get a shrug and a "whateva".

If I tell a Forge World player... "sorry, not for me". I get a 60 minute kindergarden-tantrum akin to this thread.

You really wanna be treated like everyone else? Than grow up and learn to take a "no" for an answer like everybody else. Only than will the "yes, awesome" answer you want to hear come eventually.

I'd hazard to guess that the reason is probably because the former (not wanting to play Orks, not wanting to play Spearhead) is rather exceedingly rare, either because it just wouldn't occur to most people to refuse a game against Orks, while Spearhead isn't even known by most players to make the attempt to ask.

With FW, quite often there's an instinctual knee-jerk reaction by many players to instantly and flatly refuse, often not really based on anything but "it's forgeworld", or because they feel they're more entitled to do so than against other stuff (i.e, they believe it's a 3rd party thing, or subject to restrictions like the old SC rules, etc). I've run into that more than once.

Then the FW player has to go through and show "hey look, it's really not what you're thinking, i'm not trying to bring a 15 D cannon pieplate titan to the game, nor is this tank I'm running going to annihilate everything on the board'.

First you want to legalize Forge World, next you will try to legalize cannabis. Where do you stop???

 Zweischneid wrote:

I don't mind people having the right to walk away from games they don't enjoy.

If I don't like green, I will not play against Orks

If I don't like Speehss Marinez, I will not play against Space Marines.

If I don't like Spearhead, I will not play Spearhead.

If I don't like Forge World, I will not play against Forge World.


The problem is, that (in my experience), declining the former tends to be well accepted. If I tell an Ork-Player, or Spearhead Player etc.. .. "sorry. not for me". I tend to get a shrug and a "whateva".

If I tell a Forge World player... "sorry, not for me". I get a 60 minute kindergarden-tantrum akin to this thread.

You really wanna be treated like everyone else? Than grow up and learn to take a "no" for an answer like everybody else. Only than will the "yes, awesome" answer you want to hear come eventually.

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. You turn around to someone who plays Tau (or GK a year ago, or whatever the FOTM) is and say "I'm not playing you" you normally get exactly the same mildly annoyed response you do about playing FW.

If you keep refusing games, whatever the reason, people are going to think your being "off". Forgeworld just seems to be a more acceptable thing to refuse. How long would people put up with someone refusing to play any other army?

I'm tempted to get some FW just to upset people who have a problem with it. I don't see why you should ask any more than you should ask your opponent if you can play Eldar or bring a squad or termies. The only difference is an imagined one. The escalation book shows GW intend FW to be used. It is just a different brand from the same company. Citadel and Forgeworld. Like Tesco every day and Tesco Finest.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

I don't mind people having the right to walk away from games they don't enjoy.

If I don't like green, I will not play against Orks

If I don't like Speehss Marinez, I will not play against Space Marines.

If I don't like Spearhead, I will not play Spearhead.

If I don't like Forge World, I will not play against Forge World.


The problem is, that (in my experience), declining the former tends to be well accepted. If I tell an Ork-Player, or Spearhead Player etc.. .. "sorry. not for me". I tend to get a shrug and a "whateva".

If I tell a Forge World player... "sorry, not for me". I get a 60 minute kindergarden-tantrum akin to this thread.

You really wanna be treated like everyone else? Than grow up and learn to take a "no" for an answer like everybody else. Only than will the "yes, awesome" answer you want to hear come eventually.

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. You turn around to someone who plays Tau (or GK a year ago, or whatever the FOTM) is and say "I'm not playing you" you normally get exactly the same mildly annoyed response you do about playing FW.

There was a post on here a while ago about Tau Players complaining about not getting any games. There used to be GK complaining about not getting any, Necrons too..

So yes, people will complain if you deny their favorite thing alot.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


There was a post on here a while ago about Tau Players complaining about not getting any games. There used to be GK complaining about not getting any, Necrons too..

So yes, people will complain if you deny their favorite thing alot.

 Steve steveson wrote:

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. You turn around to someone who plays Tau (or GK a year ago, or whatever the FOTM) is and say "I'm not playing you" you normally get exactly the same mildly annoyed response you do about playing FW.

Admittedly, I was oversimplifying. The odd idiot exists outside the FW-crowd too. Doesn't make the response any better though.

Short and simple:

If I don't think I'll be having fun for the next 3-4 hours on my Saturday afternoon after a hard week of work, I won't play. Might be your armies paint job (or lack thereof). Your body-odor. Your Forge World models or because I simply ain't feeling the vibe. Doesn't matter. The game builds on mutual consent. Both parties have the right to say "no". There is no "legal" precisely because you can't force people to play.

The very notion is akin to 1950s laws where married couples were obliged to have sex. Thankfully we got past that. There is no "legal" obligation to something both parties need to agree by mutual consent..

Dropping legality entirely...

...it still sucks. I've spend thousands of dollars and probably days of man-hours assembling, converting, painting, and loving my army, which is an Armored Battlegroup. Just yesterday, I made a model of my Lord Commissar's Tank. In the fluff, she's a female, so I scrounged for a plastic Sister of Battle head from a friend (it comes in the immolator kit). The tank she drives is a Malcador, because she likes the imposing, ancient, almost legendary feel it has, regardless of it's actual in-game performance.

Also, escalation is coming out, and at 285 points, a Malcador may be just the superheavy for reasonable games.

To be told that people don't want to play my army simply because it is Forge World is offensive, it feels discriminatory. It feels like they're saying "I don't want to play your army because it isn't good enough for me."

Anything else I could fix. If they said they didn't like the paintjob, I'd resolve to work harder. If they said they couldn't deal with Armor 14 tanks in quantity, I'll say fair enough, and go on my merry way. If they smell too bad, I'll go shower.

But disliking it simply because Forge World? There's literally nothing I can do about that except tell them that they're wrong. There are much much better reasons out there to not play an army.

Well, if I was GW I wouldnt put "its ok to use forgeworld" in my GW books. I would put "its ok to use this in 40k" in my forgeworld books instead.

Reasoning: Anti-forgeworlders dont buy forgeworld products in the first place, that way GW is never the bearer of bad news (that forgeworld is allowed). The bearers of the bad news are of course forgeworld players. (because they read the 40k approved stamp in their forgeworld books). GW then dodges the heated argument, and let their pro and anti minions battle each other.

I mean seriously. GW has a reputation of protecting their trademarks pretty aggressively. The "40k approved" stamp would never exist without GWs permission. It doesnt matter if forgeworld is part of GW or not, the fact that they have the stamp, and has used it for so long indicates GW is ok with it. Nor would GW link to forgeworld on their homepage, if they weren't ok with it.

That said, I havent played with nor against forgeworld units/armies, ever.

The real question shouldnt be " is forgeworld legal" but "is forgeworld accepted".
As legal is whatever you and your buddies think it should be. (excluding real life criminal stuff)

I don't think anyone was saying you have to play against anyone. That doesn't change the legality or otherwise of FW. You can play someone who will let you field Nids as allies. You might enjoy that. Still dosn't change the legality of the force under the rules, which is what this is all about.

 Steve steveson wrote:
I don't think anyone was saying you have to play against anyone. .

Great. So why all the humdrum if people turn down your game? Accept it and move on.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
I don't think anyone was saying you have to play against anyone. .

Great. So why all the humdrum if people turn down your game? Accept it and move on.

Because they shouldn't turn it down for the wrong reasons. They should turn it down for legitimate reasons.

Naw wrote:
First you want to legalize Forge World, next you will try to legalize cannabis. Where do you stop???

When we run out of things to "legalize" in a game that already says you can bring homebrew?

Seriously, in a game that says your job isn't to "just follow the rules" (Spirit of the Game, page 8) why do we need to argue "legality" about anything in this game?

Really it's my only sticking point in this game, that somethings are somehow less "legal' than others. You don't want to play? Fine, I'm cool with that. I'll spend time painting models instead or working on some homebrew. But if you want to tell me my stuff "isn't legal" and we're not playing in a tournament, then I take offense, even if it is just a little. To claim someone's army choice is less "legal" is a slap in the face to that player and really and insult the game can do better without.

Don't hide behind legality, and be up front on what you look for in a game, or is that so hard to do when the FW crowd is being told the same exact thing?

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
I don't think anyone was saying you have to play against anyone. .

Great. So why all the humdrum if people turn down your game? Accept it and move on.

I think the reason is because, at least from interpretations of online, people are much more prone to automatically raging at the notion of forgeworld and denying it simply because it is forgeworld. It's kind of like if somebody doesn't want to play with you because you mentioned I'm playing Chaos Space Marines (using this as a representation replace with whatever you wish) and the foe automatically just says no and the reasoning behind it is (all of it is op just look at those heldrakes and declaring that GW is not legal).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
I don't think anyone was saying you have to play against anyone. .

Great. So why all the humdrum if people turn down your game? Accept it and move on.

Because they shouldn't turn it down for the wrong reasons. They should turn it down for legitimate reasons.

There are no wrong reasons.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
I don't think anyone was saying you have to play against anyone. .

Great. So why all the humdrum if people turn down your game? Accept it and move on.

I think the reason is because, at least from interpretations of online, people are much more prone to automatically raging at the notion of forgeworld and denying it simply because it is forgeworld. It's kind of like if somebody doesn't want to play with you because you mentioned I'm playing Chaos Space Marines (using this as a representation replace with whatever you wish) and the foe automatically just says no and the reasoning behind it is (all of it is op just look at those heldrakes and declaring that GW is not legal).

That's what gets me posting about this personally. If you don't want to play it that's fine. But if you don't want me to play it because you don't like it, even with other people (something that happens in places because players get FW banned in a location for one reason or another, and let's be honest here it does happen and it sucks for anyone else who wants to use FW but can't) then there is a real issue. And it's one I've seen mentioned in these kinds of threads before.

Banning FW completely, or saying people shouldn't play it because of whatever justification you feel like pulling out of your ear is, well frankly it's an insult to their fellow players. It's accusations of cheese, cheating and being a crummy individual everytime those "justifications" are used. It's a verbal slap in the face that doesn't need to happen.

Don't like it? Fine. Just don't kick me in the knees and then tell me it's my fault you kicked me.