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.

I dont even care for the game. I have never played a match in my life. Im here only for the lore. I collect an army of units I like and think would logically work well together and insert them in the lore but I have no intention of playing a game with them.

 Galdos wrote:
I dont even care for the game. I have never played a match in my life. Im here only for the lore. I collect an army of units I like and think would logically work well together and insert them in the lore but I have no intention of playing a game with them.

And that is how it should be


(I.e. "Whatever makes you happy")

 da001 wrote:
I have met some players like that, but I still don´t get it.

The rules are a convoluted mess, the balance is awful, some models are ok but others are beyond nightmare territory... I don´t get why people who do not like the fluff play this game.

@Swastakowey: may I ask you... what about Flames of War?

I agree.

The setting, with all of its silliness, is the only thing 40k has going for it.

I like the atmosphere and grimdarkness of the 40k fluff.
I try to ignore most really silly stuff. Grimdark is cool. Over-the-top-grimdark is silly.
I am playing 40k purely for the fluff. Otherwise I would just stick with playing FoW, which is not perfect, but a far better game than 40k is.

There is also the fact that 40k has far more players than all other games combined.
In order to find people that are willing to play FoW with me, I often have to let them use one of my armies, because they don't collect FoW themselves.

40k is a great setting, but many of the stories published within it don't really do it justice. They tend to be to happy and fun. They are comic bookish/Hollywood action adventure stories in a world where all the main characters should usually die or go insane in the end ( or get mind wiped by the Ordo Malleus)

WH40K setting is good and fun when it is silly.

For example, Orks, as I remember them with metal jaws, bunch of scrap metal vehicles and Waaaagh as response to everything - good silly.
Draigo and his "I can kill you, you and you...and to you I will write my name...to heart!" - wrong and shameful silly
IoM as brutally ruled heap of planets with political (commisariat) and theological (inquisition and ...well, rest of the Imperium) dictatatorship - good, little bit silly grimdark
Space Marines killing in five brothers whole army of enemy forces and after bloodbath sitting "how difficult life brothers, Imperium is ready to fall, too many enemies...lets kill few dozens of demons before supper" - wrong grimdark and wrong silliness

Fluff is best whe not taken too seriously. When some guy almost screams at me "facts" about how SM are awesome and its simply "FACT YOU CANT ARGUE!", its time for cold shower.

I'd argue because its far too costly and hard to read the lore.

Right now If I wanted to understand the reason behind everything I could go to a GW store and buy all the codexs/books for $300. Or I could just buy my codex, and spend the other 270 on more models for my army.

Of course there is the counter arguement about stores like half price books where I could probably find the books and such for cheap and then read the lore, but to that I'd argue it's always hard to find the books in the correct order, and sometimes they don't even have all of them. As such, investing in the lore just becomes to much of a hassel for people who are looking for a hobby, not a job.

"What about the wiki and such? it's all there for free!"
That's true, and what's not there you could always sail the seven seas for, but to that I'd say you don't honestly understand the lore if you read it second hand, and the wiki isn't all expansive. Looking at this whole universe from a brand new persons perspective, I find just reading the wiki for my future necron army tells very little, pardon explaning the basic manner of each unit. As such you honestly need to be able to pick up a book, read it and then close it and go "Wow, those necrons are so cool, those marines stood no chance!" and from there draw your own conclusions based on what you've read, in order to understand the lore and appreciate it.

Honestly the only reason I choose 40k over the million other board games is convience. I've got a GW less then 5 miles away, and I live near the "bunker"( supposbly the largest GW store in america) so anytime I want I can normally find a game to play and a store to buy from.

 UlrikDecado wrote:
WH40K setting is good and fun when it is silly.

For example, Orks, as I remember them with metal jaws, bunch of scrap metal vehicles and Waaaagh as response to everything - good silly.
Draigo and his "I can kill you, you and you...and to you I will write my name...to heart!" - wrong and shameful silly
IoM as brutally ruled heap of planets with political (commisariat) and theological (inquisition and ...well, rest of the Imperium) dictatatorship - good, little bit silly grimdark
Space Marines killing in five brothers whole army of enemy forces and after bloodbath sitting "how difficult life brothers, Imperium is ready to fall, too many enemies...lets kill few dozens of demons before supper" - wrong grimdark and wrong silliness

Fluff is best whe not taken too seriously. When some guy almost screams at me "facts" about how SM are awesome and its simply "FACT YOU CANT ARGUE!", its time for cold shower.

...And the other way around, just because of what you said.

The entire argument is opinion-based... What is there even to argue about?

If you want Marines to be 9' tall demigods that can crush almost anything, then fair enough. They can be that.

If you want them to be 6' 5" tall mediocre soldiers that are marginally more effective than a basic Guardsman and just a big resource sink, they can be that too.

Cherrypick what you like- that is 40K for just you.

 Mahtamori wrote:
Let's just say I'm not a fan of blatant power fantasies. The setting wants to be grim dark, but fails because there's an abundance of Space Marines. Remove Space Marines to the point where they actually are too rare and precious for anything but sector-threatening conflicts and you get a grim dark setting, on the plus side you'd also get the true heroes of mankind doing the difficult jobs - the Imperial Guard.

I'd still ignore the Space Marine fluff when fielding my Space Marine army, though, but that's an aesthetical choice.

This is akin to saying that Comic Books can't be depressing because of Superheroes.

And believe me, I'd kill for the big two to return to making something cheerful once in a while.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I hate the lore because, well i much prefer history and so on. Thats why i play the imperial guard because i can sorta compromise by having a historical theme and still get to play wargames.

Despite its setting a lot of 40k lore seems very childish and ill thought out.

I just like a more realistic feel in my interests.

Although a lot of the IG stuff looks pretty cool and thats another reason i get into it.

But over all the lore is too much run and gun, heroes and villains and has heaps of "why?!?" moments.

So overall i play and hate the fluff because of the freedom of the imperial guard to do anything to my taste and still have a great game with my friends.

Company of Heroes is both cheaper and more historical.

I can understand it to a point. They might understand the basic setting and enjoy the atmosphere it creates, but have no interest in learning about the heresy or the history of the Eldar and what have you.

I feel that way about comic books now. I used to read X-Men comics pretty consistently, but at some point I lost interest in where the stories were going. I still really like the X-Men and pick up the occassional single comic to enjoy, but I lost track of the overall story years ago and really have no interest in picking it back up.

 Omegus wrote:

 da001 wrote:
I have met some players like that, but I still don´t get it.

The rules are a convoluted mess, the balance is awful, some models are ok but others are beyond nightmare territory... I don´t get why people who do not like the fluff play this game.

@Swastakowey: may I ask you... what about Flames of War?

I agree.

The setting, with all of its silliness, is the only thing 40k has going for it.

The Video games tend to also be good or great. I pitied the people who came to 40k from Dawn of War expecting the modicum of balance that existed in them.

Some of the lore is really good. But some of it is so horrible that I ended up making up my own SM chapter with a different combat doctrine since the fluff is so stupidly inconsistent with the game. The stuff I wrote was pretty sub par but I couldn't stomach all the "CODEX APPROVED MANOVEURS" and "1000 SM TAKE OVER UNIVERSE!" fluff.

EDIT: The worst thing is how each SM is unstoppable juggernaut that takes 20 years to create.

The thing that draws me into ANY miniatures game is the miniatures - first and foremost.

If the miniatures don't appeal, I may as well play a boredgame (sic) with counters.

The fluff (calling it 'lore' gives it a supposed gravitas that it doesn't actually deserve.) WAS cobbled together from several disparate sources - much of it "SF Classics" - and when I first started playing, this is why I played it - it reminded me so much of aspects of Dune, Starship Troopers, Foundation, Judge Dredd, etc.

Marines were badasses, modified and brainwashed into being the galaxy's peacekeepers. NOT "goodguys" by choice. They were bad, but the alternatives were worse.

Then they made them crusading space monk knights and I started to give up on the fluff.

I haven't bothered to read the fluff since 3rd edition.
I haven't played it since 5th (the one game of 6th I had I don't count).

If you want to awbser your question with game theory the game is designed with no clear focus of what it wants to focus on.

This is good as it can draw a big crowd of players. This is also bad ass these players will often have very different reasons to play the game. I supose the two main group who play Warhammer are competetive players on one side and painters on the other. You have many other poles as well. The original posters obviously liked the role for instance.

If you think this is interesting and want to get a better understanding of what games tend to offer players I would recomend exstra credits run down of game theory. You will not be disapointed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uepAJ-rqJKA

Edit: I would point out that a strong problem with the 40K setting is that it is also a game. There are often incosistensies between rules and fiction. For instance is one space marine a big deal in the fiction. On the table top he is a 15 point model that gets removed en mass by a hell drake. Unfortunately, hell drakes makes for bad main characters in the setting.

Edit II: "One thing that always surprises me in this hobby is how many people play WH40K, but have no interest in the story. Are there parts of the story that are poorly written or could have been done better? Of course. I largely believe however WH40K has one of the most interesting futuristic sci-fi settings out there. Why does one play WH40K if they have no interest in the setting? Like, what specifically draws them to WH40k when there are hundreds of other tabletop games out there that are far less expensive? Have you met player like this?"

I do not think warhammer is the most interesting futuristic sci-fi setting. Warhammer needs black humor and 90's irony and apreciated from a distance or you must be very young and think the "grim dark" is awsome. I would suppose transitional periods between those two oppions would also be valid. Warhammer does contain some very conseptual cool ideas, mostly because they from a historical stand point where very eraly in making mainstream a lot of now known consepts.

Also the scale of 40K is very funn, as most things tend to exist. This is best representet by the fantasy flight roleplay games as theese are not sett on the battlefield, but on the dysfucntional planets in the human empire. I would also like to see more women in warhammer, especially in the imperial guard, tau and eldar range. Having actual female models instead of just saying "yeah there are women somewhere in this setting" would go a long way not to alienate potensial female players.

I like the lore, game and models equally. GW has retcon too much of its fluff. A good example wpuld be rhe necrons. Then again, there is too many SM fluff. They need to balance out and have more lore on the Eldar, Tau, Orks and Necrons. Too much focus on SM, Chaos, IG. Having Tau, necrons, DE, oks as antagonists gets old and lame. Its pretty much rinse, lather and repeat.

The last time we saw fluff for Eldar as the protagonists was a trilogy and Tau had fire warrior. That being said, the rules are badly written and only certain forces are balanced.

I absolutely love the lore. I also love modelling, painting and playing, but the lore is what makes 40K unique for me.

Other games have great gameplay compared to 40K, but I just love the lore and miniatures for the factions I play so much that I enjoy painting every single foot soldier and vehicle in my Ork and IG armies. Getting to play with them is just a big bonus for me.

I have soon read every book about Imperial Guard and the Inquisition (there aren't many featuring Orks unfortunately), and I have thoroughly enjoyed them all.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Some of the lore is really good. But some of it is so horrible that I ended up making up my own SM chapter with a different combat doctrine since the fluff is so stupidly inconsistent with the game. The stuff I wrote was pretty sub par but I couldn't stomach all the "CODEX APPROVED MANOVEURS" and "1000 SM TAKE OVER UNIVERSE!" fluff.

EDIT: The worst thing is how each SM is unstoppable juggernaut that takes 20 years to create.

I LOVE that.

;D

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Some of the lore is really good. But some of it is so horrible that I ended up making up my own SM chapter with a different combat doctrine since the fluff is so stupidly inconsistent with the game. The stuff I wrote was pretty sub par but I couldn't stomach all the "CODEX APPROVED MANOVEURS" and "1000 SM TAKE OVER UNIVERSE!" fluff.

EDIT: The worst thing is how each SM is unstoppable juggernaut that takes 20 years to create.

Honestly you can say that of any big sprawling setting like Star Wars or Halo.

 Kain wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Some of the lore is really good. But some of it is so horrible that I ended up making up my own SM chapter with a different combat doctrine since the fluff is so stupidly inconsistent with the game. The stuff I wrote was pretty sub par but I couldn't stomach all the "CODEX APPROVED MANOVEURS" and "1000 SM TAKE OVER UNIVERSE!" fluff.

EDIT: The worst thing is how each SM is unstoppable juggernaut that takes 20 years to create.

Honestly you can say that of any big sprawling setting like Star Wars or Halo.

That is very true. What's good about 40k though is that it is a lot more open than either of those universes. 40k does pay a price for that though...

i like Ork lore ... normally about half a page at the most before that one dies then another one comes in ...

the space marines being rare and using old equipment that can not be replaced. for that .. there are a lot of them out there still ... so i can agree on more stories that do not focus on them ...

i have only just started reading the lore (started collecting the mini's back in 08 just recently started playing tho) ...

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Some of the lore is really good. But some of it is so horrible that I ended up making up my own SM chapter with a different combat doctrine since the fluff is so stupidly inconsistent with the game. The stuff I wrote was pretty sub par but I couldn't stomach all the "CODEX APPROVED MANOVEURS" and "1000 SM TAKE OVER UNIVERSE!" fluff.

EDIT: The worst thing is how each SM is unstoppable juggernaut that takes 20 years to create.

Honestly you can say that of any big sprawling setting like Star Wars or Halo.

That is very true. What's good about 40k though is that it is a lot more open than either of those universes. 40k does pay a price for that though...

Star Wars' entire EU canon is currently in flux until Disney releases it's movie. So we'll see if it becomes more open or not.

 Kain wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
Some of the lore is really good. But some of it is so horrible that I ended up making up my own SM chapter with a different combat doctrine since the fluff is so stupidly inconsistent with the game. The stuff I wrote was pretty sub par but I couldn't stomach all the "CODEX APPROVED MANOVEURS" and "1000 SM TAKE OVER UNIVERSE!" fluff.

EDIT: The worst thing is how each SM is unstoppable juggernaut that takes 20 years to create.

Honestly you can say that of any big sprawling setting like Star Wars or Halo.

That is very true. What's good about 40k though is that it is a lot more open than either of those universes. 40k does pay a price for that though...

Star Wars' entire EU canon is currently in flux until Disney releases it's movie. So we'll see if it becomes more open or not.

Disney's/Chee's announced that it's likely they're going to be destroying the holocron canon tier completely, making everything equal in canonicity. So the Holiday Special's canon.

Commissar Benny wrote:
One thing that always surprises me in this hobby is how many people play WH40K, but have no interest in the story. Are there parts of the story that are poorly written or could have been done better? Of course. I largely believe however WH40K has one of the most interesting futuristic sci-fi settings out there. Why does one play WH40K if they have no interest in the setting? Like, what specifically draws them to WH40k when there are hundreds of other tabletop games out there that are far less expensive? Have you met player like this?

Happy to say I have never met a 40k or fantasy gamer who doesn't relish the whole sci fi and fantasy worlds. Can't imagine engaging with this hobby Ina sterile way.

If you don't like the lore then I don't really understand how you can like 40K.

I mean, without the lore, 40K is just a game. And it's not a good game. It's a poorly written, convoluted game and there are other TT games out there with objectively better rules and cheaper models.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
If you don't like the lore then I don't really understand how you can like 40K.

I mean, without the lore, 40K is just a game. And it's not a good game. It's a poorly written, convoluted game and there are other TT games out there with objectively better rules and cheaper models.

This is completely true.

It's the "feel" of the setting, its imagery, its "futuristic-history" vibe... it's all the things that make 40K 40K. I cannot fathom getting into this game just for a competitive game or even a thing to do on a Saturday with some friends, not without lore and story being a major component to it.

Hmm. Kind of a tricky question, actually. I love the setting, which is inextricably part of the Lore. But I read one of the books and, erk. It sucked. I want those hours back; they'd be better spent watching paint dry.

However, while any sense of story doesn't interest me, the setting is totally rad. Plus, I don't see how the greater story affects my games (I play kitchen table warhammer, and don't get out to the local store much).

The models are great, the context is great, I'm just not that concerned if Larry the Lunatic got his Sword of Tank-Bashing on this planet or that planet, and who his second cousin is, and whether Terrance the Terror is the Emporer or the Duke or just the royal Fluffer.

I stick for the lore too.

I've always enjoyed setting the models onto a table, and watching as hundreds of men die with spectacular explosions.
Which is why I loved 5th ed rules - Once you've given the rules a once-over, and played a handful of games, you kinda know your stuff in the game, and can just set up whenever, drop some plastic crack, and play for gaks and giggles.

But then 6th came and now I hardly ever play anymore, it's too complicated, overburdened and takes effing forever to do even the simplest of tasks. If it wasn't for the lore, I'd have sold my stuff already.

 Selym wrote:
I stick for the lore too.

I've always enjoyed setting the models onto a table, and watching as hundreds of men die with spectacular explosions.
Which is why I loved 5th ed rules - Once you've given the rules a once-over, and played a handful of games, you kinda know your stuff in the game, and can just set up whenever, drop some plastic crack, and play for gaks and giggles.

But then 6th came and now I hardly ever play anymore, it's too complicated, overburdened and takes effing forever to do even the simplest of tasks. If it wasn't for the lore, I'd have sold my stuff already.

I love the lore.

Most of it.

Enough of it to keep me here.

The lore + the hobby +- the game is enough for me to give it a thumbs up.

Aye, it is complicated, but we are getting the hang of it.

People seem to forget that 40k is not sci-fi, it's pure high fantasy in a space opera setting. It's *supposed* to be over the top, it's supposed to have larger than life characters and improbable, cinematic battles, that's the entire point.

If it was just pure grimdark with nothing to temper it, the only people who would play it would only shop in Hot Topic.

I was fine with the 6th ed rules until I started using a flyer and libby. Things got confusing, fast.