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 codices have gotten much fatter since I started 40k. Most of the fluff was written in small text boxes in the margins of the rulebooks with the occasional full or half-page short story. This left a lot of questions and mysteries in the storyline. In recent years, with the plethora of novels, expansion of codices, and enlarged rulebook fluff, it kind of feels like all the empty places on the map have been filled in. It's given players a much larger sandbox, but it's also lost that suspenseful feeling of "here be dragons..."

This tends to happen with every fantasy/sci-fi/comic world. Superheroes go from the simple premise of a masked vigilante to a world filled with super-villains, resurrection, inter-galactic warfare, and magic. Expanded universe stories answer every question about every character in Star Wars that had even a single frame of screen time. Suspension of disbelief gets tested more and more as the storylines get increasingly supernatural and outlandish.

So the question, is there such a thing as too much fluff?

Good question.

I think fluff is more exciting when it is just a vague starting point and you fill in the details with your own imagination / campaigns.

That said, it is good fun reading when answers to big questions or secrects are revealed!

Hmm, in some cases I would say yes. I think I preferred the Heresy when it was a distant memory with a few remembered tales.

I think the fluff in the codices is good though as it gives you some detail on what you are playing and what their achievements or woes have been. But again, you wouldn't want their entire back story filed out as where would that leave your army.

There's still plenty of blank pages in fluff. So 'dragons' aren't extinct

Personally I like the fluff. Imagination is nice but... Did you read anything "scientific" from middle ages? This seems pretty wild from now.
For me, ignorance is not a bliss.

No. And I feel people who think so are forgetting just how vast 40k is, geographically, temporally, and subjectively. Want to play a unique Ultramarine company with a different captain? Set yourself in 500.M41 and you've got an entirely blank set of captains to play with, while very little else in the universe has changed. Want to play out the Siege of Vraks but don't want to use Death Korps? There are a hundred other worlds who experienced battles exactly like it with different IG regiments. Don't like how the Primarchs are portrayed? Tell your HH battles through the memoirs of a veteran marine, whose writings have since been recopied, edited, and censored to fit the current leadership's views. In 40k, the truth is meaningless. It is not something to cling to but instead to be embellished, reimagined and retold in new ways, from new sources and perspectives.

I dont care if GW adds more fluff or not.. I dont like the fact they add fluff in a codex and then charge more for it .. (the new Eldar codex).

The thing Fluffwise i can understand is either playing against, or watching a Bat Rep... and you have a 40 year old dude telling a story they made themselves before they play the game... you know to try to be all creative or have some kind of story behind the scenario.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx9pZ1wV5r8

Heres an example video if anyone cares to watch... it takes place a couple of mins in... the last thing i want to do is listen to an awful story before i play a game of 40k.

Sorry it really grinds my gears. If somedid that in a game shop before we played.. I'd either just pack up and leave.. or just wait outside till they are done telling their little story hahah

Ah, so this is a case of "I don't like it therefore you're a loser if you do like it."

Sort of, yes. I think fluff that explains every little detail of every little thing in a character/Chapter/whatever's history is too much. Especially when such things are meant to be near-mythical in the current era of M40.

For, say, a Space Marine Chapter, its fluff should include stuff about its origins, the culture of the world(s) it recruits from, its role in major events in Imperial history, its greatest battles, its greatest defeats, and a rough listing of lesser actions it's been involved in and where. It should provide a few references to heroes of the Chapter in its history, some info on its relics, and enough mystery that allows players to build on for their own stories.

 curran12 wrote:
Ah, so this is a case of "I don't like it therefore you're a loser if you do like it."

Exactly!.... no not exactly

Its more like.. i came here to play 40k... not to listen to some half assed story someone wrote on a napkin.

 Psienesis wrote:
For, say, a Space Marine Chapter, its fluff should include stuff about its origins, the culture of the world(s) it recruits from, its role in major events in Imperial history, its greatest battles, its greatest defeats, and a rough listing of lesser actions it's been involved in and where. It should provide a few references to heroes of the Chapter in its history, some info on its relics, and enough mystery that allows players to build on for their own stories.

I would argue that the vast majority of chapters have far less than that.

 Snoopdeville3 wrote:
Its more like.. i came here to play 40k... not to listen to some half assed story someone wrote on a napkin.

I understand your viewpoint but I do not agree with it. That is all I wanted to say.

 Snoopdeville3 wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Ah, so this is a case of "I don't like it therefore you're a loser if you do like it."

Exactly!.... no not exactly

Its more like.. i came here to play 40k... not to listen to some half assed story someone wrote on a napkin.

I got the politeness. I write my fluff but it is available if people want it or ask for it, or are discussing fluff. So I get that part. But throwing out the insults and dismissing someone's hobby is kind of a low move.

That said, you're complaining about a video battle report, people like the fluff to a story so they get it. Or you can skip it and move on. That said, I question your taste in batreps (BTP's reputation is....eh).

I don't think there's too much unless you're trying to fit it all in at once.
I view the 40K fluff a little how I view the World of Darkness fluff (bear with me..). In WoD, as a player you learn about the clan/group you play as, unless you're running the game. You don't go and learn in-depth knowledge about all the different clans (unless you're particularly interested, and are very good at pretending not to know things).

In 40K, I pay attention to the fluff pertinent to the armies I play, and learn about their motives and history.
But I am delighted to have other players tell me about their own army, and why they love it.
We'll give a little back and forth as we play, "So why's he got X drawn on his vehicle? Nice."

That's not to say that I don't read any rules other than my own codex, or that I want to have a half hour discussion about fluff mid-game...

 curran12 wrote:

 Snoopdeville3 wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Ah, so this is a case of "I don't like it therefore you're a loser if you do like it."

Exactly!.... no not exactly

Its more like.. i came here to play 40k... not to listen to some half assed story someone wrote on a napkin.

I got the politeness. I write my fluff but it is available if people want it or ask for it, or are discussing fluff. So I get that part. But throwing out the insults and dismissing someone's hobby is kind of a low move.

That said, you're complaining about a video battle report, people like the fluff to a story so they get it. Or you can skip it and move on. That said, I question your taste in batreps (BTP's reputation is....eh).

If its someone hobby to make fluff thats fine, I dont want any part of it during a 40k match. Last I read there wasnt anything stated in the rulebook you have to create a story to play the game.

O trust me a skipped it, I used the video as an example in case someone didnt understand what i was talking about.

You question my tastes in Bat reps? ha... I specifically used BTP as an example of what i think is a horrible way to start a game. I dont recall saying I love watching these guys BAT reps.

I think it is fine if you want to create your own fluff, and in the appropriate setting it would be fine, like say a campaign or narrative series. but of you are just at your FLGS, you should definitely ask before delving into your personal armies fluff. Many people In the game just want the crunch, and that's ok. if it is ever in doubt just ask, and if someone starts into their own personal fluff and you don't want to hear it, be polite but ask if we can get on to the game. its all about respect and treating others civilly,

Looking at the old Codices... wat? The new codices have barely any new fluff, they're largely filled with reprinted garbage that seems to decrease in quality with each edition. The only time new information ever comes in is through the timeline or maybe two sentences somewhere. What fills the codices is art, and I use that term loosely. Giant pictures gobble up picture space and waste space in general, with only a couple looking good (the old colored unit paintings from the 6th Ed Space Marine codex look better than the rest of the art).

If anything we have less fluff than ever before, with GW preferring it to sell you it through supplements or dataslates. Gone are the days of beautifully written pieces from the third edition that I only wish I was old enough at the time to fully enjoy.

From a few weeks back

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/644152.page

 Wyzilla wrote:
Looking at the old Codices... wat? The new codices have barely any new fluff, they're largely filled with reprinted garbage that seems to decrease in quality with each edition. The only time new information ever comes in is through the timeline or maybe two sentences somewhere. What fills the codices is art, and I use that term loosely. Giant pictures gobble up picture space and waste space in general, with only a couple looking good (the old colored unit paintings from the 6th Ed Space Marine codex look better than the rest of the art).

If anything we have less fluff than ever before, with GW preferring it to sell you it through supplements or dataslates. Gone are the days of beautifully written pieces from the third edition that I only wish I was old enough at the time to fully enjoy.

I agree with the pictures thats for sure! hahah

Definitely.

I remember being massively let down when I finally found Lexicanum and learned what Necrons really were, after years and years of mystery. (And I mean pre-Newcrons, here. These were dial-up days.)

I also feel this way about the Horus Heresy. An awful lot of stuff I dislike has come out of that.

I think it can be a symptom of not knowing what corners to illuminate. It would be really cool to have more information about Tau rank and progression and how the other castes function, but I absolutely don't need to know what's up with the Ethereals, if anything even is. The mystery is better.

But mystery only exists in Warhammer until someone decides it'll make more money to solve it.

It is a mixed bag. I like well done fluff, which coming from the GW team is growing increasingly rare. I enjoy when there is a mystery surrounding a faction or individual that novels can hint at and reveal piece by piece over time before having the reveal and putting the truth out there. It helps advance the setting and provides background from which I can base armies.

I dislike fluff when they decide to find some mystery and then fill it with whatever first came to mind or when they answer it in such a way that it destroys gaps in which people have made their armies. The Horus Heresy novels are an example of this as they present a timeline of every minor event in the heresy and stop the two "lost" chapter from taking part.

I like mysteries, but it is nice to have them revealed after some time. Otherwise it is not really a mystery but rather becomes a 'we were too lazy to make up more fluff so do it yourself'.
I really love the Horus Heresy books (the FW ones, not BL, those are awful)
Also, the Horus Heresy timeline being filled does not at all stop the lost legions from taking part. The lost legions were completely purged from memory, so it is likely they were also purged from stories and records of the Heresy, so that it seems that they were never there and never existed.

Well.....yesterday I spent a good 6 hours or more in a letter to a friend describing some of the insect life, the minor effect of a minor mineral on the human body, and a very small town , on Kaurava III .

So, yeah, I love fluff.

On the other hand , as a Sisters / Inquisition / Ecclesiarchy fan I'm often quite annoyed at the complete inability , or complete lack of desire , of secular and materialist westerners to wrap their minds around the theocratic IoM . To role-play it for cris sake.
Subsequently I worry the fluff will wind up going in the direction of wish fulfillment and general dumbing-down that ultimately translates into Dallas ( in space) Keeping up with the Kardashians ( with servo skulls ) or Little House on the Prairie ( with hover cars ) . In which case I would just as well save myself a lot of money and bother by just going and watching Star Trek re-runs.

This make-believe stuff is presumably supposed to be some sort of escape from , or vacation from, reality. In practice though , it often seems to be the exact opposite : an escape back to high school, a vacation back to high school, with its ultra-conformist, ultra-cliquish, ultra-dogmatic , pedantic cosmology.

High school ? I've already been there and done that. It was boring and it sucked.