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.

 Yodhrin wrote:

jouso wrote:

It's a matter of how much goodwill from the shareholders does Roundtree have. If his new approach doesn't work in a certain timespan they'll ask for his head.

The shareholders are mostly big funds who give exactly zero gaks about the company or how it's run providing it keeps churning out dem dividends every year, that's how Kirby was able to do whatever the feth he liked for so many years despite declining revenue and customer base - he made "efficiency savings" or just borrowed money and paid out the dividends on time.

Yup, but there are several indicators pointing out that they can't ride that wave anymore.

And it's not like Roundtree was an outsider. He's almost 20 years in and made it all the way to CEO so he's still a Kirby man even if he's evidently bringing some changes in.

When a big fund starts receiving too many indicators that the company will not deliver they either sell or bunch up voting rights and bring in a new CEO they can trust to turn the company around.

The company I worked a few years back had exactly that happen to them. The owners sold a majority stake to a big fund which first of all planted a new CEO, which over the course of 6 months changed 3/4 of higher management and roughly 1/3 of middle management. Most of them brought from the outside (very little internal promotion).

That's how funds operate, once/if GW fails to deliver the current management is in hot water.

Does it allow you to upload your own artwork? Because I'm pretty handy with a digital pixel brush...

I was sad when the Old World ended, but over the months after the End Times I started to think about the Old World in a different way. The more I think about, the more I saw the Old World was sorta generic in a few areas that I didn't realize before. Maybe it's just me who is thinking about it.

 Nova_Impero wrote:
I was sad when the Old World ended, but over the months after the End Times I started to think about the Old World in a different way. The more I think about, the more I saw the Old World was sorta generic in a few areas that I didn't realize before. Maybe it's just me who is thinking about it.

Pretty much every fantasy or sci fi world has a lot of generic elements. People like a bit of familiarity thrown in with a bit of uniqueness. If you tried to create a fantasy world without any generic elements my guess is that it would suck and not be very popular.

Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

Baron Klatz wrote:
Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

What a load of old pish. His knowledge of WHF as a setting evidently isn't as extensive as he believes, given he can caricature Kislev as a land of "slavic stereotypes where everyone drinks vodka and is called Ivan", and believes that all the Chaos tribes are blonde & ginger Viking ripoffs. Maybe he should have spent more time reading those WFRP books(and a few BL novels for good measure) and less leaving them on the shelves to gather dust. Then we get to the laughable stage of the screed when he blames WHF for his own lack of originality, because the basic illustrative "here's how to play and use the fluff we've written as a baseline" GW-provided adventure packs use the basic material - it's amazing how he's managed to become a world-renowed expert on original fantasy settings and RPG games without figuring out you're supposed to have a competent GM modifying the campaigns or outright creating new ones from scratch rather than just slavishly replaying the provided intro ones over and over again.

The best bit, the part that genuinely made me laugh out loud, was the part where he contrasts boring, derivative, unoriginal WHF with original, evolving WH40K, a setting that fundamentally amounts to said boring, derivative, unoriginal fantasy with Herbert, Heinlein, and Space Catholicism bolted to the side

Have a word with your friend man, if he keeps furiously paddling up that Egyptian river he'll get lost for good, and given the level of sneering disdain his writing displays nobody will be too keen to go looking for him.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

It makes me wonder, are people only just now discovering WHFB copied historical elements and other fantasy elements? I mean, that article sounds like it's supposed to be some revelation... as if they didn't realise as soon as they started reading about WH the blatantly obvious themes adapted from other sources? I started WHFB when I was about 10 and it was one of the first things I picked up on, a few original elements here and there but otherwise just adapted from what already exists.

Though there definitely are some non-generic elements within WH, originality isn't a big strength of WHFB, it was the way it put all those adapted elements together, fleshed them out, built them in to extensive miniature ranges and made a fun game. Beyond that when they wrote interesting stories within the perhaps not entirely original world.

I guess I've never been in to the whole roleplaying side of WH, maybe if I tried roleplaying in WH worlds I'd find it more boring.... but then i find roleplaying boring to begin with so that's probably not going to be a good gauge of anything

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

It makes me wonder, are people only just now discovering WHFB copied historical elements and other fantasy elements? I mean, that article sounds like it's supposed to be some revelation... as if they didn't realise as soon as they started reading about WH the blatantly obvious themes adapted from other sources? I started WHFB when I was about 10 and it was one of the first things I picked up on, a few original elements here and there but otherwise just adapted from what already exists.

Though there definitely are some non-generic elements within WH, originality isn't a big strength of WHFB, it was the way it put all those adapted elements together, fleshed them out, built them in to extensive miniature ranges and made a fun game. Beyond that when they wrote interesting stories within the perhaps not entirely original world.

I guess I've never been in to the whole roleplaying side of WH, maybe if I tried roleplaying in WH worlds I'd find it more boring.... but then i find roleplaying boring to begin with so that's probably not going to be a good gauge of anything

You can derive an original setting from unoriginal elements - pastiche, done well, is every bit as valid as sitting down and writing your whole new world of Gorblevorbula VII, home of the Greeblesnorks, Groowps, and Garblefabulons, from scratch, just as collage can produce art every bit as attractive as some mad acid trip-esque abstract piece painted entirely from your own imagination.

Whelp, we aren't the only ones sore about AoS: http://newsthump.com/2016/03/01/isis-declares-fatwa-against-warhammer-age-of-sigmar/

(Don't think I've seen this posted here before. Apologies if I'm wrong).

Three guesses to which Warmahordes faction they move on to.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

He just realised WFB was generic? Better not tell him how much of 40K is a straight copy of other things with the serial numbers filed off or there'll be hell to pay.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

Half of that read like he was complaining about GW's business strategies but blaming it on the Old World; the other half read like deeply-held personal issues with a GM. There's a little bit of cheap oversimplification for laughs sprinkled in as well, like the written equivalent of talking about an argument you had and using a silly voice for the other person. Oh! And a bit of making fun of Warhammer for using widely-held concepts...that Warhammer helped popularize. Saying Warhammer is derivative for using green, dumb, belligerent orcs is like making fun of Aliens because the Colonial Marines have the same gear as the dudes in Avatar.

One wonders what he thinks of super-original and not-derivative-at-all Age of Sigmar...since he seems to hold 40k as a unique, completely original setting - that can compete with Star Wars, for crying out loud - I'm quite curious to know.

 Yodhrin wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
Yeah, my good friend, Xathrodox, had that exact problem after trying to embrace the old world spirit. He got burnt out, unfortunately.

http://italwaysrainsinnuln.blogspot.com/2016/03/role-playing-rants-coming-to-terms-with.html?m=1

What a load of old pish. His knowledge of WHF as a setting evidently isn't as extensive as he believes, given he can caricature Kislev as a land of "slavic stereotypes where everyone drinks vodka and is called Ivan", and believes that all the Chaos tribes are blonde & ginger Viking ripoffs. Maybe he should have spent more time reading those WFRP books(and a few BL novels for good measure) and less leaving them on the shelves to gather dust. Then we get to the laughable stage of the screed when he blames WHF for his own lack of originality, because the basic illustrative "here's how to play and use the fluff we've written as a baseline" GW-provided adventure packs use the basic material - it's amazing how he's managed to become a world-renowed expert on original fantasy settings and RPG games without figuring out you're supposed to have a competent GM modifying the campaigns or outright creating new ones from scratch rather than just slavishly replaying the provided intro ones over and over again.

The best bit, the part that genuinely made me laugh out loud, was the part where he contrasts boring, derivative, unoriginal WHF with original, evolving WH40K, a setting that fundamentally amounts to said boring, derivative, unoriginal fantasy with Herbert, Heinlein, and Space Catholicism bolted to the side

Have a word with your friend man, if he keeps furiously paddling up that Egyptian river he'll get lost for good, and given the level of sneering disdain his writing displays nobody will be too keen to go looking for him.

First of all, I wanted to say "hello", since this is my first time on Dakka Dakka. Long time lurker, but only now I've decided to create an account. Nice to meet all of you.

Well now...

First critical post that I've recieved since starting my blog, and what a post it is!

Now to buisness. I'll try not to sneer in disdain too much, as I'll try to explain why I think that you've completely misunderstood my post.

My knowledge about WFB or WFRP or 40K isn't as extensive as I think it is. I'm not considering myself an Alpha and a Omega of Games Workshop's franchises. I'm just a guy who played them for most of his life and likes them a lot (yes, even WFB/WFRP!). After many years I've decided to start writing about it in a completely non-professional matter. Just a bloke with his opinions, writing a post every two weeks - that's me. But an expert? Don't make me laugh. I've never said that I was an expert in the first place.

About Kislev and Norse - sorry to break it to you, but they are stereotypes, or rather the guys at GW tried to incorporate slavic tribes into their game, aloing with Vikings. It was a typical case of westerner's idea about life in the east/north. It didn't irk me, it was just funny. Look at the "Checkist" career in Realms of the Ice Queen for example. Pure hilarity. By the way, I didn't said that all tribes are ginger haired and blue eyed. I meant the Norse. Kurgans, Hungs and other northern tribes are not nordic.

I've read quite a lot source books and BL novels over the years. When I'm GMing (and I usually do in my group) I tend to gather as much source material as possible. It's because I've read all those books, I get a pretty good (I think) view on old Warhammer Fantasy.

As for my lack of originality - it's not true. I always try to spice up my games with various pop cultureal references, ideas from other sources and such. I kinda have to do that in WFRP, since the source material gets stale really, really fast. I don't have trouble with being original. The game has and that's a shame.

As for WH40K vs WFB comparison - 40K is a ripoff of other games/ideas/influences, that's true. However it does that so much better and in a more funny, creative way. 40K is in constant flux, it continues to grow and expand. WFB grew for a short time, then stopped, then regressed and finally died, wondering what exactly happened and why AoS is replacing it. As for what I think about AoS you can probably guess from my sneering posts, full of disdain and self-proclaimed greatness.

Finally we come to the last sentence, my favorite. You see, I don't paddle up the river. I'm not looking for fame, fortune or even recognition. I've started this blog because I've simply wanted to write, share my thoughts, opinions and ideas - even those that are not popular. I know that this will sound selfish, but I'm doing this mainly for myself. I just like it. If someone else feels that I'm a braggard, sneer-lord or self-righteous douchenozzle, then more power to him. I'm not going to say what others want to hear, but what I want to say, even if it is inconvenient or "wrong" in that person's mind. I'm entitled to do this, just like you're entitled to post here about me being a "world-renowed expert" (Again, that was good. Made me smile.)

By the way, I was surprised that you didn't wrote anything about that in the comments section? I'd love to engage in a discussion with you, since I reply to every single comment on my Blog. Next time don't be shy and write your feeling there, and not here, where I came only because my analitics showed me that a large portion of traffic was generated from Dakka Dakka.

Once again, I'm really happy to finally be here and I will be sure to post more. This is a great place and I'm sure that my time here won't be wasted.

Mike

Oh, and hi Baron. Nice seeing you here.

Welcome to Dakka.

Yes Warhammer is generic, and there isn't much orginality in its fantasy tropes, however there was a lot of originality in th imagery and the attitude.

It was and is grimdark when grimdark was unsafe for kids, or even a word. It was grimdark through the politically correct age and gets away with it, and it was grimdark when nutcases in American through D&D was satanic.

Second it has a lot of adult themes, but doesn't conform to the usual cheesecake. Now some would consider it an advantage to have hot girl miniature in each faction, and it would be nice to see some. But the vast majority of gaming companies that depict women at all will have them in armoured versions of beachwear or skimpy dresses, and of course they all look like supermodels.

Now there are a lot of things that are tired, the writing style for one. The two dimensional roxxor nature of most of the antagonistic factions, though admittedly some thought has been put into the chaos gods themselves. The overuse of grimdark to an omnipresent cliche. The catastrofiction, and the ignorance of scale.
But people have been handwaving over this since the 80's. The better writers considently overlook the constant impending doom to write more believable fiction inside the Warhammer world, when in ther End Times was in fact an honest appraisal of how things were heading even since Slaves to Darkness came out.

Hey Xathrodox, great to see you on dakka!

... sorry for putting your blog post in the spotlight like that, just wanted to let that one fellow know he wasn't alone in seeing a bit of blandness in the old world.

On the bright side, it's certainly giving people something to talk about!

Baron Klatz wrote:
Hey Xathrodox, great to see you on dakka!

... sorry for putting your blog post in the spotlight like that, just wanted to let that one fellow know he wasn't alone in seeing a bit of blandness in the old world.

On the bright side, it's certainly giving people something to talk about!

No worries. I'm happy for that little fact. After all, the art of dialogue and discussion is important and I like to chat with other people about their feelings towards the hobby. Even if they are in opposite to mine.

Xathrodox, what are the fantasy heavyweights that far surpass Warhammer? I've read some stuff growing up that doesn't hold up well now that I'm older. I did read a book a few years ago called Black Company that was surprisingly different. Then after that I read Sword of Shannara . . .

I will agree Warhammer Fantasy copied a bit from other works but so does 40k, Star Wars and various others. It's kind of the norm to copy LotR these days though there are offshoots here and there. Fantasy combined most of my favorite fantasy things together though into one universe. I mean there are guns, steampunk, magic, daemons, vampires, king arthur and various other things. It also was a bit individual in that the good guys are Germans in a sense (the empire) and Skaven (rat-men) were totally unique. Also ogre kingdoms were a fantasy faction that we don't see enough of on its own.

For me it was the depth and scale of the universe that i loved. Also watch the 'Mark of Chaos' video game cinematic. It set the tone well for me. Empire soldiers are just normal men facing horrors they can't hope to comprehend. It's like if 40k had the imperium with only the imperial guard and no space marines but possibly still chaos marines. The issue is the threat is very real and you can relate more to human citizen soldier than super-human genetically modified death machine that shoot lasers out his butt hole. Age of Sigmar adds marines. There's no real threat in AoS, no coming darkness swallowing everything but good guys beating back bad guys with no resistance. Where's the struggle? Bad guys are just existing to be the next trophy on the wall. That's not cool or interesting.

 Monkey Tamer wrote:
Xathrodox, what are the fantasy heavyweights that far surpass Warhammer? I've read some stuff growing up that doesn't hold up well now that I'm older. I did read a book a few years ago called Black Company that was surprisingly different. Then after that I read Sword of Shannara . . .

It depends really. D&D comes to mind, simply because how diverse and varied all those games are, not to mention the ongoing support and developement of new editions. I'm not a fan personally, since I preffer Dark Fantast setting, but I do respect the classics and D&D is the biggest classic of them all.

Oh and yes, I know that they are also not original in many cases. However there are just so many flavors and variants of them, including really unique ones, that it dosen't really matter in my opinion.

As for games that have that distince "dark and gritty" feeling, I'm surprised that no one made a Dark Souls RPG. For me this is one of the most original and unique Dark Fantasy worlds ever made. What fo you think?

Maybe one day, Xathrodox, maybe one day. The board game is certainly a step in that direction.(though it'll take "Rocks fall" to a new level)

Also, Exalted is a cool looking rpg.

 Xathrodox86 wrote:

It depends really. D&D comes to mind, simply because how diverse and varied all those games are, not to mention the ongoing support and developement of new editions. I'm not a fan personally, since I preffer Dark Fantast setting, but I do respect the classics and D&D is the biggest classic of them all.

Oh and yes, I know that they are also not original in many cases. However there are just so many flavors and variants of them, including really unique ones, that it dosen't really matter in my opinion.

I'm sorry, but it really feels like you're giving a pass to other stuff that you're calling out Warhammer for. What D&D are you talking about? The 'base setting'? It's hard to get more generic than that. Most D&D campaigns have brutal, thuggish orcs. Most D&D campaigns have murderhobo PCs. Yeah, there's a lot more out there, but D&D is really a system and framework rather than a setting, and it's kind of unfair to say "look at all this variety!" when pointing to lots and lots of different campaign worlds as opposed to just the Old World.

...which can get pretty varied, actually. I recommend doing a quick Google for 'The Shadow of the Sun'; it's a second-edition Warhammer Fantasy Campaign writeup, and my second-favorite campaign to read about (the first being the fantastic All-Guardsman Party). It's set in the Border Princes in the wake of the Storm of Chaos, and you've got a lot of the standard archetypes - an elven noble, a wizard's apprentice, a grumbling dwarf - but everyone's put their own spin on things. The dwarf, for example, is using the excuse of grudge-settling in order to buy more time away from his arranged marriage. There's so much creativity involved, all rooted in the Warhammer setting and mining some really long-standing background for cool moments. You don't have to put some bizarre new spin on classical monsters or move away from real-world inspiration to make a setting interesting. You just have to know how to hook people with it.

There's a few distinct DnD settings- Greyhawk (the Original), Eberron, Forgotten Realms (setting of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden novels) and even the Dragonlance setting- all of which have many novels set in them.

Granted, it's incredibly common for DMs to create their own setting and just use the DnD rules, but it's all relative, really.

For me, there's a huge difference in feeling between those settings. I grew up reading DnD supplements, flipping through The Art of TSR, and failing to enjoy the game itself. The setting always felt 'inoffensive', designed to allow any nerd to do whatever he wanted with it. When I first started reading WHFB, I found the world intriguing. There were and still are some things I didn't like about the setting, but it definitely had a strong flavor.

Essentially, when reading DnD novels, the strength of the writing and characters is all that's keeping me reading. I read them despite the setting. (Although, I honestly have not finished the first Drizzt trilogy or the Dragonlance Chronicles. I just couldn't maintain interest, and the writing was really weak.) With WHFB, the flavor of the setting can save an otherwise dreary book. Even Jonathan Green's writing is palatable in the context of the Old World. (Also, the quality of writing seems much higher in the Black Library. Perhaps the setting inspires the writing more, or perhaps BL knows more about fiction crafting than "start your RPG session in a tavern, then write down what happens.")

Anvildude wrote:
There's a few distinct DnD settings- Greyhawk (the Original), Eberron, Forgotten Realms (setting of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden novels) and even the Dragonlance setting- all of which have many novels set in them.

Granted, it's incredibly common for DMs to create their own setting and just use the DnD rules, but it's all relative, really.

Right, which is why I don't think it's a fair comparison. Eberron's pretty unusual and takes things in a different direction from 'generic fantasy', but Greyhawk? Forgotten Realms? Dragonlance, as much as I love it? They hit even more Tolkien notes than Warhammer. Doesn't seem fair to criticize the Old World for it but give all of D&D a pass.

Anvildude wrote:
There's a few distinct DnD settings- Greyhawk (the Original), Eberron, Forgotten Realms (setting of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden novels) and even the Dragonlance setting- all of which have many novels set in them.

Granted, it's incredibly common for DMs to create their own setting and just use the DnD rules, but it's all relative, really.

Darksun was pretty good and managed to put a pretty neat spin on the standard tropes.

Like any setting, many Dragonlance books were hit or miss. I loved them as a kid. An old beat up copy of Dragons of Autumn Twilight got me into reading for enjoyment at 10 years old. But once you get rid of the nostalgia tinted glasses major flaws in the writing appear. I enjoyed the Elenium by David Eddings, then went on to read the Tamuli by the same author. They were essentially the same books, just in a different setting. For the most part they had the same characters. It's getting harder to impress me as I get older.
With original concepts like Skaven and separate and distinct Chaos gods, I like Warhammer fantasy as a setting. I think that all fantasy settings have certain parameters most follow (magic, fantasy species), and quality depends on the characters and plots. This is what made me enjoy Dark Souls so much. It still had magic and impossible creatures like any other fantasy.
D & D also had Ravenloft and Spelljammer, which I enjoyed as a kid because they were different. I remember another setting, Hollow World, that was a huge disappointment.

Heh. Dragonlance is basically the same book, written 20 times.

The Drizzt novels are pretty decent, though. I started them chronologically, with the Homeland trilogy, so I didn't have the same introduction that others did.


But yeah, DnD is definitely a 'here's a setting to play in' type of creation- I mean, that's what it's for.

And I suppose that might be part of what gives the Old World its unique flavor- it was written not so much so that people could have their own adventures of all kinds, but so that all factions would have a reason to be fighting against all other factions (and themselves) in major ways- which meant that there was a lot less nobility and a lot fewer strong ties, leading to a less common flavour to the world- the Dwarven Grudges especially, as well as the Tomb Kings- it's surprisingly rare that you find self-willed non-vamp undead being a major faction, much less with the Egyptian, "Death is holy/sacred" aspect rather than as a horrible perversion of power politics. (Can you tell which armies I played/play?)

Well, considering D&D is rooted in wargaming turned fantasy and borrowed heavily from Tolkien, it's kind of hard to view it as very "original". It pretty much created most modern RPG tropes, for better or for worse. Subseqeunt settings varied in creativity- most still borrowed heavily from Tolkienesque fantasy, but Dark Sun and Planescape stand out as notable exceptions.

WHFB took heavy cues from Michael Moorcock and rejected the Tolkien morality paradigm (and it's unfortunate implications). Instead, it drew fantasy into a darker direction. In many ways, it is kind of like a dark Tokien- still heavily inspired by history, but drawing in Chaos to a largely immoral world instead. And GW certainly made their imprints on fantasy as well- green orcs and goblins, warriors of Chaos, high helmed elves, etc.

In light of D&D, where characters often become more like superheroes or demigods, the Warhammer world presented a much grimmer picture rooted in mortality, danger and death. Much like Chaosium's Stormbringer! but with more plague :-)

I spent the last weekend playing 8th edition followed by playing the new total war last night. Seeing the map of the old world was fantastic

I wonder how many people will play the game maybe for nostalgic reasons and think "hey maybe I'll get back into this" (a group of us did just that when DoW2 came out) then find AoS bears no resemblance to Warhammer and so they won't bother. Or go and try KoW.

Daston wrote:
I spent the last weekend playing 8th edition followed by playing the new total war last night. Seeing the map of the old world was fantastic

I wonder how many people will play the game maybe for nostalgic reasons and think "hey maybe I'll get back into this" (a group of us did just that when DoW2 came out) then find AoS bears no resemblance to Warhammer and so they won't bother. Or go and try KoW.

I haven't bought Total War yet, but I am thinking it may just depress me more than anything