40k vs. Fantasy

[house_cawdor]

Who is currently writing the rules for fantasy vs 40k?

I do not play fantasy, but it seems to me that Fantasy has become a much more developed game in terms of a rules system.

I keep seeing in 40k however, ridiculous rules or too obvious of choices when filling out slots.

I have also noticed that in most cases, one is better taking a named charcter rather than a generic commander.

Thoughts?

[Albavar]

Don't get too excited. Fantasy followed 40Ks lead on True Line of Sight and some terrain concepts which has really turned gameplay upside down. In my opinion, this is one of the worst things they could have done. It works for loosely linked squads, but blocks of troops without thermal sights should have visibility and mobility blocked by forests and such. Maybe its just me...

[Mr.Pickelz]

common sense is hard to get into game-play terms without complicating it to(or beyond) a point of no return.

that said, i would love some simple area terrain rules, however that isn't the case in 5th/8th.

[Mauglum.]

Hi Mr.Pickelz.
Out of the 30+ game systems I have played in the last 28 years, 40k is by far the most complicated and abstract rule set, that delivers very little in the way of gameplay.:eek:
(It has lots of restrictive simple rules that are not in synergy with the source material.)

Most of the great games developed by GW have far more gameplay and less pages of rules , but are relagated to limbo in thier Specialist Games area.
(Blood Bowl is a prime example of great game development IMO.)

If you want to see some common sense aplied buy the bucket full, look at the new Kings Of War rule set by Alessio Calvatore.(Its free to down load on the Mantic web site , along with good value for money fantasy minatures. )

Even my amateur re write for 40k managed to get more game play in its 14 pages than the current rules manage in 70 ish pages.:eek:

The main diference between WHFB and 40k is WHFB rules were written for WHFB
And current 40k rules are just modified WHFB rules.

TTFN

[Dalleron]

I have to slightly disagree with that.

40k may at one point have been based of WHFB rules in the past. And some core rules may still be common with the Fantasy. But from what I've gathered on 8th edition, it's rules seem to be a mishmash of old fantasy, some 40k and even some LOTR/WotR rules.

[Mauglum.]

Hi Dalleron.
Rogue Trader used exactly the same rules as WHFB 3rd ed rules.
2nd ed 40k continued to use WHFB rules.

For 3rd ed they wanted 40k to be different.
They had the chioce of basing it on the EPIC rules, a modern rule set for large battle games. or chopping up the WHFB rules to alow more models on the table.
Gess what GW corperate wanted.....

They have since removed the only 2 things that made sense for the new game' Movment stats' and 'to hit modifiers', and kept the unsuiatable game mechanics from WHFB.

8th ed WHFB has undergone some changes to magic (as always,) and movment.But is basicaly recognisable as the same game as 3rd ed WHFB.

When 40k gets a NEW rule set written for the current game play it wont NEED extra rule sets to cover all of its game play.(USRs Special rules , Vehicles rules.)

TTFN