Game Does not Match the Fluff

[Lhu27]

I love the Warhammer 40k fiction. I think its the best Sci Fi out there. That being said I'm really down on how the game plays out on the table top. I feel that it does not match at all how the fluff describes it. Ive gone so far as to write a letter to GW stating that. Any one else feel the same and why? After a few comments ill post why i feel it doesn't match the awesome background and fiction of the setting.

Armies I own

Tyranids
Tau
IG x2
Chaos Space Marines
Chaos Daemons
Space Marines X3
Blood Angles
Grey Knights

[Ssyrie]

The problem with the fluff is that it's showing one side as the protagonists, most of whom need to actually survive the story (or at least not die till the end). If you can find the rules for 'The Movie Space Marines' trying playing two squads against each other. See how many turns it takes just for one marine too die. The fluff always exaggerates one side over the other which would make for a vastly one sided game.

It's a problem with many sci-fi/fantasy games where the fluff and the rules don't seem to resemble one another. I used to play a lot of Battletech and can say that the game doesn't resemble how the battles play out in any of the novels. Battles in the books seemed vastly more decisive than the slow grind the game presents.

[daboarder]

The problem with the fluff is that it's showing one side as the protagonists, most of whom need to actually survive the story (or at least not die till the end). If you can find the rules for 'The Movie Space Marines' trying playing two squads against each other. See how many turns it takes just for one marine too die. The fluff always exaggerates one side over the other which would make for a vastly one sided game.

It's a problem with many sci-fi/fantasy games where the fluff and the rules don't seem to resemble one another. I used to play a lot of Battletech and can say that the game doesn't resemble how the battles play out in any of the novels. Battles in the books seemed vastly more decisive than the slow grind the game presents.

Pretty much this.

theres also a practical consideration (good luck buying enough gants to represent an accurate Tyranid swarm)

[George Labour]

You think 40k is bad about this? Try playing Flames of War or fields of glory.

germans winning at Normandy and or Kursk ,or the spartans getting curbstomped at thermopylae are incredibly common events.

[daboarder]

You think 40k is bad about this? Try playing Flames of War or fields of glory.

germans winning at Normandy and or Kursk ,or the spartans getting curbstomped at thermopylae are incredibly common events.

you'll akways have these sorts of problems with historical that are also intending to offer equality of competition. Because those battles were as much decided by the strategic choices that allowed the victorious side to bring more effective force to bear than the opponent. And a wargame at its heart usually deals with only the tactical decisions.

take Kursk for example, your never going to have a wargame realistically represent the shear strategic dominance enjoyed by the Soviets over the Germans.....because in almost every single game, the Soviets would win.

[Lord Manton]

I'd be interested to know what your opinion is OP. If it has to do with Space Marines not being as powerful as they are in the novels and fluff, then I think you should remember that in the fluff, the enemies are rarely the bad guys we're used to dealing with. Often, the Characters are trying to take down Cultist uprisings, or they're hunting down a particular enemy, rather than fighting a protracted war.

The other thing to consider is the big difference between S3 and S4 in the game. IG grunts, Eldar, Dark Eldar and Tau are all S3; Space Marines are S4, this means they can punch through the back of a battle tank with their bare hands. I think this is commonly overlooked.

In terms of the battles in the fluff being more decisive, it's because one side usually has a distinct advantage. Also, you have to remember that in the fluff they are usually talking about wars that encompass many different battles. The Table top really only represents a single, rather small battle. It also doesn't take into account the fact that if a Tyranid Hive Ship is destroyed, the Nids on the ground will have a much harder time of it, or if an Ork Warboss is killed, usually the underling bosses will then stop prosecuting the larger Waagh! and start fighting amongst themselves to determine the new Warboss.

There are a lot of different factors in what makes a fluff battle happen the way it does, whereas the game tends to focus more on a fair(ish) battle between two small fragments of a larger force to make the game fun. If you want to get the fluff to correspond more to your games, try your hand at some mismatched battles and really test your tactical skills.

Whilst I agree that there are differences between the fluff and the game, I think this can be forgiven, because if it was a closer match, I think it wouldn't be as fun, nor would it be feasible (eg a true Nid swarm).

[Denzark]

You think 40k is bad about this? Try playing Flames of War or fields of glory.

germans winning at Normandy and or Kursk ,or the spartans getting curbstomped at thermopylae are incredibly common events.

The Spartans did get curbstomped at Thermopylae...

[Cutter]

The Spartans did get curbstomped at Thermopylae...

I think someone even made a movie about that...

[Tyrendian]

The Spartans did get curbstomped at Thermopylae...

there's a difference between losing the battle for strategic gain by buying time and "getting curbstomped" though, which is what George was hinting at I assume

[Mr Mystery]

Kerbstomped surely?

/pedantmode

[Cutter]

Kerbstomped surely?

/pedantmode

Kirbystomped usually.

[Charon]

I'd be interested to know what your opinion is OP. If it has to do with Space Marines not being as powerful as they are in the novels and fluff, then I think you should remember that in the fluff, the enemies are rarely the bad guys we're used to dealing with. Often, the Characters are trying to take down Cultist uprisings, or they're hunting down a particular enemy, rather than fighting a protracted war.

I guess he is more refering to "army composition"

While Eldar is done really well fluffwise (small units of Aspects in Serpents is in the books and thats what we see on the table too) other armies are quite the opposite.
Unending waves of Gaunts outnumbering even the Imperial Guard translates on the tabletop into "a few monstrous flyers with their big buddies". Hard to outnumber IG when your basic gaunt is more expensive than an imperial solider/conscript.

[-Tom-]

I guess he is more refering to "army composition"

While Eldar is done really well fluffwise (small units of Aspects in Serpents is in the books and thats what we see on the table too) other armies are quite the opposite.
Unending waves of Gaunts outnumbering even the Imperial Guard translates on the tabletop into "a few monstrous flyers with their big buddies". Hard to outnumber IG when your basic gaunt is more expensive than an imperial solider/conscript.

Maybe for that though, you have to imagine that what you're seeing on a tabletop is like some sort of counter on a tactical map layed out on a table in the War HQ. Maybe 1 SM model on the table does represent 1 SM, but then 1 guardsman on the table represents 100 guard infantry, say, and 1 gaunt on the table is really representing 10,000 gaunts.

Like if there was a map layed out on a big mission table for WW2 missions, 1 model tank placed on that map wouldn't just mean 1 tank, but instead a tank battalion maybe.

[Path Walker]

The pursuit of balance is what changes this in Charon's example, if you wanted to play a horde of gaunts outnumbering a beleaguered IG force holding the line (i'm thinking like Starship Troopers now) this can be done but you'd need to change the win conditions, say the IG have to keep a certain model alive for a certain number of turns, but the Tyranids have to use mainly gaunt's and gants but can recycle those squads once they're destroyed.

To really represent the fluff, you have to move past the idea that the missions in the book are all there is, the Altar of War books all have great fluffy missions, as do the campaign books

[clively]

Considering that the fluff features things like an inquisitor killing space marines in close combat With nothing more than a combat knife, I don't exactly put a whole lot of stock in what the black library fluff states. To me the black library books are just one "opinion" of what happened. There might be a kernel of truth in it or it could all be hogwash.

So, no, it doesn't bother me in the least. After all why should the "truth" get in the way of a good story.

[Erik Setzer]

Ghazghkull can punch his way out of a Mawloc and is pretty much unkillable, is an extreme psyker who can communicate across the galaxy, and inspires Orks to win anywhere he goes. In game terms he will die in one round of shooting.

Orks get bigger and stronger the more they fight. In 40K Skarboyz don't even exist any more to represent this.

Orks are able to tear guys up in combat without needing power klaws, and rip open Terminator armor with their choppas. This was represented in-game once... until they decided Space Marines weren't able to slap Orks down in combat easily enough. Orks are also able to take serious wounds and keep going... in 40K that's only represented by Toughness, which can still be gotten around with a bolter. Even an Ork Warboss doesn't have Eternal Warrior, though you can literally blow his arms off and he'll keep coming. And there was a story where Space Marines cornered an Ork Warboss and his Orks, went in for the "easy pickings," and lost three companies before they decided to stop letting the Orks slaughter Space Marines.

And then there's the fluff in the Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer, where the Imperials (whose point of view we're usually getting in the novels) tell their soldiers that an Ork Warboss is a wimp, the main gun on a Hammerhead is just there for decoration, and Eldar are weedy gits who pose absolutely no threat at all.

Oh, and the C'tan are Star Gods. Or not. Or are, but are broken into shards. And those shards are different in power. But they're not. The Necrons worshipped the C'tan. Oh, wait, now they betrayed them. The Old Ones made the Eldar, Orks, and humans... or did they? The Necrons stole the Cullexus planet because they wanted more Pariahs, but now the Pariahs are all gone.

So, right there, we have two points: Fluff is written from certain perspectives, and it changes a LOT. Go pick up a 3rd edition Necron codex and compare the background in it to the current background. Try reading Nightbringer and making sense of it, or Andy Chambers' story about Deceiver messing with some Adeptus Mechanicus. Hunt down the fluff about the Talismans of Vaul (aka Blackstone Fortresses) and their true purpose. Try to match that with the fluff now, not that many years later.

It's madness to try to hold the game to the fluff that's ever-changing and depends on perspective.

[Arkhan Land]

The pursuit of balance is what changes this in Charon's example, if you wanted to play a horde of gaunts outnumbering a beleaguered IG force holding the line (i'm thinking like Starship Troopers now) this can be done but you'd need to change the win conditions, say the IG have to keep a certain model alive for a certain number of turns, but the Tyranids have to use mainly gaunt's and gants but can recycle those squads once they're destroyed.

To really represent the fluff, you have to move past the idea that the missions in the book are all there is, the Altar of War books all have great fluffy missions, as do the campaign books

The few times me and someone else have done the Apache VS Troopers (For the UK Zulu vs RA) style scenarios and I think sometimes worrying about "winning" isn't the point of these scenarios, more of something to enjoy for an hour or so, if yr lucky to have a models painted and a camera take some pictures.

I think theres more than just the Pursuit of Balance" and the "Pursuit of Fluff" in that GW has to make a game for the most specific of friends and campaingers and then the most generic of newly met opponents who may or may not be fighting with forces that would ever face off in the game. its a tough line to walk. oh and to try and make money while doing it, ouch.

This was discussed in a pervious thread, but whats at stake here is the eternal battle between two things:

1) The Desire for ambiguity in the Fluff that allows for players to expand little bits of the universe around their army
versus
2) The desire for "Universe Expansion" on the part of the company for the players (and for the profits)

as an example look at the great work that was BOLS' 30k Battln PDF from years before the current FW 30k, or think about the era where GW fans succesfully scored material (Rule suggestion/Pictures) into some of GWs non-codex publications essentially sharing player made fluff suggestions, models/characters.

times have changed, previously GW built an empire on the inclusiveness of its fans in the creation of the Universe, now its hammering out little detail after detail of specific battles and through its RPGs often specifically defining the internal working order of the Imperium and several other realms.

Im okay with either so long as they leave enough room for both kinds of play but Im worried only one will last. I don't this **** to turn into essentially an exspensive nuanced Pokeee-man or into some lawaless RPG. 40k is kind of its own little mess

[Cactus]

I think the OP is right, the game play isn't always reflective of the fluff.

I think reading a novel narrating game mechanics would be very boring.

Also, a game that simulates reality would be neigh impossible to replicate in a tabletop game.

It is a game that uses models after all. I think GW does a fairly good job at creating a representative game that simulates battles, gives "heroes" special abilities/stats/weapons that allows a player to root for, and creates a setting (terrain, missions, turns, objectives) for the models to interact.

GW's fluff writers may have produced a better quality product than their teammates who have written rules, but that doesn't detract from the game or make it any less fun to read novels or play games. In fact, the fantastic literature that the Black Library publishes only motivates me to play more games and paint new armies.

[Denzark]

Good spot MM, kerbstomped it is.

Irrespective of spelling though, losing 100% of the ground you are trying to hold, whilst taking 99.33% casualties, is by the metric of any sensible military in the world, a kerbstomping.

[Lhu27]

So Ive been playing since I was 9 when 2nd edition came out.

Basically i feel that the game has devolved into Mad Max with Giants running around. Certain Units are so blatantly better then other units or core fluffy units. You see this codex after codex. It use to be just an internal codex balance problem, but has now reached out past that. This is why you see white scars out of Codex SM or dakka flyrants in every Nid army. I love Nids they are my favorite army of all time but how does the exocrine a shooting monstrous creature have more attacks base then a dreadnaught. How many editions are vehicles going to be 2nd fiddle, walkers in particular to monstrous creatures. How many times do we see the same mistakes over and over. The last straw for me in this respect was Wraiths vs Assault Terminators 5 wraiths with whip coils $2 a dime and a nickel. GW has thrown all pretense of unit balance out the window. Spore Pod vs Drop Pod, Wave Serpent vs Transports etc vastly superior units that do similar things better.

GW believes that in order to sell models you have to make the new units superior to old units. I believe that if you make it balanced and at a reasonable price cost you will sell just as many, and encourage game play. I have not yet played against the Necrons but i feel this codex was a huge step in the wrong direction compared to other 7th edition codex's and has just created a new problem army. We all know the power codex's they are obvious and when you can open a book and within 30 minutes determine what units are vastly superior it is a problem. I could talk about this all night but won't. It's really getting so bad it boils down to simple math run the numbers you can see the results, put the units in the hands of some one with half a brain blamo.

My next major issue is that compared to other miniature war-games the game is old slow and clunky. ITs a 1980s system that needs to be updated. I can literally play 2 games of Dust Battlefield in the time it takes me to play a 40K game. Rules Sprawl is also a giant problem, but i can deal with that if the game is good. The game does not produce any of those moments you read about what so ever.

We can all sit and say everything is fine and the game is better then ever but its not. 40k AS late as 2006 was IT for miniature war gaming every year. The only thing keeping the game afloat in my opinion is the Best Science Fiction in the world and the best over priced plastic in the world. With 3D printing only a few year off from being a legit problem GW has to do something and it has to do it quick.

[daboarder]

not sure if your actually saying the spore pod is worse than a drop pod?

- - - Updated - - -



We can all sit and say everything is fine and the game is better then ever but its not. 40k AS late as 2006 was IT for miniature war gaming every year. The only thing keeping the game afloat in my opinion is the Best Science Fiction in the world and the best over priced plastic in the world. With 3D printing only a few year off from being a legit problem GW has to do something and it has to do it quick.

On another note, the skeptic in me says that GW is doing something about 3D printing, namely, maximizing thethe boards return before the crash

[ReveredChaplainDrake]

Oh boy, buckle up. I feel a tirade coming... *deep breath*

-Instinctive Behavior is still a thing, but Phase Out is not.
-Tervigons do more to hurt Termagants than actually help them.
-Getting swallowed whole by a Mawloc is a Str 6 hit that ignores armor and causes 1 wound. Getting swallowed whole by an alien horror should not feel like getting headbutted by a Diglett.
-It is physically impossible to represent a stage of Tyranid assault where the enemy is beleaguered, exhausted, and running out of ammo.
-Ammo is never a factor in general.
-MC Deathspitters are no better than normal Deathspitters, but MC Devourers are measurably better than both Devourers and Deathspitters.
-Hive Tyrants can't have warp fields.
-Carnifexes are brutal line breakers bred for melee combat, but hit Guardsmen on a 4+.
-Toxicrenes' armor can be ignored by Krak Grenades, a weapon literally carried by every single solitary Space Marine in the game.
-Venom Cannons fire volleys of venomous shards, but are single-shot anti-tank blast weapons.
-Deathspitters fire a gout of acid, but are represented by having multiple shots.
-Spinefists aren't Pistols.
-A pair of CCWs for a Tyranid does not confer extra attacks on its own.
-Mucolid Spores that deep strike and land on enemy units suffer a Deep Strike Mishap.
-Spore Mines that deep strike and land on enemy units suffer a Deep Strike Mishap.
-A Trygon Prime is just as effective at smashing a Dreadnought as a Riptide.
-Tyranids can Perils of the Warp like everybody else, even though they don't tap into the warp enough to use other lores. Not even Biomancy. You can't have it both ways.
-Hive Tyrants and Zoanthropes tap into the power of the Hive Mind ad are psykers. Warriors and Trygon Primes do the same thing, and are not. You can't have it both ways.
-Shadow in the Warp, a presence that chokes off all foreign warp presences except for the Hive Mind itself, doesn't actually make it harder to cast psychic powers.
-Shadow in the Warp, a presence that chokes off all foreign warp presences except for the Hive Mind itself, makes it easier for a daemon to attack a careless psyker's brain.
-Shadow in the Warp affects other Tyranids.

I could go on. ...So I will.

-MC smashing is only one attack, no matter how many attacks the MC actually had.
-MC smashing is always Str10 because no MC has a base strength less than 5.
-WC3 powers are statistically 4 times as hard to cast as WC1 powers.
-Invisibility is a Telepathy power... meaning that by casting it, you've affected every single brain who could've participated in that game, no matter how far away. And I've seen Tau Skyrays shoot their seeker missiles at different stores in some mega-battles. So your psyker literally just haxorzed every brain in the universe just to make himself and his close buddies see-through.
-For that matter, things that are invisible all work differently. For Stealth Suits, it's Stealth + Shrouded. For Lictors, it's Stealth + Marbo Strike. For Telepathy users, it's snap fire + only hit on 6s in melee. Pick one.
-Invisibility affects things that are blind. Like Mawlocs. And Hive Guard. For that matter, so does Blind.
-Knights can perform Stomp attacks that can instantly kill things taller than they are.
-Rapid Fire Battle Cannons are not Rapid Fire.
-Loyalist Marines have access to Malefic Daemonology.
-Loyalist Marines have more access to Daemon Weapons than the Chaos Marines of Nurgle, Tzeentch, and Slaaneesh put together.
-Bikes and Jump MCs can jink by spinning doughnuts in place. Jump Infantry cannot jink at all.
-You can charge after jinking. You cannot charge if you walked across some arbitrary imaginary line... what's a "table edge"?
-Jump Infantry can only use Hammer of Wrath attacks if they jump in the assault phase, but Bikes, MCs, and Striking Scorpions can always Hammer of Wrath.
-Striking Scorpion mandiblasters, precision face-mounted laser blasters, are best equated to a rule that represents getting slammed into by a warbike.
-FMCs can fall. Flyers cannot.
-Flyers' ability to shoot things is dependent on where they are located when they make arbitrary changes in their trajectories, rather than at any point in their flight path.
-Flyers cannot crash into each other.
-Land Speeders and Vypers aren't flyers.
-FMCs, Jump Infantry and Jetbikes can't assault flyers.
-The area under flyers is impassible terrain.
-Twelve Space Marines, or half that many Jump Infantry, can fit in a Stormraven. Ten Space Marines, but never Jump Infantry, can fit in a Land Raider.
-A blast weapon can scatter further than the distance between the firer and the target, including but not limited to directly onto the firer.
-You can miss a target at point-blank range. You can hit a target at maximum range. The odds are exactly the same.
-Twin-Linked weapons can never hit the same target twice.
-Storm Bolters, whose barrels are separated by centimeters, are Bolters that fire two shots. The Barbed Stranglers carried by Tyranid Harpies, separated by several meters, are twin-linked.
-You can't charge when you get out of reserves, but you can shoot just fine.
-You can't charge on the first turn, ever. You can shoot on the first turn just fine.
-You can't charge out of a non-open-topped transport (except Land Raiders & Stormravens). You can shoot after disembarking from one just fine.
-Land Raiders and Stormravens have assault ramps. Rhinos and Razorbacks have disembarking ramps too, but I guess their ramps aren't special enough.
-Special Weapons cannot be picked up if their carrier is slain.
-Tau design Plasma Rifles to not overheat because of their sophisticated, efficient technology. Those same technicians also designed the Riptide power core, which overheats twice as often as human Plasma weapons, ignores armor and shorts out the entire array for a whole turn.
-Dreadknights are Monstrous Creatures. Penitent Engines are walkers.
-"And They Shall Know No Fear" and Fearless are both USRs with different effects, implying there's a difference between having fear and "knowing" fear.
-Champion of Chaos. So your champion is brave enough to do something stupid like stare down a Hive Tyrant, but cowardly enough to flee from combat and get cut down? You can't have it both ways.
-Night Lords, Iron Warriors, and recently-turned renegades that hate chaos must petition the chaos gods for gifts and may not choose to do otherwise.
-Daemonic Ascension vaporizes your Champion's armor, weapons, wargear, previously-attained daemonic gifts, and potentially counts towards First Blood and Slay the Warlord.
-Daemonically ascended Chaos Lords have exactly the same stats as daemonically ascended Cultists.
-A 20-something Cultist who kills a Shas'el gets daemonhood. A 10,000-year-old Chaos Lord who torches an entire subsector gets nothing.
-Undivided Champions can ascend to Undivided Daemon Princes, but Daemon Princes purchased in your army list can never be designated as Undivided.
-Daemon Princes exist in two different books that are both Battle Brothers to each other.
-Recently-turned renegade marines lose their drop pods, Razorbacks, non-standard Land Raiders, Scouts, Flyers, Land Speeders, Attack Bikes, and every gun more sophisticated than a Plasma Cannon.
-Night Lords cannot see at night.
-Blight Grenades work on fellow minions of Nurgle.
-Serpent Shields are better anti-tank than Autocannons.
-Serpent Shields have longer range than Autocannons.
-Serpent Shields are better anti-tank than Lascannons.
-Serpent Shields ignore solid steel barricades, but not Ork T-shirts or Termagant skin.
-Axes are only unwieldy if surrounded by an energy field. Clearly, it's the energy field that adds all that weight.

It took me about an hour to come up with all that. When I can come up with and type out one fluff-to-tabletop inconsistency per minute in a game that keeps droning on about forging the narrative, the sheer incompetence at work here is beyond denial.

[Cactus]

the sheer incompetence at work here is beyond denial.

The race car is just as fast as the boot in Monopoly.
In Clue, the candle stick does just as much damage as the gun.
In chess, the queen is faster than a knight.

[Thaldin]

A story about how the game and fluff don't match... it's pretty funny - http://www.theindependentcharacters.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=7897

[Cactus]

I really don't think its the incompetence thats beyond denial, your lack of a life is though.

- - - Updated - - -



In Risk, Cannons move as fast as Cavalry.
In Mousetrap, you use cheese to lure the mice into the cunning but frankly over engineered trap, when really, mice prefer chocolate or peanut.
In Battleship, you guess where to shoot at where as actual battleships have RADAR

In Operation, brain and heart surgery have similar difficulty to working on an arm or leg.

[Path Walker]

In Operation, brain and heart surgery have similar difficulty to working on an arm or leg.

Snakes and Ladders has you riding down on the back of a snake, realistically, this would break the spine of a snake.

[PaladinSL]

No, the game does not match the fluff and never has, even at the height of it's complexity and that is OK. It doesn't need to. I am playing a game, not a book.

[Path Walker]

I like that most of these are "I think my army is underpowered so its obviously a flaw in the game"

[Cactus]

Snakes and Ladders has you riding down on the back of a snake, realistically, this would break the spine of a snake.

[edit]
Whoops, got confused who I was replying to.

[Auticus]

If the game were to match the fluff we also wouldn't be able to cherry pick the best of everything; we would have to make due with what resources were available to us and learn to use sub par units that weren't as points efficient and we would have to play in conditions and missions that were not always balanced or to our favor.

[ReveredChaplainDrake]

I really don't think its the incompetence thats beyond denial, your lack of a life is though.
I shouldn't even have to respond to something so asinine, but having a hobby != having no life. Does this really need to be pointed out? I can have a life and poke enough holes in 40k's miserable internal logic to see straight through to the other side. That's much more relevant to the discussion at hand than taking cheap shots at people who disagree with you.



In Risk, Cannons move as fast as Cavalry.
In Mousetrap, you use cheese to lure the mice into the cunning but frankly over engineered trap, when really, mice prefer chocolate or peanut.
In Battleship, you guess where to shoot at where as actual battleships have RADAR
Mouse Trap and Battleship are at least internally consistent. You set out what one player can do, and every player can perform the same actions as any other player given the same circumstances. Risk is a different case altogether, as that has more to do with ambiguation, an entirely separate theory that GW themselves used to be really good at implementing in previous editions.

[Path Walker]

I shouldn't even have to respond to something so asinine, but having a hobby != having no life. Does this really need to be pointed out? I can have a life and poke enough holes in 40k's miserable internal logic to see straight through to the other side. That's much more relevant to the discussion at hand than taking cheap shots at people who disagree with you.

Except half of those points were either incorrect, for example, Flyers can Crash and Burn, pedantic to the point of absurdity, a Rapid Fire Battle Cannon fires two Battle Cannon shots, so, its rapid fire but not Rapid Fire, or you were moaning that your army isn't as powerful as you think it should be, everything you wrote about Tyranids pretty much, or straight up didn't read the fluff you supposedly want the game to match, Nova Reactor is a case in point there.

The fact that you spent, by your own admission, an hour of your life compiling that list, even if it did have any merit whatsoever, is what means you don't have a life.


Mouse Trap and Battleship are at least internally consistent. You set out what one player can do, and every player can perform the same actions as any other player given the same circumstances. Risk is a different case altogether, as that has more to do with ambiguation, an entirely separate theory that GW themselves used to be really good at implementing in previous editions.

Again, points out that you're entierly ok with abstraction for the sake of rules for a game, but not in the case of GW?

- - - Updated - - -


If the game were to match the fluff we also wouldn't be able to cherry pick the best of everything; we would have to make due with what resources were available to us and learn to use sub par units that weren't as points efficient and we would have to play in conditions and missions that were not always balanced or to our favor.

Which is, in my opinion, a much more interesting wat of playing the game, it necessitates a GM to work well, but its a way of increasing the fluff in a game. The game as the rule book shows you, is a framework, its the rules set out so that they can be broken

[Erik Setzer]

I shouldn't even have to respond to something so asinine, but having a hobby != having no life. Does this really need to be pointed out? I can have a life and poke enough holes in 40k's miserable internal logic to see straight through to the other side. That's much more relevant to the discussion at hand than taking cheap shots at people who disagree with you.

"Path Walker" is a troll who just does his best to be insulting and try to push people's buttons. I highly recommend going into your account settings, finding the Block list, and adding him. Conversations will be so much better without having to trudge through his insulting comments.

[Cactus]

Mouse Trap and Battleship are at least internally consistent. You set out what one player can do, and every player can perform the same actions as any other player given the same circumstances. Risk is a different case altogether, as that has more to do with ambiguation, an entirely separate theory that GW themselves used to be really good at implementing in previous editions.

I think the point is still, fluff doesn't match game play in any game. Name one game that is balanced, I dare you. Dollars to donuts, you can poke holes in the fluff vs. rules balance with your straw-man argument.

And: so what?

Does this really affect your enjoyment of painting and playing the game with your friends? Is the balance of fluff/gameplay the one element of the hobby that brings you enjoyment and happiness? It's not for me. Getting together with my friends is my favorite element, followed by painting/crafting models, then the actual competition. I also enjoy the fluff, particularly the Horus Heresy novels, among others and that all fuels my desire to play more but it in no way reflects on my opinion of the rules set.

I can not fathom that your enjoyment of this pastime hangs on the parity of rules and fluff. It's such a frivolous, inconsequential, and absurd argument that I'm lead to believe that your enjoyment of the hobby comes from antagonizing the fanbase.

[Path Walker]

And if you want the game to match the fluff more, to recreate those desperate last stands or raids by a squad of scouting guardsmen, do it, set that up, write a mission and play it with your friends.

[40kGamer]

Some historical rule sets put a great deal of effort into capturing 'reality'. It tends to make the game overly complex, slow and even tiresome for little benefit to the average player.

In Scifi there has to be some disconnect between fluff and game play. Take the new HALO game for instance. If you went by the books the human fleet would spend every game running away or die a horrible death... not much incentive to play the human side.

[ReveredChaplainDrake]

Does this really affect your enjoyment of painting and playing the game with your friends?...

I can not fathom that your enjoyment of this pastime hangs on the parity of rules and fluff.
You would be surprised what I find enjoyable, like the Total War engine I'm working on. Ever seen logistics like territory or supply lines actually matter in 40k? Because they're front-and-center in my game. And this oughta' give some people panic attacks: the only "luck" in the entire system is that you don't know what your opponent's resources are specifically until you actually attack their front lines and find out. It's entirely up to you to bluff the other guy out, and no dice will save you if you get found out and outmaneuvered. I should not be designing tighter and more sensible wargaming mechanics over lunch breaks than GW does for $50 / codex.

I've given up on GW games being balanced. If the metagame is gonna' be reduced to a Wraith-measuring contest for the foreseeable future and thereby render skill utterly moot, the least the game could do to justify the investment I put into it is actually tell some cool stories. Black Library seems to do this pretty well. But no, the designers can't even do that right. To them, it's about making sure their pets win, and they'll bring a hunting rifle to the cockfight to make sure it happens.

[Mr Mystery]

At the end of the day, any game is going to be abstract, else it would be real life.

From the field to the gaming room to the bedroom, playing games is inherently abstract.

You want background realism in 40k? Good luck killing a single Space Marine. Necrons would outnumber you horribly, and still keep coming. Imperial Guard your next game? Background wise you have as much chance of facing off against endless hordes of Guardsman as an overwhelming tank assault, which you simply are not packing enough Dakkas to stop.

You don't have to appreciate the game to enjoy the background, though from my perspective that's not necessarily true the other way round. There are better war games out there if that's all you're looking for as a player.

[Kirsten]

In Operation, brain and heart surgery have similar difficulty to working on an arm or leg.

that made me lol

[Houghten]

Snakes and Ladders has you riding down on the back of a snake, realistically, this would break the spine of a snake.

Riding? I always thought the point was they eat you.

[The_Gonk]

As I think has been touched on, the fluff is wildly inconsistent. The best that can be reasonably hoped for may be that the broad themes - Space Marines are super warriors and therefore > humans all-round; stronger and tougher than Eldar; more disciplined and better trained than Orks etc. just to take the most popular faction.
The point after that is, is the game enjoyable in itself and satisfying.
If you take movie marines as an\example, as was said marine-on-marine combat is a chore. It also involves one person playing a skirmish game whilst a non-marine plays 'mass combat'(ish). Both will get old. One is also not necessarily satisfying from a hobby perspective and won't make GW a lot of money....!

[Mr Mystery]

You would be surprised what I find enjoyable, like the Total War engine I'm working on. Ever seen logistics like territory or supply lines actually matter in 40k? Because they're front-and-center in my game. And this oughta' give some people panic attacks: the only "luck" in the entire system is that you don't know what your opponent's resources are specifically until you actually attack their front lines and find out. It's entirely up to you to bluff the other guy out, and no dice will save you if you get found out and outmaneuvered. I should not be designing tighter and more sensible wargaming mechanics over lunch breaks than GW does for $50 / codex.

I've given up on GW games being balanced. If the metagame is gonna' be reduced to a Wraith-measuring contest for the foreseeable future and thereby render skill utterly moot, the least the game could do to justify the investment I put into it is actually tell some cool stories. Black Library seems to do this pretty well. But no, the designers can't even do that right. To them, it's about making sure their pets win, and they'll bring a hunting rifle to the cockfight to make sure it happens.

Riiiiiiight.

Play tested your game have you? Exposed it to the opinions and experiences of untold thousands of gamers world wide have you?

Because if you haven't, it's a daft claim you've just made. Short of 'I'm great and should be President, because my Mum agrees, and she doesn't like the incumbent'. Seriously. Define 'tighter' and 'more sensible', because I think you'll find it's a matter of taste. 40k allows for a wide variety of play styles and army compositions. The game has to be flexible to accomodate that, and that's before you consider how many different forces are out there, and the millions of possible permutations any given game between armies can throw up (from army composition, dice rolls, terrain affecting things, sheer blind luck etc).

To be honest, a game which involves supply lines as standard would bore the tits off of me. I want the combat, not a hardcore realistic war sim. There's other games out there for that, which I choose not to play.

[Erik Setzer]

As I think has been touched on, the fluff is wildly inconsistent. The best that can be reasonably hoped for may be that the broad themes ... The point after that is, is the game enjoyable in itself and satisfying.

For me... this is where I do have one problem. In the fluff, the Orks are good at tearing people open in close combat. In the game, they're actually pretty miserable. Not very tough in combat, have to pay an arm and a leg to get the fluffy special rule "Eternal Warriors" for a Warboss, and generally are just much better as a shooty army.

I'm okay with them being a shooty army, because they kind of were in 2nd edition, but this is a long time of them pushing the idea of Orks being able to rip open Marines and now they just bounce off of Tactical Squads. Back in 3rd edition, they gave choppas a rule that matched the fluff... but God forbid someone should have the ability to beat the most popular army in assault. (To say nothing of the disconnect of having power weapons on several of the Nob models, but no access to them in the codex. Apparently they want us to believe that Orks can will weapons into working with guns and all, but when it comes to a big axe with wires running everywhere and electrical stuff attached to it, the Orks don't believe in that power field working enough for it to actually work, which prevents them from being as good as they should be at the thing the fluff says they love most.)

Okay, got that little rant out of my system... Meh. I'll be okay overall, got a Blood Axe army and about to start on Deffskullz, so I don't need to bash things up close. Just kind of disappointing they keep telling me I should and then make it damn near impossible.

- - - Updated - - -


To be honest, a game which involves supply lines as standard would bore the tits off of me. I want the combat, not a hardcore realistic war sim. There's other games out there for that, which I choose not to play.

For campaigns, that stuff could be fun, in a limited setting (i.e. with people who are really into that, rather than just wanting very basic campaign rules). But yeah, during an actual game... well, there's a reason that even games like Flames of War and Bolt Action don't include that kind of rule.

[Cactus]

You would be surprised what I find enjoyable, like the Total War engine I'm working on. Ever seen logistics like territory or supply lines actually matter in 40k? Because they're front-and-center in my game. And this oughta' give some people panic attacks: the only "luck" in the entire system is that you don't know what your opponent's resources are specifically until you actually attack their front lines and find out. It's entirely up to you to bluff the other guy out, and no dice will save you if you get found out and outmaneuvered. I should not be designing tighter and more sensible wargaming mechanics over lunch breaks than GW does for $50 / codex.


Let me make sure I understand your point:

You made up a miniature game that has balanced fluff/game play that is about lying about how many supplies you have.

AND that game about supplying (and perhaps resupplying?) is going be better designed and more enjoyable than most popular miniatures game in the world?

I don't think I would have a panic attack, in fact, it has induced the complete opposite involuntary response.

[Theik]

I agree, the game simply does not play like the fluff and we need to change this.
As such, from now on, nobody is allowed to play imperial guard without the mandatory 60 million models that get thrown into the meat grinder before 3 space smurfs arrive after they all die and save the day.

[40kGamer]

On the plus side, if the game does match the fluff a Deathwatch kill team could be your entire force. Sure could save some time and money that way. :p

[Wolfshade]

BoLS ages ago (back in 5th?) did "movie" marine rules

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2009/12/40k-playtest-movie-marines-in-5e.html

[Aegwymourn]

BoLS ages ago (back in 5th?) did "movie" marine rules

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2009/12/40k-playtest-movie-marines-in-5e.html

IIRC there originally were rules printed in a WD in the 3rd/4th edition era for "Movie Marines" as well. Very similar to those ones on the BOLS site. Some days I miss all my old WDs :(

[Tyrendian]

IIRC there originally were rules printed in a WD in the 3rd/4th edition era for "Movie Marines" as well. Very similar to those ones on the BOLS site. Some days I miss all my old WDs :(

pretty sure I still have those somewhere... if only I could motivate myself to go look for them... :)

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

My stance on this is "The heroes always roll sixes". Movie Marines etc focus on making the actions of Space Marines (the heroes) in novels statistically plausible, but I feel like that's the wrong way of looking at it. An action hero does not have a fist fight with one guy then need a day or two to recuperate. He rolls 6s to hit, 6s to wound and the bad guy's armour always rolls 1s.

Remember, in Codices and Black Library novels, the hero is always rolling 6s.

[Lurker]

- - - Updated - - -



For campaigns, that stuff could be fun, in a limited setting (i.e. with people who are really into that, rather than just wanting very basic campaign rules). But yeah, during an actual game... well, there's a reason that even games like Flames of War and Bolt Action don't include that kind of rule.

I'd have to agree there. It's pretty much already been done anyhow in games like BFG where you had the optional campaign rules that covered things like repair and retrofit, resupply, reinforcements etc. not to mention Mordheim and Necro where the after battle sequence is just that, worrying about logistics. it has its place and can even be done in 40k but should be along the lines of BFG in that its an optional campaign thing.

But to address the OP's original question-
I have no problem with the fluff not syncing to gameplay. I am a diehard fluff monkey. I love reading all the little tidbits in the codices and the BL stuff, (Abnett and Mitchelson are my favs.). And all the changes you see from book to book i kinda look at in an archaeological sense. After all the Imperium itself is 40K + years old, not to mention any of the older races who predate humans. that's a lot of history to get right.
(i'm gunna go there) Look, fluff wise what it comes down to is this. In our world we have less than 10K years of recorded human history, and I'm just talking about when we as humans started writing stuff down, not what we know now of pre-record keeping societies. We are still discovering new and interesting things (artifacts and knowledge) that change our perception of previous cultures, and we are only dealing with 1 planet! put next to the Galaxy spanning Imperium and the ancient races that exist there, that's nothing.
I remember two stories, One was a short story and the other was a sidebar in some codex or other, that dealt with tech adepts that were basically the Livingstons and Indiana Jones of 40K. they both explored deep into long abandoned crypto-vaults and other repositories of knowledge to find forgotten tech and such. they were interesting stories that kinda shone a little light on the Historians and archaeologists of 40k who otherwise are unknown in the game itself. the fluff changing (in my deluded brain anyhow) just represents the findings of these types that become re-integrated into what is known by the common folk. Hence the reason older codices might disagree with one another.

Now having said that, Does the Fluff match the gameplay? not really! I don't believe it ever could really. When you read these stories you see things like this Orc Warboss can beat up anything, that Eldar is so damn agile he makes 14 year gymnasts look fat and clumsy, or all it takes to defeat a Dark Eldar raid is one under equipped marine. Essentially, what you're reading is akin to the Myth and Legends of lore that we take as granted in our world. It's Beowulf and Arthur or the Norse gods or Greek gods. The fluff (to me anyhow) represents the legendary actions and mythical prowess of the heroes of whatever armies' book you happen to be reading at the time vs. the "reality" of what that army and its' heroes can actually do in the(ir) "real" world. and then you add in the cost, (both physical and financial) of trying to represent some of the large horde/swarm like battles, sheesh, thats best left to apoc really, lol.
Some of the best fluff i've read didn't deal with those massive battles directly. they were about a single person, squad, company or even a regiment and how they affected their part in the battle. Even the regimental stories tend to focus on only a few key characters and show the units they control as a vague presence. so basically what I think I'm trying to say here is this-

The fluff is history and legend that is subject to new discovery, while the actual game play is the "reality" of the make believe world that we enjoy visiting. Make sense?

[Tony Eric Wallace]

I want to see a space marine novel in which a space marine makes use of more than their super human heating and the catalepsian node I want to see marines eating the brains of the fallen enemies to gain vital Intel like they are supposed to be able to do, I want to see marines gobbling acidic spit into the face of the enemies like they are supposed to be able to do God dammit

[Lurker]

I want to see a space marine novel in which a space marine makes use of more than their super human heating and the catalepsian node I want to see marines eating the brains of the fallen enemies to gain vital Intel like they are supposed to be able to do, I want to see marines gobbling acidic spit into the face of the enemies like they are supposed to be able to do God dammit

Read brothers of the snake by Abnett. The protagonist, Sgt. Priad spits venom at one point. It's not a product of his biology, but sort of a built in genetic defense against toxins. Good read too!

[Melon-neko]

I want to see a space marine novel in which a space marine makes use of more than their super human heating and the catalepsian node I want to see marines eating the brains of the fallen enemies to gain vital Intel like they are supposed to be able to do, I want to see marines gobbling acidic spit into the face of the enemies like they are supposed to be able to do God dammit

IIRC, In ahriman:exile a spacewolf is hunting witches and eating them to gain their memories as a way of tracking his prey.

[Thaldin]

Which then is turned around on him too hehe

[Path Walker]

I want to see a space marine novel in which a space marine makes use of more than their super human heating and the catalepsian node I want to see marines eating the brains of the fallen enemies to gain vital Intel like they are supposed to be able to do, I want to see marines gobbling acidic spit into the face of the enemies like they are supposed to be able to do God dammit

One of Ian Watson's books has a squad of scouts eat the brain of a renegade Titan Princeps which they then take on a joy ride.

[Clockwork]

One of Ian Watson's books has a squad of scouts eat the brain of a renegade Titan Princeps which they then take on a joy ride.

Yup, Space Marine. It also has Squats, a Zoat, and some other craziness I don't even want to spend the time typing up.

[Path Walker]

Not just Squats, Chaos Squats!

Its pretty mad, the newest edition even explains it as from a time before the fluff was cemented down

[Lurker]

One of Ian Watson's books has a squad of scouts eat the brain of a renegade Titan Princeps which they then take on a joy ride.

And I'm sure they probably abandoned it in a bad neighborhood, dented all to hell with no gas in the tank! Jerks...

[Dave Mcturk]

the one that gets me most [although their in game problem is different] is the 'all powerful wraithlord' - "who can sweep an entire squad aside with one blow of his mighty wraithblade !" - except he cant - yes he might stay in combat for an entire game without suffering a wound - but even with the newdardex - if he does two kills per combat phase its on a good day !