Wut?
I'll admit I didn't discover 40k until the time of 4th or 5th edition (not sure which), but I'd be amazed if they used to be even more focused on the Imperium's perspective than they are now.
Warhammer 40k 7th Edition Review - Through the Grim Darkness
- Thread starter Lodur
- Start date
I'll admit I didn't discover 40k until the time of 4th or 5th edition (not sure which), but I'd be amazed if they used to be even more focused on the Imperium's perspective than they are now.
In the beginning of the review, it says "Warhammer 40,000 is a miniatures war game that allows players to control forces of good or evil."
Which ones are the forces of good? The xenophobic Space Marines? The faceless conscripts of the Imperial Guard that are pressed into to service to die or are killed? Those Eldar dickheads?
Which ones are the forces of good? The xenophobic Space Marines? The faceless conscripts of the Imperial Guard that are pressed into to service to die or are killed? Those Eldar dickheads?
The only ONLY time 40k wasn't strictly from the human Imperium perspective was back in the 80s Rogue Trader era. Then humans were simply another race to play and there was a heavy focus on the other alien races(Basically no one at Citadel could sculpt humans worth a damn so they just gave up and shoved orks and proto-Tyranids in our faces)DJjaffacake said:
But those were dark days, much like the rest of the 80s.
I have no idea what that other guy was talking about. I still have my 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th era books and codexes. Its all humans all the time. If anything its gotten worse with how many more human armies they keep throwing out and saying "These giant Knights have been here the whole time, they were just off to the side of all the pictures!"
Much like Warhammer Fantasy, it's most easily divided into the forces of Order versus Chaos rather than Good and Evil. The things the Imperium of Man does in the name of Order might be nasty, brutal and unforgiving, but just wait until you see what the legions of Chaos or the Tyranid swarms want to do to you.
I, too, am a little perturbed that they seem to have brought this edition out very soon after the last, and a quick check of dates shows that it isn't just our imagination. It had been four years between the last several editions, but only two for 7th. Especially when you consider how short a time the prior Space Marine codices have been out, this feels especially sudden.
Oh well, I haven't had the time to break out my Salamanders since 2000, so I'll be picking up this rulebook used, if at all, just for old time's sake.
I, too, am a little perturbed that they seem to have brought this edition out very soon after the last, and a quick check of dates shows that it isn't just our imagination. It had been four years between the last several editions, but only two for 7th. Especially when you consider how short a time the prior Space Marine codices have been out, this feels especially sudden.
Oh well, I haven't had the time to break out my Salamanders since 2000, so I'll be picking up this rulebook used, if at all, just for old time's sake.
I was just thinking that. They actually bring out new releases for every faction every year (and the one time in the last 10 years that they created a new edition, they released Forces books bringing all the factions into the new edition in the space of one year).ace_of_something said:
Oh goodness yes. I played Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40k for a while, and coming into Warmachine where they are scrupulous about clear rules without any real room for argument over interpretations was a godsend.Vivi22 said:
And reading this article really made me wince a few times. I remember the days playing a Vampire Count army when a Miscast could instantly lose you the game. Then I popped across to Warmachine, and I didn't even need to roll dice to cast a spell (well, barring offensive ones, but there was no possibility of my Warlock imploding because I had the temerity to try to have an effect on the battlefield somehow).
I'm going to have to highly disagree with this "review", yes, I'm one of the people who think the current edition is worse than the previous one, but hear me out:
1) Assaulting in general.
This was a major problem with 6th edition, assaulting armies were penalized way too harshly (look up virtually any tyranid vs tau friendly game), and this edition has not changed that, in fact, it's done the opposite since now Psykers can throw out a lot more firepower in their new phase, as well as shoot after doing so.
2) Daemonology.
I want to see how any daemon army can lose if they go a greater Lord of Change with four heralds of change, get the grimoire of true names and you can make your screamerstar back up with 4 units that don't even need to specialize in divination, and these four can summon more units, including more Heralds of Change, or allowing themselves to get possessed to summon another Lord of change (who can then summon Heralds), not to mention the fact of demons getting possessed to summon daemons doesn't make any sense. This army expansion means you can effectively double the points worth your army is, keep summoning and you'll easily end with more points than you've started with. Even regular armies can get the ONE warp charge cost needed to summon a herald, who can then start summoning more heralds.
Perhaps the most ridiculous thing is when summoned Lords of change get down to one wound, they can get possessed, to summon a Lord of Change! On the same spot, with an identical profile, all wounds restored.
3) Deny the Witch
So this got a lot harder, because you have to cancel as many successful warp charges as they've used, the odds of rolling all of the 6's you need are incredibly slim because you need to say how much you're going to put towards it before rolling, if you're a 6 short, too bad, you wasted most of your warp charges.
I don't have a problem when Fantasy does this, because in Fantasy your odds are equal, if you have six dice, and they use six dice, and you both have a level 4 wizard, you've got an equal chance of nullifying the spell as they do of casting it.
Here though, they need 4+ to use the power, you need 6+ (as many as they roll 4+) to deny it.
4) Unbound Armies.
A while ago GW came out and publicly said they don't care about game balance: http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/an-interesting-conversation-with-gw-rep.html
This pretty much proves it. It's now possible to make whatever army you want, against whoever you want, and if they don't like it, then too bad, the rules said they could do it. The reason some armies worked well was because you blanced out some units by making sure the players could not take so many, with this in there what reason is there to not spam all of your best troops for no reason, like making an entire army out of Heralds/Lords of Change (besides it being a really assholish thing to do)?
All hail the all flyer list when fighting against Orks/Space wolves, all hail the almost all Heldrake list, all hail Riptide spam, all hail the Flyrant swarm. Come to think of it, Flyers are still broken as hell (since their rules didn't change) but now even more so because you aren't constrained to the usual 3 (plus transports) you'd normally have, now you can have as many as you want and just overwhelm their AA defence while staying virtually untouchable.
Anyway, that's why I don't like this edition, for the positives I think summoning demons is pretty neat, but far too easily abusable, I think the new Psychic Phase is neat, but that's it's far too hard (and statistically impossible) to counter, and those were really the only two things that changed in this edition, it didn't fix any of the problems of the previous one, and introduced several new problems when it arrived.
One more thing about this review, I'm not sure it can be called a review, almost all of it is spent explaining what's in the books, instead of going over the positives and negatives of the new edition, it's like watching a game review where the reviewer explains how to play the game for the first 4 minutes 30 seconds of the 5 minute review, then just drops a blurb about how the game is good.
1) Assaulting in general.
This was a major problem with 6th edition, assaulting armies were penalized way too harshly (look up virtually any tyranid vs tau friendly game), and this edition has not changed that, in fact, it's done the opposite since now Psykers can throw out a lot more firepower in their new phase, as well as shoot after doing so.
2) Daemonology.
I want to see how any daemon army can lose if they go a greater Lord of Change with four heralds of change, get the grimoire of true names and you can make your screamerstar back up with 4 units that don't even need to specialize in divination, and these four can summon more units, including more Heralds of Change, or allowing themselves to get possessed to summon another Lord of change (who can then summon Heralds), not to mention the fact of demons getting possessed to summon daemons doesn't make any sense. This army expansion means you can effectively double the points worth your army is, keep summoning and you'll easily end with more points than you've started with. Even regular armies can get the ONE warp charge cost needed to summon a herald, who can then start summoning more heralds.
Perhaps the most ridiculous thing is when summoned Lords of change get down to one wound, they can get possessed, to summon a Lord of Change! On the same spot, with an identical profile, all wounds restored.
3) Deny the Witch
So this got a lot harder, because you have to cancel as many successful warp charges as they've used, the odds of rolling all of the 6's you need are incredibly slim because you need to say how much you're going to put towards it before rolling, if you're a 6 short, too bad, you wasted most of your warp charges.
I don't have a problem when Fantasy does this, because in Fantasy your odds are equal, if you have six dice, and they use six dice, and you both have a level 4 wizard, you've got an equal chance of nullifying the spell as they do of casting it.
Here though, they need 4+ to use the power, you need 6+ (as many as they roll 4+) to deny it.
4) Unbound Armies.
A while ago GW came out and publicly said they don't care about game balance: http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/an-interesting-conversation-with-gw-rep.html
This pretty much proves it. It's now possible to make whatever army you want, against whoever you want, and if they don't like it, then too bad, the rules said they could do it. The reason some armies worked well was because you blanced out some units by making sure the players could not take so many, with this in there what reason is there to not spam all of your best troops for no reason, like making an entire army out of Heralds/Lords of Change (besides it being a really assholish thing to do)?
All hail the all flyer list when fighting against Orks/Space wolves, all hail the almost all Heldrake list, all hail Riptide spam, all hail the Flyrant swarm. Come to think of it, Flyers are still broken as hell (since their rules didn't change) but now even more so because you aren't constrained to the usual 3 (plus transports) you'd normally have, now you can have as many as you want and just overwhelm their AA defence while staying virtually untouchable.
Anyway, that's why I don't like this edition, for the positives I think summoning demons is pretty neat, but far too easily abusable, I think the new Psychic Phase is neat, but that's it's far too hard (and statistically impossible) to counter, and those were really the only two things that changed in this edition, it didn't fix any of the problems of the previous one, and introduced several new problems when it arrived.
One more thing about this review, I'm not sure it can be called a review, almost all of it is spent explaining what's in the books, instead of going over the positives and negatives of the new edition, it's like watching a game review where the reviewer explains how to play the game for the first 4 minutes 30 seconds of the 5 minute review, then just drops a blurb about how the game is good.
As a wargamer for the better part of the last decade, this new edition doesn't do a single thing to impress me, and several things that just straight up annoy me.
The game is getting more unbalanced all the time, and for all GW likes to ramble on about "forging the narrative", an imbalanced game makes it pretty damn hard to do that. You'll have an easier time forging them narratives in basically any other wargame because the 40k rules all but kneecap you if you try to play outside of the one or two monolists available to each codex. Not to mention with how much semi-optional stuff is cluttering up the rulebook it makes pickup games against strangers a potential nightmare considering the wild potential differences two people might have about what's acceptable and what isn't. Should we play fluffy armies? What qualifies as fluffy? Screamerstar is pretty fluffy, I mean it's an all-Tzeentch theme list! How about Lords of War? Unbound spam armies? Oh we're not allowing Unbound, ok I'll just take like 10 different detachments in a Battleforged list since that's legal so my list is like unbound but better. Gone are the days when all you needed to know was the point level and you were ready to go.
Oh, and just to spite everyone they nerfed assault just a little bit more (charging through terrain is now marginally worse, and flying monstrous creatures can't charge the same turn they change from swooping to gliding). Because that really needed to happen I guess.
They've turned it into Calvinball 40k at this point. I had high hopes at the beginning of 6e, but they seemed determined to waste all that potential and drive the rules off a cliff. As far as I'm concerned, I can get my 40k fix from the videogames from now on, but I'm going to reserve my tabletop time for games where the people writing the rules actually give a damn.
Psychic phase would have been cool if it had done something other than solidify Eldar/Daemon domination of yet another phase of the game. I'm a Daemon player, and I'll fully admit my army is beyond broken, to the point it isn't even fun anymore.
The game is getting more unbalanced all the time, and for all GW likes to ramble on about "forging the narrative", an imbalanced game makes it pretty damn hard to do that. You'll have an easier time forging them narratives in basically any other wargame because the 40k rules all but kneecap you if you try to play outside of the one or two monolists available to each codex. Not to mention with how much semi-optional stuff is cluttering up the rulebook it makes pickup games against strangers a potential nightmare considering the wild potential differences two people might have about what's acceptable and what isn't. Should we play fluffy armies? What qualifies as fluffy? Screamerstar is pretty fluffy, I mean it's an all-Tzeentch theme list! How about Lords of War? Unbound spam armies? Oh we're not allowing Unbound, ok I'll just take like 10 different detachments in a Battleforged list since that's legal so my list is like unbound but better. Gone are the days when all you needed to know was the point level and you were ready to go.
Oh, and just to spite everyone they nerfed assault just a little bit more (charging through terrain is now marginally worse, and flying monstrous creatures can't charge the same turn they change from swooping to gliding). Because that really needed to happen I guess.
They've turned it into Calvinball 40k at this point. I had high hopes at the beginning of 6e, but they seemed determined to waste all that potential and drive the rules off a cliff. As far as I'm concerned, I can get my 40k fix from the videogames from now on, but I'm going to reserve my tabletop time for games where the people writing the rules actually give a damn.
Psychic phase would have been cool if it had done something other than solidify Eldar/Daemon domination of yet another phase of the game. I'm a Daemon player, and I'll fully admit my army is beyond broken, to the point it isn't even fun anymore.
While both the Eldar and Daemons are going to be extremely powerful in this new phase, I've been looking around and found out that somehow the Inquisition is the most powerful Psyker army in the game now, they can get completely uncounterable amounts of dice by making 6 inquisitors, and eighteen units with one Psyker, and two Acolytes in each, this total comes to just under 1500 pts, if you are playing 2000 pts you still have a lot to spend on crusaders to make sure you do not die.Xyklos said:
It's been odd for me, seeing the hysteria surrounding some of the changes.
I mean, people are freaking out over the Psychic system changes, but apparently don't realize that for the most part, psykers got significantly weaker than they were in 6th. Manifesting powers is noticeably more difficult and less reliable, fewer powers can be manifested in a given turn, and most lists (outside of Daemons, Grey Knights, and a few Eldar builds) can't muster enough Warp Charge to actually support the wailing and gnashing of teeth surrounding them.
Yes, a Daemon factory built around Malefic is pretty nasty, but it's also not unbeatable.
The changes to the FOC system, and the existence of Unbound, are being tossed around by some as the end of the world, but realistically most games are going to be run under the same system that was in place in 6th; one primary FOC, one ally FOC. Maybe some extra bits here and there, but competitive play is going to force a certain level of standardization. And ultimately, if you've got someone showing up with their army of 12 Riptides, the simple solution is not to play them. Sure, it's "legal" for whatever that's worth, but there has to be some measure of agreement between players as to what they want to play, game-wise. The new system opens up the game to let people try new things, really, without being locked into a very rigid system. I think they went too far in that direction, of course, but they've been trending that way for some time regardless, so it wasn't really a surprise.
Alternately if you're willing to entertain an Unbound level of ridiculous, just play Maelstrom of War missions and watch as your opponent rapidly discovers that his army of individual win buttons can't manage to score victory points against regular old troops.
Flying Monstrous Creatures were toned down significantly, Jink saves were brought into a more rational system, the changes to objectives in the classic missions makes them actually enjoyable rather than just a game of camping as many as you can in your own deployment zone while zipping out to contest your opponent's on turn 5, and revisions to the Allies system have neutered some of the nastier combos that were dominating 6th edition.
Which is not to say that GW didn't make some glaring mistakes, and a few blatant cash grabs. The changes to Invisibility have made it totally ridiculous, particularly when coupled with an Eldar Jetseer build, and the existence of Malefic basically just screams "BUY MORE DAEMONS". The Maelstrom of War missions are interesting in theory, but the system is set up in such fashion to make them favor mobile, diverse lists a little too heavily, and so random in where your victory conditions are going to be found that it's entirely possible to do everything right and still lose the game due to shitty rolls in yet another area of a game that is heavily influenced by shitty rolls.
/shrug
It's another edition of 40K. For me, it's almost a familiar version; I started back in 1st edition (still have my Rogue Trader book around here somewhere), and really got into the game in 2nd. And to be frank, I never really approved of the changes they made when they released 3rd edition. They threw the baby out with the bathwater, and have wound up slowly trying to piece the baby back together ever since. 6th and now 7th have been returns to what the game was when it started out; more random, more cinematic, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. People present it as such because a consistent, "cut & dried" system is what a lot of folks prefer for competitive play.
Some games are more structured that way. Warmachine is certainly an example, though it has its own share of ridiculously unbalanced units, random win-buttons, and the 1st edition of both its flagship games saw synergistic combos that made the most abusive 40K lists pale in comparison.
Seriously. Kromac + Tharn Wolf Riders in 1st edition Hordes were so unbelievably broken it was difficult to grasp how that combo ever made it past playtesting. And there are still some pretty broken combos, even after Privateer went to great lengths to remove many of them.
But I digress.
TL;DR version: It's just another edition of 40K, some good, some bad, and it ain't the end of the world.
I mean, people are freaking out over the Psychic system changes, but apparently don't realize that for the most part, psykers got significantly weaker than they were in 6th. Manifesting powers is noticeably more difficult and less reliable, fewer powers can be manifested in a given turn, and most lists (outside of Daemons, Grey Knights, and a few Eldar builds) can't muster enough Warp Charge to actually support the wailing and gnashing of teeth surrounding them.
Yes, a Daemon factory built around Malefic is pretty nasty, but it's also not unbeatable.
The changes to the FOC system, and the existence of Unbound, are being tossed around by some as the end of the world, but realistically most games are going to be run under the same system that was in place in 6th; one primary FOC, one ally FOC. Maybe some extra bits here and there, but competitive play is going to force a certain level of standardization. And ultimately, if you've got someone showing up with their army of 12 Riptides, the simple solution is not to play them. Sure, it's "legal" for whatever that's worth, but there has to be some measure of agreement between players as to what they want to play, game-wise. The new system opens up the game to let people try new things, really, without being locked into a very rigid system. I think they went too far in that direction, of course, but they've been trending that way for some time regardless, so it wasn't really a surprise.
Alternately if you're willing to entertain an Unbound level of ridiculous, just play Maelstrom of War missions and watch as your opponent rapidly discovers that his army of individual win buttons can't manage to score victory points against regular old troops.
Flying Monstrous Creatures were toned down significantly, Jink saves were brought into a more rational system, the changes to objectives in the classic missions makes them actually enjoyable rather than just a game of camping as many as you can in your own deployment zone while zipping out to contest your opponent's on turn 5, and revisions to the Allies system have neutered some of the nastier combos that were dominating 6th edition.
Which is not to say that GW didn't make some glaring mistakes, and a few blatant cash grabs. The changes to Invisibility have made it totally ridiculous, particularly when coupled with an Eldar Jetseer build, and the existence of Malefic basically just screams "BUY MORE DAEMONS". The Maelstrom of War missions are interesting in theory, but the system is set up in such fashion to make them favor mobile, diverse lists a little too heavily, and so random in where your victory conditions are going to be found that it's entirely possible to do everything right and still lose the game due to shitty rolls in yet another area of a game that is heavily influenced by shitty rolls.
/shrug
It's another edition of 40K. For me, it's almost a familiar version; I started back in 1st edition (still have my Rogue Trader book around here somewhere), and really got into the game in 2nd. And to be frank, I never really approved of the changes they made when they released 3rd edition. They threw the baby out with the bathwater, and have wound up slowly trying to piece the baby back together ever since. 6th and now 7th have been returns to what the game was when it started out; more random, more cinematic, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. People present it as such because a consistent, "cut & dried" system is what a lot of folks prefer for competitive play.
Some games are more structured that way. Warmachine is certainly an example, though it has its own share of ridiculously unbalanced units, random win-buttons, and the 1st edition of both its flagship games saw synergistic combos that made the most abusive 40K lists pale in comparison.
Seriously. Kromac + Tharn Wolf Riders in 1st edition Hordes were so unbelievably broken it was difficult to grasp how that combo ever made it past playtesting. And there are still some pretty broken combos, even after Privateer went to great lengths to remove many of them.
But I digress.
TL;DR version: It's just another edition of 40K, some good, some bad, and it ain't the end of the world.
Yeah, I played 40k for a couple of years before a few friends decided to get into Warmachine as well and I decided to start an army and join them. I planned to play both but that kind of went out the window when I realized that Warmachine was just more fun. It's better balanced (even some of the worst matchups I've encountered in the game in the last year and a half or so are more winnable than a lot of 40k matchups were. There were a few matchups in 40k where literally no decision I made after putting models on the table mattered because I couldn't win), the rules are clear and consistent, and good decision making is rewarded to a far greater degree than in Warhammer because every game can be won or lost as a result of one good or bad choice which also makes every decision a lot more exciting. Rarely is there a time where I can walk right into battle with a warcaster and not have to worry about instantly losing if things don't go as well as I plan.Azahul said:
And while still on the subject of clear and concise rules, every FAQ and errata released by Games Workshop was an exercise in frustration. Rules as written rarely mattered to them. Consistency in their rulings on unclear game effects never mattered to them. Using errata's to help fix glaring balance issues that made the game less fun to even play was never even on their radar.
But with Privateer Press, more often than not the rules questions they answer don't even need to be answered because the answers are already in the rule book if you have sufficient understanding of the rules. When they do Errata something, it's almost always to fix some unintended consequence of the rules, and they update all of their digital versions of the rules, character cards, etc. in a timely fashion to reflect those changes. But I really have to stress that that stuff is exceedingly rare. One of the benefits of having clear rules in the first place, and employing game designers who know them inside and out. I just can't speak highly enough of how much more enjoyable a game with clear rules is for the player. Never mind that Privateer Press makes their games significantly less expensive to get into. When you can buy the rulebook and start an army for less money than you'd spend on just the 40k rule book, you know you're dealing with a company that isn't interested in screwing you out of as much money as possible.
I'm going to have to disagree with this entirely. A game that has too much randomness isn't really a game since your decisions matter a lot less. 5th edition was bad enough in this regard sometimes, 6th was far worse, and I haven't read the 7th edition rules yet but I can assume from what I've heard that it isn't taking steps to go the other way. A game isn't just rolling dice to see what happens. And the more things those dice decide, particularly if there's a poor level of predictability (rolling 2d6 being a bit more consistent and predictable than rolling 1d6 for example because bell curves are fun that way), the less of a role the player actually plays in the game once things hit the table.Raesvelg said:
And GW's talk of wanting the game to be "cinematic" is nothing but a bullshit excuse they throw around to justify being bad game designers. It literally doesn't even mean anything. Certainly not in the context they use it. A table top game will never be cinematic. It's the antithesis of cinematic since it's completely static. And if their idea of what makes a game cinematic is big attacks, huge swings in fortune, and armies clashing to the death, then they're still not pulling it off well because Privateer Press and other companies are doing it better, with better rule sets, and a whole lot less greed being built into their rule revisions and releases.
A consistent cut and dry system does not mean a boring system. But a system that relies heavily on randomness does once you start to realize how little anything you decide really matters to the outcome of the game. And GW don't even really hide that fact very well since the game frequently involves rolling dozens of dice at a time, a few times over.
NO NO NO of course I dont want that £50 in my wallet Gamesworkshop! here here take it. It's not like I've got fucking things to buy.
Still I think its cheaper than previous editions... I swear one of them was £60
Still I think its cheaper than previous editions... I swear one of them was £60
The irony here, for me, is that 5th Edition is often considered the high-water mark of 40K as a competitive gaming system.Vivi22 said:
The "dozens of dice" is GW's method of handling the bell curve, so to speak. Privateer uses multiple dice per attack mechanics because they can; it's the luxury of skirmish scale, to be frank. 20-30 models is a pretty good sized game of Warmachine. It's often a single squad in 40K.
It's all just matters of probability in the end, and while GW's probability is more... volatile than Privateer's, that's just going to be necessary due to the scale of the system.
The actual, functional differences in game mechanics between 6th and 7th are fairly minimal, and in some cases actually less random (charging through difficult terrain is a consistent -2" of move now, for example, or vehicles only being destroyed on a 7 on the damage table). The only increases in randomness, really, are the changes to the Psychic system, and the addition of the entirely optional Maelstrom of War missions.
The Maelstrom of War missions represent the vast majority of that "random and cinematic" approach for 7th in particular. Shifting mission objectives every turn definitely limits the possibilities for future planning, but it also rewards flexible thinking and diverse forces.
The changes to the Psychic system are what have most folks in a tizzy though. Some, as mentioned, have the bizarre idea that psykers were made more powerful (they were, in fact, nerfed for the most part), while others are irritated that the mechanic they'd come to rely on most heavily is now significantly more difficult to exploit.
As I said, my only real problems with 7th are the Malefic power set (which is available to every faction except Tyranids, and summons daemons, with a significantly increased chance of Perils for every faction except, well, Daemons) and the changes to the Force Org system.
The latter is a relatively minor *****; most places are going to pretty rapidly settle down to what they consider a "standard" system in the interest of fairness, and all tournaments are going to do so immediately. The former is... more of a sticking point. It's a blatant cash grab making it available to all forces, and while it's certainly "cinematic" (despite the protestations of many would-be loremasters, summoning daemons in desperation/corruption by Chaos has been part of the 40K fluff basically forever), it's a mechanic that actual Daemon armies can abuse the ever-loving-HELL out of.
Wait, Eldar and Dark Eldar are listed as "Brothers in Battle" ?
Aren't Dark Eldar the ones that basically said "fuck it, let's continue with our debauchery" after the fall of the Eldar?
Aren't Dark Eldar the ones that basically said "fuck it, let's continue with our debauchery" after the fall of the Eldar?
Yes, and in several novels and backstories it is pointed out that both despise one another because of those differences with the DE viewing the Craftworlders as stuck up twats who have shut themselves off from their glorious pasts and the Crawftworlders viewing the DE with undisguised loathing for their ties to Slaanesh and their continuation of the acts that led to The Fall.Sewa_Yunga said:
But when have Games Workshop ever cared about lore when it gives them a chance to sell more models?
Ive never likedthe psykers, always felt out of place and too influential when I wanted tanks soldiers and robots.
Ive not played since 3rd but I dont think Ill be dipping back in. Too much of a time and money commitment. I lament the demise of specialist games as some of those were magic and I still keep up with. Less than 20 pieces a side and yore off, finished in under 3 hours too. Magic.
Ive not played since 3rd but I dont think Ill be dipping back in. Too much of a time and money commitment. I lament the demise of specialist games as some of those were magic and I still keep up with. Less than 20 pieces a side and yore off, finished in under 3 hours too. Magic.
I was just in a gaming shop yesterday, and the new Codices were fucking $50. No book that fucking size, hardcover or not, is worth that much money. They charge that because you "have" to have it to play.
It's amazing how much disrespect the players will tolerate from GW. They're ripping off people who genuinely love their game and the history of the game. But then again, if I could find a group of suckers willing to pay $50 for a fucking Codex, I wouldn't respect them either.
It's amazing how much disrespect the players will tolerate from GW. They're ripping off people who genuinely love their game and the history of the game. But then again, if I could find a group of suckers willing to pay $50 for a fucking Codex, I wouldn't respect them either.