The thin red line... FWs inclusion in your army

[Drunkspleen]

2) they tend to start a balance of terror in gaming groups. A Pandoras box if you like. When the first FW models hit the boards, all the other gamers feel the urge to up the ante and get their own superior FW model. Its expensive, and its not promoting cretivity or strategy.

 

This is hardly exclusive to Forgeworld though, just the other day I had a very decisive "Purge the Xenos" victory against a Chaos opponent who has since talked about expanding his army via a Helldrake thanks to the devestation wrought by a mere 4 Black Knights.

 

My new toy begat his new toy and now I'm looking at whether my new army should include Fortifications for their gun emplacements and/or Flakk Devastators.

 

The arms race is just part of the game, even if you don't turn to hard counters, the steady trickle of new Codices gives you new threats that you have to adjust and deal with, often by fielding something you wouldn't have before.

[march10k]

LOL

 

If your zealotry is so extreme that you jump all over me like a fat kid on an ice cream cake because I take your side but *gasp* reject just one of your arguments (it absolutely does not follow that ForgeWorld products are okay for a Games Workshop game just because ForgeWorld says they are.  I want to hear Games Workshop say it.  In the BGB), you need to take a deep breath, put the toy soldiers down, and go throw a frisbee for a while.  My very first statement was that I'm fine with nearly all FW units.  And don't accuse me of flaming, either.  I said an argument, not a person, was dumb.  And if your only response to my analogy is "well, divisions of a corporation aren't nation-states, therefore you're wrong," then you're shooting blanks. 

 

 

 

Here's what's really going on in Nottingham:

 

Forge World:  "our stuff is absolutely legit."

 

Games Workshop:  "Using units that aren't in the codex is equally as acceptable as ignoring FOC limitations." (the BGB "suggests" adhering to the FOC and "suggests" the codex as the source of your army list...on the same page!)

 

Citadel: "Whatever sells product is fine with us, don't make us take a side, that would piss off half of our customers no matter which way we rule!"

 

 

 

Of course you need your opponent's permission to use FW units.  For that matter, you need his permission to play with unpainted models, to proxy, to field terminators, and to use the restroom in the middle of a game.  Why?  Because nobody's forcing him to play against you.  Nothing prevents him from packing up his toys and leavig the table.  Nothing.  "With your opponent's permission" is a farce!

[Bryan Blaire]

Just so people can try to stop making arguments about corporate relationships to deny that FW products are in fact official products, take a look at the actual corporate structure of Games Workshop. Games Workshop Group PLC IS the parent company. Everything else is junior to that, a division. Games Workshop isn't a division separate, they are at the top, their CEO is the CEO of the whole shebang in the end. Is Forge World a smaller division of the same game maker, sure. Is it an official producer of product for Games Workshop as a subsidiary company? Yes.

 

If you don't believe me, do some research into Games Workshop Group PLC, Citadel (a branding with GW only), Games Workshop Limited, Forge World, Black Library, and any other Games Workshop Group PLC holdings you can think of.

 

LOL

Of course you need your opponent's permission to use FW units.  For that matter, you need his permission to play with unpainted models, to proxy, to field terminators, and to use the restroom in the middle of a game.  Why?  Because nobody's forcing him to play against you.  Nothing prevents him from packing up his toys and leavig the table.  Nothing.  "With your opponent's permission" is a farce!

I think that if you tried to argue that your opponent had to ask your permission to use the bathroom, you would have stepped outside any implicit agreement to play a game. So far as I know, none of the Games Workshop Group products has stated any requirements on bathroom use during a game.

 

That's irrelevant to the point of discussing whether FW is an official product or makes official units. FW is a junior division of Games Workshop Group (also known as Games Workshop Limited, aka Games Workshop) and very likely has internal rights to use the same copyrighted, trademarked and other intellectual property law protected material. They are an acknowledged division of Games Workshop and produce products separate from the main Citadel line. This doesn't make those. Products any less official. They are not an unlicensed producer of these products and if they didn't have the right to say that these are official units, then it is very unlikely they would even be allowed to print that statement.

 

By stating that "opponent's permission" is a farce, are you trying to say that you must allow your opponent to play with any product bearing the Games Workshop logo and that they have no say in the structure of a game, because that is what the statement seems to indicate to me. Or are you stating that because "opponent's permission" is a farce, somehow the official nature of the FW product is in question?

 

There are two main reasons I dont like FW models used in my games:

1) People tend to rely on these models as a crutch. They stop playing the game and only play their FW model. Usually these models are expensive both in points and in money and usually they are better then their codex counterparts, to a bigger or lesser extent. And that makes them an autoinclude in every single battle.

I can see that happening, but I see the same thing when I look at Draigo-wing (to some extent Grey Knights in general) or allied Imperial Guard. I will agree that FW units are not always inherently balanced, but I think anyone being honest would say the same of the GW Codexes and the Allies rules can make this even worse. Also, regarding the concept of auto-inclusion, I would say that the same is starting to be said of IG Allies, simply to get their cheap air units. When you run through a lot of threads, you see that answer popping up more and more, "just take allied Guard!" In an environment where people are looking for min/max solutions to competitive gaming, you are going to see the auto-inclusion start to rear its head. Heck, Fortifications are becoming the same as well, because a lot of Codexes just don't have assets they need to effectively deal with material from opposing Codexes. That to me is more indicative of a problem with the game itself and the methods used to produce the game, rather than any one product or another.

2) they tend to start a balance of terror in gaming groups. A Pandoras box if you like. When the first FW models hit the boards, all the other gamers feel the urge to up the ante and get their own superior FW model. Its expensive, and its not promoting cretivity or strategy.

Neither is Allies, and yet people seem eager to play with them (they have even become a default answer for a difficulty). Rather than having to figure out In-Codex solutions to the weaknesses you have against certain situations/units, you can now simply go and pick the most optimum crutch from another Codex.

 

My biggest beef with using Forge World is that they don't develop for all Codexes equally (but then again, the same can be said for Games Workshop at this point). I can't help but feel bad for non-Imperium players that want some additional loving from FW (because they certainly aren't getting it from GW itself) and yet they get just as left out because the Imperium stuff sells. I guess in the end, that's my beef overall with GW too though. I would like the game to be more balanced all around, but it seems like we are slipping farther and farther from that.

 

Thank you, John_f, for starting the discussion on why we do or don't like FW stuff, I know I appreciate it and it is a lot more interesting to hear people's opinions on why to use or not like the use of it rather than argue its "official" product standing.

[Skalver]

Is there any useful ground left to tread here? When corporate structure and the lack of rules about when to pee are used as arguments over why Forge World units can be included in an army it feels like the debate has gotten a little nebulous.

[Bryan Blaire]

Why can they? Because they have rules to be used in game.

When can they be used? When you and your buddies/FLGS/TOs agree to allow them.

Does everyone like them and want to play against them? No.

 

Other than what John_f said, are there any reasons people don't like playing against FW stuff that hasn't already been touched on?

 

Personally, the only thing I have actually used from FW is the rules for the Mortis Dread, which don't seem broken and let me keep using just the DA styled units that I do like without resorting to things that I do dislike, such as Fortifications and Allies (which to me require as much discussion with an opponent as FW does anyway, but I like talking to my opponents about the game anyway). I would like a Contemptor of some variety, which is a little beefier, but isn't unkillable and doesn't really provide all that massive a benefit that I can't get in some other fashion in the game (not to mention that it is already priced at over half a Land Raider, etc) - plus it looks dead sexy.

 

Discussions are really only as useful as those involved in them allow them to be.

[Dark_Master]

My opinion would be that I prefer to play forgeworld stuff such as my TLLC Mortis (and I'm just putting together a TLAC one as well) rather than non-fluffy allies.

 

Imperial guard knowing our business? We'll have to shoot them when we're finished! ;-)

 

DM

[Interrogator Stobz]

Stobz, if I ever manage to get down under to the land of sheep and hobbits to visit my cousin, I'll remember not to pack any RW .... No one wants a dreadsocking while on holiday!

Re: FW - my tuppence - Official? Yes. Optional? Yes. Do I have a problem with it? Not a chance. Rule of cool wins for me every time!

When you do come, I'll sort you out some accomodation and get you out to our beaches and diving spots too.

Just remember the golden rule....No Derpspeeders!!!

John_f; Sorry if my post came across a little judgmental and arguementative, your opinion is just as valid as mine :tu: (unless you like the Derpspeeder, then it's a dreadsocking for you ;) )

:D

stobz

[Balthamal]

I'm going to start this post by stating from the off, that everything contained below reflects on nobody who has posted previously in this thread. Everything contained therein, comes from my own experiences playing actual games. If you're thinking any point/comment/jibe is aimed at you, relax. It's not.

 

This "debate" (I'm being generous, I could just say argument) is getting tired to the point of sillyness now. From what I've found, there's four kinds of gamers when it comes to FW. They are.

 

The "Open Season gamers" - they're happy to include anything that has rules to be used in 40k. Titans, super heavy tanks, alternative army lists, all are fair game. I count myself amongst this group for reasons I shall outline later.

 

The "interested but cautious gamers" - these type of people like the idea and concept of FW and certainly appreciate the models but because it isn't "officially sanctioned" in the BRB will ere on the side of caution. For what it's worth, I personally have no problem with this point of view. I only start nodding off when those who share it launch into  a detailed thesis about why everyone else should be like them.

 

The "anti-FW brigade" - These people neither like nor have any inclination to explore FW, being perfectly happy with the standard lines within GW. Again, I can understand the point of view since it's a combination of adhereing to the rules set out in the BRB and a matter of personal taste. Just don't scream shout and generally attempt to convert me or you'll get the same treatment as every religious denomination thats' tried in the past (namely contempt filled silence and a slammed door)

 

The "crusaders of 40K as we think it should be" - To these people FW does not/should not exist, its a tool to suck up your money and spoil  a game. The end.

 

 

Thankfully, I have had very little experience with the latter group and somewhat equal exposure to the first 3. For myself, I am happy to include anything related to FW because as far as I'm concerned, variety is the spice of life. I played enough games in 5th ed to grow sick of cookie cutter armies where a lot of units were virtually default selections because of their usefulness. In 6th thats been toned down somewhat with the introduction of allies but i've still seen the occasional instance.

 

Now, at some point in the future I plan on doing a chaos marine army. I want to include a flier because it adds some variety to the army (and partially because fliers are quite good at present). For chaos that means a heldrake. Whilst I'm a fan of the design aesthetic of the heldrake, I don't want to include one in my army for reasons of fluff (no daemon engines, obliterators, warp talons etc) Normally i'd be forced to sacrifice one of the two, either the fluff of my army or its ability on the tabletop (Don't get me wrong, I'm about as far away from a power gamer as can be, but I also want to avoid being ground into the dirt if I can help it) . Step in forgeworld and the storm eagle, hell talon and hell blade. Variety. I love it.

 

The same applies with my DIY space marine chapter. I wanted them to be different from Ultramarines because I despise 40k Ultramarines. To do that I need special characters (I miss the traits of 4th edition) but the ones in the book are fairly bland apart from Shrike. IA volumes IX and X are a god send for me because of this, plenty of characters with inventive rules and much more flavour. Whether this is over or underpowered at this point concerns me not. I'm not looking at effectiveness on the tabletop, I'm looking at making my army my army and not a copy off a printing press. Given the number of space marine players I can accept a certain amount of this is inevitable. But I've taken the opportunity to mix it up.

 

Apologies for the long winded musings now must dash, large number of PtR vows to fulfill

[Cpt_Reaper]

I have developed this approach. If an opponent is unsure of Forge World I let him/her have a look at the book and choose a unit for their army. Let them test drive something. Granted my only actual FW unit is Hector Rex as my Grey Knight venerable Dreadnought with psycannon is a codex legal unit (assault cannon w/ psycannon bolts). People are more accepting if you let them try it out too.

[Interrogator Stobz]

Agreed, a lot of fear is caused by ignorance, not all mind you, some people actually have good reason :P

[HsojVvad]

What is official, what is unofficial? Really it always comes down to players consent no matter what. You play A army, someone plays B army. The A army player can say "I refuse to play you, you spam unit X too much", but player Army B says "it's official you HAVE to play me." Player A army says "no I don't have to play you, so no game."

 

What is player B army going to do now? Cry and stamper saying "YOU have to PLAY me, it's OFFICIAL!"

 

It always comes down to player consent, Official or Unofficial.

 

Also I can say FAQs are "soft house rules" and are not official because it's not "hard rules" Errata like GW said on their web site. So does that mean when you play my Tyranids and I use my Doom of Malantai, you don't get a cover save against Spirit Leech because as GW says the FAQ is not Official. FAQs are basically GW house rules so are not Official.

 

Just like how you just said FW said it's official, so it is, GW said FAQs are "soft house rules" and don't need to be used.

 

We can all scream in the face till we are blue in the face. It all comes down to consent. You either consent to use FW or you don't. You either consent to use the FAQs or don't. You consent to play against someone who spams an army all the time or is :cuss. It's up to you to play and no amount of "official" can make/force anyone to play if they choose to or not.

[HsojVvad]

One more thing about "consent". If we are playing a 2000 point game, and I show up with 12 Troops and 6 Elites are you going to play me? I mean, it's "official" in the rule book but so many people say you can only have one FOC in a 2000 point game.

 

So a lot of people, at least on the internet, are refusing to play against people with 2 FOC in a 2000 point game. It's official and they are still refusing to play. So again, "consent" is always what 2 people agree apon no matter what is official and unofficial.

[Agerjag]

Basically what we have discovered is that everything is really up to your game group and you should talk it out with them.  Get your opponents go ahead before playing anything not "official" (and no FW cannot declare something official for 40k, they can say that they tested it and "they" think its fine, but nothing else, otherwise I can makeup a ruleset tomorrow and declare it 40k approved, even though none of the people that write the BGB and codex had even heard of it....I can guarantee that when GW makes a codex they do not play test FW possibilities and saying that FW made a FAQ that makes it ok is really stretching it, I can write FAQs too, they are still not "official")

 

I personally like how FW adds some more flavor and different things to the universe. Explores more of the rich lore and lets you play with things you thought you could only read about. I have a problem with how it invalidates things in the codex. Look at option in forgeworld compare it to closest option in codex and most of the time I find it costs less and has better stats/armor and more weapons......  Now, if everyone has access to forgeworld this is more balanced but can be a problem. My general stance is to only bring FW models when my opponent does or in Apoc games. In the end Apoc is not 40k, its a very different game, I believe this is true of games including FW and vanilla 40k games. They are different and you should play what you like best. If someone asks me to play 40k with them, it means no forge world. If they ask me to play 40k+unofficial forgeworld expansion then Ill expect to play that instead.

 

Lastly, everyone should play more apocalypse, seriously, its fun.

[Bryan Blaire]

The people that write for GW do know and play FW stuff, as do the people that write for BL. To say that they don't know about it is a ridiculous assertion. FW has the authority to say something is official because they are part of the Games Workshop Group PLC , aka Games Workshop Ltd, aka Games Workshop. Fans have no authority because we are not part of Games Workshop Group PLC and have no official standing with the company to say anything.

 

FW is no less official an expansion than Planetstrike or Apocalypse is. They use the same Expansion logo. Fans have zero rights to that logo for production purposes.

 

Whether it is official or not has no bearing on its uses for a game. Next thing people will be arguing that only Games Workshop produced tape measures are allowed to be used, because something from the hardware store doesn't say GW40K...

[Steel Company]

Agreed, a lot of fear is caused by ignorance, not all mind you, some people actually have good reason

For the most part I am okay with FW, they can sometimes be a little over powered when used in combination with something else...

*cough* Lucius pattern drop pod with a death company dread with blood talons*cough*

Now just like bog standard 40k, there are things that are a little under cost for what they do, as much as I love my 130 point tri-TLLC Vndettas, they really should cost about 150 points each, anything more than that, and they will not see much use.

By the same token, Elysian troopers actually cost more than codex guard, so some things actually cost more than they should.

So long story short, everything should be taken on a case by case bases if you ask me.

[Agerjag]

The people that write for GW do know and play FW stuff, as do the people that write for BL. To say that they don't know about it is a ridiculous assertion. FW has the authority to say something is official because they are part of the Games Workshop Group PLC , aka Games Workshop Ltd, aka Games Workshop. Fans have no authority because we are not part of Games Workshop Group PLC and have no official standing with the company to say anything.

 

FW is no less official an expansion than Planetstrike or Apocalypse is. They use the same Expansion logo. Fans have zero rights to that logo for production purposes.

 

Whether it is official or not has no bearing on its uses for a game. Next thing people will be arguing that only Games Workshop produced tape measures are allowed to be used, because something from the hardware store doesn't say GW40K...

 

Planet Strike and Apocalypse like I said are different games. So yes forgeworld is another expansion (not as legitimate). In that sense you are not playing Warhammer 40k. Your playing an expansion of content for it. People who want to play 40k should continue to do so. The people that write for GW do indeed play FW and Apoc. They do not do their testing with FW models. They dont do enough testing as it is and to include every FW possibility is ludicrous.  They might play some fun games with them from time to time but thats it.  I prefer them not to waste the time instead of working on the actual core game, which has enough internal balance problems.

 

Your not far off on tape measures, when GW ran tournaments they allow no FW and you MUST use GW models with no exceptions. Think about that and tell me FW is legit for 40k. Even 'ard boyz, their bring the cheese tournaments did not allow FW and it has the cheesiest builds out their. This is because they are different games. If you like FW so much continue playing it. I play it as well as actual 40k, and Planetstrike, and Apocalypse(with FW of course).  I enjoy each game and always ask people if they want to play that game or just 40k. As for FW writers vs. GW writers.  They are separate entities  regardless of what umbrella they fall under. If that had meetings every month to go over how they were effecting each other that would be swell but its not how it works. The makers of FW make their rules separately from the normal rulebook and codex authors, in what they see as a fair way. Not necessarily what the codex authors would see as a fair way.  Maybe in the future the BGB will say that forgeworld is all legit, but I doubt that will ever happen and has never happened before.

 

Also while I agree that everything should be case by case. Its unreasonable to do that without a tight gaming group. I play some people ive never met before at the local shop sometimes and have some really great games. Its unreasonable for us to sit down and go through every unit until we agree. Its also unreasonable to force them to play with the list you and your buddies came up with of what is OP. FW just opens up so much and if only one person is using it its get VERY unbalanced. Yes you could take things that arn't but most of what I see people talking are just crazy good for the price. The reason people pick them so often are because they see them as effective.

[Steel Company]

Well then, may I ask what you think of the Vulture gun-ship for the guard? In my guard I don't run Russ' 'cause I hate the look of them, but I want something that meshes well with my air-cav list, in my heavy support section... the unit is not unbalanced, costs about as much as a Valk with rocket pods or Vendetta, when you start to kit the Vulture our for anti-tank or anti-horde roles, and she runs the same amount of hull points and armour values...

[Cactus]

I'm firmly in the 'Forge World make good looking and interesting units and I want to see them on the tabletop' camp. I ask my friends when we're arranging a game if they mind me using models from Forge World and have yet to receive a "No" or even a "Hmmm, I'm not sure about that". When asked the same my answer is "Yes". We're not fielding ruthlessly optimised armies (with one or two exceptions!), we know who we're playing when we write our army lists, and rarely field the exact same list twice.

 

In the highly unlikely event that I went to my local GW for a pick-up game with a stranger I'd leave the Forge World models at home, or at least out of the army list. If you're playing a game 'cold' like that I can see the benefit of having a baseline of what's allowed, and rulebook plus codex plus errata/amendment/FAQ plus White Dwarf is a sensible common ground to start from.

 

Can anybody offer concrete examples of the over-powered or under-pointed Forge World units? I see that point of view a lot but never anything specific.

[Diavlo]

. The people that write for GW do indeed play FW and Apoc. They do not do their testing with FW models. They dont do enough testing as it is and to include every FW possibility is ludicrous.  They might play some fun games with them from time to time but thats it.  I prefer them not to waste the time instead of working on the actual core game, which has enough internal balance problems.   

 

Now look at DA codex, now look at its FAQ, now look at Nephilim, now look at missile lock for non blast missiles, now look at belials disappearing iron halo, now look at land raiders with must/may dedicated or not venerable.

Now tell me that GW does enough testing :)

It really doesn't matter if its FW or GW. Its essentially the same company that does not make competitive rules and they always admit that.

 

Now I'll get back to my cell. 

[Agerjag]

Unfortunately, I dont have any books on me so I will look into it when I can. But in general pick a unit that is pretty close and check the price from that. If its armor values are the same as the vendetta then look at its weapons and special rules and see if the points differences match up with the differences in rules. It might be hard to put an actual value on some rules but just do the best you can.  You have to factor in things like maneuverability and transport capacity when looking at point costs because a super mobile Multi-melta "costs" more then a slow one and so on. You can always look into the VDR rules and check in that respect as well (kinda).

 

@Diavlo - wasn't that my point though? That forgeworld adds to much to be tested reasonably by the actual codex crew and that they dont test what they have well enough? or were you agreeing with me....somewhat confused.
 

@Cactus - For a simple example lets just look at our own Mortis. It is way better then our actual dreadnought with better rules and is cheap as chips.  It basically invalidates our codex dread. That not even adding value to the game really, its replacing something that is supposed to be balanced as per our codex(not saying it is or isnt as I did not write the codex). Now I personally feel that dreads are worse this edition but then it becomes  contest of who writes more balanced rules, FW or GW. Also dont get me started on lucious pattern drop pods.

[Diavlo]

Agerjag - I'm an extremist. In my opinion we shouldn't play 40k at tournaments, but we will. We should use FW units along with GW ones and even the ones that you just made up. As far as opponent likes it. We should play missions from battle missions, crusade of fire and any other you find or imagine.

The problem is that if people stop play at tournaments then most probably 40k will die and I don't want that. However we shouldn't play at tournaments because GW invent casual rules not competitive ones and they often make mistakes like nephilims point cost, but we shouldn't stop playing at tournaments because this may kill our hobby. 

All in all we should just have some fun. Therefore i kinda agree and disagree with you, as most probably FW rules aren't tested enough, but GW rules aren't either. Therefore using FW ones and GW ones should be equal. If you look from competitive point of view it still doesn't make sense because it's not competitive game with or without FW rules. Maybe adding more variety and units to that game is the best at the moment and it seems that GW knows it. If you pack up unlimited number of different units its going to be balanced because there will be too many choices to have one best and overpowered set of minis.

 

Thats my freaky point of view. ( I hope i didn't mess it up too much as English isn't my primary language and I don't use it enough lately)

[Agerjag]

Agerjag - I'm an extremist. In my opinion we shouldn't play 40k at tournaments, but we will. We should use FW units along with GW ones and even the ones that you just made up. As far as opponent likes it. We should play missions from battle missions, crusade of fire and any other you find or imagine.

The problem is that if people stop play at tournaments then most probably 40k will die and I don't want that. However we shouldn't play at tournaments because GW invent casual rules not competitive ones and they often make mistakes like nephilims point cost, but we shouldn't stop playing at tournaments because this may kill our hobby. 

All in all we should just have some fun. Therefore i kinda agree and disagree with you, as most probably FW rules aren't tested enough, but GW rules aren't either. Therefore using FW ones and GW ones should be equal. If you look from competitive point of view it still doesn't make sense because it's not competitive game with or without FW rules. Maybe adding more variety and units to that game is the best at the moment and it seems that GW knows it. If you pack up unlimited number of different units its going to be balanced because there will be too many choices to have one best and overpowered set of minis.

 

Thats my freaky point of view. ( I hope i didn't mess it up too much as English isn't my primary language and I don't use it enough lately)

Well your English is great so no worries there. Id say English is my tertiary language as I never learned it well enough to be primary or even secondary :P

 

I agree that we should all play for fun.  As i said I love to play all the different types of game modes that are available.  The only problem I see is that I dont want to force people to play forgeworld or not. I mean I cant "REALLY" force them, but when a crew starts switching over you basically have to accept that or use a weaker army. I will clearly say that a army with forgeworld is BETTER then one without in terms of options and in general overcomming your armies shortcommings. To me alot of those weaknesses are in place on purpose and add their own flavor to the game.  That being said I love to play with Thunderhawks and Baneblades or even just adding something like a single mortis to my list. But I also like to keep things in perspective.  In general adding any kind of expansion to a game changes it. Maybe you liked the games balance before the expansion and felt that it was better but still enjoy more options brought by the expansion so you might end of playing both. It can of course be the other way around. What I really am trying to get across to people is that FW is really not part of 40k the game. Its part of an expanded and differently balanced game. I have found that with some crews everyone gets excited over FW models and rules and in genera,l because there is participation from everyone, it is basically as balanced as the original.  I just never want to force anyone to play something they would rather not, or try to compete where it is clearly not meant to. This just drives people away from the game. So basically my message is: Start just by playing normal 40k and use expansions only where both players are really comfortable playing, don't bitch people out cause you wanted to play your FW thing and they dont have any, just roll with it and hopefully you can then show them some cool rules and maybe help them progress their hobby beyond just 40k.

 

Now, I know any player can just walk away, but id rather this never have been an issue in the first place. Game groups in general will hash this kinda thing out. FW is not meant for 40k(base game) just as apocalypse is not. Its a different kettle of fish. Just find out what you prefer to play and go from there or just be open minded and play whatever your opponent prefers.  For the record my favorite games were pre-apocalypse "Mega-Battles" with Imperial Armour and VDR (Vehicle design rules). Which was basically apocalypse before apocalypse .

[Azoriel]

@Cactus - For a simple example lets just look at our own Mortis. It is way better then our actual dreadnought with better rules and is cheap as chips.  It basically invalidates our codex dread. That not even adding value to the game really, its replacing something that is supposed to be balanced as per our codex(not saying it is or isnt as I did not write the codex). Now I personally feel that dreads are worse this edition but then it becomes  contest of who writes more balanced rules, FW or GW. Also dont get me started on lucious pattern drop pods.

 

Invalidates the codex dread?  Are we all talking about the mortis dreadnought that's more expensive than a codex dread doing the exact same thing (125 for a rifleman mortis vs. 120 for a rifleman standard) AND it doesn't have the option of going venerable either?  As it stands right now, I'd rather have skyfire and interceptor than venerable, but each still has its own function - the mortis is absolutely useless in CC.  (Of course, in the current edition, dreadnoughts have trouble in CC across the board, but I view that as a fault of overall game design, something which FW had no influence over.)

[HsojVvad]

made a mistake edited it out.

[Bryan Blaire]

My only point of contention in this thread is the continuous saying that a product produced by the company Forge World under the umbrella of Games Workshop is not official. It is an official product of Games Workshop as produced by its subsidiary division Forge World. Is it an expansion product, sure, but so is Planetstrike or Apocalypse. I'm not really sure what people have a contention about it being an official product with official units is. I've said repeatedly that your opponent has to approve playing with you, regardless of what you use. Nothing about being official or suitable for 40K makes a lick of difference if your opponent doesn't want to play Forge World.

 

What else am I supposed to address? What have I missed? If I have no real interest other than that, and I've already made my point about needing opponent's permission regardless of what you are doing, do you want me to just walk away even if I see people making the same assertion again and again?

 

Honestly, in this respect, "official" standing has zero bearing on the game, you might as well play with Fan-dexes if everyone involved agrees to it.

 

I really can't convince anyone to allow FW, other than by playing a game with them and allowing them to use models against me. Inclusion of FW in an army (the original point of the post, from the title - although possibly not the content) isn't an arguable point, IMO, because it relies on the situation.

 

HsojVvad, I don't think you made any mistakes, you raised a valid point. I have been pretty relentless in my arguments.

 

What do you think we should reset to? One of the only things I haven't really seen discussed much are the aforementioned "FW units invalidate GW Codex ones" about which I agree with Azoriel on and this from GlauG:

An interesting thought that point 4 raises...  Do FW units which can be selected by a Codex: Dark Angels army get affected by rules which specifically only affect "models from Codex: Dark Angels", such as the sacred standards?  Though I only think this matters if any FW vehicles can take Hurricane Bolters...

That I think is a really sticky discussion that I feel I have no real means to discuss. I mean, the Mortis and Contemptor are both stated to be choices for Codex: DA, but does that mean they would actually count as Codex units if you are playing with FW?

 

I think I've already made any point I can about Codex vs non-Codex overpowered-ness and balance issues.