The Most Important Thing I Feel That 40k Forgot

[MARK0SIAN]

Interesting point.

Yeah, I have noticed this was missing, but was not thinking too much about it.

 

Well, I am now nearly 25 years in the hobby.

And my motto has always been fun first, winning second.

I try to have my army painted, I try to do some role play and name my characters and I try to also act as part of my army when I am playing.

Basically, my army is kind of my cosplay.

This can be truly amazing when you have an opponent who plays along. I had some truly memorable and amazing games and made some great friends.

But there are also people who do not play to have fun.

They just crunch numbers and I just do not see the point.

They could as well sit in a corner and play with an excel spreadsheet.

Some people become super annoyed when I do my role-play and scream my battle cries and whisper in voices and talk to my characters.

They even hate it when you let out screams of joy or despair after you had some amazing roll and some amazing things happened on the field.

Like one time when some really unlikely scenes happened and my hero, completely impossible, managed to destroy a Necron monolith.

This is not something that happens every day.

I mean, what is the point? The word "play" should imply that there is an element of "fun" involved. Otherwise, I might as well go to work.

I have never understood that mentality.

I spend hours and hours painting a great army, think up background stories for the characters and I am very proud to present and share this with other people, and then some people are just annoyed at you for showing enthusiasm and enjoyment. When confronted with these people, I just completely close up and try to end the game as soon and as efficiently as possible. It is just not worth it.

No sagas sung, no skulls collected, no scrolls of honour filled.

On the other hand, what is more amazing than having two people play a game, share amazing stories, really LIVING the adventure that plays out on the board.

I play to have fun. Winning comes second. I actually prefer going through an epic story to getting a medal in the end.

I even cheer for the opponent when he manages a suitably amazing feat.

But yeah, I have accepted during my 25 years of hobby that I am just not everyone's cup of tea.

I don’t think it’s fair to say people like that aren’t playing for fun, it’s just that’s how they have their fun, crunching numbers and putting together optimum combos. It’s the polar opposite of how you have fun but it’s fun for them. No one would invest the time and money this hobby requires if they weren’t getting some fun out of it.

 

It’s not your (or my) cup of tea but it shows just how important it is to discuss your expectations before the game so you know whether its a game you want to play before it even starts. My ideal game is one where I can play casually and enjoy a fun chat with friends during the game and look at great visuals on the table so I’d try and find similar opponents.

[Valkia the Bloody]

 

 

I don’t think it’s fair to say people like that aren’t playing for fun, it’s just that’s how they have their fun, crunching numbers and putting together optimum combos. It’s the polar opposite of how you have fun but it’s fun for them. No one would invest the time and money this hobby requires if they weren’t getting some fun out of it.

 

It’s not your (or my) cup of tea but it shows just how important it is to discuss your expectations before the game so you know whether its a game you want to play before it even starts. My ideal game is one where I can play casually and enjoy a fun chat with friends during the game and look at great visuals on the table so I’d try and find similar opponents.

 

 

Well, yes, you make a good point.

Of course one has to assume that these other people have fun in a different way (and might not even show it).

However, since I am involved in some other pop-culture fandoms.... some sites/ forums/ groups have become pretty toxic and sometimes I wonder what is going on.

Sometimes, these fans only have bad words left for their former loved fandom and it seems the greatest joy for them would be if it failed.

It is sometimes very hard to judge people and to understand what their game is.

 

And I agree, communication is key.

I always tell people that I am very enthusiastic and tell them to let me know if it is too much. And I tell them I am there to have fun (at least what I understand by that word).

And on occasion, the two different world can even unite to mutual benefit.

I once had a game where my number crazy opponent even taught me a few things about my own army and we met halfway with our different ways.

 

[alfred_the_great]

 

So, TL;DR (of the internet) is that it’s GW’s fault for making individuals toxic players. <shrug>

Not entirely. Just their fault for not better communicating the intent on how people should approach the game and encouraging sportsmanship.

Don’t individuals have the agency to understand they should play with sportsmanship and approach the game so that it’s positive for both players? Have we really reached a point where everything has to be written down by someone else?

[phandaal]

 

And I agree, communication is key.

I always tell people that I am very enthusiastic and tell them to let me know if it is too much. And I tell them I am there to have fun (at least what I understand by that word).

And on occasion, the two different world can even unite to mutual benefit.

I once had a game where my number crazy opponent even taught me a few things about my own army and we met halfway with our different ways.

 

 

 

Communication is definitely key. In the example I used earlier, the other guy was a competitive tournament player. I am not, to put it mildly.

 

We talked beforehand and agreed on what kind of lists we would bring and the game type we would play. Everyone went in expecting the same thing from the game despite coming at it from very different places.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

So, TL;DR (of the internet) is that it’s GW’s fault for making individuals toxic players. <shrug>

Not entirely. Just their fault for not better communicating the intent on how people should approach the game and encouraging sportsmanship.

Don’t individuals have the agency to understand they should play with sportsmanship and approach the game so that it’s positive for both players? Have we really reached a point where everything has to be written down by someone else?

The thing is, in a game as varied as 40K there’s a huge gulf between what’s sporting and what’s positive for both players when compared to other games/sports. For some the definition of sporting will be to let someone go back and cast a psychic power they forgot. Whereas for others the sportsmanship starts at the list writing stage.

 

Likewise how much you prioritise winning. We could all, for example, try our absolute hardest to win a game of tennis but still play sportingly and the expectations of the players going into the game would be broadly the same. In 40K, trying your hardest to win is not a priority for everyone and creating a sporting list will often run counter to trying to win by making a conscious choice not to take the most broken combos you can.

 

Having this cooperative approach officially codified/stated in the rules gives everyone a heads up in the kind of game they should be aiming to have and what to expect.

[BitsHammer]

 

 

So, TL;DR (of the internet) is that it’s GW’s fault for making individuals toxic players. <shrug>

Not entirely. Just their fault for not better communicating the intent on how people should approach the game and encouraging sportsmanship.

Don’t individuals have the agency to understand they should play with sportsmanship and approach the game so that it’s positive for both players? Have we really reached a point where everything has to be written down by someone else?

 

Sounds like a lot of handwaving to say GW isn't at least partially at fault for failing to present an intent that the game should be more than who can puzzle out the best list (or copy the best one off the internet).

 

Yes, the community is responsible in part for this, but they're given much greater agency when the rules back them up. I can't count the number of times "the rules didn't say I couldn't" has been used as an excuse to club the local baby seals even in Crusade where the point is not to win harder but to try and tell a good story.

[Dark Shepherd]

A small number of armies are garbage tier and a lot less fun to play with, one or two were almost impossible to not be top tier with

 

Thats squarely on GW

 

Id include overlethality in that as well as viability of vehicles. If you cant paint much or are a slow builder/painter or are a major converter/kitbasher, its an extra buzzkill when something you spent ages working on gets instadeleted turn 1

[Halandaar]

 

Interesting point.

Yeah, I have noticed this was missing, but was not thinking too much about it.

 

Well, I am now nearly 25 years in the hobby.

And my motto has always been fun first, winning second.

I try to have my army painted, I try to do some role play and name my characters and I try to also act as part of my army when I am playing.

Basically, my army is kind of my cosplay.

This can be truly amazing when you have an opponent who plays along. I had some truly memorable and amazing games and made some great friends.

But there are also people who do not play to have fun.

They just crunch numbers and I just do not see the point.

They could as well sit in a corner and play with an excel spreadsheet.

Some people become super annoyed when I do my role-play and scream my battle cries and whisper in voices and talk to my characters.

They even hate it when you let out screams of joy or despair after you had some amazing roll and some amazing things happened on the field.

Like one time when some really unlikely scenes happened and my hero, completely impossible, managed to destroy a Necron monolith.

This is not something that happens every day.

I mean, what is the point? The word "play" should imply that there is an element of "fun" involved. Otherwise, I might as well go to work.

I have never understood that mentality.

I spend hours and hours painting a great army, think up background stories for the characters and I am very proud to present and share this with other people, and then some people are just annoyed at you for showing enthusiasm and enjoyment. When confronted with these people, I just completely close up and try to end the game as soon and as efficiently as possible. It is just not worth it.

No sagas sung, no skulls collected, no scrolls of honour filled.

On the other hand, what is more amazing than having two people play a game, share amazing stories, really LIVING the adventure that plays out on the board.

I play to have fun. Winning comes second. I actually prefer going through an epic story to getting a medal in the end.

I even cheer for the opponent when he manages a suitably amazing feat.

But yeah, I have accepted during my 25 years of hobby that I am just not everyone's cup of tea.

 

Celebrating unlikely events is one of the best parts of the game. 

 

Totally agree with that; to this day my favourite ever memory of a game was my own High Elf Archmage miscasting a spell and nuking half a block of my Phoenix Guard, killing himself and sending his Dragon on a rampage into one of my other units. The story and/or unexpected outcomes are what makes it fun for me, and i'd rather enjoy losing than have a bland experience winning.

Edited February 25, 2022 by Halandaar

[Evil Eye]

I wholeheartedly agree with this- "The Most Important Rule" is exactly as described, and whilst GW is not to blame for the existence of people who will abuse any loophole/slightly over-optimal unit to win at any cost, I feel they should have done more to dissuade such mindsets and not cater to them at all [glares at Metawatch].

 

Still, could be worse. Could be Warmahordes and its "Play like you've got a pair" thing (AKA the exact opposite of TMIR).

[The Neverborn]

Extremely good point OP

 

I think this is a symptom of "tournament play". As i'm typing this I'm releasing two supplements GW released in the last 24 months have been called "Grand Tournament".

 

And now I'm sad.

[alfred_the_great]

I wholeheartedly agree with this- "The Most Important Rule" is exactly as described, and whilst GW is not to blame for the existence of people who will abuse any loophole/slightly over-optimal unit to win at any cost, I feel they should have done more to dissuade such mindsets and not cater to them at all [glares at Metawatch].

 

Still, could be worse. Could be Warmahordes and its "Play like you've got a pair" thing (AKA the exact opposite of TMIR).

Metawatch came from “community” demand. If there was the demand for story driven co-op game play, they’d undoubtedly put that forward….

[phandaal]

I wholeheartedly agree with this- "The Most Important Rule" is exactly as described, and whilst GW is not to blame for the existence of people who will abuse any loophole/slightly over-optimal unit to win at any cost, I feel they should have done more to dissuade such mindsets and not cater to them at all [glares at Metawatch].

 

Still, could be worse. Could be Warmahordes and its "Play like you've got a pair" thing (AKA the exact opposite of TMIR).

Privateer Press is a special level of obnoxious for sure.

 

GW's marketing is in direct competition with the "play for fun" mindset, unfortunately. Less focused on "everyone has fun" and more focused on "Your enemies won't stand a chance when you do a hundred damage per shot!!!!"

[Slave to Darkness]

 

Have we really reached a point where everything has to be written down by someone else?

Yes!!

 

When we have health warnings on soap powder now so people dont eat it then yes, we have reached the point when we need written instructions. 

 

Keeping my point on the hobby though, I still say yes, if people cant figure out a basic rule in the rulebook whos intent is clear, and they need to FAQ it, then clearly we need things simplified and written down for us. 

[Slave to Darkness]

 

I wholeheartedly agree with this- "The Most Important Rule" is exactly as described, and whilst GW is not to blame for the existence of people who will abuse any loophole/slightly over-optimal unit to win at any cost, I feel they should have done more to dissuade such mindsets and not cater to them at all [glares at Metawatch].

 

Still, could be worse. Could be Warmahordes and its "Play like you've got a pair" thing (AKA the exact opposite of TMIR).

Metawatch came from “community” demand. If there was the demand for story driven co-op game play, they’d undoubtedly put that forward….

 

There is a demand for story driven co op play, GW only do stuff that makes them money at the end of the day, so they will go where the loudest shouting is, they dont care about the game or the gamers, just cold hard credits. 

[Doghouse]

It'd be nice to collect the models you like and then not find out that they suck in the game and no one uses them.

[MegaVolt87]

 

Interesting point.

Yeah, I have noticed this was missing, but was not thinking too much about it.

 

Well, I am now nearly 25 years in the hobby.

And my motto has always been fun first, winning second.

I try to have my army painted, I try to do some role play and name my characters and I try to also act as part of my army when I am playing.

Basically, my army is kind of my cosplay.

This can be truly amazing when you have an opponent who plays along. I had some truly memorable and amazing games and made some great friends.

But there are also people who do not play to have fun.

They just crunch numbers and I just do not see the point.

They could as well sit in a corner and play with an excel spreadsheet.

Some people become super annoyed when I do my role-play and scream my battle cries and whisper in voices and talk to my characters.

They even hate it when you let out screams of joy or despair after you had some amazing roll and some amazing things happened on the field.

Like one time when some really unlikely scenes happened and my hero, completely impossible, managed to destroy a Necron monolith.

This is not something that happens every day.

I mean, what is the point? The word "play" should imply that there is an element of "fun" involved. Otherwise, I might as well go to work.

I have never understood that mentality.

I spend hours and hours painting a great army, think up background stories for the characters and I am very proud to present and share this with other people, and then some people are just annoyed at you for showing enthusiasm and enjoyment. When confronted with these people, I just completely close up and try to end the game as soon and as efficiently as possible. It is just not worth it.

No sagas sung, no skulls collected, no scrolls of honour filled.

On the other hand, what is more amazing than having two people play a game, share amazing stories, really LIVING the adventure that plays out on the board.

I play to have fun. Winning comes second. I actually prefer going through an epic story to getting a medal in the end.

I even cheer for the opponent when he manages a suitably amazing feat.

But yeah, I have accepted during my 25 years of hobby that I am just not everyone's cup of tea.

I don’t think it’s fair to say people like that aren’t playing for fun, it’s just that’s how they have their fun, crunching numbers and putting together optimum combos. It’s the polar opposite of how you have fun but it’s fun for them. No one would invest the time and money this hobby requires if they weren’t getting some fun out of it.

 

It’s not your (or my) cup of tea but it shows just how important it is to discuss your expectations before the game so you know whether its a game you want to play before it even starts. My ideal game is one where I can play casually and enjoy a fun chat with friends during the game and look at great visuals on the table so I’d try and find similar opponents.

 

Keep in mind its not fair to expect such an open, carefree response when gaming with a stranger or casual acquaintance. It can take people months/ years to be that carefree/ cut loose etc. Many people don't feel confident/ comfortable to do that. Comp players can ham it up just as well as you, its done in front of friends though. 

[BitsHammer]

 

I wholeheartedly agree with this- "The Most Important Rule" is exactly as described, and whilst GW is not to blame for the existence of people who will abuse any loophole/slightly over-optimal unit to win at any cost, I feel they should have done more to dissuade such mindsets and not cater to them at all [glares at Metawatch].

 

Still, could be worse. Could be Warmahordes and its "Play like you've got a pair" thing (AKA the exact opposite of TMIR).

Metawatch came from “community” demand. If there was the demand for story driven co-op game play, they’d undoubtedly put that forward….

By community, if you mean the ITC and Mike Brandt then maybe.

 

I reached out to Nick Bayton about more narrative content on Twitter and he recommended anyone who has feedback on Warhammer+ or WHC content email community@gwplc.com which I intend to do with feedback about wanting more narrative content focus and content outside of comp play.

 

Also he said if we know of any narrative events to email them in so they can cover them too.

Edited February 28, 2022 by Fulkes

[byrd9999]

Just for balance, I find there is plenty that is light-hearted and fun in GW games.

 

I haven't played much in person over the last couple of years, only once in fact, but it was a pick up game at a FLGS against another guy who also hadn't played in 2 years, and he shoved a few models on the table, we agreed some secondaries and had a great time.

 

If anyone says GW have forgotten the Rule of Having Fun, take a look at the batreps on WH+. These guys and gals are having a blast. Kill Team Xmas edition, War Cry with Peachy vs. Nick, 40k with Guilliman vs Nurgle. It is a blast to watch because they are playing cool narrative missions and enjoying watching their models doing cool things.

 

Why do we need GW to write down that Fun should be high up on the list of reasons to play 40k?

 

As for levity in the 40k universe, has anyone seen Orks over the last couple of years? These guys are brilliant. The fiction that Black Library is putting out is top stuff. Nate Crowley and Mike Brooks have written amazing stories that make me laugh out loud. Robert Rath and Nate Crowley's Necron fiction also is fantastic.

 

The recent Thousand Sons codex also contains humorous moments.

 

For the people who are complaining, are you ignoring all this stuff, or do you just want a moan about something?

[Dark Shepherd]

Well getting paid by GW to play would definitely make it more fun

[phandaal]

For the people who are complaining, are you ignoring all this stuff, or do you just want a moan about something?

Your post actually had good points until this unnecessary reddit incursion. Unless you have a friend at Amazon who is letting you listen in on people, I doubt there is a lot of moaning going on while these posts are being written. It is a funny mental image though.

 

Those fun experiences can definitely still happen while the game as a whole moves in a more competitive direction.

 

On the other hand, it is hard to deny that marketing leans heavily on how new rules will enable you to wipe your opponent out in the blink of an eye. Seems like that type of marketing outweighs the fun and fluffy stuff.

[Tawnis]

 

 

 

To be fair, the first people to forget that both players should be having fun were the rules writers. Just look at some of the stuff in the codexes, how anyone is meant to have any fun playing against some of those rules is beyond me.

Said something to this effect in the survey GW sent out a while back. That there is someone on the receiving end of every new rule GW comes out with.

 

Sometimes it feels like new rules treat "the opponent" like they are a video game NPC who will just respawn over and over again for you to beat on.

Unfortunately I have seen an attitude that has literally been echoed on this forum, that basically amounts to:

 

"It's not my responsibility to create fun with the game. It's on GW to write better rules"

 

Sure, I agree that GW should and could write better rules, but we are all ultimately responsible to creating an enjoyable experience. Too many people don't see it this way.

 

 

We had a local beginners league dry up because a few experienced gamers decided to join and bring their noob crusher lists. After crushing a few noobs, the noobs stopped showing up to get crushed. Saw one guy nearly table his opponent in 1.5 rounds and then act surprised and disappointed when his opponent conceded. Something like "wait, really?" The other guy said something like "well you are going to kill all the rest of my stuff next turn anyway."

 

So yeah, some people really do not seem to comprehend that they are playing against another real person, even if that person is right there in front of them.

 

On the other hand, people are gonna be people, and rules designed for people should take that into account. Games Workshop has been doing this for decades, and they do seem to recognize that some people will squeeze every ounce of advantage from their rules - even if it makes no sense i.e. those AdMech jump troops that could never actually get attacked.

 

There was something that happened semi-recently that really brought this to the forefront for me, even before I got back into playing on a semi-regular basis. I have a friend who I've been trying to get into the game for well over a decade because I knew he'd love it, but there were various reasons why he hadn't over the years. He finally agreed last year and wanted some advise on the army that he should play. I told him to get Tau as they are thematically (both lore wise and tactically on the table) right up his ally. 

 

So he went down to the local GW and mentioned that he was looking to get into the game, that I had recommended he check out the Tau, and to see what they had to start off with. The guy at the local GW spent about 10 minutes trying to talk him out of playing Tau because they weren't a meta army and that "your friend is just trying to get you to play Tau so he can face roll you." 

 

Seriously W T F. Not only should the game not be in a state where this should be the case, but even then, the mentality that competitive lists are the only things that matter and there aren't other ways to play being shoved down a brand new player's throat from the get go is just re-enforcing this kind of mentality among the newer players.

 

The idea that anyone would get a friend to spend hundreds of dollars on a game just so they could repeatedly kick there ass just boggled my mind to no end, but as I've started to play more, I have found a few people like that and I still can't wrap my brain around how someone has fun like that. Not just for the person who gets rolled, but from the winner too. How do you feel a sense of accomplishment with something like that? How does copy pasting a tournament list and going to crush someone who's only playing their third game give any sense of fulfillment? 

 

Maybe I'm getting too much off on a tangent here, but for me at least, I don't find the game fun unless I feel like it was a hard fought battle that either side could have won. 

Edited February 28, 2022 by Tawnis

[gideon stargreave]

I watched Ireland steamroll Italy at the rugby the other day due to an arcane rules interpretation. No-one seemed very happy with the result, the fans, the players, neither team. I'd love GW to have something like the citadel journal where they could really showcase the fun side of the hobby. That said, I'd say it was a certain cohort of the hobby that cares about winning over fun, and that cohort is the one that inhabits a lot of stores, but that the hobby in general seems to be moving towards this more old school rp influence.

[byrd9999]

 

Maybe I'm getting too much off on a tangent here, but for me at least, I don't find the game fun unless I feel like it was a hard fought battle that either side could have won. 

 

 

 

This is a good point, that GW can best help players enjoy the game by making the balance between armies as close as possible, making sure each unit can do something useful in a game, and reducing the gaps between the weakest and most powerful units in the game. This would make more of a difference than publishing The First Rule of Fun, which plenty of players ignored even when it was around.

 

Personally, I would rather lose a close game than crush my opponent. Massive victories/defeats are not fun for either side.

[byrd9999]

I watched Ireland steamroll Italy at the rugby the other day due to an arcane rules interpretation. No-one seemed very happy with the result, the fans, the players, neither team. I'd love GW to have something like the citadel journal where they could really showcase the fun side of the hobby. That said, I'd say it was a certain cohort of the hobby that cares about winning over fun, and that cohort is the one that inhabits a lot of stores, but that the hobby in general seems to be moving towards this more old school rp influence.

 

It would also help if GW improved the narrative gaming side of things.

 

Rather than involving a massive escalation of cross-referencing, book keeping and artefacts for models, narrative games should be more about telling a story. I wouldn't mind it if GW took a leaf out of RPGs like D&D.

 

There have been some interesting Bat Reps in White Dwarf that involve storytelling.

[phandaal]

 

I watched Ireland steamroll Italy at the rugby the other day due to an arcane rules interpretation. No-one seemed very happy with the result, the fans, the players, neither team. I'd love GW to have something like the citadel journal where they could really showcase the fun side of the hobby. That said, I'd say it was a certain cohort of the hobby that cares about winning over fun, and that cohort is the one that inhabits a lot of stores, but that the hobby in general seems to be moving towards this more old school rp influence.

 

It would also help if GW improved the narrative gaming side of things.

 

Rather than involving a massive escalation of cross-referencing, book keeping and artefacts for models, narrative games should be more about telling a story. I wouldn't mind it if GW took a leaf out of RPGs like D&D.

 

There have been some interesting Bat Reps in White Dwarf that involve storytelling.

 

 

My favorite White Dwarf battle report series was this thing they did years ago where they would buy and paint a unit or two on a limited budget each month, then add those forces to their armies for each new report.

 

I remember one issue the guy had some extra cash left over so he got a bacon roll on the way back to the office. It was great - just some guys knocking together some lists for fun in real time.