What, if anything, should GW do about Legends

[ThaneOfTas]

Rightly or wrongly, I don't believe that it's controversial to state there there is at least a very negative perception of Legends rules for 40k. How much of an impact this has on your day to day games is going to heavily depend on your local scene obviously, but I've seen many people sharing anecdotes saying that either it has no impact, or that it's rendered anything legends as unplayable.

 

Assuming that you think that there is an issue here, what do you think GW could do in order to better encourage non competitive players to keep using Legends rules?

 

Personally I think that the fact that legends rules are not available on the app is one of the biggest hindrance to their wider adoption. Battlescribe has been able to show or hide Legends content with a simple checkbox for 3 editions now, it's completely doable.

 

Otherwise, maybe a simple commitment to giving legends datasheets a once a year checkup, even just to update any keywords or attachments that have gotten out of date in the interim would work wonders I think.

 

Regardless what do the fraters think?

[ZeroWolf]

A yearly going over should be simple enough, as long as it's keywords that need updating or comparing with any changed base rules. 

[DemonGSides]

 

Personally I think that the fact that legends rules are not available on the app is one of the biggest hindrance to their wider adoption. Battlescribe has been able to show or hide Legends content with a simple checkbox for 3 editions now, it's completely doable.

 

This feels like enough, to be honest. They should just be a check box turn on for those who want it.

 

Expecting Legends datasheets to get more updates than regular datasheets seems like a fools errand. They hardly ever update non-Legends datasheets, I'm not sure why these datasheets need more going over. 

 

Every "problem" with Legends is community inflicted. At some point the competitive brain rot gets squashed or the community continues to be tournament grinders.

 

That being said, tournament grinders are also pretty chill with legends from my experience. If they want to get competitive reps in they'll tell you, then you go find someone who isn't doing that. It isn't that hard. 

[Brother Casman]

Yeah, import them into the apps (for all systems that have an app). Toggle on or off, and you're done.

[TrawlingCleaner]

Not being in the app is a big one, as you mention, Battlescribe have had the function for so long and it would go a ways to help more people use it. Having a PDF or a printout +the app or codex is a bit of a faff. Updating the Legends rules, even if only once a year kind of defeats the purpose of them I guess? I don't think that's a bad thing mind you. They could produce more of the free narrative missions like they've done previously/ have done for Horus Heresy, feature more Legends units in White Dwarf reports etc.

 

To be frank (and none of this is taking shots at other folks), I think Legends is loudly said to be a negative only really in the online community (and in IRL communities with folks who are heavily online) and the buck kind of stops there. It does become a bit echo chamber-y whenever something goes to Legends.

I think more folks in the hobby need to self-advocate for both the way they want to play, however that may be, and be a driving force for the change they want to see in their groups. Passion and enthusiasm for a shared subject or hobby tends to promote more passion. More people would play narrative or casual games if more people advocated for them or organised them. I think there are so few people in real life that are adamant they would never play against Legends and quite frankly, they don't really sound like a fun opponent in any game they'd play.

Annecdotally, I've run Legends units against folks practicing for a tournament with zero issues (make sure to check before game day, of course) and run Legends units every chance I can get (Biker lord and Sicaran, my beloveds)

[HeadlessCross]

Legends shouldn't be a thing, period. It's the logic GW has been using to create unit profiles that are "box = rules". You want people to accept Legends? Make people not accept the current design paradigm to begin with. 

[DemonGSides]

 

It's the logic GW has been using to create unit profiles that are "box = rules".

 

You're angry about two very different things. 

[ThaneOfTas]

 

You're angry about two very different things. 

I mean, in fairness a lot of loadout options that aren't in the box get sent to legends too. Stuff like giving Sanguinary Priests anything other than a chainsword. That's a case of something getting sent to legends because of the "box = rules" design philosophy. Hell the Sanguinary Priest with Jump Pack is an example from this edition. So i wouldn't say that they are all that different as far as reasons to be frustrated go

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Personally I think they need to do away with legends.

either do away with those units completely or integrate them into the codexes.

 

legal, but sort of not really, is pretty stupid imho.

[Special Officer Doofy]

My play group has a no legends rule. They no longer sell the models so if the rules are good people don't have a way of buying the model new. I think not being able to play with an old model is not as bad as not being able to get the model as a newer player. I know a counter argument to it is someone can just use a newer unit/model to count as the older one, but the group's thought is the opposite is true too, you can use your old legends unit/model to represent a new unit/model and avoid legends altogether. They are not strict on wysiwyg or base size.

 

My own personal belief is that legends is silly. Either make the rules for the model or do away with the rules. If GW no longer makes the models, probably shouldn't be rules for them considering someone new to the hobby can't go to a store and buy it. Nothing lasts forever. The only issue with "box = rules" is that GW didn't do that for it's entirety up until recently. It should have always been "box = rules", people should never have to buy extra bits to make a possible load out.

[HeadlessCross]

 

My play group has a no legends rule. They no longer sell the models so if the rules are good people don't have a way of buying the model new. I think not being able to play with an old model is not as bad as not being able to get the model as a newer player. I know a counter argument to it is someone can just use a newer unit/model to count as the older one, but the group's thought is the opposite is true too, you can use your old legends unit/model to represent a new unit/model and avoid legends altogether. They are not strict on wysiwyg or base size.

 

My own personal belief is that legends is silly. Either make the rules for the model or do away with the rules. If GW no longer makes the models, probably shouldn't be rules for them considering someone new to the hobby can't go to a store and buy it. Nothing lasts forever. The only issue with "box = rules" is that GW didn't do that for it's entirety up until recently. It should have always been "box = rules", people should never have to buy extra bits to make a possible load out.

Then maybe kits should be designed better. Chaos Terminators are easily one of the worst examples since the frickin trophy racks take up so much room for what should've been other weapons. Heaven forbid I don't want to roll for 5 different weapons for Skitarii Rangers and Vanguard. 

[HeadlessCross]

 

 

You're angry about two very different things. 

They're different equations used to get the same answer. It's the same thing, or are we pretending "Relic Razorback" was totally a thing and not making various options "Legends" because it wasn't in the kit specifically? 

[Marshal Rohr]

Get rid of this datasheet nonsense with pictures and random pop outs and return to the superior and much nicer unit profile and options. 

[Sgt.Sangha]

As a white scars player who made alot of bike themed units, it hurt. But my gaming group has a few people thay will play me anyways in narrative games. 

 

I think put them in the app and update every edition, ibstead of every year for 2 editions after they go legends and then drop them. That way people who put in time and effort to build paint and play them get some functionality out if them before they go away. 

[ThePenitentOne]

Legends allows me to play things that I wouldn't be able to play without them. For me, the whole "there shouldn't be legends" thing isn't really an option.

 

It's easy to say "There just shouldn't be Death Cult Assassins" when you don't have a bucket full of Death Cult Assassins, but it's entirely another thing when they're an integral part of your army's narrative and a vital part of the setting for your campaign. So I'm grateful for Legends, and I find it difficult not to respond with anger to those who suggest that those units don't matter.

 

Now if you want to fix 40k, all you need to do is reframe it. Right now, the "Base Game" is tournament mode, and the other stuff is all add-ons, and thus the perception that it lacks "legitimacy."

 

But if you shift the focus, so that the default play mode is the sandbox (including Legends and more diversified load out options to represent previously legal builds), Legends is no longer something that you add to the default game, it's what you take away from the Tournament Variant. This bigger, broader game also gets updated once per year only, in a single, easily identifiable digital download. With that as the established default play mode, you then create "40k Tournament Mode" as an alternative to the default game. This is where the units that are currently "Legends" would be excluded. In fact this would allow the exclusions to be even more restrictive if that's what's best for balance in the more competitive-minded game. This is also the version of the game that would continued to be updated a ridiculous number of times per year.

 

It's just a matter of recognizing that the BIG GAME is the default thing. Tournament play is the "Alternate Play Mode."  Do that, and Legends is removed. What you have instead is an exclusion list that applies in the optional "Tournament Play" game mode.

[ThaneOfTas]

 

 

But if you shift the focus, so that the default play mode is the sandbox (including Legends and more diversified load out options to represent previously legal builds), Legends is no longer something that you add to the default game, it's what you take away from the Tournament Variant. This bigger, broader game also gets updated once per year only, in a single, easily identifiable digital download. With that as the established default play mode, you then create "40k Tournament Mode" as an alternative to the default game. This is where the units that are currently "Legends" would be excluded. In fact this would allow the exclusions to be even more restrictive if that's what's best for balance in the more competitive-minded game. This is also the version of the game that would continued to be updated a ridiculous number of times per year.

 

It's just a matter of recognizing that the BIG GAME is the default thing. Tournament play is the "Alternate Play Mode."  Do that, and Legends is removed. What you have instead is an exclusion list that applies in the optional "Tournament Play" game mode.

Honestly that sounds like my personal ideal solution. I doubt that its likely but it would be fantastic.

[Special Officer Doofy]

 

Then maybe kits should be designed better. Chaos Terminators are easily one of the worst examples since the frickin trophy racks take up so much room for what should've been other weapons. Heaven forbid I don't want to roll for 5 different weapons for Skitarii Rangers and Vanguard. 

 

No arguments from me. Just look at the hot mess that is the plague marine box. 7 models in box, special weapons could be taken in 2's for 5 man's and now it's only 2's at 10. Got rid of some weapon profiles 2 editions later. I mean GW makes the kits and writes the rules. They only have themselves to blame. I was mad I bought extra blight launchers at first because I had too many when the rules changed, but then I came to terms with this is how it should have been from day one and quit being upset. 

 

I know for a lot of people they see that as creative restrictions, but for new hobbiest or people looking to get into the hobby, it's seen as predatory by not putting all the options in the box in the first place.

[Evil Eye]

My personal take? Remove the concept of Legends altogether and just put the units in the Codex. Also take the whole "living system" concept out the back and shoot it. If options don't have models, make the models- upgrade kits clearly work for HH. Encourage hobbyists to actually engage in the hobby. If you can't comprehend the idea of putting Arm A on Body B, maybe this hobby isn't for you.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

My personal take? Remove the concept of Legends altogether and just put the units in the Codex. Also take the whole "living system" concept out the back and shoot it. If options don't have models, make the models- upgrade kits clearly work for HH. Encourage hobbyists to actually engage in the hobby. If you can't comprehend the idea of putting Arm A on Body B, maybe this hobby isn't for you.

 

They can't release rules until the models are available, or else they run into the very issue that got sorted with the Chapter House lawsuit (jeez, that must have been 15ish years ago?).  And that just folds the issue back into "what's in a box is what's in the rules" which is already a point of contention being discussed, so this doesn't actually solve anything.

[HeadlessCross]

2 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

My personal take? Remove the concept of Legends altogether and just put the units in the Codex. Also take the whole "living system" concept out the back and shoot it. If options don't have models, make the models- upgrade kits clearly work for HH. Encourage hobbyists to actually engage in the hobby. If you can't comprehend the idea of putting Arm A on Body B, maybe this hobby isn't for you.

A living system is the correct way forward though. Armies shouldn't go a decade without an update. 

14 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

 

No arguments from me. Just look at the hot mess that is the plague marine box. 7 models in box, special weapons could be taken in 2's for 5 man's and now it's only 2's at 10. Got rid of some weapon profiles 2 editions later. I mean GW makes the kits and writes the rules. They only have themselves to blame. I was mad I bought extra blight launchers at first because I had too many when the rules changed, but then I came to terms with this is how it should have been from day one and quit being upset. 

 

I know for a lot of people they see that as creative restrictions, but for new hobbiest or people looking to get into the hobby, it's seen as predatory by not putting all the options in the box in the first place.

If 3D printing and bitz sellers online didn't exist, yeah it would be "predatory". As it is, it's just GW trying to cut other people out of the market with their bad kit designs to begin with. 

[gideon stargreave]

I don’t mind them cutting legends out altogether. It’s pretty straightforward for me to use my apothecary on bike as a chaplain on bike, or my contemptor dread as a brutalis or whatever. I already convert everything anyway, and often have to increase the base size so the model will fit. If my opponent doesn’t want to play, then that’s fine, we probably have different gaming paradigms anyway, so we’d both have a more productive evening having some beers or painting our minis together. 
For example, what would this mini (in an imperial army) be in either legends or the main rules, obviously it’d need to be counts as)

[Scribe]

GW should retreat from this nonsense path all together.

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, gideon stargreave said:

I don’t mind them cutting legends out altogether. It’s pretty straightforward for me to use my apothecary on bike as a chaplain on bike, or my contemptor dread as a brutalis or whatever. I already convert everything anyway, and often have to increase the base size so the model will fit. If my opponent doesn’t want to play, then that’s fine, we probably have different gaming paradigms anyway, so we’d both have a more productive evening having some beers or painting our minis together. 
For example, what would this mini (in an imperial army) be in either legends or the main rules, obviously it’d need to be counts as)

 

Well, that's a necron.

 

And your situation you've postulated isn't about Legends, it's about proxying which I think most everyone outside of tournament settings is fine with doing what you want as long as it's consistent.

 

But if I had to slap that guy into an Imperial based army, probably Guard, probably a Ministorum Preacher or as a tech priest enginseer.

 

He could probably also work as any number of mechanicum guys.

 

Could also fit in as a servitor in a SM army or as one of Hellbrechts attendants in a BT army specifically. 

Edited October 9 by DemonGSides

[Evil Eye]

3 hours ago, Iron Father Ferrum said:

 

They can't release rules until the models are available, or else they run into the very issue that got sorted with the Chapter House lawsuit (jeez, that must have been 15ish years ago?).  And that just folds the issue back into "what's in a box is what's in the rules" which is already a point of contention being discussed, so this doesn't actually solve anything.

I take your point, however that genie is well and truly out the bottle; at this point, people buying 3P models (cast or 3D printed) aren't doing so because GW haven't made the model, it's because they either can't afford the prices GW charge or they refuse to support GW for whatever reason, and the "no model no rules" policy isn't going to make anyone in that camp come back- if anything it'll chase people (like me) into said camp. At this point they might as well cut their losses and just drop no-model-no-rules altogether and focus on making a better ruleset, accepting that people can and will use non-GW models/parts.

2 hours ago, HeadlessCross said:

A living system is the correct way forward though. Armies shouldn't go a decade without an update. 

Counterpoint: If the army rules are already good enough, why update them? It's one thing adding actual new content via expansions ala Imperial Armour. It's another thing entirely to rewrite the content already released over and over again, resulting in invalidated books, an inability to make any kind of long-term plans and a constant chase to keep up with the latest balance patches for a game that's not really any more balanced than what we had in 4th edition, and with barely any of the depth or flavour.

 

Personally, I think "living" systems don't work for analogue mediums like tabletop wargaming. It brings the horrors of digital archive decay to something that should be completely immune to it. In an ideal world GW would release a game that, whilst not perfect (because no such thing exists) is certainly more than good enough, and once all the factions are released leave the base rules and codices alone and never touch them again, with all future releases being optional expansions to the base game that build on what already exists rather than supplanting it.

[Tawnis]

18 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

Honestly that sounds like my personal ideal solution. I doubt that its likely but it would be fantastic.

 

I basically came to say this as well. The perception of Tournament style play being the default and that everything needs to be perfectly balanced is the main issue. Rather than Legends being the exception, they should be the rule and tournaments the exception. 

As someone who mains Kroot and has a bunch of Knarlocs kicking around, I'm glad the my FLGS allows Legends units in their events and that none of my friends have any issues with it. However, recently I attended Play On Tabletops massive narrative event, it was a wonderful experience and everyone there was amazing, the only critique I have about is was that they said Legends were not allowed because they were worried about the perception of imbalance and unfairness. 

 

When the default for narrative events starts to become turning away from Legends (essentially the exact thing Legends rules were made for) then there's certainly a problem with community perception.