A 40k renaissance - same lore, different rules

[Kenzaburo]

Fraters, I've had the best experience this last weekend and feel the need to share it. Sorry, if this might seem pointless to you

 

Preface: For some time now, roughly a year, I've been falling out of love with 40k more and more. It all started in 9th, a rules system that I loathed (I nevertheless see the benefits and detail that brother PenitentOne cherishes). The mental load had gotten too far, I spent too much time flipping through an assortment of rulebooks and focussing less on the cool minis on the table. I always loved 40k for its visuals, its style and its lore. I loved the rules up until roughly 5th edition, but also enjoyed 8th. After that every game and prep felt like a chore. Never a competitive gamer, but someone who still plays the game with his oldest friend once every 3 months or so (and occasionaly with his godson, said friend's oldest son), I basically had to learn the rules for each game we played anew - 3 months is just too long a time to keep all the minutiae of current rules memorized. But games were taking longer and longer and we had continuallly less fun. When 10th launched, we played one game, hoping that unit cards and less stratagems would help. They did not. And it colored my entire love for the hobby - I've been into warhammer since around '96-'97, even worked freelance for the company at some point, participated in Golden Demon and all that. But the game itself was strangling my hobby enthusiasm, well, that and the really shoddy marketing GW has been putting out in the past 4-5 years (sorry, longtime marketing professional, I just can't stand their current approach, but enjoyed the way they handled it in the late 2010s). 

 

We basically abandoned the game, for most of the latter half of 9th we had been playing more and more AOS, since it had a better flow. That, too, felt quite stressful at times with the amount of special rules, but still was more manageable than current 40k. Through recent discussions we found that we longed for the days where marines basically were all the same, but differed because of their loadouts, i.e. tactical squad, assault squad, devastator squad. No such nonsense as tons of circumstancial special rules. We just really don't need our guys to all be special. And we just didn't have 3 to 4 hours for just one single game.

 

So, people kept bringing up OnePageRules. To tell the truth, I usually don't care for alternate rules sets.  But at this point I felt I had nothing to lose, really. So I looked at the rules (mildly interested), but then discovered that the armies are basically 40k factions with a different name. This was a game changer, because even my first tries had me building all my armies in no time. A closer look at their special rules revealed that these did fit the spirit of what these units were in my mind. Cool. I convinced my friend to give it a go. He was apprehensive at first, but agreed to try it because he saw that it was important to me to rekindle our love for 40k in some shape or form. 

 

And last weekend we tried it out. It was glorious! I haven't been as prepared (rules-wise) for a 40k game in ages, exactly because it's just one page of rules. Last week I built a 3-player-scenario for us to play, Blood Angels vs Death Guard vs Necrons. The scenario was pretty asymmetrical and more narrative, I had ChatGPT help with the odds regarding victory points, then I layoutet the entire thing to look as close as possible to official publications. So, with 3 players, having never played the rules set or the armies, we played a little over 3 hours. The game with its alternating unit activations kept us all in the game the entire time. It flowed. Every time we had to look up a rule it was done with a glance, no flipping, no checking 3 different books. And yet, the armies felt like they should - Necrons and Death Guard were hard to take out, marines felt like marines, power armour was tough. The only army builder was ace, offering short, concise descriptions of what the army special rules did. And what's more: the wording was on point and readable, even more so compared to what we saw with heresy 3.0.

 

So, long story short, what is this all about? In recent time I've seen more and more of us veterans mention how they struggle with current 40k and where the game is going. Some of us switch to older editions, some just keep going, some drop out. What OPR has offered us is a modern, yet slim ruleset that feels reminiscent of 40k, but varies enough to be more approachable. That is has most if not all of the newer models covered (aside from named characters, which have been added by the community) is another boon and a leg up over, say, playing 5th ed. What I mean to say is: It took me quite some time to understand that I don't need to and should not wait for GW to fix their rules or change their business practices (I don't have time for a new edition every 3 years). There are alternatives that are worth playing. In my case it's OPR, for you it might be some form of oldhammer. I know your mileage may vary, I know that it's harder to pull off if all you have is pick-up games. But if you've got some friends who are as annoyed with current GWs rules writing, take a look around. You don't have to drop 40k - the lore we all know is still there. But rules are interchangeable, which GW ironically reminds us of every 3 years. :D

P.S.: Sorry if this is too long, I might edit it down tomorrow or so. I just felt the need to pour it all out. :)  Have some pics of our game in return, even tho 2 armies aren't painted. 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 04:02 PM by Kenzaburo
needed some spacing between the pics

[The Yncarne]

Enjoy the advanced rules when you get time. Then prepare for the next version. 

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

Welcome back in the hobby.

[Ahzek451]

Your certainly not alone, Pretty much 95% of what you described I have been through or I can relate with. I've been the guy that always thought that GW's most recent ruleset was the only way to play. And to be fair, Onepage is far from perfect. But in modernity, with GW dropping the ball on so many things the incentive to try other rules like Onepage has been on the rise. It certainly feels like GW has been burning through its one resource it fails to recognize. The good will of its fans. Just a few months ago I finally gave onepage a try at Adepticon. You already summed it up, but my short version is.... I'd rather play this than 40k right now. It took very little effort for my friends to switch over too, hardly any convincing required. Again, the system is not perfect. But if the choice is between 10th 40k and one page...going with Onepage.

Anymore 40k feels like Junk lady in Labyrinth. 

I will be buying the new Grimdark Future: Broken Truth. I do like the 40k lizardmen and the robots have grown on me as necron replacements. 

I think there is a growing trend of resentment for GW in the last few years. More and more I hear of people playing older editions, one page, and with the horrible rollout of heresy 3.0, many are playing 2.0, 1.0 or even homemade rules. The only GW game systems that I have heard that are decent have been Kill team, and Sigmar. 

Edited 19 hours ago by Ahzek451

[Madao]

Agree. For large scale, we are going with OPR:GF almost since the start of the 10th ed. For skirmish games KT wins though, as OPR:GF firefight doesn't feel right as a skirmish, it is more like full scale game, but with only few models

[ThePenitentOne]

I'm glad you're having fun, and thanks for thinking of me.

 

Heck, even I've thought about checking out one page, just so I could see the other side. 

 

The last game I played was a Boarding Action game- my first ever 10th edition battle! I was woefully unprepared- I went in without a lot of the cards I tend to rely on, and I found myself missing strat opportunities, pain tokens, and all kinds of other shenanigans. So I get it, even though I come across as a real rules curmudgeon. Next game I'll make sure I'm prepped, and equipped with the cards I need to make sure I don't miss out on some of what the army has to offer.

 

I imagine the cool thing about 1PR is that you wouldn't have to worry about that kinda stuff.

 

Cheers, and happy renaissance!

[Lexington]

I've come to the conclusion over the last few years that GW's modern style of both rules and background writing simply aren't for me anymore. There's other systems that fit my perspective more, and crafting one's own spinoff version of the 40K universe isn't all that hard. Part of the way through writing up my own homebrew set of rules as well. It's freeing.

[Kenzaburo]

16 hours ago, The Yncarne said:

Enjoy the advanced rules when you get time. Then prepare for the next version. 

Good morning, fellow fraters, and first of all thanks for all the kind feedback. :)

 

@Yncarne: I fear it's gonna be a while until I get to play another game. In about a month and a half another kid will be around and upend our lives once more. :D But since I'll be tired and exhausted for the better part of the next 14 months or so the better to have found OPR now - makes it that much more realistic to get a quick game in. But: next version? What are you talking about?

 

@Ahzek: I'm not so sure GW are dropping the ball on a lot of things. I certainly don't like recent rules sets as much, they just went in a very much less interesting way after 8th for me. On the lore front they are doing okay, I feel. It's a matter of taste, really. Again, there are certain things I'd like to see more and some stuff I really don't care for, but that goes for most IPs. They might even be doing great marketing-wise. It's certainly not for me, so much so that I actually loathe it, but it might be fitting for their target audience. I'd need to see some data for that to really judge that. It's just not to my taste and too much click-baity with little to no substance, childish humor and very weird approaches to what they feel needs hype. The content strategy just seems off. But if their KPIs are good, than their approach would be validatet - if only from a statistics POV. I digress. :D 

 

You are right, OPR is not perfect, but to expect perfection only sets you up for disappointment. It's perfectly fine for what I want and need as a ruleset right now. What's more: I just don't need the constant switching of rules - 3 year edition change is bad on so many levels. To come back to my marketer POV just for a sec: As the head of that department I would have had serious talks with the C level about that decision. "Do you really wanna invalidate your rules by throwing them out every 3 years? You're gonna lose trust in the customer base here. Furthermore, you are implying that your rules are shoddy and need constant resetting - that's what you are indirectly communicating to your customers. Are you aware of that?" But again, it seems like they are making a pretty buck from printed products nowadays. So the business side proves them right, my GW stocks certainly prove that too, even though the gap between business goals and the needs of your customer base keep drifting apart. 

About your point with the resentment: I think that this has always existed. We, as a community, have always complained. It seems to be the nature of things. I remember me being upset by the change from 2nd to 3rd and giving my local staffer my piece of mind about what he can do with 3rd edition rules and what they do to my Space Wolves squads. :D And I was around 17 or 18 at that time. Then there were times when they screwed up the big global campaigns and everybody was up in arms about the end of Storm of Chaos for WHFB. 5th had all that nonsense rage about Matt Ward and the writers (boy, do I feel sorry now for being such a bumhead online about that - it's just never okay to attack people like that and that includes the "anonymity" of the internet, I mean, look where that lead us :/ ) and it goes on and on. The sky is always falling in one way or another. Don't wanna say it isn't at all justified, at least on a personal level, but in the grander scale of things, it's never been all bad or all great. It's pretty much mid, I dare say. :D 

 

@Madao: What doesn't feel right about Firefight? I'll certainly try it out, to get an idea, but am very much interested in other people's views on it. 

 

@PenitentOne: Haha, you've been so passionate about 9th and Crusade for years, brother, it seems hard not to think of you when it comes to current rules. :D You are right tho, OPR does need way less preparation than 9th or 10th did. It's also less bookkeeping and in that regard, sure, it also lacks flavor. I'd guess that this is why it won't be your type of game, but maybe still give it a try. I'm always more inclined to homebrew some campaign system on top of a ruleset. Even when I did design the 3 player scenario I took a lot of ideas from Cities of Death, Battle Missions, Planetary Invasion, Apoc, even Crusade of Fire. I think you can come up with a modified Crusade for OPR, if there isn't any (not sure, tbh).

 

@Lexington: That's impressive, crafting it all on your own. I'm not the type of guy for that. :) I found deciding to step away from official rules to be the hardest part. I'm just wired that way that I like to stick to official stuff. I use homebrew rules as add ons or for narrative elements, mind you, but the basic rules should be what's put out by the company. But after growing more and more disappointed I came to a point where it just didn't seem feasible to continue on. I will stick to the overall lore and IP, I can still enjoy that, but I don't want to waste any more time or energy on rules that seemingly are intended for an entirely different target audience. The one problem with that step is always your group of players. If you are dependent on playing at a store, you might still be out of luck. You might even encounter resistance amongst your friends. And that sucks, to be honest. But if you can get everybody on board, it is, as you say, freeing. :)

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Kenzaburo
=] Removed Flagged Word, replaced with Emoji [=

[Orange Knight]

8th edition was the last edition in which 40k actually had very fun and intuitive rules.

 

The way the game is designed now, and the way rules are desribed - as if reading from a legal document or some form of terms and conditions - is both tedious and exhausting.

 

The mission design is also extremely regimented and doesn't lend itseld to spontaneous fun or unexpected outcomes.

[Urauloth]

OPR's Firefight is really cool if you ever want a smaller scale game, too.

[phandaal]

20 hours ago, Kenzaburo said:

What I mean to say is: It took me quite some time to understand that I don't need to and should not wait for GW to fix their rules or change their business practices (I don't have time for a new edition every 3 years). There are alternatives that are worth playing.

 

Took me a while to figure this out myself. No need to slog through the modern GW paradigm when there are plenty of ways to get your models on the table for some 40k. And just as important, plenty of other people who want to do the same!

 

Glad you are having fun again and enjoy your freedom! 

[Ahzek451]

4 hours ago, Kenzaburo said:

 

 

@Ahzek: I'm not so sure GW are dropping the ball on a lot of things. I certainly don't like recent rules sets as much, they just went in a very much less interesting way after 8th for me. On the lore front they are doing okay, I feel. It's a matter of taste, really. Again, there are certain things I'd like to see more and some stuff I really don't care for, but that goes for most IPs. They might even be doing great marketing-wise. It's certainly not for me, so much so that I actually loathe it, but it might be fitting for their target audience. I'd need to see some data for that to really judge that. It's just not to my taste and too much click-baity with little to no substance, childish humor and very weird approaches to what they feel needs hype. The content strategy just seems off. But if their KPIs are good, than their approach would be validatet - if only from a statistics POV. I digress. :D 

 

About your point with the resentment: I think that this has always existed. We, as a community, have always complained. 

 

As you pointed out, you are correct concerning lore. It certainly is a matter of taste. But ive never seen such a general disapproval for some of the mainline stuff (handling of the rollout of the returning primarchs, terminus decree, custodes change, etc. This all feels different from those that griped about necrons change from C'tan led to the reverse and the like. For a lot of us, its some of the whip-lash jerking around changes to forgettable moments and fillers. 

To mix the two points together, yep, I have been around since 2nd. I am well aware of the typical crowd of naysayers that have been around since the beginning. I'd like to think I've had my fingers on the pulse through all these years well, but something has been steadily shifting and feels different in the last few years that stands apart from your typical negative crowd that has always been. Maybe its not just resentment, I should have included apathy as well. People do feel GW has dropped the ball from game design and management, aggressive IP protection, to pricing and how they have developed new lore. Looking at KPI's at current only tell you how they are doing now. At one point Disney too was rocketing ahead, and today......well. Like I said, Good will is a resource.  

Edited 4 hours ago by Ahzek451

[Ahzek451]

3 hours ago, Urauloth said:

OPR's Firefight is really cool if you ever want a smaller scale game, too.

This is the kill-team equivalent right?

[Urauloth]

1 hour ago, Ahzek451 said:

This is the kill-team equivalent right?

Yep! I got into it because there's a community effort to make rules for Heresy-era teams, and I really want to play Horus Heresy skirmish games.