• RSS Feeds
  • Login
  • Register
  • Less is more

    Editorial

    Now GW gets more than its fair share of abuse. Even here at TGN the company probably gets more negative commentary than any other company. I am, myself, not a big fan of the company despite being a very big 40K fan and a very big fan of the entire Inquisitorial theme in 40K. That said, I’m willing to guess that almost everyone reading this has at least one GW miniature in their collection and perhaps a Warhammer or 40K army. I know I have a lot of them.

    GW’s mandate, and rightly so it has to be added, is to sell as many miniatures as possible to its customers and so it focuses its attention on providing rules and background that facilitate the purchase and use of large armies. One has to wonder though if GW might be able to make even more money from selling and supporting rules that allowed gamers to play smaller scale games with the same miniatures.

    What got me pondering this was a link I found this morning to a Yahoo Group set up to create and discuss variant rules based on the GW Lord of the Rings ruleset. Without a doubt, most of these variants are historical or for genres like Barsoom. But it seems that it wouldn’t be difficult for GW to produce a LotR variant for Warhammer. This is what got my “gamer sense” tingling this morning. I really like the Skaven models and the background for them. But there is no way, and I can’t emphasize this enough, that I would ever play a Skaven army for Warhammer. There just aren’t enough hours in the day for me to paint the vast number of minis that a Skaven army requires. Even a small Skaven army would tax my free-time.

    So the net GW sale of Skaven minis to me? Zero. Potential sales if they had a game that allowed to me play using a smaller number of minis? Who knows, but it would certainly be more than they currently sell me.

    GW has made some rather half-hearted attempts to provide skirmish based Warhammer rules. The problem being though that they have always seem like promotional material made to get you painting and then move you into playing Warhammer. Not solid rules on their own. I can’t speak to what GWs actual motives were when they released things like Kill Team or Border Patrol but there never seemed to be much follow-up or additional support to maintain interest in these ancillary games.

    GW does produce Mordheim but the game is restricted, quite deliberately, to a limited setting with a small number of available troops. As well, GW, sadly, doesn’t seem to provide any real support for an of the Specialist Games lines anymore and the fact that they haven’t just killed the company off seems to be slightly morbid at this point. One pictures GW accountants circling around and poking the Specialist Games balance sheets with a stick to see if it reacts. Perhaps GW is waiting for warmed economic times to resuscitate Specialist Games?

    And I think its obvious that there would be quite a lot of people interested in a 40K skirmish game. Again GW has done some half-hearted attempts to create rules like Kill Team and promote the 40K in 40 Minutes rules but these also seem incomplete and certainly lack anything approaching the level of support the “core” games get.

    Does GW think it would lose sales if it supported skirmish gaming? Probably. Its really the only explanation for the lack of official, solid skirmish rules from GW. Its a market that GW could mine to extract some extra miniature sales so the fact that they haven’t made a push into the genre makes me think that GW is worried about cutting into their existing sales.

    That said, I’m going to look more closely at the LotR Variants Yahoo Group. Maybe someone has Skaven rules. :-)

    Note: I do know that GW has made some skirmish rule systems. I just think that they all suffer from a general lack of attention and have been left untended when some of them need work.

    This piece is also just a random musing about why it is that GW doesn’t appear to sell or support skirmish rules. No rant is intended nor should one be assumed :-)

    Update: I’ve gone back and reread the Kill Team rules that Phil Kelly originally wrote for White Dwarf and also looked at some of the scenarios online. One could, with a bit of work, run some interesting scenario based skirmish games with the rules. So if you are interested in 40K scenario based gaming then Kill Team could fir the bill. That said, GW appears to have a lot of Kill Team material that could easily fit into a book and perhaps make it easier for gamers to explore Kill Team.

    40 Responses to “Less is more”


    Jeff Cope says:

    I seem to be a rarity amongst gamers. I’ve been gaming in some capacity or another since I was in High School (early 80s) but have never bought nor played a GW game. There was never any great reason except it never seemed as though anyone played the game in my area…and the prices were high compared to some other games.

    I do like the look of the Warhammer ‘verse…and would play the game if they came out with a true skirmish level game with pre-painted minis. As I’ve mentioned in other comments I’ve left on this site, I am firmly in the pre-painted camp these days with little time to be spent on assembling/painting.

    So, here is a gamer from whom GW makes zero, but if they came out with a pre-painted, skirmish game set in the Warhammer world I’d likely be right there with my wallet open.

    Jeff


    Zac says:

    I am willing to bet that there are probably a fair number of gamers who do indeed have no GW minis or played GW games. I’m willing to bet that many might be in the UK or US East Coast which have a longer tradition of gaming than we do here in the West Coast.

    I think the idea of pre-painted Warhammer skirmish troops is bloody brilliant. As long as there are Skaven :-)


    Stu says:

    A Warhammer skirmish game: Mordheim anybody? Or Border Patrol if you fancy more traditional WH unit formation?

    A 40k skirmish game: Necromunda? Inquisitor with 28mm figures?

    Are people not aware of http://www.specialist-games.com?


    Zac says:

    I’m totally aware of SG. I used to write for them.

    I am also aware that no-one in my gaming circle will touch their games because GW doesn’t support them or produce regular (or any) miniature releases.

    We used to have weekly Epic games and then GW “re-organised” SG and stopped releasing minis and gaming dried up.

    I also just don’t like Mordheim. I find its focus limiting and I am not always interested in a campaign game either. There are other settings available but GW never made an effort to update the rules and perhaps gather all of the good information in a single volume.

    Inquisitor is an interesting idea but its an RPG. Its not a tabletop game. It has no inherent balance and percentile stats are great for an RPG but I can’t see how they are necessary for a tabletop game.


    chopa says:

    didnt some old WD have miniWHFB where unit sizes were lessened and there were a few other stuff? (made the scale a little closer to wargods really)

    I wanna say it was in the 280s


    briguy says:

    Maybe I’m just slightly jaded, but if they were producing skirmish rules using WHFB or W40K mechanics, I would stay pretty far away from either game (neither one turns my crank in the slightest).

    That said, I truly don’t understand the gutting of Specialist Games. I am an avid Warmaster player, and it’s like they go out of their way to make it difficult for us to give them money for models (and it seems like Epic is even worse!)

    Their business model is completely incomprehensible to the likes of little ol’ me.


    Jason Hupka says:

    I would defintely begin buying GW stuff again if they had skirmish rules. I’ve toyed with the idea of buying the 40K rule book for Kill Team stuff, and I have a 5 or 10 page handout from a couple years ago for “Kill Team” like rules for the Warhammer world. Unfortunately, I don’t really have any other Warhammer rulebooks with mini-stats so they’re only mildly useful.

    But if GW geared their codices for both large army and skirmish rules, and then had solid skirmish rules, I’d be in. They’d get my money for a codex, the rulebook, and around 500 pts of minis for a couple different armies. Right now I can’t really “support” 1000-1500 points of armies for painting and gaming.

    Plus, I’d rather play a scenario driven game with a Kill Team instead of two random armies facing each other in a tourney. I really have no desire to play any tournemant games, and besides selling minis I believe that’s another big GW push is to really promote that competition.


    Stu says:

    Imho Necro and Mordheim are probably about as good as it’s ever going to get for Skirmishing in the GW universe(s). I can’t see why GW would be at all interested in promoting games that only sell a handful of figures. That’s what killed MH/Necro/Inquisitor/Bloodbowl/Space Hulk after all.

    For me the single quickest way for GW to boost their sales would be to reduce their prices but of course that’s never going to happen.


    Zac says:

    I have to disagree. GW let support for their other products drop because they can make *more* money focusing on their core games.

    It isn’t that these games don’t make cash. The return for their effort is less than it is for 40K or WFB.

    Again, the peril of a public company. GW needs to maximise shareholder value and that isn’t always (or ever you could say) in the best interests of gamers.

    GW could probably make a tidy sum of money selling 10 or 20 minis at a time to skirmish gamers. Rackham sure as heck makes some nice coin selling smaller armies to people.

    The idea isn’t that its some general scheme to increase GW revenues but that they can cushion their sales by selling figs to an audience that might like their figs but doesn’t want to buy a 2000pt Warhammer or 40K army.

    Why turn away sales if you could produce a product to get gamers to buy your minis?


    miniguy says:

    I’m one of those players who plays skirmish-level games. However, I have bought a lot of GW minis over the years, some just to build and paint, others because I like the smaller scale games now under Specialist. I completely agree that Specialist Games lacks support and I think it’s a shame. Blood Bowl and Mordheim were both fantastic games that have gone to seed because of a lack of oversight. The latest versions of Blood Bowl and Mordheim rules read like a mish-mash of house rules where anything goes. Less is more applies to the rule sets as well as the army sizes, and both games were stronger and more fun when there weren’t hundreds of skills, special play cards, or overpowered mercs/star players. By letting these games fall by the wayside, GW is sending the message that small sales don’t matter and that it’s all about moving battalion boxes. Free rules PDFs are a nice gesture, but I’d rather have better crafted rules, even if I have to pay for them.

    GW has changed their aim and I’m no longer in their target market anymore. That’s fine. I’ve got my old print editions of Specialist games, I can get a great range of mini support from Reaper or Impact. I can get high-quality skirmish games from Privateer or Rackham. I don’t think my gaming has suffered from GW’s new direction and I’m positive my wallet’s a little fatter. That’s a win all around.


    Zac says:

    Ahem. The second edition Necromunda rulebook as an embarrassment.


    miniguy says:

    I never got into Necromunda. Is the second edition the online “Living Rulebook” or one before that?


    Zac says:

    The Second Ed. is the PDF that you can download online from the SG website.


    bobsnephew says:

    Why does GW have to do this, did you lose your own creativity in a horrible beat poetry accident? :)

    Use what they do have to make your own games. That is what one of our groups at my store is doing. In January we are going to use the Necromunda rules to fight the Second Heresy. Each player will start with 10 Marines and a set number of “credits’ to outfit them. Then we will be running a story-based campaign.

    Boom, GW skirmish and it didn’t cost us anything but time, and an original-ish idea.

    Just because they made and printed the game doesn’t mean you can’t change it to do what you want once it is yours. I think it is time that gamers take back their favorite games from the companies that make them. Once you buy a book it is no longer theirs, it is yours. Play how you want to.

    I am kinda tired of the ‘tournament’ mentality that is destroying the creativity in gamers everywhere. It is no longer about what you want to play, but instead about the companies ‘tournament rules and points values.’ I say that is crap! Play what you want!

    I didn’t have to do much work at all to get my tournament only 40K players on the Necromunda campaign bandwagon. I just mentioned it and had to beat them off with a stick until I had it put together.

    And who needs their support anyways. What happened to converting and kit bashing? I think a lot of people have gotten lazy and are only using product handed to them. Not to say “back in the old days”, but back in the old days of Rouge Trader there were no kits to be bought. You had to make your own vehicles, and we liked it!! ;)

    If GW has done anything wrong it is that they have fostered the ‘our stuff only’ mentality the reigns supreme in today’s hobby.

    Take you game back, play what you want to play!

    Anthony
    anthony@endgameoakland.com
    http://www.endgameoakland.com


    Zac says:

    I think people like to know that if they are going to invest time and money into a ruleset that they will have a evolving product that will get updated as the range and background expands and also get updated to fix rule issues or add corrections.

    Not everyone wants to have the DIY experience.


    Richard says:

    I’m sorry to bring this up but it appears that you are using your editorials/website as a spring board for your own dislike for Games Workshop. I use your site to get impartial information about the hobby as a whole, not to be subjected to this tripe.
    I find it disgusting that you find that you can use your site as a slagging post for your pet hates. I think you really are missing the point, where the hell does it say you have to use 2000pts, or 1500 pts. Your hang ups about tournements seam to have clouded your judgement. In every codex/army book you get a basic army with the minimum choices or small starter forces which work up to the more popular sizes.
    It is also apparent that you must have some ill feeling towards SG as well. Just because you don’t like mordheim doesn’t mean that GW don’t do skirmish. I remember when it came out and it is a fun game. The whole idea is to use models that would fit into that type of game.

    If you want to keep up this unrelenting hate filled rantings then change the name, this has to be the most un-professional website i have seen. Please sort this out or I will be going back to the less effective TMP.
    Please sort this out Zac its childish.

    As bobsnephew said the ‘rules’ GW give you are the basic play rules, they encourage you to come up with your own ideas rules, how about take back this hobby. Stop waiting for the silver spoon your missing and do you own thing.


    oldsalt says:

    mordhiem and necromundia were decent fun games… but really were isolated from the main games which seemed odd to me.

    the one thing they shared was perhaps what they needed to abandon… the basic game mechanic. As they were skirmish games they could have used a system less prone to randomness. (when your rolling lots of dice it’s more prone to evening out)

    it always seemed like a rogue trader scale game should have been brought back in a new form… and mordhiem expanded greatly (using some of the stuff with empire in flames supplement)

    In effect do what Rackham did with confront and ragnarok in reverse.

    i.e. sell a game that supports 5 to 30 figs per side- But
    and heres the smart bit… Your army suppliments are in the regular WHFB or 40K army books.

    i.e. The various skaven gangs are in the whfb skaven army book.

    i.e. what to field a space marine containment force in rogue trader? buy the 40K army book.

    as your gang expands your contstantly tempted by the history and models you can’t field in the skirmish scale.
    And in this way the skirmish game acts as a trojan horse for the battle game.


    ctzn99 says:

    For those bashing the “editor” for expressing his opinions in his “editorial” please take a few minutes to look up the word “editorial” on dictionary.com or, heck, even pick up one of those old school icky paper dictionaries.

    While looking up the word please note the inclusion of the word “opinion”, it’s important to the sarcastic context of my reply and I don’t want it to be missed by you.


    evernevermore says:

    Another option for GW skirmish, 40k or fantasy, can be found here; http://www.wargamesunlimited.com/ - Pretty much its a pair of free rulesets designed for use with other companies minis, especially minis that no longer have supported games. The downside, and upside for someone with an eclectic collection like me, is you have to create a profile for your figs and an army list. There are some army lists already being put out but they havent done every version yet (the game system is still expanding). I dont mind that because it lets me do an Imperial Guard army my way, more of a Stormtroopers meet the Aliens Marines army - not as deadly as Space Marines but still not pushovers with cardboard for armor and flashlights for guns…
    That said, GW is doing some to support skirmish level games. WHFB has the Warbands ruleset which changes up the army requirements and restrictions to allow games below 500 pts. And 40k has Kill team, which is a much better game when you have the various White Dwarf supplements to go with it. So there is a basic framework there and as an owner of a copy of Rogue Trader thats all you really need. However I would love to see GW put out a true skirmish ruleset for 40k…


    evernevermore says:

    oops - should have read “… as an owner of a copy of Rogue Trader I’ve seen thats all you really need…”


    Zac says:

    Now, now. Everyone play nice :-)

    I use your site to get impartial information about the hobby as a whole, not to be subjected to this tripe.

    That is the main reason why all of the editorial posts are marked as such. You can safely ignore them and with the graphic and category marking they should be easy to avoid.

    You might also want to check out the Feeds page if you use an RSS reader as you can easily create a custom newsfeed that does not have the Editorial posts in them.

    I make no bones about the fact that I don’t like the way that the managers at GW run the company. I would like to think that my commentary is limited to these Editorial posts though

    I think you really are missing the point, where the hell does it say you have to use 2000pts, or 1500 pts.

    The rulebooks seems to think that 1500 pts is a normal game, the White Dwarf articles all use the same ballpark and I don’t know that anyone plays 40K or WFB regularly at lower point values. None of the local players I know or see playing do so.

    It is also apparent that you must have some ill feeling towards SG as well.

    I love SG. As I said I wrote for them. I was the FAQ maintainer for Epic, I wrote two of the army lists, I was, for some time, on the Rules Cmmte for Epic as well.

    I have nothing against SG.

    I have strong opinions about GW gutting the company though.

    And who needs their support anyways.

    Quite a few people do. As I mentioned before, not everyone likes to make their own gaming experience.

    If you do then all the power to you but that doesn’t change the fact that there are a lot of gamers that don’t have the same desire to “roll their own” or write their own stats because a company has dropped support for a game.

    If you want to keep up this unrelenting hate filled rantings then change the name,

    I’m not really sure why you think this editorial is a “hate filled ranting”? Perhaps you’re taking the tone to be more serious than its intended to be but I can assure you that this is simply a curious comment on my part as to why GW doesn’t sell skirmish rules and certainly not a “rant”.

    GW news, rumours and topics get posted here all the time. And they will continue to do so. But I think that the company’s actions merit some criticism and that is what I do provide from time to time. I don’t think that this is “GW bashing”. The company takes actions and we as gamers are entirely in our rights to comment on them


    Zac says:

    mordhiem and necromundia were decent fun games… but really were isolated from the main games which seemed odd to me.

    GW made decisions some time ago to isolate their “properties” so that they could licence items like Mordheim or Necromunda to video game developers or other parties without inadvertently licensing things like Space Marines or the entire Warhammer Fantasy world.

    That is why Space Marines and other troops never made it into the Necromunda and why the official Mordheim books remain focused on specialised units in a small setting.


    ctzn99 says:

    So… with that said…

    I would have to disagree with the Mandate, their Mandate is to simply make money. The path they have chosen to reach that Mandate is to sell as many miniatures as possible. That’s not a slag, it’s an opinion based on the fact that GW is a public company that has to answer to it’s share holders in dollars and cents (or pounds or euros).

    Their are other paths to reach that same mandate that companies like Rackham and Privateer Press are using but, then again they probably aren’t making as much money.

    Sadly, I don’t think this necessarily mirrors the personal Mandates of the games designers, I would like to think they are out to make a good, fun, balanced, playable game. And for the most part I think they have reached that goal and met their mandate but… the same mandate stops them from creating any new game systems not based off their existing mechanic, designed for lots of miniatures, for small scale skirmish games. In fact, I don’t even think that was something that was thought of during initial development of either warhammer or 40k, it was more of an organic evoltion i suspect but… then again i don’t really know.

    I do have to agree with Zac however that if they had a good skirmish system, that wasn’t based off of their existing “universal” mechanics, and was based off of a custom built for skirmish system I would probably pick up the GW torch again. I have tons of GW miniatures but I just don’t have the time that I used to have to paint or to even assemble them. I play hordesmachine and confrontation, it takes me minutes to create my army, i don’t have tons of mini’s to assemble and paint and I don’t have tons of mini’s to move around the table. Typically I can play either of those games in half the time that I can play a decent size warhammer or 40k game in.

    Net new sales GW product to me… zero.

    New new sales if they had a system tailored to small scale skirmish battles with the same flavor of the large scale versions of the game… to much to count.

    I’m not saying that GW hasn’t done, or tried to do skirmish (nor do I think that’s what Zac was saying). I did like necromunda and mordheim but the games didn’t feel like 40k and warhammer respectively. I also wasn’t a big fan of the campaign system (and thus didn’t use it). But the real problem, as I alluded to above, is that the basic GW mechanics aren’t suited for skirmish scale games and when played at the skirmish level are inherently broken. I’ve even tried to take their existing necromunda and mordheim systems and convert them into something along the lines of what I was looking for but in the end I’m not a game designer and what I created was probably half as good anyway. That’s why I buy game systems instead of just making them myself.


    Zac says:

    And 40k has Kill team, which is a much better game when you have the various White Dwarf supplements to go with it.

    This is one of the things that stops me from trying Kill Team. That and its, again, narrow focus. There is a lot of supplemental material that is spread across several magazines or on the GW website(s). It would be really handy if they gathered all this from time to time (like the old Chapter Approved books) so it was easier to access.

    I think Kill Team is a really good idea but it would be nice to see GW support it more.


    steeldragon says:

    I liked Necromunda and Mordheim, but somehow I never managed to grab a full Mordheim band of my own…

    I don’t know if you remember but GW used to release a new game every two years, then stop supporting the game, then it was time of hoping your favourite game got back in a couple of years. Specialist Games was a great idea… too bad they are in a state of abandon.

    Warhammer Quest was great… Space Hulk was great… Necromunda was great (OK now I’m aware of more skirmish games and Necromunda is not that good but was fun).

    I liked that way of releasing huge boxed sets… it presented a new twist on universes I really like, and eventually pushed me into buying more minis.

    I believe GW discovered it was more profitable to do the global campaigns than a new game… at least I know that Medusa V put me back on playing 40K… I even considered a new army…

    I hope one day the new games will be back… I would love a 40K Skirmish that every two years changed setting… things like Comorragh Strike with a specific Dark Eldar warband, a specific Space Marine Company that managed to land on Comorragh, some Harlequins, a group of scaped pit slave orks, another group of scaped human pit slaves and some Dark Eldar experiments… then after two years of campaign you can mix those models on your current WH40K with a Comorragh Strike Codex, and then release “Warp Storm Survivors”… a huge Battlefleet Gothic battle gets swallowed by a sudden warpstorm than instead of killing them drops them on a strange planet… the action develops on the ruined, crashed, husks of the ships… introducing an Inquisitor faction, plus some new Sororitas, Chaos, more Space Marines, some eldar Pirates, more orks, Necrons and the strange inhabitants of the planet… and so on… too bad I do not belong to a developer’s team :P

    Andres


    Zac says:

    I love the old boxed games they used to come out with. Great fun. Especially games like Gorka Morka

    I will also add that GW has already posted Kill Team rules for Eldar Aspect Warriors so there is a little more life being added to Kill Team.

    As before thought I just wish Kill Team wasn’t so narrow in its focus.


    steeldragon says:

    I still want to grab a warband of the non-mutated humans of Gorka Morka…

    Andres


    Stu says:

    I agree with ctzn99 that fundamentally the mechanics of Mordheim/Necromunda (as they’re essentially the same) are broken. In particular the I-go you-go system is an incredibly poor choice for a skirmish based game. So much so that we use house rules with playing cards to determine individual model movement rather than the Mordheim rules as published.

    Personally I don’t mind the campaign system. Sure it’s silly and often unbalanced, but it does lend itself to the creation of rather interesting happenings for individual models. That probably reflects the fact I play skirmish games for fun foremost.

    If I was looking for balance/realism I’d probably investigate a WWII/Moderns skirmish rule set as that’s more their focus. As GW’s universe is inherently overblown and melodramatic I can’t see it benefiting from any attempt at a realistic skirmish ruleset.

    Zac, weren’t you considering trying .45 Adventures in a 40k setting? Apart from obvious issues (weapon stats etc) I think that might actually be a fairly good match…


    Zac says:

    Zac, weren’t you considering trying .45 Adventures in a 40k setting?

    I am indeed writing rules for it and want to try it out.

    After reading the Kill Team rules again I might actually try some variant of Kill Team first to see how well that works.

    Had another read through and I don’t think they would work for what I was thinking of. You need a lot of “goons” in the game so its an interesting idea if you have or know someone with 20-30 “goons” to add to a game but I was looking for a smaller game so I’ll stick to my .45 Adventure rule writing


    Zac says:

    As GW’s universe is inherently overblown and melodramatic I can’t see it benefiting from any attempt at a realistic skirmish ruleset.

    I think you can have overblown melodramatic skirmish games. Gloire seems perfectly suited for melodrama. Well Musketeers do, Gloire just facilitates it :-)


    wyrdlyng says:

    And who needs their support anyways. What happened to converting and kit bashing? I think a lot of people have gotten lazy and are only using product handed to them.

    I have to second, and third, this motion. Gamers seem to have fallen into the same trap as much of the rest of society: desire for entertainment with no effort on their part. This is why people go and play video games rather than a wargame or rpg. Same reason why people don’t read as much; why imagine something when someone can imagine it for me?

    If you do then all the power to you but that doesn’t change the fact that there are a lot of gamers that don’t have the same desire to “roll their own” or write their own stats because a company has dropped support for a game.

    Then their desire to play that game isn’t really high and they shouldn’t complain. “I sort of want ice cream, but there’s none in the house. I could go buy some but that’s far. Oh well, I guess that I don’t really want ice cream then.” If you don’t have enough passion to kitbash some simple rules, or convert some at least, then stick to prepackaged games and stop whining.

    This is something plaguing wargamers, even rpgers will convert settings and rule systems to better suit what they want. Wargamers just roll over and complain.

    As before thought I just wish Kill Team wasn’t so narrow in its focus.

    I don’t understand what that means. The Kill Team rules and scenarios revolve around a small team dealing with a precise mission. How is that limiting? Any scenario where you have a small team trying to complete a small scale objective fits. If you don’t want to play squad vs brutes then play squad vs squad and have someone set up random brutes for both sides to overcome.

    I’m not a GW fanboy, there’s alot about their rules that I hate, but at least I accept their games for what they are and don’t complain that they don’t cater to my specific wants and desires. A lot of of these complaints just really strike me as increasing gamer laziness.

    He who dares wins. Ask Privateer Press or Rackham if you don’t believe me.


    wyrdlyng says:

    I need to figure out the correct mark-up codes. :p


    Zac says:

    The site just uses HTML code instead of the phpBB codes. I’ve edited the message for you


    Zac says:

    The Kill Team rules and scenarios revolve around a small team dealing with a precise mission. How is that limiting?

    I said that it was narrow in focus. It deals with a pretty specific set of missions and then gives you rules for those. And part of that is the idea that you have a small team facing off against 20-30 grunts.

    Nothing wrong with that per se but I want a more general system. So I’ll continue to write the add-on rules I started for .45 Adventures. I like the idea of being able to create a wider range of scenarios and if I am going to have to write more rules then I might as well write those for a system more in tune with what I want to game.


    briguy says:

    Then their desire to play that game isn’t really high and they shouldn’t complain. “I sort of want ice cream, but there’s none in the house. I could go buy some but that’s far. Oh well, I guess that I don’t really want ice cream then.” If you don’t have enough passion to kitbash some simple rules, or convert some at least, then stick to prepackaged games and stop whining.

    I don’t agree with you, and I don’t mean to cause offense, but I feel that your comments are coming across as rather condescending. To carry your analogy, if you want ice cream, do you go make your own? Do you buy your own cow pasture and raise them from calves? Some of us don’t have either the time or the creativity to sit down and playtest a bunch of homecooked rules, and we’re perfectly willing to let somebody with both the time and a lot more talent do that for us. But does that not give us the right to say when we don’t care for one product over another?

    What’s wrong with focusing on what you enjoy and do well (playing games) and paying others to do what they do well (design rules)?


    Zac says:

    This is something plaguing wargamers, even rpgers will convert settings and rule systems to better suit what they want. Wargamers just roll over and complain.

    Different people want different things from their hobbies and some people have differing amounts of time and money they can devote to their hobby. Some people might not want to write their own rules or create their own add-ons for existing rules.

    And I don’t know that its fair to be criticising people for not wanting to approach their hobby in the same fashion that you do. To each their own.

    I don’t find GW’s offerings to my liking and in response I am writing my own rules.

    I don’t expect people to do the same though.

    I’m not a GW fanboy, there’s alot about their rules that I hate, but at least I accept their games for what they are and don’t complain that they don’t cater to my specific wants and desires.

    This actually started as a discussion wondering why GW didn’t provide skirmish rules for WFB and 40K gamers.

    I don’t particularly think its necessary to turn this into a general critique of “lazy” gamers especially since one’s definition of what makes a gamer lazy is highly subjective.


    TheOldMan says:

    If the maker of the game does its job correctly and properly playtests then I shouldn’t have to kitbash rules. We don’t have to kitbash rules when we play Warmachine for example. I also want good quality miniatures for my games without some jackass screaming “convert! convert!” at me every two seconds. Conversions should be something fun to do for a change of pace not something that a gamer has to do because the game maker doesn’t support the game it has created. Screw all of the kitbashing of rules and converting of miniatures. I want to be able to play right out of the box. Am I a lazy gamer? Yup. I’m not the only one either. There are plenty of places to spend our dollars. If you want us to spend them on your product then make it good. Don’t half ass it.

    I totally agree with Zac that GW should improve their skirmish rules for both their fantasy and sci-fi games. I can’t really speak about the sci-fi aspect from personal experience but I can safely speak about the fantasy aspect since I have played Warhammer and Mordheim.

    I would LOVE to see GW dig deeper and develop Mordheim further. First and foremost the rulebook needs to be re-written. The “Living Rulebook” is all well and good but in my opinion the game should have a rulebook that includes ALL official warbands, hired swords, and dramatis personae. It should also include a bunch of scenarios and a nice modelling and terrain making section. Make a quality product and actually push it.


    Psychotic Storm says:

    Either we like it either we don’t GW is a big company and it draws attention, so I find hardly surprising discussions about her stir up, Zac as the editor of this website has all the right to express his opinion in the editorial page, you don’t like opinioned articles? Then don’t read editorials.

    Onwards to the rather interesting discussion, kit bashing or writing from scratch rules is interesting, I myself have wrote a few game systems in the past for my leisure (nothing spectacular), but it was difficult to convince people to try them, why? their logic is simple a one man cannot produce a fine tuned game system and they don’t have the time to help me play test them and balance them.
    As for conversions, well I like converting as many things as I can other people don’t have time to even paint (or hate painting) let alone start extensive conversions.

    Anyway, GW’s mentality was always to sell figures, this can be traced on all its games, from good old RT (roll the tables then fix the miniature to have what you rolled) to their skirmish games (models must have what injury/ equipment they are supposed to have) and of course their WYSIWYG rules. Their games and more their skirmish games are flawed with this logic, necro, gorkamorka, mordheim are filled with unnecessary random tables that are more optimized in making you convert your models after each battle than for any game balance.

    Their recent :skirmish” attempts are a failure as well, 40k in 40 minutes and border patrols are a quick made untested set of rules that have been made only in order to allow starting players to play with their small forces and not get bored till they have a proper force to play a game a testament to this is how some armies simply cannot field a force in the said games, also a small reminder is that the games are indeed optimized for 1500 pts (40k) and 2000 pts (WHFB) and great imbalances are obvious in battles of so low points. 40k kill teams is another failed attempt, the “goon” player is there just to roll dice and the game could easily be played as a solo, let alone that goon squads have no real choice or variety forcing player buying models that they would never really field (how many TAU players have really so many gun drones for example?).

    Would GW benefit from making a true skirmish game? I don’t really know but I do know that I like skirmish games more than the battle games so GW has lost contact with my wallet a long time now.


    Zac says:

    I don’t really know but I do know that I like skirmish games more than the battle games so GW has lost contact with my wallet a long time now.

    And this was really all I was trying to say. No slag against GW or their rules. Its just that there are gamers they could be selling minis to and for Warhammer at least it almost seems as all they would need to do is write some LotR stats for Warhammer figures. 40K might be more problematic


    miniguy says:

    Just to reply to the notion that this is somehow a failure on the part of lazy gamers unwilling to “roll their own rules.” This is silly to me. Part of what a good rule set should provide is a solid, tested basis for play that’s portable. I’m not a proponent of the tournament scene, but if every club or circle has their own variant of the rules, you wind up with either a lot of insular gaming communities or a ruleset that becomes a sloppy conglomeration of house rules (which, IMO, is what has happened to Specialist).


    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.