30K/40K: I Just Want To Play With My Toys

 

30k1

What do you mean I can’t take (fill in the blank) when I play your 30K army?!  Do you realize you’re taking a freaking PRIMARCH?!  Warning: yes, I am more than a bit indignant about this issue.

So I’m talking with a mate who is now immersed in playing with his shiny new 30K army.  I still cling to the archaic 40K version of the game.  However, I really fancy some of the Taghmata Mechanicus models, particularly the Thallax and the Vorax Runabouts.  They will be a nice addition to round out my Skitarii/Cult Mechanicus force.  But wait…as I mention I am bringing them to our next game, his eyes narrow, he looks at me, and with a straight face says…”You can’t take those models, they’re not allowed in 40K.”  Exsqueeze me, baking powder…did you actually say the words “those aren’t allowed in 40K?!”

30k2

Wait WHAT!

Does he realize he is taking 20-model squads of Marines?  That they are armed with all kinds of fun and wacky 30K weapons?  That his terminators have a 4+ invul save?  Not to mention the fact that he is taking a primarch!  And yet I can’t field half a dozen robots with Jetpacks and three bug-eyed servitor assasins?  This is freaking insane.  So people are willing to play their 40K friends with their 30K armies, yet I guess don’t want us to corrupt 30K models by playing them in a 40K list?  This makes absolutely no sense to me.  We are not talking tournament play.  We are talking casual gaming between friends.  There is also the “you can’t take that vehicle with Flare Shields.”  Why the heck not?  I am looking at page 58 in my Crusade Army “red book.” It shows that for 25pts I can add a Flare Shield upgrade.  Oh, I see, because it shows that the same vehicle in your fancy 50 Quid Imperial Armour tome with no Flare Shields, your expensive version of the book trumps my working class version.

30k3

Are all 30K/40K players doing this elitist thing?  Of course not.  Another friend has no problem with me bringing a few 30K units, as long as I pay the proper cost and slot them in the appropriate place in a CAD.  So why the heart burn over adding some Forge World goodness to my 40K lists?  I just don’t get it.  It just makes NO sense to me that if there are models available from multiple divisions of the same company, and that 30/40K both use the 7th Edition Ruleset as the core of their gameplay, that any model from any GW source cannot be used in casually gaming.  I get that in tournament play this would be a concern.  If it is a strictly 30K event, then all models should follow those guidelines.

 

Apples and Oranges?

Do people thing that 30/40K hybrid lists are somehow unbalanced/more powerful than pure 40K lists?  It is that they want the rules applied consistently?  If it’s the former, that just doesn’t bear itself out when you look at what people can bring to the table on both sides of the current meta.  30K armies are certainly more expensive model for model, both in terms of cost and points, but you certainly get what you pay for.  If it’s the latter, then someone has an interesting sense of humor.  Do Forge World rules specifically state “the units in this book cannot be used as part of a list that otherwise consists of models not from the Horus Heresy model line?”  Even if it did, do 30K players actually feel threatened by a hybrid list?

30k6

Let’s just be clear…if I play you in a casual game, I should be allowed to take any models from either GW or Forge World, as long as 1) I pay the appropriate points cost, 2) I slot my units into the appropriate position on an CAD (unless I am playing Unbound) and 3) I give you the courtesy of letting you know I am dropping Forge World models into my 40K list.  The latter being a part of the often mentioned “social contract,” which on more than one occasion, I admit to being remiss in following.

30k5

Bottom line…if you are bringing a bloody primarch, then I sure as heck have every right to bring whatever I freaking want to the gaming table!  I just want to play with my toys!

Do you take “30K” models in your 40K lists?

 

 

  • BaronSnakPak

    That’s what I love about AoS, bring whatever you want to play with.

    • Agreed. the problem is that the majority of our gaming culture the past twenty years is totally 180 degrees of this and we are seeing what happens when a game tries to introduce that to the overall community at large.

      • BaronSnakPak

        Yeah, people getting irrationally upset that their entire collection is playable instead of just the current top tier netlists. For all the griping about “lack of balance” I’d say my AoS win loss ratio is 50/50 and I play with different lists almost every time. 40K on the other hand, I very rarely lose.

        • eldarconvert .

          This is tosh, people are not complaining that every unit in there army is playable

          • BaronSnakPak

            People complain about the lack of points = lack of balance. The points system is what created the current netlist culture where “unit x is a cool model, but unit y is better costed” invalidating units based on whatever edition/codex is being used. The lack of points allows for a huge degree of flexibility and experimentation, making your entire collection viable.

          • Charon

            Not the lack of points allows for this but the steamlined units. Every unit is basically the same with minor variations. It is bigger than the difference between horseshoe and racing car in monopoly but way smaller than space marine and imperial solider.

          • Guy John Culmer

            But the current system still has this problem but rather than “unit cost x cool model” it’s “stats x cool model”. Ultimately they would have lost nothing from having points included AS WELL as their current option of bring what you want. More ways to play = more happy players.

        • Secundum

          Your loss ratio is 50/50 because AoS is literally a coin flip.

          • BaronSnakPak

            Last I checked a coin only had 2 sides, and not 6. There is strategy in the game, knowing what units combo best with others, what buffs to use, and what units should attack what. Dice rolls do factor in though, just like any game based on dice/chance.

          • Secundum

            There are only two real strategies though-either use an instant win strategy or use a summoner.

          • BaronSnakPak

            What instant win strategies? Summoning isn’t automatic, either, you first need to pass the summoning rolls, and second keep the summoners alive if you want to continue summoning, and third have the models to summon.

            And please don’t say “bring 100 Lords of Change and win”. No one in their right mind would play against that, let alone find someone willing to pay $6,000 for 100 of the same model.

            My friends and I play with the rules as written, we alternate deploying units until someone stops, and use tactics during the game. This assumption that AoS critics cling to, that everyone who plays is a triehard who only spams uber units, is flat out wrong.

          • Secundum

            Tomb King single Scarab Swarm list.

          • Secundum

            Plus, with the right list, summoning is a) piss-easy, b) easy to keep summoners alive by sticking them right at the back of the board and c) with the farciful ‘100 wounds’ that a lot of people like to stick to, having extra models isn’t hard.

          • BaronSnakPak

            Your points are assuming that A) the summoning army wins turn initiative rolls consistently, B) the opposing army doesn’t have a lightning/deep strike ability, C) there aren’t shooting attacks/spells coming from the opposing army (arcane bolt, for example), D) summoned units don’t lose battle shock tests and run away, leaving the summoner wide open.

            I can’t speak to the “farciful (I think you meant farcical) 100 wounds” because we don’t play with that restriction. People bring what they want to play with and that usually all ends up on the table, with maybe 1 or 2 units left out.

          • Secundum

            Initiative is irrelevant when summoning. Shooting and Arcane Bolt don’t have the range when the summoner is at the back, and you can use cannon fodder to block any deep strike abilities (of which there are few).
            And people like you who just bring what they want just prove my point about the game being unbalanced.

          • BaronSnakPak

            Initiative is absolutely relevant, you can only summon during the hero phase. If I beat you on the turn initiative, I have the hero phase and movement phase to set up counters before you can act. Arcane bolt has 18″ range, High Elf Archers have 20″ range for example. Against a slow army, that’s one or two rounds of summoning before getting shot at. Using cannon fodder to block deep strikers opens up the field for other units in your army to attack the summoners. Everything you’re presenting as unbeatable is easily countered.

            As to your “people like me” crack, my friends and I bring whatever we want and adjust what is being played accordingly. The only times we play unbalanced matches is when we want to create last stand, or david vs goliath types of battles. I think you’re forgetting this is a GAME, played with TOYS, and it’s meant to be fun. It doesn’t need to be so serious and high-stakes. Stick to your previous editions if you want overly-complex and slow gameplay against stagnant lists and “must be this serious to play” gamers.

          • georgelabour

            You’re dealing with an angryhammer player. Reality isn’t included in the rule book they use as their bible.

          • Spacefrisian

            Bretonnia with back up Damsels and Lords, eg never fail a charge never fail to hit and to wound and always stay healthy.

          • Extensive playtesting and playing games over the past five months or so shows that the guys that were winning mostly in whfb are also winning mostly in AOS here.

          • LordRao

            Then you probably have a very fun, non-WAAC player group. So do I, I’m pleased to say. Unfortunately, not everyone can say the same.

          • Thats true. It takes some time to build up though.

          • JJ

            Must be nice to have players from WFB that stuck around..

          • We dropped to 5 people from 28. Its slowly recovering but it takes some work to rebuild the community. The same thing happened in 2010 when 8th dropped too. Almost the exact same ratio of players quit for warmachine as they have for Kings of War this time around.

          • JJ

            We went from 12-15 to 0, one weekend there was a WFB group, AOS came out then poof everyone had their army up on e-Bay! Kinda sad!

            Actually it has hurt our local game store pretty bad as the PO’d WFB players usually quit 40k as well. Took almost half of the 40k group!

            Tried several times to get AOS up and running, but after seeing the group disband the way it did it’s a hard sell to new players!

          • Yeah that sounds very similar here too. We lost a lot of 40k players as everyone decided to flip off GW and go to Infinity, X Wing, etc. Actually Kings of War started but fizzled, so there isn’t really a fantasy scene here that I know of (someone may correct me if I’m wrong)

            However we had a fairly strong campaign group so the die hards among us kept on going. I’m stubborn that way.

            I wish there were a way to gather those that are sticking with it. Community psychology and group-think is a very hard thing to overcome though.

          • Craig Biddulph

            Kings of War is fading away? Shock, we didn’t all see that coming. Over the next year or two we’ll see AoS pick up properly. We still don’t even have all of the armies out or the background fleshed out.

          • Dennis J. Pechavar

            We lost most of our players to Flames of War and Warmahordes. The group had be bleeding people since 8th came but it was still 10-12 regulars. AoS came and fantasy became 2 people. Not AoS, just fantasy. Mind you Mordheim is picking up steam again. 🙂

        • Agent OfBolas

          All WHFB units are playable in 9th Age ruleset. What’s more – there is a POINT based balancing system.

          Why touch such thing like AoS when you can play something with rules that do not insult your intelligence.

          • BaronSnakPak

            Yeah, because streamlining is tantamount to insulting your intelligence, and isn’t a way of making the game faster paced…

            Get over it. If you want needlessly convoluted slogfests, stick to the old editions. You act like AoS peed in your cereal and told you to eat it.

      • Severius_Tolluck

        Funny is that this is how the game started. You were almost allowed anything back in the day, along with allies and crazy weapons of doom! Got to quote Heath Ledger to all the younger generations and ask “Why so Serious?” Especially we are playing with dolls…

        • Around 1995, the Magic scene exploded with a world tournament circuit with huge cash payouts. This set the stage for competitive gaming to thrive.

          Since then, gaming went from being something you played with for fun to something you played as a form of athletics, and set the model for today’s culture which pushes hard for a world tournament circuit, large prizes, etc.

          I noticed tournaments and serious gaming were becoming more and more a thing in the late 90s and around the early 2000s the transformation was pretty sound and serious competitive gaming mindsets became the default.

          This hasn’t changed since, and I feel that that is a huge reason for the backlash being received now for non serious gaming being pushed to the forefront.

          That and the mass migration to other companies that are promoting serious gaming.

          As much as we may wish it so, serious competitive gaming is, I feel (at least publicly) the vast default of gaming period.

          Several game designers have spoken on this over the past couple of years, particularly after 40k unbound became a thing. Alessio, Rick Priestly, etc, these guys have given a lot of posts and feedback about how important it is to keep serious intonations in their games because they feel that is what gaming is today.

          • euansmith

            Apparently Ronny Renton was behind the launch of Apocalypse because he wanted everyone to play with all of their toys… and for them to go out and buy more toys to play with.

          • Yeah. When apoc came out I was excited because I like using super heavies once in a while. Unfortunately no one here would ever play in games of apoc because apoc wasn’t tournament-standard.

            Thats where a lot of the local rage was directed when 40k moved to let super heavies in normal games because tournament-standard got shifted to allow those big models and it made people mad (tournament events could ban super heavies and some do but because super heavies were now “official” it rankled the guys that want RAW)

          • eldarconvert .

            Apocalypse game were just shout fests that adults avoid, so they brought apocalypse into the regular game and now its going down hill fast with Gargantuans and super heavies and the boring D-weapons every where

          • I’ve never had that in my experience. Apoc games are large scale games that were always a lot of fun, though draining because they usually lasted all day and were not conducive to competitive play.

            The problem as I saw it was that tournament-standard dictates their sales and they saw that most things not tournament-standard didn’t sell well (any of the expansions really never sold well and it was a common thread on forums where some people complained about having a hard time getting to play those expansions) and they wanted to push the bigger kits so something had to be done, so they made it explicitly official instead of an expansion.

            In my experience, that problem was that people bought an army to play standard games, and the expansions meant they had to buy more models to stay competitive in those expansions and they didn’t want to buy and/or paint more models so left the expansions alone (this reason was given to me many many times when we’d try to run city battles or apoc battles in our campaign… ex “my army is built for the core scenarios, not a city battle and as such my army is not competitive in a city battle and I don’t want to have to play a scenario that puts me at a disadvantage”)

            This problem was also seen in whfb, where the default scenario was battleline and doing scenarios outside of battleline could be difficult depending on your area because “my army was built to play battleline and I don’t want to have to buy other models to play a different scenario so I don’t want to play a scenario that puts me at a disadvantage”

            This has also helped me shape my campaign packets better for pepole that don’t want to buy more models for scenarios not standard – but the current direction is really no standard and that has helped on the campaign front at least.

          • Luca Battisti

            Yes, but the problem is not apocalypse itself, it’s bad rule writing. GW is partially moving away from it but to make the investment in their design is also throwing out A LOT of rules. So they will probably will have to pick up the rules they disseminated around rather soon when they lose completely track of what they’re doing.

          • euansmith

            Talking about the new version of Warpath, Ronny has been very clear he envisions huge armies. It is almost like he wants to sell more minis 😀

          • Orodruin

            Interesting reply. I don’t really play any other tabletop games aside from 40k, but I imagine Warmachine, X-wing, and so on are pretty similar to the competitive situation you described? Just curious.

          • Warmachine is played, as far as I can tell, because it is a game that is designed exclusively for tournament play and attracts tournament players in droves.

            If xwing did not have a world tournament circuit, I don’t think it would do as well. Granted I base this on my own local experience, and most of the guys that play xwing do so exclusively in competitive environments (leagues, tournaments, and their pick up games are often to tune tournament lists or league lists). Without those tournaments, the world circuit, etc, I don’t think they’d be as interested.

            Thats just my opinion. I’m sure there are people that play xwing casually, in fact I know there are a few, but I find that the competitive guys are very much in the majority as far as xwing goes, and I have only ever met a handful of casual warmachine players in my life, the rest are very devoted to their tournament scene and in going to tournaments in the region and the big tournaments at big conventions.

            Take away those tournament events, and I don’t think those games would be played much.

          • WellSpokenMan

            I kind of see what your saying, but athletics can still be fun. Magic, as serious as it was, was fun, It was and is, a prohibitively expensive and one dimensional hobby. That’s why I quit playing it. Magic might be one of the culprits of a shift in attitude, but I think the internet and the resurgence of board gaming also a large played part.
            40k grew up, for good or bad. If you show up to recreate the Battle of Hastings with a Cromwell tank, it stops being a “historical wargame” and becomes a Tabletop RPG. If GW wants 40k to be a Tabletop RPG, then they should make it one and not sell it as a sci-fi wargame. There’s nothing wrong with that. Taking on the Normans with WW2 armor could be a lot of fun. If they want 40k to be a game though, they need to get the rules sorted.

          • Thats just it though. I’ve played a lot of tabletop wargames like RPGs. It can be done 🙂

            I’m not fond of the rules for 40k either. Mainly the glaring holes that make coordinating events difficult because if you leave them alone in the name of RAW you drive away players that don’t want to deal with bad rules, and if you shore them up you have to deal with the people that don’t like deviating from RAW – it becomes no win regardless of what you choose.

            The internet definitely played a big role in shifting games from “for fun” to “for serious”, mainly with starcraft and games like that in the late 90s becoming tournament type games.

            I agree it was definitely not just one thing. Magic is to me the biggest root that blossomed into what would shortly later become a default culture towards games having to be geared toward competitive play or risking death.

            I know they can be fun; i invested over a decade of my life immersed in that culture myself.

          • Charon

            Every hobby “grows up”. There is nothing wrong with that. You can still play a casual game of soccer despite there beeing tournaments. You can still have a nice game of bowling despite there are guys that play it for a living.
            And still you can have fun. Or you can play “serious”. You can switch between these modes as you like. And both groups use the same ruleset.

          • WellSpokenMan

            Rules wise, I don’t really think 40k is suited for a TT RPG though. All the “forge the narrative” stuff aside, 40k doesn’t feel like a narrative game for me. BattleTech, Malifaux, and Infinity all feel more story driven than 40k. Perhaps it’s the size, the IGOUGO, or some combination of both, but 40k always felt closer to large scale historicals in the way it plays. They really need to revamp or replace Killteam imo. Aside from serving as a great starting point to the larger game and giving the game a more narrative feel, it would also give them a place to experiment with the rules a bit. People still want narrative in their games, and there are games now that have that quality built in to their fairly solid rule sets. GWs mindset of “take our crap rules and sprinkle some narrative on top to make them work” just isn’t going to compete well with those games.

          • Ira Clements

            I remember when 40k started getting “competitive” back in the 90s. I was like”huh”? That wasnt fun at all.

          • Luca Battisti

            I think the main issue is that you can play a serious game in a silly way but a silly game is pretty hard to play in a serious way. So people believe that serious games are just better.
            Of course “silly” games are better at what they do. But it feels (at least at first sight) as a niche.

    • blackbloodshaman

      I know I always do, its just that what I want to play with isnt AoS

    • Secundum

      And the problem with AoS is the fact that it’s a laughably bad gaming system.

      • Craig Biddulph

        There are those who argue to the contrary. Personally I think Warmachine is a laughably bad gaming system, but that doesn’t make it a fact.

        • Secundum

          Warmachine is better than AoS at least…And those that argue to the contrary tend to be casuals.

          • Craig Biddulph

            Filthy casuals? You say that like it’s a bad thing. The two game systems are simply targeted a different audience.

    • Erik Setzer

      You can in 40K, too. Unbound is right there in the rulebook. And since 30K stuff is technically for 40K, you can mix and match to your heart’s content… though, you know, following the points, of course.

      But hey, bonus points to anyone who does an army of Archaon leading Sigmarines who’ve turned on Sigmar after becoming disillusioned with a war they can’t win, or a Chaos Sorceror leading an army of Seraphon he took control of. Or just an army of Incarnates.

      • BaronSnakPak

        True, I always forget about unbound because no one around here ever plays it.

        • Mike Siegmund

          30k has different list building rules and no unbound

  • Djbz

    I have no problem with 30K stuff being mixed with 40K
    30K stuff that’s stupidly powerful tends to also be stupidly expensive points wise

  • Jason Brown

    I can understand an issue of bringing 40k gear to 30k, it may not have been invented yet (TAU i’m looking at you), but anything in 30k used for 40k is just a survivor of the past, like so much of the ‘rare’ gear in 40k.
    How much of that armour the marines wear can be traced back to the heresy?

    • An_Enemy

      “anything in 30k used for 40k is just a survivor of the past, like so much of the ‘rare’ gear in 40k”

      Yeah and Forgeworld went through the trouble of writing rules to reflect that. This guy doesn’t want to use them though. He wants the “better” rules.

      • georgelabour

        except in the example the author provided his opponent is using primarchs, legions rules, etc, etc.

        Basically he was being told he can’t bring his 40k into his 30k because 40k isn’t in 40k but his opponent can use whatever he wishes because…he’s using only 30k. XD

        Which gets even stupider as 30k is just a fan made designation with no official backing from the people who actually write the rules.

        Also his opponent was using a primarch…

        • An_Enemy

          “Which gets even stupider as 30k is just a fan made designation with no official backing from the people who actually write the rules.”

          No. It’s called the Age of Darkness. People call it 30k for short. It has its own force orgs. It’s own deployments. It’s own game missions. What you’re saying is demonstratably wrong.

          “Basically he was being told he can’t bring his 40k into his 30k because 40k isn’t in 40k but his opponent can use whatever he wishes because…he’s using only 30k.”

          No. The author wanted to use 30k units in a 40k CAD. He wanted to use units that have 40k rules as 30k because he liked the wargear more. Forgeworld has officially stated that you can ally 40k AdMech with 30k AdMech but they must be allies and not in the same CAD to avoid rules stacking hijinks.

          • georgelabour

            He also said his opponent was using a primarch, and other legion specific tidbits…which is ALSO a part of the age of darkness rules. It’s in the first few paragraphs of the article.

            You left out that in your rush to discount my statement.

          • Nathaniel Wright

            You mean like armies now have their own force orgs?

            Have their own mission types?

            The differences are becoming less and less an issue, and having entire units made up of a single weapon type isn’t exactly new. Eldar have been doing it for a long, long while now.

  • Mike Siegmund

    The power levels are not the same and minmaxing can be so much worse. It’s like going unbound. Staying in the same rules evens it out as you pay the unit taxes and 40k armys seem to be stronger than 30k

  • nurglespuss

    30k ‘selectivism’ is for games played in the ’30k era’ (akin to the bolt action theater books). If you want to try and slot 40k armies into a 30k timeline, go ahead, see what is justifiable to create 30k Orks and Eldar, or what you can use to represent the alien races encountered in the novels 🙂 . However, rock up to a standard pick up game of 40k with a primarch? That seems daft. The codex’s already exist for you to perform the incredibly easy task of converting your Legion army to a Chapter army…

    I see no conflict? I also see no reason to play a 30k ‘codex’ against a 40k ‘codex’ in straight/pick up game, that just seems a bit unnecessary…

  • Emprah

    If you want to play it with a friend as unbound, sure. 30k orks can be fun! Or you can really make a fun and lore friendly 40k Adeptus Mechanicus army if you add Secutors and Thallaxi (They exist in 40k too) .

    But if you are going blind its usually best to stick to the basics. Except if your opponnent has a multi Wraithknight army. In that case feel free to sick all the primarchs on them!

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      And watch as the Wraithknights bombard the primarchs with D weapons?

      • KingThrogg

        Thats what 2/4+ Terminator bodyguards are for.

    • Nathaniel Wright

      And that’s what it ultimately comes down to, isn’t it? A pickup game with Eldar or Necrons against a 30k legion probably isn’t going to be that much different than if they were fighting a 40k chapter. Hell, they might even be at a bigger disadvantage because of a lack of access to all the hot and spicy formations.

  • Red_Five_Standing_By

    30k armies are built very differently. No one bats an eye at 10 dudes walking out of a drop pod with 10 flamers in 30k but that really changes how 40k is played. Especially when you start rocking 10 plasma or 10 grav weapons. The Scorpius is good in 30k but they are amazing in 40k against Marines (since they do not have the numbers to recover from watching a squad getting pulled off the table with such ease).

    40k games should be played with 40k rules, 30k with 30k. It just makes life better.

    EDIT: The only real exceptions are Eldar, Orks and Dark Eldar, as all of them were active and remain relatively unchanged after 10,000 years. From a fluff stand point, they would make prime enemies for the Legions Astartes.

    • Will Evans

      However, some quick 30k unit composition modifications would be nice for balancing eldar/dark eldar against other 30k lists (and considering how shafted DE are at the moment, the general player population/TOs might want to consider letting the update be used for DE 40k lists :P). Fluffwise, it would reflect Craftworld Eldar having considerably greater numbers and better resources 10,000 years ago, and Dark Eldar lists conforming to a Commorite Noble House hierarchy rather than a Kabalite hierarchy.

    • Mike Siegmund

      Gravity weapons in 30k are much weaker

    • Nathaniel Wright

      It’d be like having ten Dark Reapers popping out of a wave serpent.

      Or ten Fire Dragons popping out of one.

  • TB0N3

    I would allow AdMech lists (Ordo Reductor, Legio Cybernetica, Taghmata Omnissiah, Centuria Ordinatus, etc) in a 40k enviroment… Legiones Astartes, Primarchs, and Solar Auxilia just dont exist anymore. Weapons, upgrades, and even units that used to be commonplace are now rare or non-existant

    • Craig Biddulph

      Solar Auxilia more than likely do. They are basically storm troopers who train to operate in the void. I am sure there are a few regiments knocking about.

      • Haighus

        They were likely forced to conform to the IG template with the reorganisation and standardisation of the Imperial Army in the Guard though. Wouldn’t be huge changes, but they would lose some of their uniqueness somewhat.

    • David Hurst

      Because of the way the legions splintered I would have thought it possible for certain legions to work. Iron Warriors or Alpha Legion especially should contain some rebel marines who did not fall to chaos and for those the 30k Legion lists are probably the best way to field them.

      Otherwise the Iron warriors apparantly discarded all of their siege weaponry for no apparant reason.

  • Charon

    “if I play you in a casual game, I should be allowed to take any models from either GW or Forge World, as long as 1) I pay the appropriate points cost, 2) I slot my units into the appropriate position on an CAD (unless I am playing Unbound) and 3) I give you the courtesy of letting you know I am dropping Forge World models into my 40K list. The latter being a part of the often mentioned “social contract,” which on more than one occasion, I admit to being remiss in following.”

    Interesting that this is exactly what a few players argue. when they bring multiple Wraithknights while fulfillingpoints 1 -3 but are somehow labeled WAAC by exact the same people who want to claim the same freedom for themselves.

    • A Smith

      Because everyone on the net agrees that wraithknights are under costed beyond belief and that D ruins games.
      Old Wraithknights i could just stand but with the latest dex they really are just a broken model, this guy wants to bring in things which are entirely balanced (my opinon just take 1 army of skitarri/mechanicus and ally in the 30k stuff dont just mix the codexes and rules) however things like Wraithknights, Supremacy suits etc just take the fun out of the game, sure you may enjoy them but your opponent wont its about fun for both sides.

      as for point 3 do you tell people you bring 2-3 wraithknights before a game? because if you told me i would just refuse to play and ask my chaos friend if he wants to reenact historic event X and we have fun doing so whilst the eldar and tau player has no one to play but eachother because they demand to bring units which take away from their opponents fun.

      • Charon

        So you would refuse to play a legal army and would not let my play my “toys” because you think it is not balanced? Shocking.
        Probably this is the reason why some people do not want other people to use their toys, even if it is perfectly legal. Still not the player to blame but the company for creating broken units/rules.

  • Craig Biddulph

    I would be upset if you sprung it upon me unannounced. Not because a few Thallax and Vorax are more particularly broken, but because it is cheating. It’s the same as me taking a unit of Genestealers with my 30k Thousand Sons because I fancy some close combat power. It doesn’t even work unbound, as unbound armies must abide by the Allies Matrix, and Mechanicum are not on the same chart as Forces of the Imperium.

    If you warned me in advance I wouldn’t care. It’s the difference between agreeing with your opponent to do something and simply cheating.

    • Haighus

      This. You’ve worded what I was thinking.

    • CMAngelos

      Exactly this. Now if you want to bring your 30k Mechanicum stuff to compliment your 40k AdMech. Bring a proper Mechanicum list to ally to the AdMech, forgeworld already said the AdMech Codexs could be allies for 30k, bUT the are not the same. You don’t just get to stick non faction stuff into your army cus it looks cool.

  • Just sounds like a whiny knob to me. My advice: dont play him till he pulls his thong outta his butt.

  • nurglitch

    Chaos Space Marines can take 20-strong units of Marines, field 4++ Terminators, and Daemon Princes. Nobody is threatened by those. The 30k Imperial Robots are actually useful. That said, I’d love to play with them.

    • Craig Biddulph

      Loyalist Marines can spam 3++ Terminators.

  • Skimask Mohawk

    Its almost like your friend was following the rules, complete with 30k inflation, no formations, and limits on Lords of War (among other things) and you wanted to break them and got mad…. I give you a classic example of entitlement and BOLS rolled into one

    • Orodruin

      Does it really matter? What is the bad thing that would have happened if his friend weren’t such a stiff about playing a game of toy soldiers?

      • CMAngelos

        What matters is acting like a twit and crying because someone expects you to follow the same rules you are.

      • An_Enemy

        Which is worse here? The friend expecting his friend to play by the rules or his friend coming on BOLS and whining about it?

        • Orodruin

          Haha, you’ve got a point there!

  • An_Enemy

    Look buddy, if the unit is available in 30k and 40k formats, the rules differ significantly, and you’re playing a 40k army then you use the 40k rules.

    Your friend is playing a 30k army…is he injecting 40k grav into it? No? Then why do you feel you should be able to cherry pick units from 30k when Forgeworld has set up some pretty clear guidelines for doing so. It’s fine in a separate CAD. Those Thallax are REALLY good and I don’t suppose you were planning on having them benefit from Canticles huh? Yeah…uh huh.

    Who let this guy use BOLS as a forum to rant about his friend making him play the game the way the designers intended?

    • Sebastien Bazinet

      “Those Thallax are REALLY good and I don’t suppose you were planning on having them benefit from Canticles huh? Yeah…uh huh.” Nailed it!

      • Nathaniel Wright

        Like people do with Space Wolves and (x imperial faction)?

        Or Blood Angels renting their drop pods out to Mechanicus?

        It wouldn’t be the first time and it certainly wouldn’t be the last that people did less believable things because the rules were ambiguous.

        If anything, I’d be more okay with canticles working with the Mechanicus because it makes sense. Rent-a-Pod though? Seriously?

        • benn grimm

          Just using standard marine drop pod models kinda sucks, but if they’ve taken the time to build Termite carriers for their army I’d be more than happy for them to be run as counts as drop pods.

        • Sebastien Bazinet

          What do you mean by rent-a-pod?
          There is a difference between using a proxy and choosing which ruleset to use with a model. And the issues is not ambiguous rules it’s someone wanting to use a 30K unit in a 40K army without using the 40K rules for said unit, basically cherry-picking rules

          • Nathaniel Wright

            I’m just saying, who gives a damn about which rules list they use? As long as it’s from a legit source, does it really matter? Having Volkite weapons or using the kakophoni ruleset isn’t going to turn your game into any worse a game just by existing. I mean, as long as you tell your opponent, what difference does it make?

          • Sebastien Bazinet

            It depends on how fluffy you like to play I guess.

            But I ask again, what is a rent-a-pod? I started playing 40k not too long ago so I don’t get the reference sorry

          • Nathaniel Wright

            Basically, it’s the concept of taking, say, a blood angels force to gain access to their drop pods, not for the blood angels, but for the Adeptus Mechanicus force (since Battle Brothers can use the vehicles of battle brothers).

          • Sebastien Bazinet

            Ah ok thanks but even if they are Battle Brothers would they not be able to arrive via drop pod since it is a dedicated transport? To my knowledge Battle Bros can embark on a friendly not transport but not use one as a dedicated transport but I may be wrong

          • Nathaniel Wright

            I believe they also have fast attack profiles.

    • A Smith

      Best response to this babies article yet.

  • EVILINC

    I can see both sides of the coin here. First thing you need to do is work out with your gaming group these sorts of things as a whole group so that everyone is on the same page from the very beginning and work out any such differences of opinion with compromises or house rules and so forth before you even get to this point. If one player wants to mix and match for maxing out the amount of damage/survivability between the two rule sets in order to win, or just for “cool factor” of what they think looks good, I say go for it. But the ability to do so needs to be known by both players beforehand. That way, you dont have one guy showing up with a “legal” army for a game and getting bushwhacked by an “illegal” list. The “legal list” player should have full knowledge of the possibility and have the same option to make an “illegal list” as the other.
    Communication and compromise and working these things out are key in gaming groups. It should NEVER have gotten to that point.

  • I’ve had an opposite problem where several of the guys in my local group become extremely agitated that I would even consider brining my beautiful 100% converted 30k Word Bearer’s Host (Which is Truescale) to an APOC GAME!!!! Its APOC! I’ve seen people print out a picture of a Reaver Titan, tape it to a Milk Carton and play it as a legal model!
    Oh and one of these players was playing an Imperial Knight Army.
    My local scene has several players who still claim that nothing forgeworld makes is legal in standard 40k games ESPECIALLY if its heresy era. They are wrong and trying to deny me the right to bring my toys to the party, I’m guessing out of fear. Perhaps a forgeworld unit once killed their Whole army in a single turn like a Tau/Eldar Army or something and they are just scarred by the experience.
    Take what you want as long as its fun, your opponent understands it, and it doesn’t rob your opponent of fun.

    • An_Enemy

      I’ve had people refusing to play my 30k army for years. Always because some cousin of a friend’s sister said it was “way OP bro.”

      Fear of the other. Make them play a game themselves on a person by person basis. That’s what it took for me to get to play my 30k Space Wolves.

  • Agent OfBolas

    please don’t give dumb ideas to GW as they will turn great and competitive wh40k in to bland mush AoS like….

    Fortunately sales on 40k are so good, that GW wants to keep current gamestyle as it is.

    You can play 40k at “home rules” and take whatever you want OR stick to tournament play. Your choice.

  • Master Avoghai

    “Does he realize he is taking 20-model squads of Marines? That they are armed with all kinds of fun and wacky 30K weapons? That his terminators have a 4+ invul save? Not to mention the fact that he is taking a primarch! ”

    But… I don’t get it… If your friend field a primarch and 20 men squads… It means he’s playing a 30k army too…

    Hence why are you talking about 40k?

    You’re a 30k game with him, hence your thallax are tottally legal!

    I really don’t get what is your problem

    • Mike Siegmund

      The thing is 30k has much stricter army building rules the writer wants a 40k army with 30k units added in. now a proper 40k army vs a 30k will have the 40k winning unless it’s one of the low level armys

      • Master Avoghai

        Yes but it’s not what I’m saying.

        The author states that his opponent forbid him to bring 30k stuff in 40k games.

        But in the same sentence he says that the same opponent brings a primarch and 20 men SM units(which are 30k only feature)

        So either the game he plays is a 30k game hence he is allowed to play whatever 30k units.

        Either they are playing 40k game and rhen his opponent cannot bring his primarch and his 20 men units that are not slloed either in 40k.

        Hence i don’t get the point of a problem. We’re not dealing with the problem “why a sicaran is allowed in 40k and not a sicaran venator?” We’re dealing here with why would you play guilliman and You forbid me to play Thallax?

        • Mike Siegmund

          No see 30k can play vs 40k thou the 30k player is fighting uphill. We have here a legal 30k list vs a mix Following no army build rules (as 30k dose not have unbound) it’s like having a heldrake in a guard army

  • OolonColluphid

    Lol. The author sounds like a pissy power gamer.
    “I can choose what ever I want.”
    The type who tries to rules lawyer a 30k Unbound Army when such a thing doesn’t exist.

  • Luca Battisti

    “Do people thing that 30/40K hybrid lists are somehow unbalanced/more powerful than pure 40K lists?”
    Are those lists bound to be less powerful or at the same power level of the pure 40k lists?
    No. Then they would be right to think so. If you get more options you lose nothing and (possibly) gain something.
    “It is that they want the rules applied consistently?”
    I don’t know. Ask them. But know that they’d have reason to protest against an hybrid list if they had this intent. Some chapters have different rules, some units have different equipment and different point costs. Those are all rules and in an hybrid list you would not have rule consistency.

    Are those points valid? The answer is: “why would I care to get an answer? I’m not playing with you, discuss it with your gaming group. I belive that it’s a matter of opinion.”

  • Terminus

    Wait, he’s playing a 30K army and won’t let you use your 30K army? I’m confused.

    • Michael Campbell

      No, he wants to play against his mates 30k army with a 40k

      army, and wants to pick and mix in some 30k units he likes.

  • Michael Campbell

    Wut?

    Because they are from different army lists!

    I can’t run Stormwolves, Stormravens, or Stormtalons in my Dark Angels. Because they are from different army lists.

    The 30k army lists are army lists, it’s not a pick and mix plate like Imp Armour. How do you not see this difference?

    You might have a leg to stand on if you were talking about taking an allied detachment from a 30k book, but just slotting units from a 30k army list into your 40k force? That’s dumb.

  • Slite

    Ew. All the amounts of ew about this article. The game has rules… follow them!

  • Cameron Chapman

    If 30k and 40k have different rules they’re different games running on similar engines, right? So why should you be able to play both at the same time?

    I’ve not touched 40k since 5th so I’m not entirely sure exactly how true this statement is, but all I can think of is someone trying to justify modding Skyrim to have laser rifles because Fallout 4 is made by the same company.

    • nurglitch

      Thank you for that well-informed comment.

      • Cameron Chapman

        Instead of being sarcastic, how about you tell me if I’m wrong or not? The impression I always got from hearing/reading into it was that the games used the normal Warhammer statlines/rules but functioned differently on an army building level. Therefor, same engine, different games.

        • foto69man

          Same game/same rules. Different FOCs and list building rules. The author is basically whining because they want to break the rules and build an uber/cherry picked force.

          I say get off the internet, stop writing ‘articles’ to raise unsupported mob mentalities, and play a single game of unbound if thats what he wants. He obviously knows nothing of the actual 30k rules.

        • CMAngelos

          30k and 40k both run off the 7th Edition Rules set for 40k. 30k is technically an expansion for 40k, and Is compatible with 40k should you choose to play against a 40k army.

          The fluff does not mix, obviously and there are different weapons for different armies. But at the core they are based off the same rules.

        • nurglitch

          Why bother? You haven’t played since 5th edition. You lack the context to understand what’s changed about the game.

          • Cameron Chapman

            Because I want to be educated on the state of a game that I loved at the time, and a universe that I still love through the RPGs. Provide the context for the one asking the question, don’t dismiss them out of hand.

          • nurglitch

            The context, that education, is provided by playing games so you’re familiar with how the game works. Unfortunately I can’t provide that for you.

  • Terminus

    Not using Vorax and Thallax and all that in a 40K makes sense because that’s all considered heresy “now”. What sucks is not getting to use Skitarii with 30K Mechanicum until FW publishes some rules.

    I do not believe in mixing the forces willy nilly and a Primarch is no big deal.

    • CMAngelos

      Forgeworld has said in the past that the 40k AdMech Codexes work as Allies for the Mechanicum, but they are not the same army list.

      • JJ

        Where did they say this? Our local Mechanicum player would love to see this in print!

        • CMAngelos

          Here is the exact quote from their response, it was some months ago, and was published on BattleBunnies after the fact.

          “The Skitarii and the Horus Heresy Mechanicum represent similar forces but from two very different eras and so are not specifically designed to be used together in rules terms. However, if you want to have use them as Allies for each other, perhaps to represent different branches of the Adeptus Mechanicus/Mechanicum working together, and your gaming group are happy for you to do this then please feel free. You may need to come up with your own house rules to represent this though.”

          But they do specifically stated they are separate and should be kept as such, so a tagmhata army list could use a convocation allied detachment or whatever but they’re still their own armies

          • JJ

            Gotcha.. Unfortunately most people want an actual printing from a book.

            Personally I don’t care, but look at how people respond to Questions asked via e-mail to GW.

            But thanks I will forward the information to him!

  • Neil Burns

    The Cult Mechanicus book very clearly states, that the Thanatar, Thallaxii, and Castellax are still being produced by some obscure Forgeworlds. Cite that.

    • An_Enemy

      FW’ s stance is pretty explicit. You can ally 30k mech with 40k mech, but they have to be seperate CADs. 30k mech is not designed to benefit from Canticles. They have their own buff mechanics. Cybertheurgy being one example.

  • Erik Setzer

    It’s all a bit of a jumbled mess. I’d point out that 30K and 40K aren’t really balanced with each other, but the internal balance of 40K got mauled in recent years, so it doesn’t really matter. It’d be smart of GW to get all the stuff in order and balance 30K and 40K stuff and then say which 30K armies are which 40K factions (Imperial or Chaos, pretty much). Want to use old 30K units? Well, you can claim they came through a time warp. That happens in the 40K universe. Or the reverse, some guys got sucked backwards in time from 40K to 30K. Whatever.

    Certainly not all 30K players are elitist. I’ve never seen a mixed army, because people just seem to like playing “pure” armies, but I see plenty of 30K vs 40K. And if you can’t afford the FW models but have appropriate 40K models, folks’ll let you use them for a 30K army (which is how I was playing my Iron Warriors until recently).

  • Learn2Eel

    It’s been said a few times but it really bears repeating. What you are doing is illegal per the rules, what your opponent is doing is not. You can’t just take Thallax and Vorax and plonk them into a 40K Adeptus Mechanicus army, just like Space Marine players can’t use Roboute Guilliman in their 40K army. It isn’t even allowed by the Unbound rules due to them following the Allies Matrix, to which 30K and 40K use entirely distinct charts.

    Now, I understand that you want to use them in casual games and that is fine – you didn’t do anything wrong by asking your opponent before-hand. However, in my experience I have often seen similar requests turned down even with casual gaming being the aim of the two (or more) parties involved because they would still mostly play by the rules. I once converted up a Chaos Baneblade and asked several people if I could use it in my Chaos Space Marine army back in 5th Edition in larger, friendly games. It should come as no surprise that the most common answer was “no”. I wasn’t salty about it as I understood that not everyone wants to play against illegal army lists even if it is in a casual setting.

    As for the “hypocrisy” of your opponent, let me stop you right there. Provided the Lord of War restrictions are satisfied and the correct Legion used, Primarchs are fair game in any 30K match of 2000 points or more. This is supported in the rules. In addition, Forge World has rules and suggestions on how to integrate 30K army lists into the 40K gaming scene; the rules support using armies from the different eras against each other. By contrast, there is absolutely nothing in the rules that allows you to simply take Thallax and Vorax from the 30K Mechanicum army list and add them to the 40K Adeptus Mechanicus codices as not only are they from a separate faction altogether (rules wise), they are from different game systems.

    I’m sure Astra Militarum players would love to replace their Infantry Squads with Lasrifle Sections but the rules do not allow it – the Lasrifle Sections belong to a different faction, do not have a data-slate that specifies they can be used in a given 40K list ala many of the Heresy era Space Marine tanks (Whirlwind Scorpius, Spartan Assault Tank, etc) and do not follow the same Allies Matrix and thus cannot be legally fielded in an Astra Militarum army via the Unbound army selection method.

    Your complaints about what the Legiones Astartes army can bring as opposed to your mish-mash of 30K and 40K Mechanicum are also rather amusing. Twenty-man squads of Space Marines and Terminators with 4+ invulnerable saves are a trade-mark of Chaos Space Marines which, guess what, are considered one of the weakest factions in 40K currently. Fun and whacky 30K weapons are a trade-mark of the very faction you play regardless of the era being used; 40K Mechanicum use Graviton, Phosphor and Volkite weapons remember. Also, a “freaking Primarch” is hardly something to be terrified by any more than something like a Stormsurge or a Wraithknight. Besides, Primarchs are fully legal for use in Legiones Astartes armies that meet the 30K Lord of War restrictions…quite the opposite of what you tried to do.

    TLDR: I’m amazed that you can’t see the gaping hole in your argument as the core point of your post suffers greatly from it. While I agree that casual gaming should shrug off most of the usual restrictions, an opponent turning you down for using an illegal army is not really that surprising and it is something you should expect. I’m a firm believer in facing any kind of army and often allow my opponents to do what you attempted to, but writing an article to complain about it was definitely unwarranted. Next time, instead of airing your petty grievances with a friend to the front-page of a massive internet community, organize your army list into a legal format – take the 30K Mechanicum stuff in a separate Allied or even Combined Arms detachment to ally with your 40K Mechanicum army – and go from there. It’s not “elitism”, you are cheating the army selection rules and your opponents aren’t deeming it worth playing against. Talk it out with your friends and don’t come crying to us if they aren’t happy with any specific idea you have for a game. Cheers.

    • grim_dork

      Well considered and well stated.

      Applause.

  • georgelabour

    What this boils down to is that forgeworld needs to get that rumored mechanicus/tau/raven guard book out sooner rather than later. ^_^

  • JP

    Here’s my answer. “You’re bringing this, I’m bringing that. Don’t like it? Find someone else to play against.”

  • reepy

    Your bottom line makes no sense. The main idea of that social contract is not whether it is “legal” to bring those units. It is whether your opponent will have fun playing against that list. If he/she believes that you shouldn’t take those units it doesn’t matter what you think is proper. It only matters that their “fun” is ruined.

  • DaveTycho

    Is it wrong that I want to bring a 30k list to a 40k tournament?

    There will probably be someone responding with X reasons why this ain’t possible and/or makes tournament play worse blah, blah. I don’t want to hear reasons why you can’t, or even stupider comments like “don’t corrupt 30k with 40k” (or the other way around) either.

    I don’t care if my 30k list would be at a disadvantage in a 40k tournament. I just want to play. I want to know if anyone else feels the same way as I do.

  • Daniel Hall

    When I play with a friend (or anyone) using 30k/40k (And we do this all the time in my meta) you stick by the rules given for army construction for THAT ARMY. So for 30k, you get no unbound, your stuck to your legion rules/rites of war/allies (If applicable)

    40k? standard 40k force org/unbound if you wish, works a charm in my group, relatively balanced, fun games. (unbound I generally hate myself anywho, as I always 100% of the time field a legion list, dont own a standard 40k list)

    I understand there are idiosyncrasies here between 30k/40k play, and the whole “just use the 40k rules” Shtick is fairly laughable when your talking about traitors legions, as chaos rules are garbage.

    As for one of the above statements regarding tank costs; Many of the tanks are balanced for said lists. you cant truly look at a tank from the 30k book, and the 40k book (same tanks) and say one is objectively better just because of a stat increase / points decrease due to the fact that the tank isn’t in a vacuum. The tank is encompassed as part of its own Codex (which in reality is what the 30k Crusade Army List book is, its another space marine “codex” if you will. just with alot more “chapter tactics” so to speak.

    Its just one of those things the community deals with on a case-by-case. I think the authors best point was that his opponent was bringing a primarch, which I would concur gives the opposing 40k player a bit more….leeway. Though to be fair Ive also seen guard/dark eldar/eldar and Necron lists do just fine against a primarch, they arent as tough as many people make them out to be.

  • Hazamelistan

    I’m on your side. 😉 Based on the fluffy background of AdMech it’s completly legal to use 30k Models in 40k. I think it’s even mentioned in the Codex Skitraii that they are relying on old technology like their rifles. I think there’s also something like Cult Mechanicus recovers their robots from the battlefield for ages because they are so valuable and no one knows how to build something like that.

    • Shiwan8

      If there is a valid unit dataslate that allows using a 30k unit in 40k list then it’s fine. If not, by the rules, it’s illegal.

      • Hazamelistan

        So what’s a Dataslate? The things GW sell? Or is a PDF from FW having rules for e.g. a Knight on it already valid Dataslate.
        As I said Fluffwise it should be legal. And I know it’s disgusting, but sometimes talking to your opponent helps. If he’s okay with it why not?
        And the point of the article is, that his opponent fielded a lot of 30k stuff including weapons and a primarch but complains about Mechanicum

        • Shiwan8

          Any of those, really. The point is, if it works with some codex etc. it does not mean it works with something similar to that. The dataslate either is in the army book it works with or otherwise explicitly informs the gamer which armies can use it. “It’s in the fluff” is not that kind of information.

  • kaptinscuzgob

    cant play tau against a 30k army, they didnt exist in the same time period

  • Eddie Draper

    Normally I don’t care, but more and more I see it being players wanting to take these overpowering units for their army to mix and match the time periods to get something more powerful combo. Like I said normally I don’t care. There are other game systems that use to have this problem until they restricted the time periods of their games. For example, Flames of War and BattleTech. Both these systems use time periods to govern which weapons and units are available. Which brings more of the fluff into the games. That is really what this break down to. Are you a fluffy player or playing to be playing, or a competitive player looking for that edge.

    It would not be hard to blend both 30k/40k together. There would just have to be some sort of balancing element need. For example, if I brought a unit of Firedrake Terminators with my 40k Salamanders to protect He’stan Vulkan, I would be willing to give my opponent a 1VP if he killed the Firedrakes. Now oddly enough, in the fluff He’stan does have Firedrake terminators to protect him. Its been their task since the HH, its just not in the Space marine codex. Firedrake unit exist in the 40k time period, its just a matter of fluff and not in the game.

  • Shiwan8

    So, the problem really was that one gamer wanted to mix and match units from multiple different armies in one FOC. Now he’s peeved because the opponent did exactly what he should do, demand that the rules are followed.

    Honestly, it’s not the opponent who denied this from you that is the problem, it is you.

  • Divergent_Reality

    I play Necrons. This has no bearing on my army.

  • _Ares_101

    Personally, I love it when people mix 40k and 30k, if it has to do with conflicting rules, look at what army it is. IE, mechanicus would have better vehicles than Space Marines in the fluff. If you both still can not decide what to do, choose two units, 40k and/or 30k, same points cost. And have them fight, winner decides.