For your consideration, 40K and Fantasy

[quote="The Eldar Guy"]

Kyle wrote:

True line of sight is the bullshit. As per the BRB you check LOS from the eyes of the firer. How the hell are you supposed to do that? The models aren't glass- you can't see through them. You can see ABOVE their head- but then you're at an incorrect angle. It is literally impossible to draw true LOS for a non-vehicle model.

Having played true line of sight games for quite some time even before 40k, I never found it to be a problem. If it bothers you then use laser pointer and put it at eye level of the figure. Even GW put out one with a curved back to place over the head of the model and it's quite cheap. Any discrepancies with true line of sight games are usually put to rest with the tool and it's more accurate than above the battlefield eye views.

I usually don't play a game without one, it's a great tool and best way to take care of any los arguments. Especially required for any skirmish level game like INFINITY where terrain is highly important and playing with any complex terrain elements.

The Eldar Guy wrote:Why should it bother you- 5e changes mostly benefited orks.

The updated dex and new edition didn't help mine since it was primarily a charge at you assault army, the improvements had basically had me have to buy tons of new shit to make them into "good orks", which I still have to work on finishing some day. But armies getting better or worse with a new edition is pretty normal stuff, some armies obviously suffered and need a new dex to bring them up to seed with the game changes.

Great idea about the laser pointer. Los always seems to come up and that tool is a great idea. Putting arguments like that to the way side can help speed the game along; thanks.

True line of site is an awful rule.

scurrdi wrote:
Unfortunately, the author fails to notice the time genre difference. 40k is designed around squad warfare, where units rarely go above 10 to 15 man squads (unless special rules like the 'mob' rule dictate otherwise).

Thanks, I was thinking about this overnight, and wanted to make a similar point.

Time scale, unit scale and ground scale will all make a difference to how a game will look and play.

ShadowMaster wrote:True line of site is an awful rule.

Merely the way it is implemented in 40k 5E. It works fine for other systems, but they simplified it too much for 40k. Models not visible should not be able to be allocated hits too, this is how other games do it, how the bullets magically curve around terrain in 5E is what doesn't make sense. I can see a dude out of 30 of them, then I can only hit that one dude. Simple and efficient true los like how other games do it. But allowing the whole unit of 30 guys to be hit? Yea that is dumb.

Same applies to vehicles. You can see an antenna on a tank.... I can hit it!.... no, a standardized hull rule would make more sense.

True LOS was just badly done in 5E.

Lot of the problems also come from stores and much of peoples old terrain was designed around old 40k rules and now in 5E, that terrain does not block los anymore and now is simply cover. Bigger and actual visual blocking terrain is now more important, no longer are little templates of trees of any effect.

True LOS works fine for many other games, but the way GW did it, it is nothing but something that is easily abused.

Maybe it was the terrain involved.

All the open windows and mortor holes make it impossible to completely hide anything. Forests are useless.

Remember, the reason for the odd logic and "real world" conflict in all table top miniature is the game mechanics. So logically or physically it may not make any sense at all, but in order for the game structure to function properly they have to use that method. Some companies are better at then others. Privateer Press, Battlefront are two examples of systems that I believe are superior to GamesWorthless.

The only way for this to be totally solved is anyone who plays 40K should start playing AT-43!

JerryB

Kyle wrote:
Having played true line of sight games for quite some time even before 40k, I never found it to be a problem. If it bothers you then use laser pointer and put it at eye level of the figure.

How exactly do you put it at the eye level of the miniature? I get that you can place it at the tip of the head- but not eyes. The 2 cm difference between eyes of the model and where you actually place the laser (top of the head) makes all the difference. How do you work out models that must draw fire from eyes and yet have none? Wraithlord comes to mind.

jerryb wrote:Remember, the reason for the odd logic and "real world" conflict in all table top miniature is the game mechanics. So logically or physically it may not make any sense at all, but in order for the game structure to function properly they have to use that method. Some companies are better at then others. Privateer Press, Battlefront are two examples of systems that I believe are superior to GamesWorthless.

The only way for this to be totally solved is anyone who plays 40K should start playing AT-43!

JerryB

Pshaw, real gamers play BATTLE CATTLE

The Eldar Guy wrote:How exactly do you put it at the eye level of the miniature? I get that you can place it at the tip of the head- but not eyes. The 2 cm difference between eyes of the model and where you actually place the laser (top of the head) makes all the difference. How do you work out models that must draw fire from eyes and yet have none? Wraithlord comes to mind.

You don't put the laser on top of the head, you put it in front of the models actual eyes. This requires obviously a small laser pointer, which you can get at Wallgreens or most stores for a couple bucks nowadays. No big pen sized laser pointers of old. The GW gaming laser pointer one for example has a curved back, because this is what you place on top of the models "head", and the laser then hangs down around where the eyes are. You can get even smaller ones nowadays even that are easier to position, and some with adjustable heads for creating spread lasers for wider laser dispersion.

As long as everybody uses the same method as to where the laser pointer is placed, it makes no difference if the pointer is placed on top of the head, or in front of the eyes, or sticking out from the barrel of the cannon. It's consistency that is needed.

"I can see a dude out of 30 of them, then I can only hit that one dude. Simple and efficient true los like how other games do it. But allowing the whole unit of 30 guys to be hit? Yea that is dumb."

I like to think of it in the same way that GW explains why you can't target a special weapon. To wit, guy #1 falls dead, guy #2 goes over to the body:

"Blimey, I do believe Brother Marcus has been -argh!"

Guy #2 walks over:

"What the? Why are both Brother Thadeus and Brother Jerry dow-argh!"

Guy #3 walks over to the 3 corpses:

"Brothers, why are you derelict of your duties? Don't you see--ARGH!"

And so on until the squad all got hit.

j/k

No Brother Vycem, they way GamesWorthless explains it is; "Take another $20 out you wallet, snatch"

#2 " Okay take another $20 out of you wallet"

#3 " Okay take another $20 out of you wallet"

#4 " Okay take another $20 out of you wallet"

#5 " Okay take another $20 out of you wallet"

#6 " Okay take another $20 out of you wallet"

Until all you money is completely gone (repeat process with next paycheck)

That's how GamesWorthless explains it.

JerryB

I knew that Jerry was the Tau King

Tau King attack everything.

I am just stating the obvious and for me it's just GamesWorthless, not any of the other major game companies.

I will never fault a person or company making an honest living.
Even AT-43 (the god of current Sci-Fi games) has wacky unit boxes that force you to spend unnecessarily, but overall some of the best deals I have ever seen with any game system. $70 MSRP for a 2000 box set, BUILT AND PRE-PAINT! And not crappy units. As matter of fact you can only get some type 3 vehicles which are very desirable in the box set. And soon they will have box set for every army not just their favorite unit (so far they have 3 of 6), like GamesWorthless Space Marines.

Another example; I believe Warmachine is NOT cheaper then GamesWorthless on a per model bases. Although you do not need to purchase as many models to play. And their paint containers are just as bad as GamesWorthless, made to dry out prematurely.

But GamesWorthless is just over the top with their abuse of their customer base.

I have a high regard for all of the other major companies out there.

JerryB

Jerry, your constant bitching about GW is starting to get really old dude.

But it's always so fresh and creative.

Thanks Kyle for your support.

I have a friend that I tried to join this forum and he declined. His reason was "Everybody on those forums only pisses and moans constantly" he was speaking in general terms and not about this particular forum. I understood his point, but did not totally agree with him. I have seen pages and pages of pissing and moaning that I have waded through and tolerated, so yes it does happen, but it is not the only thing or content and generally speaking this and other forums are a great resource. So a lot of complaining does happen, and if it bothers me, I just move on and skip the section that I feel has no value for me, it might be worthy of read for someone else.

So I don't know how to react to Diosamblet without coming across as being negative.

So I'll try (but no promise) to let it go.

Or is to late? Have I join the ranks of the cry babies?

Life's good Game ON, with whatever company you desire, no matter how under handed, rip off and evil...

Dammit, Shit, sorry...

Game ON!

JerryB

I do agree VP's were much better. KP's are the lazy mans way. "Wait I have to actually ADD things up? Fuck no! just count how many units I killed." As far as assaults are concerned, I believe GW did the right thing in making them less lethal. I remember seeing whole armies get swept off the board in a few turns of assaults. That's serious bullshit. Assaults are still very lethal, but you can't rely on them to win whole games any more. You need a certain squad dead? Assault them and sweep them. Prepare to get shot in return. A lot of the complaints for 5th edition , I've noticed, come from people who were entrenched in 4th. It's a different game and for the most part the game has changed for the better. TLOS is a throwback to 2nd edition. Anyone remember? The TLOS rules back then actually stated you had to see 25 percent of the squad / model in order to shoot it. I think that's a better option than the TLOS rules we currently have.

And Jerry.... Don't be a hater brother!

OMFG I HATE STELEK! 40K is a better more liberal thinking game.

Apples and oranges. 40k is more mainstreamed towards the public. If you dont like the system(fantasy) dont play. You cant compare World War 2 to Romes War against Carthage. The tactics are completely different(amongst all other aspects of those two wars). Again a simple solution...dont play Fantasy if you dont like the system.

WOW, I just finished reading the article and the thread.

I've been playing 40k for about 10 years and fantasy for about 5. What I can say is this :

Fantasy is clearly a more complex game. I can't imaging anyone who has played both games for any length of time declare the opposite. Fantasy movement is more restrictive and requires more thought, especially because the enemy can flee. Fantasy deployment requires more thought because of movement restrictions and because of line of sight restrictions. Fantasy shooting requires more preparation because of to hit modifiers. Fantasy close combat requires more thought because of all the various factors (many) that affect combat resolution besides kills. Fantasy is much more heavily affected by psychology which has multiple effects on virtually every game. The Magic phase adds complexity to the game due to it's very powerful effects on the enemy and on your own army.

A comparison to Checkers vs Chess is appropriate in my opinion, with 40k being checkers and Fantasy being chess. Like Checkers, 40k still takes strategy and thinking ahead, and becomes extremely difficult when playing against an intelligent, seasoned opponent. Fantasy is more akin to chess in that it is more complex, requires thinking several more moves ahead than checkers, and requires more tactical thought once the game starts.

Both games are fun, so it's really about what stimulates each person in their search for having fun. For some, the complexity of Fantasy is a turnoff, not because they're not smart enough or can't handle it, but maybe because they don't want to have to think that hard in their downtime off of work. For others it's the fluff... why play a game that doesn't attract you from a thematic standpoint.

I've heard that Peurto Rico is a great board game, but ya know what, I probably won't like it, because I prefer to get my ass kicked playing board games that involve interstellar domination.

So to each his own.

Just remember that if you've been kicking ass in 40k for a while, it don't mean shit until you come over to the big leagues and start kicking ass in fantasy

In conclusion...dont play it if ya dont like it.

People are just discussing the two systems, nothing wrong with that. It's possible to enjoy/play both yet have differing thoughts and opinions on the games.

Stephen's post is on the $

Thanks Bill,

I'm looking for the 40k / Fantasy crossover though.. with the space marine squad caught in the time warp and end up in the Old World.

Regular Space Marine = M5 WS 5 BS 5 S4 T4 I 6 2 wounds 3 A Ld 10 Immune to Psychology , Stubborn.

Bolter = Range, 40 inches, 5x multiple shots Strength 6 Armour Piercing
Power Armour is a +0 armour save.
Chainsword is stenght of wielder +1 with Armour Peircing.
Power Sword is autowound with no armour save