Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Have been posting on the site for a while but only recently really started looking at the fluff section.
Anyhow had a question for you all, how specific should the fluff you are basing your army on go to, say for example for a tournament?
For example I am just starting a beastmen army and like the idea and rules behind Khazrak the one eye (incidently I hate the model but that is an aside) and was planning to theme my army around his warhorde. Now having previously played empire I have quiet a few spare empire bits and was thinking of basing the entire army around the battle where he soundly defeated the army of middenheim (forget the name is G something, dont have the book with me at work). From this I would model up the bases and so on to suit the battle, with dead/dieing empire troops and so on. Question is once the army has been done and modelled to this detail is it too specifically aimed at one situation?
I have an alternative less specific idea mapped out but thought I would get opinions on this one before I progress too much further either way.
Thanks for any help in advance.
Essentially, your fluff is your own - you can do with it what you like, and it won't affect anything much on the tabletop. I reckon it would be fine to theme your army around this battle; even if an opposing commander has their army themed to a completely different event in the warhammer world, it won't stop you playing one another.
Besides, unless someone specifically asks you, all they'll see is an army of beastmen miniatures that look like they've just routed an Empire force. It could be any force, so if your specific theme ever causes trouble, you can just draw back a little and set your fluff as a random beastmen-empire encounter. I'm sure they happen from time to time!
So, I can't see a problem. Hope it helps!
What he said. Most tournament play is for the win, not the story. If most armies played to the fluff, Tournaments would be an interesting thing to see...
But, for your question, modelling your guys to seem as if they've recently took part in a specific battle or something will have no effect on the rules. In my experience, Fantasy is not WYSIWYG like 40k is. There is a bit more leeway, but you should still be able to model your guys how you'd like and still have the army look the way it should on the list.
Nights Justice Space Marines
Eldar Eth Kariel Craftworld
Spear of Kurnous - High Elf Expeditionary Army
This kind of depth is actually lauded at tournaments. I've played in several tournaments, and most of the time, I've seen models with "the bare minimum", which is a reasonable paint scheme and a flocked base. The worst I've seen is an army of Orcs with the 3-color minimum: Green skin, Brown cloth, Silver weapons.
GW will like the extra effort put into the army, and if your opponent is expected to rate you on your army's appearance, they'll appreciate the work you've done.
There aren't many tournaments that require you to submit fluff for your army. That's part of my mission in my fluff shop- provided players with an excuse as to why they only have 25% core, and then have a massive deathstar regiment somewhere in the list. In your case however, as the fluff is already written, you just need to make sure that each of the units depicted in that particular work of fluff are also represented in your army. This might mean naming a particular regiment or painting them up with a described regimental standard.
There is no such thing as fluff which is "too detailed". In fact, I hate the armies that are just a 'standard army'. Those are lame. Give me a reason to want to fight you. Or provide a story that makes your guys as cool as you think they are.
Thanks for your thoughts and advice on this one, rep all round.
I always have some level of theme or fluff behind my armies but it has not always been fully followed. The battle I was going to base it from doesnt give more than Khazrak lead it and there was a couple of different beastmen types there. I will probably expand on this and write more depth into it and post it up in the near future.
Sounds like you have a pretty flexible starting point then - thanks for the rep, and I hope the writing goes well! I'll have to keep an eye out for it.