I would like to know how many people out there used fluff to determine aspects of their game or to write the battle reports later on. How important do you think fluff is? I personally think that fluff makes the game seem real, so I use it all the time.

I will argue that fluff MAKES Warhammer 40k. Without it, it would just be another tabletop game that I wouldn't have cared for much. I know many will disagree with me, but I think that the story is the best aspect of GW's games. I like modeling and playing, but without the story, these games would just be good and not superb.

I play Battlefleet Gothic and fluff is extremely important. If I'm playing a battle where I have to destroy an objective, and the enemy fleet has to guard it, fluff makes the game much more enjoyable. Instead of just gunning for a few ships deemed to be a convoy, I can believe that those ships are carrying a regiment of IG to help a beleagured world. If I fail, my Chaos ground troops will be hit hard by the enemy reinforcements. Lends to the game a certain gravitas that otherwise would be missing.

Overall, the drama is in the story, and I wouldn't play the games nor model the miniatures without it.

i agree with houston...we are making a campaign in our small gaming group and obviously the backgroud is very important...but more than being just necessary, its a lot of fun when you can point to a chaos lord and say, 'the only man to defeat that mad bugger, is librarian Occio of force nemisis'...makes for great vendetta games too

I agree with both of you, at our club, all of the Veteran gamers are writing multi paged stories about their armies, I'm one of those psychos.
It makes the armies more distinct and also creates an atmospehere that offers a wealth of conversion abilities, I'm currently busy in making a chaos Prometheus after it was captured in our last campaign.
A lot of crazy vehicles are gonna appear soon.

I think fluff does have an important role to play, but I cannot say that it is the only reason I play GW games. That said, I haven't ever really been involved in a campaign or anything that needs much to tie it together, such as fluff. Even ATM I am still in the testing stage for a decent armylist...

Dan

fluff is really important to the way I choose my armies. for example. my DH army is led by a young inquisitor who comes from a very wealthy family so has been able to build up her own elite armed counterindaemoncy force. the idea is that she is a flambuoyant young artistocrat with a impressively uniformed force, but who is used by her superiors to be a very public face of the Inquisition, the sort of inquisitor who acts as a decoy while the real operation goes down, like a sleight of hand. Of course, she is rapidly building up a formidable reputation for engaging in all out assualts as he is not aware that she is a decoy...

But should fluff be used to the detriment of gameplay? I would argue yes, but I'm sure people would disagree. Unless it's for a tournament, I fail to see the point of an army that's built to win (in any capacity) over having fun, which fluff invariably adds.

Provided both sides were playing fluffily, then it would be fun. However, if one side was just playing to win, then the fluffy player wouldn't enjoy it at all because they would be being forced to play to win as well, otherwise they may as well not take the table.

On the other hand, however, it could be argued that playing to win is what the game is about, as it shows a greater tactical and strategic skillfulness. However, fluff can still fit into this scenario.

Dan

Originally posted by Odd_Bloke@Jan 31 2005, 03:04
On the other hand, however, it could be argued that playing to win is what the game is about, as it shows a greater tactical and strategic skillfulness.
316842


Depends on what you see 40k as. I see it more of a universe than a game, so the narrative is more important.

and, not to niggle, but shouldn't this be in the Fluff forum?

Where this belongs...? Ah, details.

And fluffily...lol, what a wonderful word.

I'm glad to see so many people enjoy the fluff as much as I do. I posted a similar opinion in another thread a while back and got cut up by some powergamers who insist that GW games are about "the true hobby" of modelling and gaming. Some actually think that the fluff gets in the way of the game.

But fluff can only add to one's enjoyment, I think. I would rather play a game with some fluff tied in and lose over playing a game solely to win. I think people that think that way are setting themselves up to get frustrated when they don't win, and I don't want frustration to even be part of the equation when I am enjoying my hobby.

I'm a firm Science fiction follower, and I don't know how this comment will be received, but for me, the Warhammer 40,000 universe is the best sci-fi story I have ever absorbed. Its not a regular story, as its broken up in various mediums, but the various books, codexes, rulebooks, campaigns, and magazines each work together to tell one hell of a story. The best in sci-fi, if you ask me.

Originally posted by Xerxes@Jan 30 2005, 22:08
and, not to niggle, but shouldn't this be in the Fluff forum?
316849


I didn't want to limit the discussion to one game and I didn't want to get in trouble for double posting.

I know before every battle we play I take it up to myself to write a history about why the battle is taking place, where the battle is taking place, and how the battle is taken place, taking in each armie's fluff into account. I feel that it causes the players to actively participate in a more positive way and feel that the battle actually means something to them and is more interesting.

I know I always incorporate my fluff with my Ogre Tyrant in my OK army by adding another title to him after every battle he wins and taking one away if he loses a battle.

I always right fluff for battles.I'm even thinking about adding a "legendary battles" section to my BA chapters site so I can post up all the really cool fights.We're even thinking of doing a campaign,considering most of our battles take place in this one speceific solar system...if we can just find more people that'll play it >.<.

my fluff between battles extends little further than giving my fairest and best a new shiny medal or critter head, but I have an ongoing narrative in my head

I tend to agree with the majority. Whenever I play 40k (Which, I admit is a grand total of 4 times at the time of this posting) I use the fluff of my army to dictate how I will play out the battle. Sometimes making mistakes on purpose because I think it is in character with my commander.

And that's what makes this game great! It's not finding the cheesiest army that can be totally flexible and unbeatable in all situations and playing uber smart and never losing. It's finding out how to relate to a whole army of people/creatures that you created themselves. THEY arn't always going to get out of the way of Old One Eye so they don't get massacred in close combat... So in a way I think that using my models out of character is almost like cheating...

That's dedication for you... I don't think I would go that far, as it takes away from the strategy element too much. It's as much a game between players as it is a war between armies.

I must say that that is pretty bold of you to throw the game because the voice in your head said no he wouldn't do that. Or is it that you make the mistakes and then you cover them up by saying that you should not make that decision because it would be out of the normal character of your commander.