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!
With the abundance of special characters in 40k these days do you think they improve or take away from gameplay? Do they force people into repetitive cookie cutter lists or do they add a new dimension and variety?
http://www.armyroster.com Check out my ToP WIP in the projects section!
In the older codex they were handled better, now they are huge buffs to the army that you should take. (He'stan for flamer heavy lists, Cheknov for conscript spam, etc..)
i feel like when two people play a game of 40k the point is they're fighting a battle that hasn't happened yet using their own chapters/armies/fluff/etc. and it's part of the game to create your own experiance, almost like a session of DnD
when you add it special characters and specific chapters it makes it seem like like a prescripted video game rather than an immersive roleplaying game
i feel they should be limited in their use and only allowed in very large games
I definetely think they add dimension to the game. Taking the example of the latest Marine Codex, you have a plethora of characters to suit a variety of playstyles, and your Captain's, Librarians and Master of the Forge's are all equally useful.
Taking the example of He'stan, he greatly buffs a flamer/melta/thunderhammer heavy list in ways no normal HQ can. However at the same time your basic toys are not inferior simply because a special character is not added.
I disagree with the assertion that a TT battle should be like a game of D&D. D&D is primarily about the story, with the mechanics for telling a story using a variety of abilities added in. Warhammer and it's science fantasy counterpart should be strategical games first, story games second. If your army can have fun abilities whilst still retaining a tactical edge, someone did well. That's not to say you can't add story to the game, or run a campaign, or rename He'stan or whoever to fit your ideal army, but the Warhammer world/universe is one where the mechanics and the fluff do not mesh all that well. Sometimes you just have to enjoy both seperately.
I myself can't exactly explain why, but I won't use special characters except in very rare curcumstances, and I naturally look down upon those who use them all the time (especially those who use 2+ special characters in armies). Something about a person having to rely on special characters and their special abilities just makes me think less of someone. Not sure why I feel that way, but I do.
I do agree with Kelter Skelter. Putting in special characters makes it feel more like your playing a historical battle instead of one that you made. I personally love it when I can say that MY character beat your army, it wasn't Abaddon, it wasn't Marneus Calgar, it wasn't Asdrubael Vect, it was some guy I created, painted and named myself.
But then again, I'm the kind of person who can't make a single army without making up fluff for it.
i feel like making your own fluff and tying it in with your own paint scheme is one of those most rewarding aspects of this hobby
if you want to use a specific chapter and specific characters and fixed army lists then GW should just sell boxed armies like they sell pre-built decks for magic the gathering
i want to play 40k like a RPG wargame... not a boardgame that plays like a wargame
I generally do not use Special Characters in my lists. Only Telion (named The Boss) has appeared more than once.
Chekov might make it in to my guard army, as I have no access to Commissars and stubborn guard are much braver than regular guard!
I've been playing since 3rd Edition was released, and used Special Characters maybe 5 or 6 times.
I much prefer to have my own characters take the lead
Arch Overfiend & Grand Despot
I currently play:
Doom Eagle Space Marines
Hive Fleet Omega Tyranids
Goff Ork Boyz(dead)
Tau of O'me
Inquisitorial Xeno Hunters
and my attempted foray into fantasy
'Dark Angel Green' Dark Elves in need of fluff
Why does this argument always devolve into "If you're using special characters, you're not in it for the hobby?" and vice versa?
Yes, you can play 40k like an RPG Wargame. It's not exactly designed that way but the more power to you. That does not mean those people that don't want to do that should be shown the Confrontation/Magic: The Gathering door.
Creating fluff is rewarding, but so too is imitating the set armies. If you're looking down upon someone because they're creating the Ultramarines 5th or whatever, it's time to take a step back.
Again, the hobby and the game itself are not mutually exclusive. I can rename He'stan, I can change his origin, his ethnicity, his gender. I can make him a Half Eldar raised by Kroot if I want. His abilities are just a template. If you disagree with his abilties or point cost, thats another matter, but (for better or worse) it's going the way of special characters ain't so special no more.
Personally I find that, at least as a SM player, the special characters give me a solid centre for me to base my list around and thus I'm trying different types of list just by varying the special characters.
There is no difference between a named GW character and a named homespun character except that GW have given theirs some special rules and balanced the points for me.
Why is using a named character somehow "less pure" than not? Exactly what criteria determines if folks are "properly" into the hobby?
Doesn't seem like a fair assumption to me, to stereotype or otherwise look down on someone who is otherwise playing by the rules.
It seems as though some folks are suggesting that playing out a game with a character somehow might "violate" their already official fluff. What exactly requires that a character only be used in matches that reflect battles from their fluff? Does it really bother anyone if Pedro Kantor and Abbadon are on the same table, even though they have never met in the fluff?
But then what of custom conversions? Would anyone venture that conversions to represent special characters to lead custom chapters is somehow an invalid practice? Even though GW openly encourages it?
I have a custom converted character that represents Vulkan He'stan. He has his own name and fluff, as does the Chapter he leads. Does this somehow make me "less into the hobby", because I decided to center my force around elite marines with exceptional wargear, both in rules and in fluff?
Last edited by psichotykwyrm; September 17th, 2009 at 17:56.
"It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous."
---Ogvai Ogvai Helmshrot, Jarl of Tra, VI Legion Astartes