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!
Well, I've played 40k for close to a year now, and there is a lot about that game that frustrates me (the overabundance of Space Marine players, crappy coverage in White Dwarf, etc.), so I decided to have a look at the fantasy side of GW.
I never looked twice at fantasy, mostly out of a "judging a book by its cover" mentality because I liked 40k minis a lot more than fantasy models. But now, I'm looking at it more and I know by and large its regarded as a better game (more tactically challenging, more balanced, etc.). So, I'm excited at the prospect of starting a new army for an entirely new game (I have Tyranids and Eldar for 40k), and have chosen Lizardmen, mostly because I like the Aztec-ian flavour to the army and I also think they have the best looking miniature range.
So, is there any advice that Lizardmen or other WFB players can give me? I'm not asking for an army list to be drafted for me or anything silly like that, but can anyone suggest what I should buy for my initial forces (between 500 and 1000 points...I'm a little strapped for cash). I was thinking of a skink priest and one or two boxes of Saurus warriors, supported by some Skinks with either Javelins or blowpipes. I hate to admit it, but I don't even know how the Force Organization Chart works for WFB (for 40k, 2 HQ, 3 Elites, 6 Troops, etc.), so I don't even know what the minimum requirements are. I assume its 1 HQ and two Core choices?
Like I said, any advice would be appreciated. I'm not 100% on WFB yet; more like 95%, so I haven't even bought the rulebook or Lizardmen rulebook yet. Sorry for being such a newbie. And thanks again for any advice.
P.S. What's the word on army coverage? Generally, what percentage of players field what armies? Is there a 40k syndrome where the majority of players choose Empire, or something similar, or are most of the armies fielded pretty well equally?
P.S.S. And finally, what's the deal behind the WFB fluff? In looking at a map of the Fantasy world, one can see it clearly resembles our world. They also follow a similar timeline and have similar cultures (eg. Lizardmen with Aztec similarities, Empire being German/European, Tomb Kings being Egyptian). Is the fluff very tongue-in-cheek and not taken very seriously, or is the world supposed to be an alternate dimension or something? Just curious.
Welcome to the temple grounds!
Your initial perception is pretty accurate. While FB is a superior game to 40k, it IMHO loses badly in the fluff department. Though some of the individual armies have cool fluff, there isn't a whole lot interweving them outside of ancient wars, and as you saw, much of it is tongue-in-cheek, eg IMO the worst example yet, directly from the "Conquest of the New World" that came with the last WD: "The year is 1492, and a Tilean merchant-explorer by the name of Marco Comlombo has returned from his voyage... [to Lustria]." So yeah, you will not see the quality or depth of fluff in WFB as you did in 40k, though it isn't all rubbish.
As for a starter LM army, you have the right idea: a box or two each of saurus and skinks, along with a saurus hero and maybe a skink priest makes an excellent starter army from which you can expand. The Force Org in fantasy is rather different from that in 40k. In each army book (codex), units are organized by how common they are (HQ, troop, special, or rare), rather than what function they serve. The ammount of each you can take is dependant on how many points your army is; you have unlimited troops (require at least two or more, depending on points) certain numbers of everything else, which increase with every 1k points. Tis a bit confusing at first, but it makes army composition much more realistic.
As for army preference, their are no space marines in WFB, though some armies are more common. Empire is quite popular, but the spread is pretty good. The only really unpopular armies are chaos dwarves (many people don't even know they exist!), Dogs of War, and (to a lesser extent) Wood Elves, primarily because they don't have army books and aren't sold in GW stores (WE will likely become rather popular when they get redone this summer, though).
Last edited by Rhodeta; May 3rd, 2005 at 23:12.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely...
but it rocks absolutely, too!
Welcome Houston. Maybe I should say: The Skink servants will show you around. But they're not available at the moment, so we humans will have to do it. :p
Anyway, I agree with rhodeta. The best advise I can augment is to buy the rule books. WHFB is quite different from 40k. For the rest, to look around on this forum. Some of your questions would be answered.
Another army from which I've got the impression there are less players is the Beasts of Chaos. For it is quite a new army and inconventional.
If you want to start with a strict 500 pts army I advise a box of Saurus and one of Skinks. In that case you can just use a Saurus warrior as you hero.
And you're just in time to see the new Battalion Box coming out. That might also be a good start.
And finally someone who inmediately recognizes the Empire as German instead of Roman. I was getting tired of explaining they aren't.
Thanks for welcoming me so readily; I feel at home already. I plan to buy the WFB Rulebook and the Army Book for Lizardmen today. I'm very excited at the prospect of starting a whole new army as well as a whole new game. Since I really like chess and other games that really test your mental abilities, I'm sure I'll enjoy Warhammer's more strategic level of thinking.
I will, however, miss the awesome fluff that GW is known for --- oh well, I suppose the WFB world is so like ours just to give us a greater connection to it (the "Marco Columbo in 1492" thing is rediculous in one way, but it also helps us really identify with this world in another). Instead of knowing the Lizardmen's entire culture, now we can just know that its based on the Aztecs, and fill in the blanks where necessary.
I'm glad to join the ranks of the Lizardmen. Now to defend our temples and their secrets.
Originally Posted by Araith
how can anyone think the Empire was Roman in stead of German/hungarian? :eek:
the names are enough to give it away,
but anyway i concur get a box of saurus a box of skinks, and a skink priest and youl be laughing,
WELL SAID, NO MORE SQUATS THEY ARE DEAD GET OVER ITOriginally Posted by artificer
Cause it is the equivalent of what is called The Holy Roman Empire of German Nations.
Even some historians (at least here in Germany) sometimes claim that it was the last Roman Empire, which is imho complete nonsense. But who am I as a student of Law to mess with the experts.
Well, officially it is the heir of the Roman Empire. The Church first appointed Charlemagne as heir and defender of the Church, hence his promotion to Emperor.
Later his empire collapsed. But around the year 1000 I think, a noble called Otho (Otho I or Otto the Great) united Germany under his flag, defeating the Magyars from Hungary. Then the Church named him the heir of the Romans. Thus the birth of the Holy Roman Empire. A lot of things like titles etc were traced back to the Romans, as being their heirs. Up to the 13th century, when the nations of Europe began to stabilize in their present forms, developing a real national identity.
People tend to confuse the Empire with the Romans because of the detachment system. I think it's rediculous, but not everybody has the wit or knowledge to see it.
cadre, the Empire has nothing Hungarian. Only the Kislev, who are a powerful mix between Russia, Poland and Hungaria.
yeah i remember learning about those roman crossbow and pikeman detachments!! ha ha...people are a bit dense aren't they..i personally think people should look into the historical basis for the warhammer armies where it applies, and to be fair a large number of LO members are pretty genned up on it all. Although i thought the Pope's only proclaimed the german emperors the successors of the western roman empire to get them to sort out the rebellious city states for them (certainly barbarossa), i can imagine the Byzantine emperors didnt like the title being handed out to the barbarous christians in the north... anyway i digress..Originally Posted by Araith
never really thought about lizardmen but with the new lustria campaign ive started to see the appeal..am very tempted to get a small force myself...whats the cheapest combination to get a decent sized force (around 1000pts)
PLAN CLAN MAN!!
He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man- S. Johnson
Yes, the Church only named them the succesors to create order and protection for the Church itself.
But the Holy Roman Empire was created for Otto I around 1000 AD. The later emperors kept the name and the title. The problems with the rebel city states of Italy were of later date, from the 12th century onwards. And that was more a problem of the Germans than of the pope himself.
The Papal States were essentially a large city-state like all the rest, playing the same political games in Italy. The only difference was the presence of the Papacy, but in Italy itself, it was just another city-state. One of the richest and most powerful.
I think the cheapest way of creating a decent 1k army, would be to get a Saurus hero, 2 Skink Priests, 2 boxes of Saurus and 1 box of Skinks. That way you skip the expensive monsters and still have a good army with strong CC-capabilities and strong magic, supported by a sufficient number of skinks.