March 29 2020 15:01:47
Navigation
Forum Threads
Newest Threads
· Marianna Chevaux
· New 3rd Ed. 40K oppo...
· 6th ed rules for 7th...
· Reclaim The Stones!!...
· Destroy The Chaos He...
Hottest Threads
· Marianna Chevaux [4]
· New 3rd Ed. 40K o... [2]
Latest Articles
· THE GODS OF CHAOS HA...
· Posting Content on t...
· A word on Attachments
· Final Testing and Bu...
Users Online
· Guests Online: 3

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 252
· Newest Member: Sherpa1016
Welcome
Welcome to Classic Hammer
View Thread
Classic Hammer » Warhammer Fantasy » General Discussion
 Print Thread
Game and Army Fluff
TinyLegions
In one of my random musings that I had recently I thought about the general storyline and fluff of the armies that we play. As we are playing now a game that is no longer officially supported by GW, I was wondering if other people are thinking of branching out in their fluff and how they see their army. As someone who tends to like map campaigns, I have always had a hard time reconciling what I got from the story line in some of the army books over the years with what was actually going on with my army. For instance, if you are on a completely different planet that looks no where near what GW has created then how can your High Elves be an army from Caledor that is not on the map. I know that you can name things whatever you want in a planet of your own creation, but I always got a sense that doing that is not making your own original story.

Even in general pick up games, I really did not care much for the fluff of the armies that I played or wanted to play as written. Following GW's cannon leads to more of a sense of reenactment than anything else for me, which is something that I tend to avoid. I always believed that the fluff to be a good idea to get the general theme of the army, but after that I really did not care as to what was going on. It is one of the reasons why I liked how some of the army books were put together in that the actual history was only vaguely discussed in the 6th edition (ex Dwarf)

For me, I am going to move away from GW's cannon in that my Swordmasters are no longer from Hoeth, my executioners are not from Har Genneth (SP?), and so on.
All of these units are going to keep their general purpose, but I am not following GW's description for them at all. Few units have this type of moniker on them but I am dropping them, to branch out on my own. I am really going to try to make my own world for my armies and their own fluff, or when I can adapt them to the planet that I am on when I do a map campaign. Yes I will have white lions, but they wont be from a place called Chrace, and if I can figure it out, I want to put different animal skins on them, and call them hunters of the wild or something more creative. The primary question that I have is are you going to stray from the GW cannon?
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Just Tony
In my mind, it's not unreasonable to assume that there are "outposts" for lack of a better term of Swordmasters in every province. Retainers to the palace mage at Tor Yvreese or something along those lines. I see your point in that. I just wish there were more colonies or something so you didn't have a finite Ulthuan, and had more open undefined areas like the Empire and Bretonnia.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
TinyLegions
Agreed, I always thought that the HE book lacked variety in the sense that you either take regular units as is with no variety of arms or ability,(Silver Helms being the only exception) or one of each elite unit barring honor exceptions. That is what I am going for in that we can now introduce our own world with our own culture.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
baranovich
Great topic for discussion! I completely agree with your sentiments, makes absolute sense to me and always has.

For me, our gaming group have always taken a bit of a peculiar angle on the fluff and lore of Warhammer.

We sort of honor it and ignore it at the same time. As you said, with some of your units you are no longer following the official GW fluff of the names of exactly where in the Old World the units come from.

Going all the way back to the 80s until now, my games of Warhammer along with my friends, have always taken place in a sort of "generic" Old World. Kind of a place suspended in time that just "is". We know time is passing in the world and GW was chronicaling official events that were happening, but we considered and still consider our tabletop battles to be merely generic snapshots from "somewhere" in that world without being specifically tied to official lore, names or places.

As such, my Empire army for example is painted in a weathered campaign color scheme that doesn't comply with any of the official GW heraldry or provinces colors.

Our orc army uses some elements of GW's official tribe symbols on its banners, but only because we like the aesthetics of red on black color schemes for banners.

Our dwarf army is also a generic campaign army that doesn't follow any of GW's official lore.

Equally important is that our army lists never acknowledge official GW character names. If a player chooses Karl Franz on his war griffon Deathclaw, he's just an unnamed Empire General. Joseph Bugman is just a generic brewmaster, etc. We DO USE the official GW miniature that represents them, but just as often we will use a GW generic engineer or generic general/commander/captain miniature for a named character model. In other words, our lists utilize GW's character stats and special unit stats, but we don't use the character's or unit's official name or fluff. Empire Greatswords for example don't come from anywhere perse, they are just a unit known for doing great deeds in war, etc.

When we do campaigns, our maps follow the geography of the Old World, but we don't always use the official GW names of cities. If we do a city battle or siege of a major city, it's just "an Empire city somewhere" in the world.

Our gaming group likes to keep the look and feel of the Old World, so we have only collected and used GW miniatures for our games, with a few rare exceptions included.

Our terrain and tables are generally fantasy neutral, a mix of generic medieval with some GW fantasy pieces. But we don't acknowlege any official GW landmarks.

A lot of our group also does historicals and other fantasy games. But we all follow the same philosophy with Warhammer; loosely based on the Old World with GW's aesthetics included but without following official fluff or lore.

As far as things like End Times and other major world-shifting events, we simply disregard major shifts in the lore altogether. Our Old World is forever suspended somewhere between 3rd and 7th edition as a stable world with the usual conflicts of interest between mortal races and factions, as opposed to GW's world which is constantly teetering on the edge of being overrun by Chaos. For our gaming group Chaos is just another mortal faction with its own strongholds, etc but without all of the Gods and celestial stuff that are part of GW's official Chaos lore.
Edited by baranovich on 28-11-2015 16:15
 
TinyLegions
baranovich wrote:
As far as things like End Times and other major world-shifting events, we simply disregard major shifts in the lore altogether. Our Old World is forever suspended somewhere between 3rd and 7th edition as a stable world with the usual conflicts of interest between mortal races and factions, as opposed to GW's world which is constantly teetering on the edge of being overrun by Chaos. For our gaming group Chaos is just another mortal faction with its own strongholds, etc but without all of the Gods and celestial stuff that are part of GW's official Chaos lore.


One of my biggest pet peeves is how the great and all powerful chaos gods are destined to doom the whole world in an age of darkness, yet no other gods can step in as if they don't exist. This is the main reason why I don't like the Chaos Pantheon of Deities.

On another note, Welcome to the forum Baranovich. As it appears that you have a group setup already, please do feel free to post any and all battle reports on any of the classic games.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Just Tony
I agree that having evidence of deities interacting with the factions is a big turn-off for me. It also kind of ticks me off that this nepotism GW writers have with Chaos leads to situations like constant interaction with the Chaos Gods with gifts/whatever and yet none of the other races have a direct interaction with their gods, bar maybe Orcs. Why bother playing anything BUT Chaos if that's the case?
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
TinyLegions
Indeed, especially when everyone who complains about how "broken" things are point to marked chaos units. You never hear anything about how non marked chaos units broke the 6th edition. No coincidence in my mind.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Jump to Forum:
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Member Poll
There are no polls defined.
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

No messages have been posted.
1,323,027 unique visits
Table 'cmvogan_phpf1.phpf_new_users' doesn't exist