With all the current rumors of an increase in randomness
coming to 40k, I just wanted to share my opinions on the matter. As
you know I am unashamedly a Beer and Pretzels (B&P) gamer, so that
predictability that tourney players are looking for is not my bag. I play for
the sheer fun of rolling dice and hanging with my bros. I will give some of my thoughts from both the competitive and B&P side of my mind.
Recently there have been whispers that random terrain
effects and randomly generated psychic powers similar to way things are done
WFB may be coming to 6th. The gnashing of teeth has been epic from
many in the 40k community and I do understand a bit of the issue that the
tourney guys are having. I used to be a hard core tourney player, but have gotten
back to my B&P gaming roots.
I still don’t think it is as bad as many are worrying that
it will be. I think it has added a ton of depth to WFB, in fact it is the only
GW game that I will still play in a tournament format. I think WFB is more
balanced than ever, unlike 40k IMHO.
From my Competitive side:
All GW games are at their core “dice” games; meaning there
is always going to be tons of randomness. While playing to win you have to plan
for random outcomes to happen and mitigate them as best you can.
If this current batch of rumors are true it provides the
opportunity to up your game competitively. Dealing with randomness like this
really gives you many more opportunities in the risk verses reward type of game
play on the tabletop and in my opinion 40k has lacked this kind of depth for
too long. Do I want to charge that unit or shoot them?
Positioning of units on the tabletop will become much more
important. 40k has always had a very lackluster movement phase since 3rd
ed and anything that shakes that up is a good thing.
From the Beer and Pretzels viewpoint:
Randomness is not something that ruins my experience in wargames
as long as it is not arbitrary and pointless. It takes away an amount of control
from the gamer and I would actually propose that it is a good thing for the
game in many instances.
An example of pointless randomness is the way that difficult
terrain is implemented in 40k. It is silly that if you’d like to enter lets say
a wood and you are 4 inches away from your unit and you roll less than 4 inches
you do not even move to the edge of the wood by default, nope you only move the
1-3 inches that you roll. Now mind you I only say that this is pointless
randomness in its implementation. If the implementation were to have the models
always move to the edge of the terrain if they fail to go far enough to enter
the terrain; that would be good randomness.
Well implemented randomness changes the focus of the game from worrying about winning; it brings the focus back the process of playing and having fun. You become more interested in seeing how things will play out on the tabletop, and less interested in who actually won.
Well implemented randomness changes the focus of the game from worrying about winning; it brings the focus back the process of playing and having fun. You become more interested in seeing how things will play out on the tabletop, and less interested in who actually won.
Your average B&P gamer is looking for; a fun day/night of
socializing with their opponents, rolling dice and having a great gaming
experience. Basically they want to get a nice looking table set up, with
painted figs, great terrain and armies that both of the players love. It is all
about the spectacle of watching a story unfold before their eyes and randomness
can really help generate some unpredictability that lends its self to great
story telling.
Polish your boots sir!
ReplyDeleteJust kidding. I think the concern from more competitive gamers (and even fluffy gamers like myself who like tactics to win over luck) is that introducing more random factors make skill less important. It's a point of view I share. As you say, the point of game is entertainment. For you AND your opponnent. I don't enjoy tabling someone anymore than I enjoy being tabled, but I do enjoy a good, close, tight game. I like randomness that makes the game more fun (Shokk Attack Guns, scattering Orbital Barrages onto your own troops, that sort of thing). But there's a point when randomness begins to affect the outcome of the game too much. We're perilously close to crossing that line already (it's a very fine line). I reckon 5th ed hits the balance perfectly. I'd hate to see it tip over the edge.
That being said, I won't worry myself overmuch about how 6th ed turns out until I see. Once I read the rule-book, then I'll worry (or not) and by then, it's too late to do anything but ride with the tide regardless :D.
I will agree that the sky may not be falling with these changes, especially since we don't know the full extent of these proposed rules or if they are accurate. However, I am in the opposite camp and completely disagree with rules that either lessen the impact of player skill or remove it from the game completely.
ReplyDeleteAt best this change will simply change the skills a player will use, and that is something I would be ok with. If movement and positioning are made more important and become the biggest measure of player skill, I'm fine with that. it's already the most important aspect of high level play in 40k (on the tabletop) anyway. Adding more depth only increases the skill ceiling. I like having more room to improve.
And maybe I'm strange, but even when I started playing 40k, I never was big into "seeing what happens". I can get behind others wanting to do that, but it is not at all what I am interested about in 40k. For me storytelling is for setting up the backdrop or changing the scenario, not for determining what happens on the tabletop.
I approach RPGs and CCGs the same way; When I am taking actions toward an outcome, I want some very reasonable assurance that outcome will happen. Choices should matter in gaming, not the fickle hand of fate. I want something to engage my mind and reward smart play.
I'm all for some system where actions and choices can change future goals. That is a more meaningful story element, in my opinion, than rolling dice and seeing what random effect befalls my forces.
My personal feelings on random don't really revolve around competitive aspects but what makes the most sense in a "at least attempting to approach reality" way, keeping in mind it's a game not a simulation.
ReplyDeleteI actually dislike the random charge ranges in fantasy as it stands and would probably dislike them in 40K for similar reasons (and I play dwarves mind you which benefit highly from the 2d6 charge)
Taking fantasy as an example, if I have Move 5, my guys can move 5 inches all the time.
Now, it makes sense to me then that if they are going to CHARGE!!!, trumpets blaring and all, they move farther than their base movement in open terrain. So 5 + X.
The Fantasy rules then make x = 2d6. 40K just makes X = 6 (although in a little less clear way because movement and charge movement are in different phases).
In Open Terrain, why would it be that sometimes my guys would charge faster than other times? This seems illogical to me. They move the same all the time. So, you can't say, well maybe Johnson ate a bad burrito at lunch and is therefore moving a little slower today because Johnson is moving and marching the same else wise.
Speaking of which, what is the logic behind a full blown charge potentially being slower than a marching speed? Running versus Walking??? Or maybe the guys just decide that a brisk jog is warranted this time? This is the part that bothers me. It doesn't make any sense to me. :)
So, I realize that it's just my opinion, but to me, the random charge range falls into that unnecessary randomness category that you mention with the difficult terrain rules. (we house ruled this at our club by the way to you always at least move up to the terrain... because once again... really??)
Now, you charge through terrain, I get the randomness, but that's already in place in 40K.
As an aside, I also feel like the d6 run is also unnecessary and should just be like a March or some guaranteed amount (double, half again, whatever). Once again, really you run faster this time but not last time??? For what reason?
Randomness is a double edged sword for games.
ReplyDeleteIt can make the game really fun but it can also make the game ridiculous.
Its all in the amount thats added, I believe.
I have no problem with some randomness being injected into a game like 40k, for example, I love the new White Dwarf Deathworld Rules set. Deathworld rules bring some much needed fun into some already stale mission scenarios.
I just hope they do not go as overboard as 8th edition Fantasy. Don't get me wrong I still love Fantasy and quite enjoy a majority of the rules, I think so much randomness makes the game a little too random if that makes any sense.
Like you said, random charge lengths? Your now getting Dwarves who are moving faster then Elves and that just seems very out of place.
And I understand how the uber-competitive players feel but if your that concerned about competitive play then go for Warmachine/Hordes. Talk about a game literally built for competitive play...
I would like to see GW stir the pot so to speak, shake up the rules a bit, throw in some randomness. It is definitely needed, BUT in moderation. Too much and the game just feels and plays like something completely different.
Too little randomness and you have chess... it's only about thinking ten moves ahead of your opponent.
ReplyDeleteToo much and the game is just not fun because even in a friendly game you want at least some strategies to come to fruition, and you want it to make sense and be something you can actually imagine happening.
Also too much in the wrong places and it eats up time, like run/terrain moves. Or it destroys part of the game, like dangerous terrain rolls for jump infantry or units whose randomness make them unusable. We already roll to hit, to wound, to save, and to save that save if it wasn't saved... how much more randomness do we really need? I love Ork randomness but at least with the orks it's reasonably priced for the randomness. I'd love for chaos to have more random stuff but no more 'oops pushed that button, now you lose the game' type randomness.
Whilst I agree with the broad sweep of the argument, I very much disagree with the example of "pointless randomness". Just because you've put your difficult terrain on a base doesn't mean that's the extent of the terrain. There may be smaller rocks, tree roots or signs of mine laying well before the actual terrain. Plus, the prospect of entering difficult terrain may cause soldiers to slow down, either from worry or because they have to carefully pick their route.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with a number of your points.
ReplyDelete1. Fantasy is NOT balanced at all. There are certain army books that are so far better than others due to similar reasons that imbalance in 40k occurs (Old books versus New Books, poor design concepts, etc.) The Dark Elves book is SO far better than the Wood Elves book. Competitive fantasy is just as brutal, imo worse than competitive 40k.
2. The random elements work to unbalance the game as well. Having your 200 point monster die to a 6 on a 100 point cannon is not fun or balanced. In addition, neither player likes to win because a tree shot fireballs at your army all game. It's not fun for either player.
3. A further example of randomness in games being unbalanced: Blood Bowl. The tabletop game is definitely the most random game I have ever played. It was very frustrating at the beginning that my dwarf runner couldn't pick up the ball off the ground and my opponent immediately got to crush my entire team because of one bad dice roll. It's not fun for either player. I enjoy BB now, because I have no choice but to accept its ridiculousness and roll with it.
4. Even beer and pretzel type players don't like the randomness either. I know several players like that and MAN do they gripe about dice rolls. Add more dice so these guys can whine more? forget that.
Thanks for the comments, on a hot topic. I totally understand a lot of the sentiments being presented here. I do however think that when this new edition is released and the randomness is understood within the fullest context of the rules everything will work out fine.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes I really like 8th edition fantasy, so I look forward to more of that style of game play in 40k. Besides the more of these tidbits that drop the more it looks like a tweaked version of the "Leaked/Fake" 6th ed PDF.
In the end to each his own, like it or not 40k is getting shook up. At least there are plenty of alternatives in Sci-fi gaming these days, so if you absolutely hate 6th you can easily find something to your liking out there.
-Jim