Games Workshop have now confirmed that Forge World units are allowed at their Throne of Skulls event.
Quote from GW's Warrior's Code:
"5. Your Army List must be selected from a current Games Workshop publication. The following list of publications are in use at events run at Warhammer World. For Warhammer 40,000 Events
• A Warhammer 40,000 Codex and/or Codex Supplement
• The Escalation, Death from the Skies and Stronghold Assault publications
• A Forge World publication (including digital updates)
• Forge World Experimental Rules
• Dataslates
• The “Horus Heresy” publications will only be in use where the Event Pack specifically says so."
I find this interesting because many look to Games Workshop events to seek affirmation of what 'standard' 40k should be. In the past one of the major arguments against FW's inclusion was that GW didn't include it at their own events.
Regardless of how competitive these events are, this is another indication of GW confirming FW's inclusion. We now have 40k approved stamps, the removal of the wording requiring an opponent's permission to use the rules, GW releasing rules for FW only models (e.g. Escalation) after the Chapterhouse case, senior staff (AD Brown) and a shared company registration number stating that GW=GW+FW+BL and possibly an integrated website this year.
Whilst it would be nice to have a BRB FAQ saying 'FW units with the '40k Approved' stamp are allowed in standard games', I think the evidence above is enough to shift the burden of proof onto the naysayers to argue how FW is not now standard 40k.
See the event page here and The Warriors Code here for more information.
Imperial Armour will always be included in our Warzone tournaments, no matter how many nay Sayers there is around. I can't wait for an "official" confirmation.
ReplyDeleteI do like a bit of FW goodness, as you know! I can appreciate why some don't like it, but I think it's getting harder to argue against it being included as standard for the reasons laid out in the main post. I would suggest that these are already 'official' confirmation, but a bit of text in the BRB FAQ would certainly help!
DeleteDo we really want tournies more bloated with umpteen different things? This isn't just 40k approved, but all fw including the experimental rules, like that hideously broken riptide, also opens up more broken super heavies into the game.
ReplyDeleteAs a counterpoint Sentinel, do you approve of escalation and stronghold assault being rolled out to all tournies? Since they are also in all GW tournies Care of the code? I for one always considered attending a throne of skulls at some point, because of the fact it's fairly friendly, and a couple of blogs I follow go regularly, escalation for me makes that a no go.
I'm going to jump in here. At the tournaments we run, we are allowing everything except super heavies and experimental rules. I do think that there is a place for escalation, but not at every event. Maybe 1/3 should allow it. Down here in Australia, we are testing out escalation at some events. I don't doubt it will take at least six months for the scene to set proper restrictions that work for everyone. I'll be running a escalation allowed event in May to contribute to that, I just hope people turn up....
Delete@hornywingything - I know what you mean about the number of things now included in the game. It's harder than ever to have a good knowledge of all the rules, let alone try and keep up with the pace of current popular lists to try to know how to beat them (not saying I've achieved either!).
ReplyDeleteWhat I would say is that it seems as though GW intend for these to be included in the standard game, so perhaps it's the game becoming bloated rather than tournaments? 40k can't exactly claim to have a streamlined ruleset!
Personally I was surprised at the inclusion of experimental rules. I wouldn't expect these to be used, but this might be an opportunity for direct feedback to FW at the event!
Interesting question about the inclusion of Escalation, etc. I think this deserves a post of its own, but the quick version is that I believe that TO's should be free to set up whatever games they like, from hobby events to hardcore competitive tournaments. There is no reason why we can't have both, as they cater to different tastes.
What I do crave is a standardized competitive environment that encourages playing to win within the rules of the game. I will go into this in more detail in a separate post and it's something I've already been working on, but it would be great to have some sort of widely recognised standard format that players could practice for and travel too without learning loads of different versions of the game and needing tons of different builds to compete with. This is just my own opinion though and I know lots of players who like the diversity!
Me too, but GW have no intention of ever doing that by the looks. Still there's some hope from the American tournies scene atm, the things Mike Brandt and Neil from the 11th company are working on mission wise look like they could rebalance the game in interesting ways and give deathstars something to think about..... Also, you seen the Swedish comp? It's quite interesting, though imperial armour isn't covered by it.
DeleteAnd yeah, I agree 40k is getting bloated, given the disappointments I had with the new nid releases, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't looking at other systems, I'm not overly keen on the way 40k seems to be going. Dropzone commander has caught my eye......
Yeah, the stuff MVB, Neil and others are looking at is really interesting. I haven't had a look at Swedish comp yet, but I will definitely take a look at some point!
DeleteI think these are very exciting times for 40k and we are seeing change at a scale and pace that I would never have expected from GW. Terrifying, but exciting! I do find myself a bit in limbo while the tournaments I'm interested in attending decide which way they want to go. I find it very difficult to plan on what to develop and practice with when the ground is shifting so frequently, but once I have a clear direction I tend to build up a good head of steam!
@CrAzY424 - I agree that it's likely to take some time for TOs and players to adjust to all the new stuff. I think Lords of War are the biggest shake up thanks to D weapons and can understand some tournaments wanting a bit of time to let the rules settle in before allowing them. Comp is a tricky subject (see CONCEPTS: Comp if you haven't already!) and like I've said above I will discuss tournament standards in its own article - not enough room in the comments box!
ReplyDeleteMy local GW manager told me that Escalation was "self balancing." An interesting view. My response to him was two fold. Firstly, I pointed out that at 1500-2000 point events, D-Weapons were the main concern. D weapons are only self balancing if your opponent has his own. Furthermore, having things like the sky shield pad + revenant makes things broken.
DeleteMy second point was that at under 1000 points, the proportion of super heavies shifts in favour of Guard. A Hellhammer is, arguably, far more potent then a shadowsword at those points, even without a d-weapon.
I was thinking about introducing my own restrictions on super heavies to the events. For example, you have a -1 modifier to your roll to go first. Or you may not seize. Another idea is that a D weapon cannot score first blood.
"Self balancing"? Interesting... I guess that means they think they're powerful enough to, erm, 'encourage' players to buy one to have a chance to win? I'm not sure that all of them are that amazing, but I do agree that it's the D-weapons that are the biggest game changer. Letting four SD large blasts, plus the other weapons, loose on a buffable stomping walker with high mobility and a special holo-save through play testing is, shall we say, very nice for Eldar players. Some might even be tempted away from serpents and seer-stars!
ReplyDeleteGuard do have a wealth of options at the lower end of the super heavy price tree. The stormlord is the one that jumps out for me, but to be honest I'm still reading through the book!
There are lots of possible options for comp for those who want to go that route. I've not played any games with either Escalation or Stronghold Assault yet, and as a community I think we're still gathering information and trying to gauge how powerful (or not) the new toys are. Add to that we're still finding out ways to combat the new threats (this is something that's really interesting for me).
I think the game has changed significantly, and if we're going to collectively play the same game, rather than a huge variety of homebrew/comp variations, then we needed to give ourselves the chance to generate the data and get the experience to find answers. My preference is to give things a try and I'm hoping that given the opportunity counters will be found!