Monday, August 16, 2010

You put your chocolate in my peanut butter!

Lyrics | Nofx lyrics - You Put Your Chocolate In My Peanut Butter! lyrics

There are two main GW games many play - 40K which is the sci-fi version, and WHFB, which is the fantasy version.  Two different things, right?  Not always.

When responding to a post on Table Top War about why Magilla doesn't see much cavalry  in 40K games, I mentioned that some people just don't like the idea of them in a sci-fi setting.  They don't want to play a fantasy army, a Napoleonic army, or even a World War I army; they're playing a sci-fi game, they want big laser guns, flying tanks and things like that, dangit! 

On the flip side, there are fantasy players who want to see armies with swords and spears, cavalry and wizards, and dislike all these guns, cannons, tanks and helicopters peeing on their imagery.  Take your warpstone creations and Hochland whatchamijiggers back to Mars, thankyewveddymuch!

Of course, others like the combinations.  They enjoy seeing 41st-millennium knights pile out of tanks to engage their foes with swordplay, or seeing someone enchant a cannon to shoot better.  The imagery of the mashup is part of the appeal to them.

Where do you stand?  Are there things that you think are silly to see in your game of choice?  Are there supposedly anachronistic things that you love?


  1. First off, thanks for the plug.

    Secondly, I stand on the side of what fits the style of army that I am building. If I am building a assault based army, then Cavalry or Beasts have their place. If I am playing a mechanized army, then I say no way. To me, it has to fit the build of the army itself.

  2. I'm all for a gun in a fantasy setting or a horse in a 40K one. Fantasy doesn't mean there's no technology just as sci-fi doesn't mean all horses have been killed off and are useless in combat. It may not fit your aesthetics or style though, like Magilla is saying.

    Fantasy and sci-fi material is forever entwined, for better or worse.

  3. I would kill for more cavalry in 40k. I think the flavor of psykers is about as close to magic I would like to see in 40k though. As far as guns in 40k is concerned, I quite like where it is at right now, I could stand some more steam powered creations in the like but I'm not gonna actively ask for them, I've got warmachine to scratch that itch.

  4. My Death Korps of Kreig has 5 Squadrons of Deathriders (3 Fast Attack, 2 Hq), so I think you can probably figure out where I stand on mashups.

  5. I am telling you, I would love to see more Cavalry and beasts in 40k. Anyone who does not realize the 40k is Sci-Fantasy they are in denial!

    The more fantasy the better, it makes for great story!


  6. Good point on the army theme Mags. If I was building an aircav IG list, yeah RRs would be out. For the raiding techno-barbarians however, they fit right in.

    Agree with you folks that 40k is definitely more sci-fantasy than hard sci-fi. I like the mix for 40K; it's a big part of what makes 40K what it is. I'm less thrilled about it with WHFB, but it doesn't bother me too much and I can even embrace it sometimes.


Related Posts with Thumbnails