# why is 40k more popular than fantasy?



## jigplums (Dec 15, 2006)

how popular is fantasy compared to say 40k in your area. seems that 40k is more popular, yet fantasy is the better game  [imo].

why do you think this is the case?

i think its too do with ease of painting and start up costs.

a real fantasy army costs more than 40k because you need more models. fantasy models i think take more time to make them look good [not in all cases]


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

40k by a long shot in my area. Reasons are simple. 1) Ridiculously slow build up before you have a proper size army (30 models compared to 80-120). 2) Noticeably higher average starting cost for a 2000 pt army. 3) Larger and more punishing learning curve. 3) The problems of storage and transport of 100+ models.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

i think when GW first started Fantasy was thier flag ship line, but with the erruption of 40K, more diverse models and more reasonable costs, it took over. I started Warhammer in 1987/88 and got into the 40K side about 7 years later. I had a vast fantasy army but found 40K more affordable


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

Because fantasy players are abandoning fantasy due to random movement rules and completely barmy magic?

Transporting and set up is a lot longer with fantasy which can be annoying if you only have a short amount of time


----------



## neferhet (Oct 24, 2012)

because of this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xlQ3m7hLBGM/UXF_NSrZxmI/AAAAAAAAXQ8/VGHmw3Zak78/s1600/HE-chariot-10.jpg
Seriously.


----------



## Firewolf (Jan 22, 2007)

>> In my gaming group, its about 50/50. The younger players started wi 40k, due to cost, but the old men of the group prefer fantasy. I am a 40k player 1st, but I got introduced to fantasy, and have to say I enjoy it. The good thing for me is that the only fantasy army that really grabbed my attention was Warriors of Chaos, so model count isnae as high as most other armies. Due to rediciolous pricing by GW, im not surprised 40K is more popular, cos wi most fantasy armies,and the way shit is packed now, £40 for 20 minis is a jip.


----------



## Squire (Jan 15, 2013)

I like the fluff potential of 40k. Practically anything could happen in the 40k universe- your army could rule or slaughter billions of people without it impacting on the existing fluff, while that doesn't seem possible for fantasy. That means you have more freedom to create whatever you like with your faction while staying within the bounds of fluff

Also guys wearing fully enclosed suits of armour and carrying automatic weapons are cool. Carrying missile launchers and flamethrowers is cool. Having those guys in a tank is cool.

I was into those Fighting Fantasy books as a kid before I discovered Games Workshop, and much preferred the fantasy settings to the sci-fi ones, but for a tabletop game with miniatures I instantly gravitated to 40k. I think 40k stuff just seemed far more bad ass


----------



## Battman (Nov 2, 2012)

Personally in my experiences the cost is an extreme compaired to the standard 40k list, only horde armys come anywhere near to the same ammount of models. But also for me a lack of fantasy players anywhere nearby were also a factor, with few 40k and one or two fantasy players that i could easily find.


----------



## effigy22 (Jun 29, 2008)

40k is for boys.
Fantasy is for men.

There are more boys than men in the scene


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

For my original gaming group 40k won out due to two major factors:

1. The much steeper learning curve, because while some 40k armies can be severely hamstrung with poor deployment, from what I recall it can all but guarantee a loss in fantasy.

2. The cost of a good sized fantasy army is much higher than that of a good sized 40k army, and thats something harder to deal with when you aren't making all to much while going to school.


Also, starting fantasy smack dab in the middle of hero-hammer was not the best in my opinion.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Because Fantasy's shit. As a long time Fantasy player, I've come to the realisation after they churned out Warriors of Chaos, Daemons of Chaos and High Elves in a short space of time that really didn't know what the fuck they're doing.

It was balanced, and Vampires was the best book that GW have ever produced, IMHO, including 40K, but not FW or WHForge. Then they came out with retarded stuff. Utterly.

Fantasy has become a toy range; in a way, 40K is as well, but the difference is, they're mostly useable. Look at Fantasy's biggest releases, and they're simply turning into modelling projects. They're now too big, too daft, and have utterly retarded rules that 6th edition managed to perfect away from 5th edition stupidity.

The game is now so random that the actual units you use do not matter. While I realise it is a fun game, and meant to be so, it can be broken easier by some armies ability to remove the randomness and force dice rolls, while others cannot have that same effectiveness, and just crumble when their one shtick fails.


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

My LGS is almost 100% 40k in the store (although the manager says there is a healthy fantasy community that plays at people's homes).

As for my personal reason for prefering 40k over fantasy. I like the heroic style sci-fi setting of 40k with guns, vehicles, etc. There are other similar games and in general I prefer them.

Why I avoid fantasy has to do with my original miniature playing was Ral-Partha and other historical miniature games. If I want to move large blocks of models, I fall back on Historicals...I would rather run large blocks of French heavy knights or Hoplite infantry than Grail Knights or Skaven.


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

Higher model count and player base are both factors. Probably the largest factors other than GW's balls-out focus on Space Marines.

There is another, though.

People always say that Fantasy is the more tactical game. The more cranial, and challenging game.

_When I was first expanding into Fantasy I thought that was plain elitism and swore I'd never say it._

It's actually true though. Of the two, Fantasy is far more the thinkin' man's game.

Not everyone wants their leisure time to involve more thinking than necessary. When I played 40k I often found that whole turns had elapsed without my being able to remember them. I'd been playing (and winning) on auto-pilot.

One simply cannot do that in Fantasy, to play successfully, even to lose well, one needs to keep one's brain engaged with the game. Some people like that, others prefer a game that lets the brain idle for a few hours.

It's like asking why the telly is more popular than reading.

I's still peg GW's marketing policy as the number one reason, though.

It's impossible to overstate the degree to which GW pushes 40k and Marines in particular.

If Little Timmy (and/or his mum) walks into a Games Workshop without knowing anything about the games they sell, well, 90% of the time he'll walk out with a box of smurfs in his hot little hand. The one and only time I've been in a GW shop the assistant spoke to me for almost a minute about my Sisters of Battle before trying to flog me a Stormraven. I bet if I'd been a Fantasy man back then, he'd still have tried.

Actually - it'll be even worse than that now... Little Timmy, knowing nothing about the hobby will be offered an intro game, of 40k - using the Dark Vengeance models. Marines Vs Marines.

"See, Timmy, these guys are super cool Space Marines with motorbikes with guns on them! And these guys are super cool Space Marines with spikes and battle axes! Which do you want to collect?"

If he's lucky, he'll see some red boxes on a shelf somewhere, and might even hear that LotR exists, in some nebulous fashion.


----------



## chromedog (Oct 31, 2007)

Fantasy is more popular around where I live.
It's certainly more popular at my clubs.

40k was more popular up until 6th ed hit, when many of the players decided to return to playing fantasy. We have multiple 60+ player events a year locally for WHFB.
Can't even get 30 for a single 40k event.


----------



## daxxglax (Apr 24, 2010)

As seems to be the case with many of you, in my area Fantasy tends to attract older, veteran gamers; It seems to require more strategy than 40k. The fact that the kits are more expensive and you need more models for an army are definite barriers, which is why I've never been able to bring myself to start a Fantasy army. 

That aside, I think the Fantasy background tends to appeal more to older gamers while the 40k fluff is more accessible for everyone. I enjoy the 40k background on a much deeper level than I did when I first started playing, but it still remains the reason I get into my chosen armies. The 40k armies can seem less archetypical than the Fantasy ones (even though they've got plenty of expies, i.e. "Elves in Space:, "Tomb Kings in Space.")


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

See, I disagree with the sentiment that it's more tactical. Fantasy, in the few games I've played but the many I've seen, boils down to bring a big fuckoff block of infantry and as many Level 4 Wizards as you can, then follow a set of fairly inflexible tactics (seriously, I've never seen High Elves do anything except sit on Throne of Vines and buff the shit out of either Swordmasters or Phoenix Guard. Never. I got bored playing Ogres because it's a. cast buffs, b. charge. That's the whole game plan). 40k has it's own imbalances (shooting > combat, for example), but unlike Fantasy you can build an army with minimal shooting, or minimal combat, or whatever. In Fantasy, you take a magic-heavy army, because it's the only competitive option.

Midnight


----------



## KahRyez (Sep 7, 2010)

40k is more popular around where I live most of the reasons stated. I personally haven't gotten a fantasy army because building a skaven army is expensive >.>


----------



## Machiavellismx (Sep 11, 2011)

I think it's something else. My area like most is 40K, but there's a strong fantasy contingent. That being said, I used to think along the lines of 40K is more for kids/young adults, and fantasy is for adults. I'm an example - started out with Fantasy, liked the look of 40K, switched to 40k, before stopping the hobby (moving to uni, money reasons etc).

Now nearly 6/7 years later I'm 23 and loving fantasy again and find the tactical approach, the vastly different armies and army rosters of each race far more interesting and diverse. Say what you want about the games, but 40K certainly has the certain-lists-smash-tournament kind of armies - remember the space marine drop pods lists?! - but fantasy has a much, much larger amount of competitive lists. Yes, you need mages to be competitive, but that's like saying you need troops to be competitive. Of course you do, it's a given. But it's not the be-all-end-all. If you spend all your points on mages, they're going to die. Badly. They need support troops. Fantasy is the game of a perfect army roster balance. Core, heavy hitters, troublemakers, mages, artillery, monsters, monster hunters, the list goes on.

So why is 40K more popular? I think the two reasons stated are pretty accurate; easier learning curve, less models per army equals less cost. But for me, the main overall reason is what I'd call the 'instant action'. Things die in 40K, and they die quickly.

Think about it - Fantasy is the game of tactics. Movement, the right charge, flanking, breaking, running down. It comes down to a very big game of rock paper scissors. Everything in the game has a counter, a weakness, and the meat of it is to exploit your opponents weaknesses without allowing your own to be hit. Your army is made up of rock-paper-scissors units, and its about matching them with the right targets, and throw in some luck.

40K on the other hand, whilst I'm not for a second disputing the tactics and some variance in lists, I'm a fan of both games after all, is more forgiving. You learn quicker, because there's less to use, and certain weapons can kill most things. You can make bad decisions and lose but make similar bad decisions in fantasy and more often than not you'll be massacred.

And as I said, things die much quicker. On turn one in 40K, you're not so concerned with moving your troops the perfect charge distances, you're not so bothered with allowing your flanks exposed, you're not trying to move a battle line. Your guys go forward, or they hold steady for the most part. But they shoot, they shoot a lot, and something often dies. It's quicker action, less foreplay. Guys run forward with guns and tanks and blow stuff up. Therefore it appeals the action gamer, and the kids who want to see something happen straight away.

But for those who like the foreplay of fantasy the real (and for me larger) reward is watching your epic plan of battle go perfect. And it's damn hilarious when it doesn't and your mage blows up, your hellcannon eats its crew and your chaos warriors flee from skaven. That's the luck of the game, you try to minimise the luck, but it's what makes it unpredictable and fun. It's about risk versus reward and tactics versus luck. For me, it's a fine and dandy balance. It's a poor metaphor, but if Fantasy is Chess, then 40K is closer to checkers.

Though I've noticed far more kids (by kids I mean below the age of say, 21) playing Fantasy at my local GW and clubs. It's a cool sight. I think most fantasy players fall into two categories: you have the guys who like the tactical aspects and greater depth of play, and you have the guys who like the fantasy setting over the sci-fi.

(Though I'm going to be awkward and say I think the 40K universe is far more badass. I love the fluff more, but fantasy has its own and great stories.)


----------



## SkorpioXVII (Aug 5, 2013)

As a younger gamer (15), in a younger gamer dominated area, 40k wins due to all the aforementioned reasons. By far the largest factor is start up costs and the time constraints of setting up.
I love the strategy and coordination Fantasy brings, but it cannot really beat the action, ease and all round experience 40k brings. The greater fluff freedom, customisation and army themes really appeals to most


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Fantasy?...what's that?...ohhhh you mean the boxes that hold the shelves up in stores?


----------



## OgreChubbs (Dec 13, 2011)

Fantasy is harder to paint, more tactical and requires more time and effort to play a good game. 40K army list/game can be played with about 15 minutes of thought.

Fantasy army list consist off.
Magic
Block troop
Flankers
Seige/long range
Shooting
LD needed

40k army consist off.
HQ
2 troops that everyone will use i.e. tactical squad/boys
box with treads is every tank or a frizby for eldar
atleast every second army you play will be a space marine since they get 9 codex for every 1 someone else gets.


Best thing they should do is start a game called space wars where you can only play a space marine and all their different colour brothers.

Then make a game called 40k where their is more armys.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

In my area 40k has long been more popular. Both are common, and my old flgs would alternate seasons. About 6 months of each. And by that I mean the players who brought armies for the current game got table priority. And the off season players had to wait. 

Hmm, it's been a long time since I played fantasy. I played from 4th edition in to 6th I think. I have heard unflattering things about the last two editions, including how random and magic centered they are, but I haven't played them to find out.

In my recollections however 2nd ed 40k was much more tactical. And more recent editions of 40k are getting back to that. Fantasy, as another member mentioned was a lot more like rock paper scissors. And I recall most of my games became boringly: lather, rinse, & repeat. 

40k by virtue of the coherency, army variety, equipment, and different structure was much less predictable.

The last 4 editions of 40k following the addition of AP value (oh, how I hate it) became much more rock/paper/scissors. However rules changes after 2nd ed also made the game easier for entry level players, even though the cost to play increased by about double; the game size remained the same (1500-2000 points) but unit point costs were divided in half.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

MidnightSun said:


> See, I disagree with the sentiment that it's more tactical. Fantasy, in the few games I've played but the many I've seen, boils down to bring a big fuckoff block of infantry and as many Level 4 Wizards as you can, then follow a set of fairly inflexible tactics (seriously, I've never seen High Elves do anything except sit on Throne of Vines and buff the shit out of either Swordmasters or Phoenix Guard. Never. I got bored playing Ogres because it's a. cast buffs, b. charge. That's the whole game plan). 40k has it's own imbalances (shooting > combat, for example), but unlike Fantasy you can build an army with minimal shooting, or minimal combat, or whatever. In Fantasy, you take a magic-heavy army, because it's the only competitive option.
> 
> Midnight


This ^^^

Fantasy has no tactics, from what I've played and see its exactly as above
Step 1: bring magic
Step 2: win
Step 3: brag and tell everyone how tactical the game is -_-'

Love some of the models though


----------



## Madden (Jan 22, 2012)

For me it's a time thing, it's quicker to plan set up and play a 40k game than fantasy also it's instant action. As my spare time is few and far between (parenting/real life) I like to get an instant escape rather than an hour of meticulous movement and falling hard by one dice roll!( exaggeration but not by much). Sure when I have a lot of spare time I like fantasy but that rarely happens.


----------



## Ratvan (Jun 20, 2011)

I've always been a massive fan of fantasy and although 8th is mostly my favourite edition I still feel that certain phases overshadow the game. In certain match ups/armies it can be very tactical but that is becoming much more rare than it previously was. Many/most of the tactics at the moment for myself is how I can keep my army coherant (Orcs and Goblins). I've tried to get into 40k but found it so extremely dull to play.

I still love playing fantasy but the games now are more how can I avoid the big spell and bring down that uber deathstar horde with my themed OnG. Its never a massacre one way or another but small margins of victory that keeps me playing for now


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

I think MidnightSun nailed it. 40k gives you several armies that can be played in a handful of competitive ways - Fantasy gives you several armies that have to be played in one way to be competitive... and as aforementioned, this 'one way' is the same for nearly every army.

Fantasy is somewhat slower than 40k. Granted, flyers do move faster than anything in 40k, but with general movement being greater, I feel that the game flow in 40k is a lot smoother.

The loose formations that 40k infantry etc can move around in only amplifies this fact.


----------



## JontheWarmaster (Dec 28, 2012)

At my FLGS, 40k is the dominant GW game to play. Not saying there isn't a healthy amount of fantasy players (because, there are), but the amount of 40k players to Fantasy is about 3 to 1. 
As it has been said, I have begun to notice that the fantasy players at the shop tend to lean more towards the older crowd. I used to be very large into Fantasy when I was younger(I'm 20 now), but that was mainly due to all the really cool models; and not to mention, the feel of controlling a literal 'army'. (not just a 20 man skirmish force of space marines!) 
As of right now, I'm strongly considering building a Lizardmen army, (admittedly due to the amazing new models, and feel the army gives off) as well as playing 40k on a regular basis. So I'm not going to be one sided on which games I play. Another FLGS that I have been going to just reached module 1 on the GW supplier chain, and has thusly begun to move into the realm of tabletop games. 40k is the dominant game there as well(if you count 6 or so people as dominant), however, one of the guys that work there and I have been trying to push people into trying Fantasy as well so as to raise popularity. 
In the end, both games are awesome. They each have their own quirks, and styles of play, but we play our games because they're fun to us; not because they're popular.


----------



## Jam123456 (Feb 9, 2012)

I think 40K is perhapse the easier way into the table top gaming. 
firstly its a lot cheaper which means that kids can soon collect a reasonable army and enjoy playing without having to fork out a small fortune (which most don't have).

Secondly its also a time consideration as well. You can set up and play a game of 40K in under an hour. most people don't have more than a couple hours to go and play a game. When it can take over 30 minutes to set up a fantasy game thats eating into precious gaming time.
Just rolling for terrain takes a long time and if your playing even a small fantasy game say 1500pts your deployment can take 20 minutes ( when you have to take out 100+ models and put them on the brd).

I like playing both games. I like my Eldar in 40k and I really enjoy the fluff and books so thats fun for me. but I love my daemons in 40k and in fantasy. tactically both can be a real challenge I'm newer to fantasy but so far i don't find it any harder. just more time consuming to do everything.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I think that the missions you roll are a factor as well, Some are so stupid that the whole game can be decided before you start, Watch tower I'm looking at you. 
The amount of models in fantasy also restricts army variation which can mean games get repetative whereas in 40k just by putting in a few transports you can change the way the whole army plays.


----------



## The 13th (Jul 7, 2013)

Personally and I realise I'm new. But I think it comes down to 40k getting bigger marketing presence. Whether it's because of the video games or whatever else. 
Back when I first became aware Of the Wargaming it was 40k that sparked my imagination and in turn fantasy "wasn't 40k".
I dunno I know nothing about it so maybe it's just that. 

I have recently heard the lizard men's fluff and that is just epic


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

The 13th said:


> Stuff


Yeah I think that 40k gets more marketing.
P.s. welcome

I frequently bounce between 40k and fantasy, what ever mood I'm in.

I like 40k because guns and tanks.
Fantasy cause of zombies....and necromancy.


----------



## SSG.House (Jul 29, 2013)

I love Fantasy. But I never got into warhammer fantasy. I dont know why.
I used to play D&D in high school, and continued it for a bit in the Army. 

But Warhammer 40k had me from the get go. I truely love the Dark Sci Fi aspect.
I love how man is a number and not a human. The Imperium of Man is so full of hate, and fueled by eternal war. Entire worlds are purged over the taint of Xenos or Chaos.
You are either a producing member of society, or you are enslaved into service of the Imperium. I dont fully understand my fascination with 40k.....But its there, and its does scare me that whole planets can be wiped out on the whim of an Inquisitor or Guard units summerily executed by Commisars. 

Its a dark universe in 40k....its not touchy feelie. Mankind is in the middle of the fight for its life, and will hold nothing back to survive....even at the cost of a planet, or system.


----------

