# Differences between 40k and FB



## countchocula86 (Sep 1, 2008)

Although Im into both sci-fi and fantasy, when I first got into the Warhammer hobby it was via 40k. Lately, though, Ive become more interested in the FB side of things. However, Im aware that the differences between the two are more substantial that just setting.

If someone could go through the major differences between the two systems. Basically all I know is that in FB you have your troops in tight units, rather then the more scattered approach for 40k.


----------



## squeek (Jun 8, 2008)

Good question :wink: Well there are a lot of differences between the two systems, some more important than others. The obvious one (which you mentioned already) is the use of regimented units instead of loose squads, though Fantasy does have skirmishing units that are dispersed in a similar way to 40k squads.

Another major difference is that Fantasy is dominated by the movement phase, this is of course largely to do with the regimented nature of the units that requires much more consideration of who goes where and so on. Hand in hand with that is that once you manage to charge with your unit, generally only the front rank is going to get to fight so far less dice are used. This means they often can have a greater impact on the game than in 40k since when rolling 10 dice on the charge it is quite possible to miss 10 times, but it is far more unlikely to miss 40 times with 40k Ork Boyz, for example.

The restrictions on movement imposed by having to move as a regiment, and the greater impact of dice mean that tactics can play a greater part in a Fantasy battle than in 40k, since it is very important to make best use of the movement phase so that you can get the charge on your opponent, or avoid the bait unit, or bait your opponents unit, and so on.

Oh, and another major difference is the way combat is worked out. It is very important in Fantasy to win combats decisively, it doesn't matter if you kill all the enemy models as long as you win the combat and force them to take a break test. So when charging units often a good tactic is to flank the enemy with a unit that removes its rank bonus and so helps you win more effectively.

There are more differences, but those are the major ones for me.


----------



## Othiem (Apr 20, 2008)

A few more differences -

WFB has a whole additional phase, the magic phase. Effects of spells can be simple shooting attacks, or they can have game altering consequences. The opponent has the option to attempt to cancel out your spells through various means, so this can turn the magic phase into an interesting game of bluffing and risk management.

WFB has a concept of static combat resolution. Often the difference in kills is only a small part of determining who won a particular combat. Outnumbering, flanking, having extra rows, attacking from a hill, and other factors will all effect who wins. This is part of the reasoning behind the claim that WFB is a more "tactical" game, since one can look at a combat before even rolling the dice and have a very good idea of who will win.

Psychology plays a much larger role in WFB as well. Leadership values tend to be lower across the board, and units respond to events on the battlefield. Watching a nearby unit run away forces a leadership test, if that unit fails and runs it can force another leadership test on units further down the line, leading to the possibility of your whole line collapsing due to panic.

WFB allows you to respond to charges, not just sit there and take it up the rear. You can choose to flee from a charge, however you run the risk of the enemy running you down and killing you immediately, and also run the risk of forcing the rest of your army into fleeing as well. 

A few ways that 40k is better imo, since nobody seems to every bring these up when answering this question:

Since WFB is dominated by the movement phase, you never really see interesting terrain. 90% of WBF games are played on a basic table with a hill in each starting area and a stand of trees in the middle, since most people would rather have room to move around. Even if players are willing to play on a detailed board, it is still far harder to place big blocks of troops in forests, ruins, or other terrain features than it is to drop a few individual models in such features. With Cities of Death rules 40k pushes this advantage even further.

WFB only has one official game mode, line up and kill each other. 40k on the other hand forces you into a diverse choice of missions and setup options. There's no reason you can't play scenarios in WFB, however your pickup games will likely be limited to cleanse style missions.

But yeah, if you want to get a feel for the difference, just heft the small paperback version of the rulebook for each game, and know that the WFB book is actually the more clear of the two even though it weights bout twice as much.


----------



## Green Knight (Feb 25, 2008)

Differances between 40k and FB 
Right then 40k more about dice and cover than tactics, and more about shooting to be fair. Have high powered guns, tanks, more guns, flyers, walkers, and assult units.

Where as Fantasy is a more tactical game, more rules, sweet sweet magic, dragons, magical creachers, and more mass on field.


----------



## Aryx (Nov 6, 2008)

Green Knight said:


> Differances between 40k and FB
> Right then 40k more about dice and cover than tactics, and more about shooting to be fair. Have high powered guns, tanks, more guns, flyers, walkers, and assult units.
> 
> Where as Fantasy is a more tactical game, more rules, sweet sweet magic, dragons, magical creachers, and more mass on field.


I personally would disagree. IMHO it is about the same tactical wise. While there are more rules , magic,dragons, and so on in Fantasy In most of the games I've been involved with the tactics come down to the same thing, who can footslog across the table and who can inflict the most damage the quickest. With 40k, when I have played, I notice myself trying to match opponents moves with certain squads, transports and heavy weapons. When I play Fantasy, I march my Nurgle boys straight across and slam into my opponent and that is about it. With the extra phases and rules, it does take some thinking and tactics, but I wouldn't say any more or less then 40k.

Just my two cents.


----------

