# Skill in 40k compared to Magic The Gathering



## Emperorguard500 (May 5, 2010)

i heard this argument before between 2 guys at a hobby shop

arguing about which game takes more skill magic the gathering, a card game, im sure most of you have seen or heard of and warhammer 40k...

what's the skill/luck ratio between warhammer 40k and does it take more skill, knowledge to master it then magic


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

The bases are the "same", a vast choice of units, hard and fluff armies/deck.
I think the differences are that in 40k you can follow a battle strategy, but in magic you have to adapt a lot with what you have on the moment.
Another point is that in 40k luck on dice is crucial, in magic it's more about topdecking (knowing what you're going to draw or ways to put cards on top).
For me magic is more strategical because you have to win with a different combinaison of card in each game. And an error can cost you immediatly the victory.


----------



## Starship Trooper (Dec 2, 2009)

Takes way more skill to play MTG. There is simply way to much luck in 40K.


----------



## elmir (Apr 14, 2011)

MtG has a waaay more complex game system compared to 40k...

The number of cards that can be played is so enormous that it doesn't even compare to the number to total troops/wargear/psychic spells/whatever you want in 40k.

The "luck" component in MtG is also a whole lot less than 40k (not none-excistant, but way less since good deck composition goes a long way). 

But there is something to be said for the fact that TCGs are (by their very nature) a lot heavier on the "pay to win" factor. That is if you play standard format tournies.


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

I think that there is more chance of me winning a "Magic: The Gathering" Tournament with my Eldar Apocalypse Army, than Emperorguard500 ever posting a second time in a thread that he started.
Discuss...


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Well it seems like you're comparing two different skill sets to me.

MTG tests memory (what cards have already been played and how many of each you have in your deck), logical sequences of events (if I play X and he counters it, then I respond with Y which he responds to with Z) and probability (what card am I likely to topdeck, what does he have in hand?).

Warhammer tests your overall strategic command (20+ units on the table with near-infinite movement/attack options compared to 7 cards in hand with fixed mana costs), your ability to compare averages (how many kills do I get if I charge unit X with unit Y?) and your flexibility to respond to bad/good streaks of luck by adapting your game plan (I lost my troops unit on that objective, need to reallocate units XYZ to compensate).

It's like asking whether it takes more skill to paint a picture or to compose a piece of music.


----------



## Corporal Punishment 69 (Jul 8, 2012)

40K has dice, so much depends on them that I have to say MTG needs much more skill....


----------



## Moonschwine (Jun 13, 2011)

Pssyche said:


> I think that there is more chance of me winning a "Magic: The Gathering" Tournament with my Eldar Apocalypse Army, than Emperorguard500 ever posting a second time in a thread that he started.
> Discuss...


I believe that one day he will follow up with a reply in one of his threads. This will coincide at the same moment the devil feels the first snowflake land upon his head and all the cows come home. 

Comparing 40K to Magic the Gathering? Seriously, I've had some inane arguments but that's just down right silly. 

3/10 for making me reply.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

40k requires artistic and strategic skills. So I say as a whole 40k is a lot more demanding (It doesn't take 4 months to build a MTG deck). Now on a mathhammer basis I would say MTG can be more complex, but at the high end warhammer (Fantasy more then 40k) can be just as headache inducing.


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

It's like comparing apples and oranges. Are oranges harder to eat because you have to peel them? But what if you have no teeth, that makes apples harder. Or if you like peel, what then? And oranges get your fingers slippery with juice, and stain clothing...

As someone who plays both, I can say neither is harder than the other, it's a different skillset for both...


----------



## shaggy (Jul 9, 2009)

The biggest difference I can think of is that in 40k you have all your toys ready to go on turn 1 unless you use reserves. M:tg makes you wait till you draw that golden card that'll save your bacon so to speak. This means that magic takes more skill in setup and 40k takes more skill in execution. 

Another note on that randomness. Keeping that pokerface is essential in magic since neithere one of you know exactly what card is next. Keeping any composition secrets in 40k is a great way to annoy your opponents. Gamer courtesy dictates that you tell your opponent what you have and where it is any time they ask.


----------



## Eleven (Nov 6, 2008)

On a strategic level MTG is a far more complex game than 40k. On a tactical level they are much closer since there is alot of different scenarios that can arise on a tabletop (enough to rival the kinds of tactical decisions one has to make in MTG)

The difference is that though MTG is a superior game in both rules and strategic value, it has literally zero hobby value. While Warhammer is at least 90% hobby.

In conclusion, i'd say if 40k was nothing but a game, magic would be alot better. luckily, 40k is more than a game. I do wish that 40k copied some things like magic, such as having highly trained judges that know the 'correct' final call for all scenarios. There are at least 100 different unanswered problems in the rules with 40k.


----------



## Gue'vesa'O Ba'cho (Aug 2, 2012)

I'd agree with SilverTabby's apples to oranges reference.

You can slam the mathhammer with your weapons setups or spend a thousand dollars making a mtg deck that you can't lose with just because of the numbers. You do have a vast array of options for deck building in mtg which can lead to a ridiculous number of vying strategies, but in 40k you have to be tactically nimble over different planets terrain and against various enemies (with the 6th ed rules, sometimes multiple enemy armies at once). 

I run a Mill in MTG and all i can say is once I hit turn 5 or 6, the opponent doesn't get another turn (as I run little machines that give me infinite turns). 
Things are different between the two systems, and rightfully so, they're different animals.

One is a strategic card game, where you count the cards in your deck and use probability to determine the outcome of that draw you need to ruin your friend's day. The other is an epic hobby that you spend months in preparation on a resplendent army that you created and painted and then pit it and your tactical know-how against an opponent, using the probability of dice rolls and smart movement to ruin your friends day. 

Neither requires tactical superiority or more skill to play, but if you plan on WINNING, they'd both be an asset in playing either.


----------

