# Fluff in your armies



## daxxglax (Apr 24, 2010)

Fluff is an important part of the 40K universe, but it can be tough to balance out effective playing styles and background in your army. For instance, you wouldn't make a Khornate CSM army consisting entirely of Berzerkers, with no tanks or heavy support whatsoever. And certainly no Rhinos. The servants of the Blood God do not hide in metal boxes!

What I'm trying to say is: Where do you, personally, draw the line? Do you hash out an army list with no regard to the background? Or does story come first, and you choose the most effective units available only if they fit the criteria?

I'm a bonna-fide Fluffer Nutter, putting fluff first. I try to create the background of a well-rounded force that is specialized at the same time. For instance, I probably wouldn't create the force listed above. I would make this warband my own, with its own background. I mean, what if the rhinos were equipped with saw blades on mechanical arms? (Counting as dozer blades, naturally) 

After all, there can be some nasty steel hiding beneath that fluffy exterior


----------



## ItsPug (Apr 5, 2009)

Khorne has no problem using tanks. In the original fluff, Khorne liked techmarines because they had access to the big guns and planet killing weapons, and khorne warriors in warhammer fantasy battle could get boltguns!

Saying that when I go about getting an army completed I tend to pay attention to the fluff and what units I like and then go about picking an effective list, so for example in my guard there are no psykers or abhumans cause I like to have a more modern-day style army list.


----------



## ElTanko (Mar 4, 2010)

I go for fluff first, I think thats mainly though because I am a modeller not a gamer, so I go for what I like the look of. My Black Templar's are pretty accurate though, not many tanks, I have yet to get a Land Raider though. But I like the regular Marines more than tanks, so it fits well with the fluff.

ElTanko


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

Fluff. I've never actually built a competitive list but several all around lists. Though I think it would be more fluffy for my marines to be in rhinos and such mine just have to groundpound it.


----------



## WarWolf88 (Apr 1, 2010)

Interesting question. I'm also more of a "Fluff first"-person, but I do like to keep an eye on the Codex's, much like daxxglax.

For example the Sons of Hellas (a DIY SM Chapter I'm working on) do not have any tanks, but they do have "cavalry", as in SM bikers sitting on horses and using bike rules. On the other hand, drop pods are still an open possibility as transports, as they are known to have used them and pods have a signifigant role in their early history. And, since you decide on an armies background, you can give them a few interesting bonus rules or equipment if you feel like it. And naturally, it all supported by the background, so its only fair they are reprisented on the board, right? :biggrin: (just remember to give every advantage a draw back, like high cost or dire consequesnces if failed, it keeps the game interesting)


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

In my fluff the Merovingian always win..... So a competitive list is a fluffy list I suppose. Lol


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

I am more fluff/model driven. I have a general theme for my armies but if there is a cool model or a conversion i have done then i will try and fit it in somewhere.


----------



## cain the betrayer (Oct 12, 2009)

my new word bearers army will be mostly fluff based only with little things like icons representing to which god they are nearest but sadly that rules out most the compatetiv options like oblits cult troops and i just dont want to use a dp becaus it doesnt fit the theme really well


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Fluff is everything, but what is there in regards to necrons? Legions of warriors, wow that`s refreshing...


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

I'm the same fluff first and foremost. I have a Crimson Fist army that will eventually be led by Cortez, but I wouldn't dare run with characters who are not associated with the Crimson Fist. I've always been very fluffy with my IG and Eldar. Back when Craftworld Eldar came out and I ran a Biel-Tan army I stuck with the loads of Aspect Warriors concept, even running the Young Kings Court.

And I admit it does sometimes irk me when people run an extremely unfluffy army sorry but when I see a Chaos army with Bezerkers and Thousands Sons being led by a Daemon Prince of Nurgle with psychic powers I'm just like really? You really fielded this?

Now I still play and don't complain or belittle, but yeah still.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Those armies are what we call WAAC, and those people should be slapped on sight.:laugh:


----------



## daxxglax (Apr 24, 2010)

Someone suggested that I give my Chaos Bikers a Mark of Nurgle, in order to get an unearthly T6, and I nearly had a heart attack. I mean, really... Nurgle Bikers???


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

daxxglax said:


> Someone suggested that I give my Chaos Bikers a Mark of Nurgle, in order to get an unearthly T6, and I nearly had a heart attack. I mean, really... Nurgle Bikers???


Lol stick a plague marine ontop of a bike and that would be the best thing I believe I would ever see.


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

I've always liked fluffy armies they are a lot of fun to play. It depends on what the list is for though, if it's tournament play then fluff is pretty much going to go out of the window unless it offers some form of playing advantage. 
For campaigns and friendly play, at home with your mates and stuff, fluff driven armies are always the best choice IMO.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 27, 2010)

I suppose it depends what your trying to get out of your games. I personally don't enter tournaments and I'm not really attracted to them. I would probably paly a differnet game if I was. If I wanted a completely tactically balanced and challengeing game I would probably play chess instead (and for the record I do play chess with people and get that exact thrill).

In my opinion, with the GW games, the story is a vital part of the games. You should be trying to reflect this with how you paint your models and what you are trying to represent with your armys. everyone should be able to give a quick background to their armys, even if it is just meant for playing tournaments. It doesn't have to be much, it could be as simple as saying 'I chose this colour scheme for my guard to represent the fact that they were raised on a world that is predominantly desert.'

But it also enhances games to have a quick idea of why your fighting and to have the army reflec the fluff completely. This often menas unbalanced games, but also fun games. The best way round it is to adjust the table scenery and the rules of the scenario to give such armys a chance. For example an army made of of prodominantly khorne bezerkers is workable on tables with loads of covers and if your opponent themes their army slightly to give them more of a chance.

I'm hopeing to play a very large Epic game soon useing a large selection of my models. To make this work I've been working on specific scenario rules and a background to justify the type of armys that will be playing on both sides. Hopefulyl it'll work out, but if not its been very interesting prepareing for it. I'll hopefully put the fluff bejhind the game and the descriptions on the homebrew fluff and specialist gmaes forums later.

So basically long live scenarios, they make games more interesting and bring the fluff to life.


----------



## warsmith7752 (Sep 12, 2009)

Fluffy armys are cool but 90% of the time they suck. When i am making a list of iron warriors for example I give them lots of heavy guns and tanks but thats because i want lots of heavy guns and tanks thats why i picked the army in the first place. I would not make an all shooty khornite army because thats not what i would pick the army for. You should pic your army because youlike the playstyle/fluff and if you like it you will use it. 

When people use marine armys like vulkan termies or wolfwing (using special charactors to give your army an advantage) Is this going fluffy or trying to make the army more effective?


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

warsmith7752 said:


> When people use marine armys like vulkan termies or wolfwing (using special charactors to give your army an advantage) Is this going fluffy or trying to make the army more effective?


It's a bit of both really, I think most players pick an army because it's something they like. Either the back story appeals or the general look or the colour scheme. 

When I first started playing way back before the dawn of time (the early nineties) I initially went for Harlequins, I thought they were kick ass minis and had a great back story, it was much later that I found they were double hard bastards!
After a very long break I got back into the hobby and was tempted by the dark lures of Chaos. Again, I picked them because they seemed like the army for me, they looked cool and had great fluff. 
I didn't pick them because Lucious gets a gazillion attacks on the charge or because Karn is nigh unstoppable or because the Dreads are completely pointless, I found that out later.

If I was writing a list for a tournament I would pick apart the Codex to find the best possible combination to make a brutal unstoppable army. If I'm playing for fun the army would be based purely on fluff, just for the fun and the laughs.


----------



## WarWolf88 (Apr 1, 2010)

> When people use marine armys like vulkan termies or wolfwing (using special charactors to give your army an advantage) Is this going fluffy or trying to make the army more effective?


I'd say its a little both. If a certain special charecters special rules/equipment/etc are within what you feel can be supported by your fluff, I say that's ok and well. But when you start to change your fluff or even bend it almost out of place to get Marneus Calgar as your Chapter Master, then that's purely for the game effect, and its killing the fluff.

Shame on you!:nono:

BTW, this talk about wierd Chaos armies remind me of the 3000 points battle I had last summer. There were Thousand Sons, Greater Daemon of Nurgle, and a Prince (can't remeber if he undivivded or something), undivided CSM, Khorne Lord (who in the managed to kill himself with that sword of his...), Terminator Sorcceror and about dozen Chosen Terminators... yeah, i don't think there's any shread of fluff that could support that army. Unless it was all a scheme of the Thousand Sons (after all, _they_ were the ones to sit on the Chaos objective..,)


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

WarWolf88 said:


> BTW, this talk about wierd Chaos armies remind me of the 3000 points battle I had last summer. There were Thousand Sons, Greater Daemon of Nurgle, and a Prince (can't remeber if he undivivded or something), undivided CSM, Khorne Lord (who in the managed to kill himself with that sword of his...), Terminator Sorcceror and about dozen Chosen Terminators... yeah, i don't think there's any shread of fluff that could support that army. Unless it was all a scheme of the Thousand Sons (after all, _they_ were the ones to sit on the Chaos objective..,)


Actually _Codex: Chaos Daemons_ goes a long way to justify multi-god forces.


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Actually _Codex: Chaos Daemons_ goes a long way to justify multi-god forces.


Only because the armies are crap and they needed a way to justify giving them their own Dex.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

normtheunsavoury said:


> Only because the armies are crap and they needed a way to justify giving them their own Dex.


If you say so.. 

But personally I think the justification generally makes sense and I hold no problem with it.


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

Sorry, didn't mean any offence! 
I just prefer the old Realms of Chaos books and the deadly rivalry between the powers being prety much the only thing that kept them from total victory.
Chaos Daemons were a good idea as an army but I think more work should have been put into using the four powers individually instead of the one size fits all approach that GW seem to be heading in at the moment.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

normtheunsavoury said:


> Sorry, didn't mean any offence!


Of course, none was taken 



normtheunsavoury said:


> I just prefer the old Realms of Chaos books and the deadly rivalry between the powers being prety much the only thing that kept them from total victory.


Is it not still roughly the same though? The general thing preventing a total Chaos victory is still Chaos' innate Chaotic nature.

In this regard, the only thing _Codex: Chaos Daemons_ altered was that it developed the background of Daemons themselves, their motives, purposes and why they are so interested in the Material Realm. And at least to me, the justifications for Bloodletters fighting alongside Horrors for example makes sense.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I don't like overall fluffy armies as to where an army doesn't make sense. I have always tended to chose armies of chaos that don't worship the gods in their entirety like the Iron Warriors and Night Lords. However, I do like being competetive, so instead of giving them "marks" I give them "veteran skills" which is basically what they are I just give them a different name to make sense.

I was a salamanders player who played with thousand sons rules. So it really just was a chaos army that looked like a sm army but I wanted to further elaborate the strengths and weaknesses of my salamanders. Firstly they are slower than normal marines which would explain the slow and purposeful and their master-craftmanship provided for the +4 invulnerable and the ap-3 weapons. Plus their pychers get more realistic powers that salamander librarians would use.

All in all I think fluff armies are good as long as you find somehow for things to make sense. Normally, I dislike Tzeentch or Slaanesh daemon princes leading armies full of khorne marked troops. Thats obviously way too unrealistic. Or Kharn leading a retinue of slaanesh marked terminators. :ireful2::ireful2:


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

I think they should have just made one all encompassing Codex: Chaos book instead of making an extremely bland Codex: Chaos Space Marines and IMO an extremely pointless Codex: Chaos Daemons. Maybe it's because I've always liked the road they went with Chaos (hell I'd even take the 3rd Edition Chaos Space Marines over the current book).


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Which 3rd edition Chaos Space Marines Codex? The 1st one or the 2nd one with all the Legion rules included from the WD Index Astartes articles?


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

IMO i see the daemon fluff making sense but at the same time im an old school 40ker.

When i play my daemons i will only combine zteench and slaanesh or Nurgle and Khorne why is this well a fully dedicated daemon army really has no flexability fluff wise its awesome but lets face it u need range if u use slaanesh. 

I will never put Zteench and Khorne together for obvious reasons.

As for the fluff of my daemon army well not much room for fluff but i decided that when daemons break into the real world that they whould use natural elements of the planet they spawn on.

My Khorne stuff looks as they were formed from volcanic rock and lava, Slaanesh looks almost formed from stone, Tzeench mostly from elements such as fire and water, Nurgle on the other hand i went the standard route except instead of putrid greens im actually use blues 

My SIsters army though i named them the forgotten. They were a faction that was suposidly wiped out by the necrons but strangely they have remerged and the imperium is stil dicideing if they are corrupt or loyal.

I like to go with a route most dont think of. Hence why my khorne stuff isnt the commor red wo me its boring and has been done over and over. 

My favorite fluff army ive seen though was a friend of mine made an IG army that was stranded on an ork world and adapted to useing ork weapons and tactics he even made ruff riders on worgs


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I preferred the 3rd edition chaos rules... partly it made me unbeatable, but then it also gave you more options and abilities to use veteran skills. Oh man I miss dreadaxe on my daemon prince. Oh man and 5 man units with lascannons. Pew Pew! haha. They just got rid of all the coolness and reality so that younglings could understand them more. But I say... if your a nube just get the space marine codex, nothing against regular space marines but they have always been easier to understand


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I too have fond memories of that wonderful codex. Sure, I joined the hobby a little late, missing all of the WD extensions, but that book was friggin` solid regardless! I`m with VM, I would difinitely prefer that book over the current. The fluff and viability were so much more realistic, the background was actually integrated with the rules.

BEZERKER: "Fuck off Sorcerer! We don`t want your mark of Slaanesh here!"


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

The old codex was good but it was very complex, I once took an hour and a half train ride and was still messing about with a 1500 pt list. THe old FnP khornate terminators were cool, the bedlem staff, the fact that MoT stopped you frying your brain with psykic tests. Chaos was oversimplified in the new codex, but we did get ap3 bolters, then new ed came along and everyone gets a 4+ cover, thanks a bunch guys, kick tzeentch in the backside yet again (how ironic, really). 

They had to do something to stop infiltraiting plague marines and super IW havocs but in
my opinion went to far and destroyed fluff in doing so. (btw whats with the icon system what was wrong with the marks? I can just imaging a icon bearer being sniped and the god suddenly going "meh don't care any more about them, they've no banner on a stick" 

It would be nice if both codexes could be used together, limited by which god your HQ worships, no mark gives all basic troops but none of the warp beasts, a bit like the imperial factions and the inquistion. Bring back god hating gods, and give CSMs their deamons back. (how many people play thematic fluffy IWs, NLs or word bearers now?)


----------



## Azhek Ahriman (Apr 27, 2010)

I stick to the fluff playing an Ahriman warcoven. No summoned daemons, Rubric Marines, all of that good madness. Everyone gets Mark of Tzeentch, I think you know the drill. No Rhinos, only 9 guys a unit (sacred number of Tzeentch), and Ahriman with a Sorcerer Lord to back him up. No Fast Attack, and only LasPreds as Heavy Support. All sorts of good stuff.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> I too have fond memories of that wonderful codex. Sure, I joined the hobby a little late, missing all of the WD extensions, but that book was friggin` solid regardless! I`m with VM, I would difinitely prefer that book over the current. The fluff and viability were so much more realistic, the background was actually integrated with the rules.
> 
> BEZERKER: "Fuck off Sorcerer! We don`t want your mark of Slaanesh here!"


Haha, Right? Oh its ck not vm. I noticed that both the keys are close but maybe its a nickname:victory:



Barnster said:


> The old codex was good but it was very complex, I once took an hour and a half train ride and was still messing about with a 1500 pt list. THe old FnP khornate terminators were cool, the bedlem staff, the fact that MoT stopped you frying your brain with psykic tests. Chaos was oversimplified in the new codex, but we did get ap3 bolters, then new ed came along and everyone gets a 4+ cover, thanks a bunch guys, kick tzeentch in the backside yet again (how ironic, really).
> 
> They had to do something to stop infiltraiting plague marines and super IW havocs but in
> my opinion went to far and destroyed fluff in doing so. (btw whats with the icon system what was wrong with the marks? I can just imaging a icon bearer being sniped and the god suddenly going "meh don't care any more about them, they've no banner on a stick"
> ...


I agree. Though come on, you have to say reading that stuff was awesome. The new codex revolves around a black legion army. I think it would be awesome for GW to create codex's for every legion. WOULD BE AWESOME! I mean look what they are doing with the simple chapters of the space marines. They come up with one every once in a while. Which they could do with Chaos legions as they are bigger and more powerful individually. After a while (I know they don't want to put more racks up) they could just put them for sale online through their website. But hey, thats just my dream. The Chaos Codex was complex, I will admit but it really was 9 codex's in one. How gay is getting sniped by a vindicator assasin and scaring the shit of the chaos gods so much they take away their abilities away? Beyond me.:laugh:



Azhek Ahriman said:


> I stick to the fluff playing an Ahriman warcoven. No summoned daemons, Rubric Marines, all of that good madness. Everyone gets Mark of Tzeentch, I think you know the drill. No Rhinos, only 9 guys a unit (sacred number of Tzeentch), and Ahriman with a Sorcerer Lord to back him up. No Fast Attack, and only LasPreds as Heavy Support. All sorts of good stuff.


I hear you, playing a couple legions I prefer to just write my on codex which I do legally by just naming things differently. Slaanesh marked Iron Warriors... yeah okay:shok:


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I always prefer to make my own fluff when I build an army because I just like to be original.

However I DO restrict myself when choosing units.

An example is my eldar army which con ONLY have 3 aspects present across the whole army (including phoenix lords) and since it is recovering from a tyranid attack (NO jokes about similarities to Iyanden) it MUST have wraith constructs somewhere in the army. The only troop choices available are dire avengers (taking up 1 aspect slot) and pathfinders (NOT rangers).

So every home made army can be fun but just restrict it a little bit. The surprising thing is that the army actually wins a lot because I care about it rather than using an existing craftworld. I almost flipped my lid the other day when an ultra smurfs guy was using a blue captain Lysander in his army.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Stephen_Newman said:


> I always prefer to make my own fluff when I build an army because I just like to be original.
> 
> However I DO restrict myself when choosing units.
> 
> ...


You have a similar fluff ego to me.

Though I try to have at least one of every model (For the sake of knowledge), I will rarely use some of them. 

No pariahs in my necron army; My Lord doesn`t trust them.
No weird boys with my orks; The boss had a bad experience with one once...
No valks or vens with my guard; The captain is afraid of heights.
No carnifexes with my nid; they`re useless now... maybe not a fluff issue.

...and so on...


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

yolu know i think they should just make the big uber book o chaos.

man i remember having ten khorne chosen with powerfists.

IG feared me i called them the can openers


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

TheSpore said:


> yolu know i think they should just make the big uber book o chaos.
> 
> man i remember having ten khorne chosen with powerfists.
> 
> IG feared me i called them the can openers



Ten chosen, MOT, Disc, Bolt of Change, Power Fists. Used to cost me over a thousand points:shok:, and always lost, but still a shitload of fun!:laugh:


----------



## Yodhan (Apr 8, 2010)

I, too, am a fluff player. Since I am pretty new, I have no thoughts of entering any tournaments, so I go with the fluff. That being said, I still try and find a way to make a somewhat competitive army within those guidelines. 

I am playing a Dark Angel successor chapter that was crated to hunt Fallen. I figure that, yes, while they do have standard marines, they might be a little heavy on Terminators and bike squads for hunting, as well as tanks for causing some major hurt. I found a way to fit the Deathwing and Ravenwing into the fluff and make it more likely for me to field more of them without as many standard troops.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

TheSpore said:


> yolu know i think they should just make the big uber book o chaos.
> 
> man i remember having ten khorne chosen with powerfists.
> 
> IG feared me i called them the can openers


What do you think they could add or change?

In my case, though I'd like to make another thread on this, but I'm not, I would changed or add:

Add- Veteran Abilities
Add- An armory
Add- MUTATED HULL... I miss it sooo much
Add- Heavy Weapons with less guys
Add- Properly marked lords. You can't have a litteral Emperor's Children, World Eaters, Thousand Sons, or Death Guard Lord with the specific Abilities of their actual units.
Add- Daemons that you can actually play. :shok: This surprised me the most... How can you have a Black Legion Army without all the cool daemons?
Add- better upgrades to Daemon Prince
Add- toughness five on Obliterators

Remove/change- Dumb Daemons, add good ones
Remove/change- Lucious... way to make him suck Chaos Codex 4th Edition
Remove/change- Arniham... really? What the hell? Your better off making a Daemon Prince with his mark or just using his cool model for a well upgraded Sorcerer for cheaper. But yes they messed him up again. I remember third edition he didn't even have a power weapon and he was I think the same price, he had a staff that could grant him powers, but nothing for close combat. Failure two times in a row


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

really what needs to be done is they need to bring back cult armies 

Return the cultist unit as well.

if u want daemons then whatever mark you lord has should dictate what daemons u can bring also daemon animosity done like in 2nd ed should come back as well Yeah we will let you feild zteench & khorne on the board together but ur gonna suffer for being unfluffy.

BRING BACK THE CHOSEN!!!! need i say more

Finally as for daemons they need some new units to help support folks who wanna soley base there army off chaos god like maybe blood letters that can throw S 4 AP5 axes or something. kinda sad that your only option to have range in your army is zteench.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

No to cultists. One guy made an army that featured 80 that could infiltrate and were fearless and had icons so they rushed in 1st turn, summoned daemons second turn and then charge with daemons 3rd turn. I DO NOT want that army back thank you.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

I make up fluff for characterful squads like Veterans or Storm Troopers, but so far only my command squad has actually had metaphorical pen put to metaphorical paper;

_Colonel Zarras was a seasoned veteran of the Damocles Gulf Crusade. He had fought the Tau on many an occasion, and had the scars (and medals) to prove it. His left arm was taken from him by a Vespid Stingwing's gaping maw as he fought alongside his command squad to hold back an assault on their downed shuttle. The unfortunate Vespid was now in use as an ornament in Zarras' command ship, Aquila. His lost limb was now a gleaming bionic, and although it was a relatively crude field replacement, he had refused the offer of a more modern prosthetic. He claimed that he should fight the Imperium's enemies in whatever state the immortal Emperor deemed necessary.

The members of his command staff were equally as reputed, with the Regimental standard bearer Corporal McNevin having once removed a Khorne Berzerker's head armed only with a chainsword._

Midnight

P.S. Anyone wanting the full story send me a PM.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

This might sound a little bit off track but somehow connected. Speaking of fluff-vised armies, I try and stay strict on Tau and Imperial Guard, even though they are quite easy on the rules like dont mix that with that. However lately Ive been thinking "hey lets buy and put together some csm just for the change of things" so I got some Death Guards at first and then EC. My wonders are, which of the old legions cant you mix together and whichones are open to suggestions of working together?

I know TS and WE are like nah nah, no way. The same about EC and WE. But like DG, EC, WB and Alpha legion?


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

It depends on whether you're talking about Heresy Era, or modern Chaos.

Modern Chaos forces will be split along God divides, so Legions that follow Khorne won't fight alongside followers of Tzeentch and Undivided Legions will fight with anyone.

During the Heresy itself, Legions had rivalries but were generally united in their attempt to overthrow the Emperor.

Personally, I find the more "fluffy" the list the less "competitive" it is. The only army I've really been able to reconcile this with has been my Eldar, where I can justify them all driving in Grav Tanks because the Eldar style of warfare is to strike hard, and strike fast while avoiding return fire.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

@MidnightSun: That sounds like an interesting story. I do the same with my units (units that seem to have an uncanny habit of surviving time and time again).


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Fluff is a mild consideration in my army, however if I played exactly in line with its fluff I would have a FoC consisting of just raptors, CSM's, toped of with havocs and chosen. However I like my Daemon Princes to much to do so making me quite the hypocrite.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

lol i think everyone is saying fluff comes first because this is in the fluff section of the forums where all the fiction-smart people go. I bet if the same question was asked in the general 40k forum you'd get some different answers.


----------



## LucarioNid (Apr 24, 2010)

unxpekted22 said:


> lol i think everyone is saying fluff comes first because this is in the fluff section of the forums where all the fiction-smart people go. I bet if the same question was asked in the general 40k forum you'd get some different answers.


That's actually a very good point. I'm kinda wandering the forums, but I like fluff a lot. As I made my own nids fleet, I don't have to bother about army fluff.


----------

