# Why play Fantasy?



## MidnightSun

I'm having something of a crisis of faith. I've put a fairly substantial amount of time and effort into my Ogre Kingdoms and have reached roughly 2000pts (which is still, according to my group, not enough for most small games, let alone a proper game). So before I shell out a VAST sum of money, I pose a question:

What makes Fantasy worth spending time and money on?

Because I've found it to be playing a dice game, with some plastic ornaments in the background. You sit there and flail ineffectually at each other with giant rectangles of infantry, while your cannons kills each other's cannons, and then Wizards happen to make everything happen. The army hinges on the Wizards - you can't achieve anything without a Wizard, and your opponent can't achieve anything without a Wizard. If you don't have a Level 4 and your opponent does, you may as well call the game at the start. There's no tactics involved - you just slam your infantry into your opponent's infantry and hope that you kill four of his hundred and twenty dudes while he only kills three of your ninety dudes. Your army achieves nothing. Your Wizards, though? They remove handfulls of dudes, or debuff your opponent into oblivion, or make you into unstoppable machines of destruction.

I get tired and frustrated when I play Fantasy, because it seems to be a game of rolling dice to kill a couple of models per turn until one player lucks out on his Winds of Magic or fails a dispel and the game is won in that one magic phase.


----------



## Xabre

Let me start by saying that I don't play much. I don't often say it out loud, but I'll always admit it if challenged: I build and paint and theorize, but I don't play much. That goes double for Fantasy.

But why do I still stick to it? For the epicness of it. I don't _like_ the idea of large blocks of infantry. They bore me. I like going for things that look amazing. My High Elves? Yes, my most recent army will have blocks of spearmen, but that's just because they're so farking amazing for Elves. However that's a 3k grand army list. in 2k? Knights. Armored knights on horseback from every direction. Even if I die a glorious death, I'm going to make you at least grudgingly respect my force on the table first. 

I deal in Dragons; I have three of the models, two kitted as mages (7E allowed slots, so I could run two, instead of %s) and one as an 'Imrik' kit with lance and shield. My giant eagles use Drake models, and my Skycutters are pulled by drakes. I even used a Nazgul felbeast to act as a Fire-Drake instead of the Phoenix kit. My magical strength is actually fairly low in my army (far higher in my Grand 3k kit, but that's a more 'traditional' force), but I play towards cavalry, monsters, and specialist units. Toys instead of bodies.

And then I lay em all out on a table and picture the epicness of the _story_ behind the whole thing.


----------



## Deathypoo

8th Edition is a little too magic heavy for me, but otherwise I think you have some complaints common to 40k people who also play fantasy on the side... 40k players think that the point of melee units is to get them into melee as soon as possible. They also think that each death is a lot more meaningful than it is.

When you have a block of 30, you only need 20 for max combat bonus, and only need 10 for max attacks (even your ogres should be taking blocks of 9-12 for core units). This is not like 40k, where every model should contribute to every fight. This means you have a buffer of models to take the extra turn under fire, and maneuver these blocky formations into flank charges. Because that's the other thing about these rectangles... they are VERY HARD to maneuver, so it's easy to just line-em-up and throw them forward, but the game absolutely rewards the person who can make them dance.

I played fantasy for 10 years before I picked up 40k, btw, and I like them both... Some day I need someone to tell me how all my bad habits from fantasy are making me lose 40k games, though


----------



## JAMOB

I love fantasy like I love any other table-top board game, just more. I love the tactical difficulty of playing Wood Elves, but the way that if played right they can do well. I love the formations - outmaneuvering people and making them do things they definitely don't want to is really entertaining - and I love being able to get in close and not lose my entire army immediately (like I do with my BA, though I often kill most of his first and sometimes pull a win). I don't personally put too much into magic, and though I do use a lv4 Beastweaver the best I can do is buff my own units with it. I also don't use large blocks of infantry, which may be why I seem to be enjoying it more than you. I don't know much about ogres tactics, but cavalry, MSU, medium infantry blocks combined with support, all of this works pretty well for me. The fun of the game isn't in crashing your army against your opponents and hoping to pull off a win, but rather from maneuvering, positioning, and bringing your army together to strike at his units in a way that will cripple him at the opportune moment. The movement phase is the most important of the game, because the rest is just dice and target prioritizing.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar

This has been rather insightful for me. I've sat down to go over the various armies in this game over the past year and watched quite a few games play out... long games to say the least since they were high points. I'm looking to possibly make a move into fantasy playing Empire with a Pirate theme.


----------



## kickboxerdog

at my local club we started a campaign, the army starts small at 750pts and follow normal restrictions , im personally quite new to fantasy and im really enjoying it, the game offers such a different tactical layout, having to react in certain ways and trying to get it right , or your units can be left exposed and open to flank /rear charges, i find wfb to be alot more than just large blocks of troops and magic, yes some people do play it like this, but then army who can put out massive blocks( looking at you night goblins) they also die quite easy i run my dwarf and warriors of chaos block at the biggest maybe 21-28 models( ranks of 7) this works well and isnt to big at all and allows for easy movement.


----------



## Ratvan

I have played fantasy for about 14 years and have just never got into 40k despite constant attempts through all the editions. 8th is probably my least favourite ruleset due to the magic phase but I tend to work around it with the armies I play (Loremaster in HE, Arch Lectors and Warrior Priests for Empire) and dont six dice dwellers etc. For me WHFB has more tactical play trying to surround and outnumber my opponent before committing to combats


----------



## KarnalBloodfist

Unless you're using every game to practice for a tournament ... why not change up HOW you and your group play your games? Set certain limits:
1) NO LVL 4!! -- If you're so bored by the power of the magic phase, curb it down a bit. I play a lot of smaller games so this is easier done for me. I've even used no magic with varied degrees of success. But 8th Ed (unfortunately) is mostly a game of "he who gets the nuke off first". Sure you can still do that w/ a lower lvl magic user since they can all use 6 dice but the chances of getting that spell are much lower. Heck, try a few games w/ NO magic.
2) No Horde Formation -- If you find it annoying going up against 2 or 3 horded up units, play some games where horde is not allowed. You could even go so far as to set limits on unit size (max 30, no horde).
3) Try to have everyone use 1 or 2 non optimal unit/formation in a few games.
4) Gun lines got you down? Set a percentage of the army that can be missile units/war machines.
5) Play/make up new scenarios! So many people just want to play the standard battle line scenario ... SNORE!!! Throw some home brewed scenarios into the mix. Make sure everyone agrees on any special rules. Obviously, try to keep them from benefiting/hindering any one army.

These are just a few easy suggestions. Try just one at a time. I'm not a huge fan of the "Super Comp" systems. I think the best form of comp is self restraint. Try to get your usual opponents to try new ways of playing.

I play WoC and they tend to be non-optimized armies. But I play in a group where that's the norm since none of us has played in a tournament for a good 8 years. And guess what, we usually have a lot of ...*FUN*... when we play! :good:


----------



## Zack Cart

Try playing a few games as wood elves. You'll change your mind about it just being dice rolling and huge blocks of infantry then! (Well, that or you'll be dead in short order)

But I get what you're saying. In 8th especially, the rules support giant hordes of grinding troops, rather than the older, lighter playstyle. I *have* heard rumours that when/if 9th appears, the rules will shift back in favour of small, quick, skirmish style units and terrain-utilizing tactics. Which would be nice.


----------



## Samules

I like dwarves..... Was there supposed to be something more to it?

I have a large group of angry short people with axes who drink beer, grow magnificent beards and hate magic.

I also play Brettonians from time to time, because knights are awesome.

I don't know, every time I try to get into advanced tactics or strategy for a game I just end up not enjoying it as much as when I played how I wanted to.


----------



## dutchy1982

^ +1 everybody loves the short guys


----------



## andyg

Many moons ago, I have played both Bretonnians and Space Wolves and found fantacy more enjoyable as it tended to be more about how well you move your troops and use there strenghts and defend there weaknesses. I found 40k more about how big your guns are.


----------



## effigy22

Fantasy has been watered down since previous editions but its still a more tactical game. I rarely hear people playing 40k say "I lost because of my deployment". 

You have to think, also there are the "risks" of charging certain units, especially ones with characters. You have to ask yourself "Could he have a magic item that could throw the fight his way?" or "Are there fanatics in that unit of night goblins?"... ok the second question is a given but you understand my point.

My favuorite edition has to be the last edition, no pre measuring, no random charges. It was a fine line between a winning charge and "OH CRAP I MOVED TO CLOSE TO THAT UNIT OF BLOODKNIGHTS!!!" failed charges actually usually meant you were doing something right rather than your opponent having a poor dice roll... and i have gone a little off topic, shutting up now.


----------



## Uveron

effigy22 said:


> I rarely hear people playing 40k say "I lost because of my deployment".


But they should! 

40K's Tactics are their but allot of players miss them... and then get tabled by more tactically aware players despite 'inferior lists'


----------



## neilbatte

My Orcs are the same when I try to be sneaky or tactical they refuse to play along and I lose badly so now I leave the tricksy bits to the Gobbo's and just let the Orcs do the hitting.
My last 40k game my opponent lost because we roled to play lengthways and I got to go first.
My last fantasy game Orc's vs Ogres I lost because we got the tower mission and I had no unit eligable to set up in it and my opponent got his horde of ogres in there first.
Many games are won and lost before deployment unless your playing a straight battle which can be boring or building your list after you've rolled scenarios too time consuming, you'll get games where you can rarely win and some that are to easy to be a challenge.


----------



## rayrod64

For me its just the little extra thinking you have to do to be sucessful in a fantasy game. You really have to become familiar with your units and strenghts and weaknesses. The more familiar you are with your army/units the more you care about how it plays and how it looks on the table. I feel that im more "vested" in my fantasy armys than my 40k armys. 
At our old gaming club we used to ask "Chess or Checkers" when we were looking to play. Chess being fantasy because you could lose the game during your setup you had to make sure your units could come to grips with the ememy effectivly.
In 40k i find that its a bit more forgiving during your setup and your units can move easier to cover any flaws in your setup.


----------



## Steaknchips

It sounds like you've fallen into the trap you often see new players rolling with. Line up walk strait forward and hope your magic out does their magic so the strait lineup swings in your favor. I often refer to 40k as a game of anti tank guns shoot tanks, anti infantry guns shoot infantry and it seems your cannons shoot cannons, infantry fights infantry is you trying to follow a 40k playstyle. But what happens when your cannons ignore theirs? Ever tried putting it on a flank and shooting into the side of a horde? Imagine what you could do if a 40k lascannon hit all the infantry in its path? Would it still be the case of anti tank guns shoot tanks? You say combat is a 100 of his vs 90 of yours situation, well when i play i try to manouver so its a everything of mine vs one or two of his. As an ogre player try running sabres with the sole purpose that they die but in doing so get in the way of as much as they can. Your very unfortunate in my oppinion that oiur army is very forgiving and plays well at a line up and fight game, if your friends have armys such as wood elves or brets maybe you could ask to have a play using them to hopefully learn a few tricks from a fragile army that you can take back to your ogres.

On the subject of magic this edition.....yes its game changing. Ive had a purple sun go across a whole gobbo army and win the game before he even had a turn. Was it fun, no, not for either of us and this will happen now and then but i dont see it any differently than a combat where one person totallt fluffs the rolls and gets stomped beyond all odd. Its a dice game bad luck will happen. When it comes to magic atleast defending from it i'm overly cautious depending on the situation. If i know theres a spell that can wreck my army early on i will spend the first couple of turns throwing everything i've got at shutting down the phase at the expense of late game magic phases. This is often one of the most tactical phases of the game for me trying to work out what my opponent wants to cast, when and at what. There is no big visual indicator like you get with infantry blocks as to where things will be cast and there is no visual indication as to how much force (dice) is going to be thrown into it. In addition as you move to larger games the big magic has a lesser impact, you still only get upto 12 dice, you can still only use 6 per spell but there is more and more on the table.


----------



## Sethis

I think the best way to play Fantasy is to play "friendly". So talk to your opponents, and work out a compromise where you can both play fun lists against each other. Competitive Fantasy is pretty much exactly what you said, because there is no reason NOT to take a Level 4, 2 level 2s and a BSB and just win the magic phase with one of the broken rulebook lores.

Even something as simple as "Every army has to use the magic in their codex, the rulebook is off-limits" or "get rid of the 6th spell in every rulebook lore, shift every spell up a slot, and allow people to drop down to 1 instead of having a signature slot" are decent fixes to how stupid the magic phase has become, but the best way to address it is simply to admit you don't want to play "optimally" and instead want to play for fun. So the only army I have is Tomb Kings, and I run it with 2x Level 2s with the TK lore, both with Flying Cloaks supporting a 12-chariot block with 2x Necrosphinxes. The fastest Undead you'll ever meet! But it gets hard-countered by Cannons, so we have an agreement that people won't take more than 1. In return, if someone plays an army that doesn't have a great answer to Necrosphinxes (like Ogres) then I'll drop them in favour of something else. It's a lot more collaborative than 40k, I find.


----------



## MidnightSun

I kind of forgot this thread after ragequitting my Ogres, but thank you all for responding with such in depth replies!

I'm enjoying Fantasy much more as Warriors of Chaos. Having more than three units, and having different statlines and roles rather than having Ogres, armoured Ogres, Ogres with guns, and slightly stronger Ogres, I can bring a wider range of units and I'm really getting to grips with some of the tactics of Fantasy (the only one I can really say I'm good at so far is using 30pt units of Warhounds to block enemy charges, although I still need to perfect their facing so the enemy doesn't just overrun into my flanks). Magic is still powerful, but having seen the extent of it's luck dependancy and playing an army that relies on fewer buffs - Tzeentch Warriors (I roll Metal 90% of the time, and I do a little happy dance whenever I roll up Glittering Robe - 1+ armour on core infantry is insane!). Yeah, sometimes magic has won games, but rarely does it win the game directly (so far, it's happened three times out of my seven games - yeah, okay, that's not uncommon, but it was statistically incredible; how often does Final Transmutation kill a Level 4 Wizard General on the first turn? Three games in seven, in my experience!)

Thanks again for the replies, heretics.

Fantasy on!


----------

