Hi!
I'm not opposed to people making their own armies to simulate current
fluff, but remember that that doesn't mean its core. Remember all the
gnashing of teeth and stomping regarding the Slann and that one took
YEARS to straighten out (and we still have detractors on that one).
I think once the timelines gets accepted will have a framework to which
to add and design. Of course it doesn't mean we can't make up more army
lists, we have some for Ogre, alpha, ratmen and a whole host of others.
But like I said above, core, is another beast entirely.
This revision is different from the others because I want to encourage
all those new units and rules that in the past got lost in the dust. But
remember, just because they are in the book it doesn't mean we can ram
them down peoples throats. With very few exceptions, mostly everything
we do is optional. Only time and play testing can make something core.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: deaconblue3_at_... [mailto:deaconblue3@...]
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 3:49 PM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Re: Thoughts on Chaos
Ok, agree. Still you've given no reason why a full force of World
Eaters, Death Guard or whatever may not be fielded when the actual
background permits to do so.
-->If teh background permits it, then it can be. As I said before,
Heresy era battles would certainly permit this, and would even be
encouraged. Then again, they wouldn't be Beserkers either (except for
the veteran company). I'm saying that at the most advanced point of the
time line (M41), it would be outside of "normality" for that to happen.
By M41, the old traitor legions are so fractured that they retain little
or no aspects of their former structures. even their armor colors have
changed, and they usually retain only one or two bits from the Heresy
era
armors. The World Eaters have killed off all their librarians and
chaplains, for example, so the old structure simply can't be.
Yep, that's your opinion... mine is different. The history of 40k is
simply evolved, new races are born and some things changed. Comes to
my mind that according to your ideas, I cannot field TAU or C'tan
armies either (I agree with you that they squeezed them into the
background only to sell the pieces, but they are still there and I
should have the possibility to play with them too).
-->Yes it is my opinion, and that of others as well. 40K did not
evolve.
The changes were often made, not "naturally" but arbitrarily to
accomodate new figs, not because they advanced the story, or enhanced
the
setting. The destruction of the Squats was one such move, made not
because of the setting, but despite it. You are aware of why the Squats
were eliminated aren't you? I don't like the Tau. I think they're
mishandled, and are more of a pentagon in a rhombus hole. There
shouldn't be a C'Tan army either IMO. the C'Tan are dead, dead, dead.
They make the Slaan look lively and active, and they're so degenerate
and
slumping as to be more myth than fact. Lastly, using your own argument,
if we don't have to accept the older fluff, we don't have to accept the
new stuff either.
Josh R
"No matter where you go, there you are." B.Bonzai
To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Received on Sat Nov 23 2002 - 21:32:46 UTC