Re: [NetEpic ML] Re: Necrons for NetEpic

From: Peter Ramos <netepic_at_...>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 22:10:17 -0400


Agreed. Perhaps as I mentioned in another post we can make a "gw" like
necron list but come up with a whole different fluff for their origin
consistent with our own stuff.



Joshua Raup wrote:
> Chiming in here with my "usual" Fluff rant.
> On the Necrons, I am of a single opinion. First off, as far as
> "official" NetEpic fluff goes, I want to stick with the existing Slann
> related fluff. I am completely unconcerned with what ever GW is
> currently passing off as "fluff," as it is horribly inconcistent, and
> changes from edition to edition. I do not want to be tied to it except
> to mine for nuggets that can be added to the NetEpic fluff. I'm still
> compiling and sorting fluff for NetEpic (based mainly on RT era stuff,
> including AT, SM1, and TL), which is proving to be a far more massive
> project than I originally anticipated. Not to mention putting it all
> into a cohesive and readbale format.
> That all said, there is no reason not to create and include a stand
> alone Necron list. Just don't expect to have the current GW fluff
> included as NetEpic "cannon." This is one area in which we clearly
> distinguish ourselves from whatever GW is currently doing. Yes, we try
> to include as much as possible, but not everything makes sense or
> "fits" with what we do.
> "No matter where you go, there you are." - B. Bonzai
> Homepage:
> <>
Received on Wed Mar 07 2007 - 02:10:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 11:00:05 UTC