"Top 5: Why 40K Players Should Try Historicals" Topic

You were asked – TMP link

Why Should a Warhammer 40K Player Try Historicals?

And the Top 5 answers were:

13% of the vote: "historicals aren't dominated by franchise gaming"

11%: "you can't copyright history"

9%: "historicals are fun too"

9% [TIE]: "history is the ultimate lore" OR "40K and historicals aren't different hobbies"

An army commander figure doesn't cost $55.00 USD.

That's one of the best reasons. Lee or Napoleon mounted figures cost just as much as a filthy scum cavalry figure.

However, I have noticed that some newer complete gaming systems, like Blood and Plunder Pirate, do have a huge markup for the Big Guys. But it's only $10 USD for Blackbeard, vs $6 USD for Scurvy Jack.

If a new edition of rules comes out, you don't suddenly discover that the Stonewall Brigade or Firefly tanks "aren't supported". 🙄🤷

Lee or Napoleon mounted figures cost just as much as a filthy scum cavalry figure.

Even historical commanders may cost extra, simply because the company knows they won't sell as many.

Yeah – but not the ridiculously inflated GW price for one-offs.

There are a lot of (for example) Space marine players, so even a one-off leader will sell quite a lot of figures.

But it's a pointless argument – price is not the reason people play GW games. If GW want £30.00 GBP / $40 USD for a single not that big leader figure – then it's sure, no problem. You can say "but you could get a whole WWII platoon for that" until you are blue in the face, doesn't change a single mind. That's people for ya!

As someone who has played 40k recently, 9th edition Genestealer Cults army, and also plays any historical game I can, I can say that 40k is a sport and that most players treat it that way. Scenario and narrative play just doesn't really exist in 40k. The best reason I can give to branch out from 40k (or GW really) is that there are so many ways to play tabletop gaming that the GW gamer may find something else they really enjoy.

I have gotten the 40k type to do Black Powder Peninsular battles.

I remain struck by the bad reasons. "We're the same" or "You can do the same stuff" is no reason to change.

This is kind of like asking if hip hop artists should listen to Merle Haggard. Nobody is stopping them. But I'm not going to argue with them about it either. 🤷

Many years ago, the Rhinedahlen club, Germany, met in an old school hall. Most older chaps were playing historical games, loads of big Napoleon's Battles games. All very good natured, most starting off on a Saturday morning with a glass of port or red wine. The 40k crowd were there, arguing like mad, over the latest codex, not this edition, or some such.

We used to get folks coming over to try the historical games probably for a glass of port and to avoid getting a bop on the nose because "wrong codex" or something!

Tally Ho!

When you consider what makes 40K popular beyond wide availability of games and models, there is the following:

1) A points or balancing mechanism for pick up games
2) A vibrant and active competitive scene
3) Army building that leads to a sense of ownership in "your army"
4) A non static environment with new things: models, rules, scenarios, etc
5) Scenario generators

The closest historical game I can think of is Bolt Action which may explain it's popularity

In 40k, you can play your own army – and thus never have to face any complaints about "That is the wrong shade of blue on your infantrymen", or "Your tanks are the wrong shade of olive drab".

40K players don't have to worry about the correct color, because often they aren't required to paint their figures.

Well, except GW do supply the "official colours" in their paint range!