Nov 30, 2011
I’ve been thinking about this a lot for a variety of reasons; the biggest of which is there’s currently a feud going on among two of the bigger players in the Seattle area who both have done a huge amount of work to promote the hobby in the area. I won’t get into the particulars of the feud, which actually goes beyond the scope of 40k, but I understand the reasons for the antipathy, but I just can’t help but wish they get beyond it.
But that’s not really what I wanted to talk about; what I’m concerned with is why 40k tends to cause so much nerd-rage when it is, at its core, a silly game using toys of fictitious things. It’s set in a world divorced of the usual faux pas conversation topics like religion, politics, or race. It should be a great medium for having lots of happy fun; and, by and large, most of us who enjoy the game DO have lots of fun with it. But why do we put aside the fun and get angry about things so often? Why are we frustrated by fellow gamers about so many different things?
First off, 40k REALLY isn’t a game, it’s a hobby. Not to stir up hobbyist/WAAC debates, but the truth of the matter is that the people who continue to play this game aren’t really in it for the rules, more like in it DESPITE the rules. Anyone that gives two figs about RAW knows that GW writes atrocious rules. Look at how many FAQs they need and how quickly and over stuff that should be so simple! Look at the INAT for goodness sakes! The holes in the game of 40k are WIDE OPEN, and I’m not even talking about the lack of balance even within codexes (Hi, I’m the pyrovore!). I’m not sure there exists a person who looked at the rules and said, “Yes, this is the game I want to devote hundreds of dollars to!” No, even the most cut-throat competitive person out there at some point was inspired by some model or drawing or bit of fluff and decided to buy in. Once you invest into 40k, then your next-level personality comes out: uber-competitive douche or whiny milquetoast painter and everyone in between. In the end, what keeps us playing and buying more models is because we want to be engaged in the world of 40k in a creative manner: whether its physically creating beautiful (or even beautiful to just us!) models or else designing masterful lists that really milk the codex for all its worth. Either way, or BOTH, we are spending time being creative more than actually playing the game itself (I know I drop HOURS on list designing even on armies I don’t own, I find it diverting), and that’s why this is a hobby akin to playing Sudoku or scrap-booking, the only difference is that you then take that thing you spent so much time on and then you put it down on the table and play a game with it, but that is almost always a side-effect of the hobby, rather than the main goal.
Now, this is probably the most important point: 40k is intensely personal, but you have to play other people. I have a distinct memory of trying to play GI Joes with my best friend Jon back when we were about 8. He brought his Joes over, I got out mine. We went to the backyard and spent most of the Saturday digging trenches and making a river with a garden hose. Then we set up the forces and got ready to fight the battle. Now, I’d played GI Joes with others before and found that having a “game plan” of figuring out which side would win and who would die in the fight BEFORE playing really alleviated a lot of “Beachhead totally just killed Storm Shadow!”"NU UH!” type arguments. I thought this was a perfectly reasonable solution, but Jon immediately thought my idea was ridiculous. “Why even bother playing? We already know who wins!” What I realized at that moment was that when it comes to make-believe and play, people have widely different ideas of what is cool and fun and what restrictions are pointless and which are good. 40k is intensely personal. We are inspired and awestruck by completely different things in the 40k universe. Why do I play 40k? Because I thought that the idea of an Ork riding a cybernetically enhanced boar was an awesome idea (stupid lack of cyboars now a-days…GET OFF MY LAWN!). I find the look of helmetless Space Marines to be idiotic, my buddy thinks they look heroic. I think its cool that Logan Grimnar is considered a hero and is almost universally loved in the Imperium, whereas some of my friends think it should be Marneus. I like the idea of the Hive Mind and the oppressive terror of the Tyranid forces, my buddy thinks that since they are all mindless that the army has no soul and is uninteresting.
What am I getting at? We all like certain parts of the game for different reasons. We are all inspired in different ways. What happens then when you go to a tournament and plop down an army that you think is really cool (for WHATEVER reason), and your opponent immediately dismisses it. “That’s a battalion box set army if I ever saw one!” “You brought a leaf-blower!” “Why did you paint your Space Wolves brown? Don’t you know they are only grey!?!?!” When people attack your army, they are attacking YOU, the very core of what you find appealing about 40k. Not only that, but they are denigrating your HOBBY, not just your army. If I’m playing a game of starcraft and I crush someone with a zerg rush and they get all snippy about rushes being lame, I don’t take it personally, I just say, “qq moar!” Because, the thing is, they’re really complaining about the game, not me. I can shrug that off. When someone is complaining about my army for whatever reason, I take it personally, because I have so much invested in it. Now, if for whatever reason, if you wrote poetry, you were forced almost always to then read your poetry to people, you’d quickly find that some people don’t like your sonnets, and prefer haikus or dirty limericks. You’d get really annoyed because an important part of you is being mocked.
40k is a game populated with nerds, nerds are, in general, not good with people. Even before you get to any potential issues, you have communication breakdowns as one quiet type tries to communicate with another. Next, conflict resolution for nerds is usually made up of retreating and going into a fantasy world in which they have power of some kind and…oh wait…crap. What happens if the escapist fantasy world is now the heart of conflict!?!?! How do you resolve this problem now? Well, just like in high school, the solution is to find allies in cliques. Find people that think like you enough that you can get along well enough and now tear down the other groups.
But here’s the real kicker, the reason these things get so acrimonious is because the overall pool of people is so small. Imagine that instead of 40k, I’m talking about rec league basketball. If you were more of a casual rec leaguer, you wouldn’t get into the super-competitive leagues, you’d go for the softer ones. And the thing is, you’d probably never bump into the ultra competitive people and you’d just play and have fun. With 40k, your pool of players is limited to the point that you can’t REALLY divide THAT much, so you’ll be forced to interact with someone who thinks about 40k differently than you fairly often. Try as you’d like to subdivide 40k (and BOY do we!), those subdivisions will invariably interact somewhere and then sparks fly.
So, essentially, you have something that is more than a game that sucks up hours upon hours of our lives in various ways, that makes us feel good for various reasons; but then in order to get any real value out of it, you must put your extremely personal hobby-result onto a table and have it judged by others. When some people don’t immediately love what you love or even act superior about their imaginary stuff, you immediately get defensive and angry and then you look for people that think more like you, but we can’t escape the people that think differently than us, so the conflict simmers.
I’m not sure what the solution to this whole thing is other than learn to deal with people who think differently than you (which really doesn’t solve anything because 40k is so personal) and do everything you can to bridge the gap between yourself and your fellow gamers. Try and see what the other person is personally investing in and realize their ideas are just as valid as yours.
Anyway, this whole thing isn’t very coherent, but I hope I got my main point across: 40k gets really intense and divisive because at its core it is fueled by our imaginations and it’s hard to be told our imaginations are wrong.
pathtyphon
TastyTaste
Frank Austin
fluger
Brent
Dethtron
newsun
AbusePuppy
nyhil
That Teri Girl
reecerobbins
badtaste
My favorite in-game retort is the perennial “suck it.” It usually doesn’t work, but that’s okay because I’m not gay.
that was as a good read
Thank you.
Well stated.
Thank you, also, where do you play at btw?
Generally at Mugu Games or AFK Tavern these days.
My group makes the trip down to Seattle Wargaming when we can….Hoping to be there for the Dec 17 Tourney.
I try to play with Gerry, Zen, Paul etc at the Edmonds club but don’t make it as much as I want.
I mostly play with Mark Fritts (Markdawg on the Overlords podcast)
Well stated. I don’t think that there is necessarily a solution; whenever you have a group consisting mainly of people who, by definition, are stereotyped as socially awkward (be it programming, comic book collecting, or war gaming), you are going to have conflicts among impassioned people with intensely personal (and most likely myopic) viewpoints. I find it to just be part and parcel of swimming amongst nerds. I’d join in myself, but I’m old and can no longer have spare energy to actually have an opposing opinion regarding cheesiness, spamminess, or any other food metaphor.
We should make nice people be called “bacony”
Fluger. Where you been, man? Coming back out of hiding?
The article is definitely shows a keener view of the 40K political structure in most areas. And, as I’m sure you know, it’s like that all over. Our group can barely even visit our nearest store because for whatever reason, the clique that has spawned there around, as your article so keenly points out, a personality who built a group, blindly dislikes us. It’s bad enough that I don’t even know the names or faces of the people but have felt the unwelcomeness. Could only contribute it to something I said on the podcast.
Long story short, though, is that this problem goes above and beyond nerds in the 40K scene. It’s really just a general people problem. Republicans and Democrats seem familiar? How about warlords killing each other in Africa? Not sure what it is about human nature but “personalities”, for good or bad, attract groups, and then use those groups to get their way, make a point, or just try and change their small world, for good or bad.
Heck, we get cliques where I work.
The place where you are spot on is that 40K is such a small group of people that it’s hard to sustain feuds between groups.
<<Fluger. Where you been, man? Coming back out of hiding?
Soon! I'm going to start listening to 11th soon too and posting again. My new job has seriously sucked my life away from me. I've been working 60+ hours a week and then on top of that I've had another kid and my wife has been super sick for a few months. I've only recently started to post on here as work has eased enough that I can pop on and post now and again. The only reason I had time to write this article was the 4 day Thanksgiving weekend.
<<<The article is definitely shows a keener view of the 40K political structure in most areas. And, as I’m sure you know, it’s like that all over. Our group can barely even visit our nearest store because for whatever reason, the clique that has spawned there around, as your article so keenly points out, a personality who built a group, blindly dislikes us. It’s bad enough that I don’t even know the names or faces of the people but have felt the unwelcomeness. Could only contribute it to something I said on the podcast.
Yeah, its the same all over. Not surprising.
<<<Long story short, though, is that this problem goes above and beyond nerds in the 40K scene. It’s really just a general people problem. Republicans and Democrats seem familiar? How about warlords killing each other in Africa? Not sure what it is about human nature but “personalities”, for good or bad, attract groups, and then use those groups to get their way, make a point, or just try and change their small world, for good or bad.
Absolutely, which is why I made the rec basketball analogy. For instance, I play with a bunch of other fatties in a church league. We are competitive for what we are, but we certainly couldn't step up to the A leagues by any means, and we choose not to. If I tried, I would be embarassed and my teammates would be annoyed. The difference between rec leagues and 40k is that you have enough rec leagues to find a better fit and you won't be doing tournaments against people with different playing levels, but with 40k, you're FORCED to play against people with different views due to the smaller groups and limited large events.
Your Mom!
Just kidding, awesome analysis.
Thanks!
I actually wrote about this very same observation in my blog about a month or so ago. I think that the divide between the competitive and the hobby aspects are divided because the game design doesn’t allow them to meld with each other. Just like your example of the GI Joes, both the player who wants to have fun imagining what’s happening and the player who wants to try their luck at strategy need to be satisfied. When your game rules don’t allow both, then it causes this divide.
It’s not a matter of how tight the rules are, per se, but more about whether they make sense for both the competitive player and the hobbyist. The problem is that in 40k right now there are rules that don’t make sense to the hobbyist but are obvious choices for the competitive player (veteran squads with 3 plasma guns!?). Conversely, you can have rules that make sense or are fun for the hobbyist that are not good choices for the competitive gamer. Again, it doesn’t have much to do with the gaps in rules, but rather that the design of the game/codexes creates the conflict by having rules that make sense to one particular party and not the other.
Precisely.
It really comes down to GW’s inability to write clear, balanced rules.
GW is totally capable of writing clear rules, as evidenced by Warhammer Fantasy 8th edition. The problem is their rule design in my opinion. I believe that GW really focuses too much on luck being a factor in their games compared to others. While luck should always be present, there is way too much luck involved in their systems to the point where I don’t think they’re even aware of what choice/skill could look like in their game systems. This is the problem with Fantasy right now and why all competitive types have left: the rules are clear, but they are clear that luck is the name of the game.
That doesn’t mean that their universe has to depend on luck, as has been made evident by Fantasy Flight games. GW just needs to completely revamp their entire system so that choice and skill is more important than D6 rolls, even if they’re balanced to be fair by probability.
I actually think 5E 40K is a much better-balanced game than 8E Fantasy. Fantasy is still, in many ways, struggling to find what the “right” power level for many abilities is, like magic. Its rules are more random (lots of “works on a 4+/2+” stuff) and even just the basic scenario/terrain rules are complicated enough that a lot of people simply don’t use one part or another of them.
I would agree with regards to luck, though- GW tends to take a “random = fun” approach to design sometimes, although Mr. Ward and Mr. Kelly have thankfully steered away from this. “Wacky” abilities certainly have their place- Orks wouldn’t be the same without them, for example- but I don’t think they support good game design when used extensively.
I like the level of luck inherent in GW games. I think its a good thing. Reason being, I feel like the things in the game that make it most memorable are the moments when things go UNEXPECTEDLY. How players react when what SHOULD have happened DOESN’T is what makes things interesting IMO.
I totally agree. Those luck based events in games are where we cheer, laugh, cry and see a level of cinema in the game.
Let me be a little more clear about what I mean:
What constitutes “skill” and “tactics” in 40k right now is knowing how to make the most of the rules like wound allocation, and objective scenarios, rather than legitimate tactics. It doesn’t matter if the rules are clear and balanced, what matters is whether or not they make sense.
Ask a Flames of War player about real tactics. I don’t play the game, but I do know that while luck is present, legitimate tactics are the difference between victory and defeat.
I disagree that being “good” at 40K is mostly about rules minutia- having a good battle plan, understanding what the enemy needs/wants to do and how to counter that, etc, are all very important parts of playing the game. There is plenty of skill, tactics, and strategy involved in 40K.
Combined with their ability to make a compelling universe and models.
I just know that some people don’t even care that much about the rules. To them, its all about having a structure to play with miniatures.
I don’t know what I just read
It probably sucked.
Well said. I’m still new to the PNW scene, but all the fluff/uber talk that has popped up on the forum the past couple weeks really took me by surprise.
I hope everyone from that debate reads this article.
Its a bit of argument that’s been going on for a while. Comp vs no Comp is always going to get heated for a variety of reasons.
I see 40k gaming rather like the SCA (Society for Creative Anachronism) circa 1985; it’s an activity with no connection to The Real World ™ that inspires extreme emotions about how it should be played.
Dear lord, please let this hobby never get as bad as the SCA.
” I find the look of helmetless Space Marines to be idiotic, my buddy thinks they look heroic. I think its cool that Logan Grimnar is considered a hero and is almost universally loved in the Imperium, whereas some of my friends think it should be Marneus. I like the idea of the Hive Mind and the oppressive terror of the Tyranid forces, my buddy thinks that since they are all mindless that the army has no soul and is uninteresting.” – All this examples are about fluff issues. But what about people who don’t even know and care who Grimnar or Calgar are? Your article is incomplete. I have no problem with people who have a different view on fluff. But I am upset with people who don’t care about fluff. Net sportsmen. And enough calling anyone who respects the game background a nerd. Any reasonable adult understands that it is not like this. Only small minded people will believe in such kind of stereotypes. Your article is about understanding each other, but silly stamps like “nerd” or “nerdrage” does not contribute.
I’m a nerd. Why would such labelling be so painful, or not constructive? Now, I think its interesting that you think that someone who respects the game must equally like the fluff and understand. I’d say that’s someone who respects the universe of the game. Someone who is really intent on following RAW might believe that they are respecting the game and someone who isn’t interested in the minutia of how rules interact is someone they might find annoying. Again, what we are invested in in the 40k hobby varies, and none is really more valid than the other.
As an 40k player I love and understand fluff. But i don’t see it understanding fluff plays any part in a tournament base of playing the game. Every event have their focus. Anyone who find it annoying with RAW in a tournament is asking for trouble and should not be there in the first place.
Where will they go to win Best Painted?
Painting event. We have one in vancouver at strategy games and hobbies every Oct. This year is the 5th or 6th. other one at Gottacon. Hosted by the store “Dicebag”. More info on that go to http://www.gottacon.com. other one is Golden Demon by GW. 3 just on top of my head to win Best Painted.
What about Best Sportsman?
First you have to defind sportmen. if sportmen mean 40k history i can point u to gamesday quit event. if you mean building the hobby then i point to u the grey knight program. U go up against each other on how many demo games, followers etc. If sportmen mean fame i point the internet to u.
40k is a hobby. In this hobby, we have many “aspect” that people enjoy as you point them out already; painting, modeling, playing etc.
Fist I must quote: What happens then when you go to a TOURNAMENT and plop down an army that you think is really cool (for WHATEVER reason), and your opponent immediately dismisses it. “That’s a battalion box set army if I ever saw one!” “You brought a leaf-blower!” “Why did you paint your Space Wolves brown? Don’t you know they are only grey!?!?!”
The problem/issue, and many gamers have this problem, is that you went to a TOURNAMENT and expect an “Hobby”.
By def, a TOURNAMENT is a competitive event. I expect competitive games. I consider disrespect when i went up against an easy or a fluff army at a tournament. Let said is 100 dollar to go and 5 games, i match up with an fluff army that i just stream roll over. To me, you just wasted 20 dollars and time. Is only fair i say something to the effect please don’t waste my time and money. Also I am not there trying to guess what is what, I am there to play. so brown space wolves i might have a problem with if i have to guess what is what.
Now takes OFCC as an example. It is not a TOURNAMENT so I expect “challenge” game. I am looking forward to fluff army crazy of the wall missions. So I am paying to see what crazy/stupid stuff we can do while having a beer. The objective of the event is can we meet this “challenge”.
Next takes Gamesday. Is a show and tell event. I am there not to play game but to see whats new, show off my painting, see whats brown can do for space wolves.
I can go on about different type of events. 40k is a hobby but a TOURNAMENT is not a hobby. Is like going to a painting event and I complain about ur 3 colors model and u said this is a hobby and my space marine can beat your guardsman in hand to hand.
Historicly, GW has always wanted to emphasize the other elements of the hobby even at tournaments. I think the key to remember is that a GW tournament is a different animal than other tournaments. Its like a one of those words that are spelled the same but mean different things.
Here is the heart of the problem. GT or similar tournament is not one tournament but more 3 or more tournaments mix into one. lets just keep things simple and limit GT to only 3 tournaments going on at the same time. What you are saying is that gamers should be ok to bring a fluff list or a underpar army to this event. after all they are only there for 2 out of the 3 tournament by not taking part in the competitive tournament. So by the same token can a gamer also go there for 2 out of 3 and not taking part in sport?
Heart of the problem is this article wants competitive gamer to respect gamer that takes no part in competitive tournament. But DEMAND the same competitive gamer to part take in sport. Mainly not be an ass to the fluff player and said the fluff player just wasted my time and money.
Tournament is just mean competitive event. GW had host a tournament where 40s guys sitting there competing about 40k history. lastest example of that is in TOS vegas but in the 90s is bigger. Is disrespectful shows up in a tournament (whatever that is. can be painting) and not ready compete.
Example of that is OFCC. I better be ready to compete for smiles and not KP. so the the other side don’t show up at NOVA and be a fluff bunny. The problem is people shows up to a tournament or a set of tournamets and confuse on why they are there.
Actually, this article isn’t making demands of anyone; and, frankly, I think its funny you think its aimed at competitive players. We’ve never played against each other to my knowledge, but I can assure you I lean more to the competitive side than the hobbyist…
“Actually, this article isn’t making demands of anyone” then why u asking ppl to accept the hobby they way u like it. If you are not asking for something then what the point on posting.
“I think its funny you think its aimed at competitive players.” Is just the quote I was was aim at competitive player. I don’t care where your aim at. I don’t agree with I have to accept how other enjoy their hobby at tournament.
I will made the same points if you wrote the quote on hobbyist have to accept comp player.
At Type A event, a Type B attitude player show up. You are asking readers to accept Type B player because he is enjoying 40k his way. NO, I will not accept him because is a Type A event. Type B player ruin my enjoyment of the event. substitute A & B with whatever: comp player, hobbyist, mix type, cheater, dice roller, fluff bunny, drunken 40k, etc.
So when an event use the word tournament in their title; they define their event.
That was a good article. What is this, I don’t even…?
Oh, it was by FLUGER…that explains it then…
Thanks!
Well said. Don’t forget that, along with a fairly small pool of participants, we also get really used to WHERE we play. The local environment is hugely influential to how we view the game.
But, at the end of the day, it is just a game of toy soldiers.
Absolutely!
Well.. here is my thoughts on yours.
http://bloghammer.net/?p=975
I love what you’re saying. And it’s totally true.
(I’m an outsider to all this behind the scenes stuff but Fluger and Zen’s words are food for thought. I am putting the same comment on both articles.)
The one thing that this hobby cannot afford is bigotry. I think that most of us came to wargaming and similar pastimes through some sort of dissatisfaction with the traditional ways of measuring status. Loving something despite peer disapproval can make a type of escapism more cherished. This can backfire when two fans come at a hobby from different angles, and their sets of assumptions get challenged. Tolerance is key, there is no right or wrong way to have fun if it is not hurting someone else. In a wargame, part of the activity is playing out fantasy violence so our minions die instead of us. If only we could transfer our resentments onto the wargame battlefield as successfully as we transfer our bloodlust.
In any group there will be misunderstandings and minor infractions but getting butthurt is not helpful to anyone on the road to happiness. This goes out to everyone, call it unsolicited advice. Stow the drama, it’s never worth it. Save your fighting spirit for when the dice and tape measure are in your hand. Kill your foe’s models, not their joy.
While some like to divide gamers into camps our similarities outweigh all the differences. Otherwise, there would be no cooperative headspace in which to functionally act out a game. Most of our assumptions and preferences will be shared, and that should be enough. Every 40k gamer I have talked to seems to like the models, the backstory, and the game. So what if someone likes or excels at one aspect more than another?
As an analogy consider baseball fandom. Some will prefer the socializing, shouting and beerdrinking in a big arena. Others will enjoy the technical aspects of the game and keep track of statistics. Yet other fans will like the visceral thrill of athletes in action. Is there a right or wrong way to enjoy sports spectating? All these different kinds of people appreciate some aspects more than others but can come together under the banner of one sport, or one team. 40k has teams of a sort (Waaagh da Orks!!!) but that’s not really important. What is important is not to lock the doors of the stadium to “the others” that don’t like your hobby your way.
I understand OFCC is an invitational, the hobby can sustain a few of those exclusionary events. Almost every party has a guest list, and you’re not likely to reinvite the asshole or the clueless bumpkin back to your home. You want only those with the right hobby spirit, I get that. Does it need to go further than that? “All hard liquor drinkers must go to the basement, the smokers do their thing outside, and the beer drinkers have to stay in the kitchen.” An odd party indeed.
This party analogy is playful but falls apart. 40k is both a gentleman’s game full of shared conventions, and highly structured with a strict ruleset. Our tournaments are the same way. There are some official rules for behavior but you don’t need to tell people not to flip tables or eat gretchin. They just know. Gamers can pick up on subtleties and show restraint when given the proper format and encouragement. They don’t need to be forced into anything. Any restrictive system will be “gamed” and eventually broken.
If you trust the “leetness” of having an invitational centered around narrative gaming, then you don’t need rules governing comp or to rank the army lists. If you want an open competitive event that has a clear appreciation for the casual or story focused gamer, look no farther than TSHFT.
I am going to use your party example. It is ok to smoke in front of the beer drinker? prolly is better for him to go outside and smoke. when he finish he can come back in and enjoy a beer with us. it is ok for the hard drinker to go yelling and screaming when the beer drinkers want to talk about their wife/gf problem with other guys? they can yell and scream at the basement and join the beer guys after they want to take a break from it. In fact, party every group does stay in their area just ppl moving around to different area. but once they are there they change to fit within that area.
I don’t smoke but if i want to join the smoking group outside i knew i am going to get 2nd hand smoke. I will not complain but welcome smoking in that area. but if u smoke in the kitchen for sure i will say something.
so same with 40k. enjoy the hobby but don’t force your way of enjoyment into “my area”.
Nerds get ragey with other nerds especially when in a competitive environment. I am one, so are we all.