Sunday, January 23, 2011

New Poll - To Fluff or not to Fluff

Hello everyone!

We've taken a look over the last few polls at what level of painting you're comfortable with before the models hit the table, how you like your tournaments, and what you think of GWs recent eyebrow-raising FAQ. On the whole, it looks like most people out there are in the same boat with painting - getting a lot of models done to a pretty good standard but never quite achieving full completion, with a good chunk in the "3-colors-covers" category, and the smallest groups being polar opposites of the fully painted masterpiece armies and bare plastic camps. Most of you preferred tournaments with few or no soft scores like painting and comp, and most people were in agreement that the new FAQ was a big help to Dark Angels and Black Templars, but it's not going to change the game significantly.

Now, we're looking to find out how much fluff factors into your list building. Regardless of whether you're building a tournament or casual list, do you keep the fluff in mind and take models that 'make sense' with the storyline, or is it all about the best, theme be damned?

-Dis.

12 comments:

  1. When I build a list, I pick a fluff aspect I would like to build around and then go and fill in the points with competitiveness in mind. I may make an exception here or there, but I feel that the most fun lists are those which are made around a theme.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The choices for this poll are biased. I don't consider fluff at all when building a list, but that option shouldn't be dismissed with "if it's in it wins".

    I choose models for fun or simply just want to play, and doing so isn't mutually exclusive with ignoring fluff.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Not to self-promote too much, but I just today posted some fluff!

    http://enormous-noise.blogspot.com/2011/01/emperors-spears-fluff.html

    I think fluff is great to help focus your army, make it your own, and make each little guy matter. Especially when you play an elite army, and each model really is "one guy" whose name you might know.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Depends on system, force and play environment.

    I'm not going to build a fluffy list for a Warmachine tournament, and I'm not going to build a crunchy doom list with no soul for a WFB campaign weekend.

    I do have one consistent principle, though: whatever is possible is permitted. The background should never be used to shut down play options; it should encourage people to contextualise the play options they choose. Saying 'but that's not fluffy' reveals nothing but your own lack of imagination... and here endeth the lesson.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "The choices for this poll are biased."

    All polls are biased. Welcome to the life of a grown up.

    ReplyDelete
  6. No, actually, they're not. Not well-designed ones, anyway. And trying to come off as clever by being snide is unhelpful.

    "How much does fluff factor into listbuilding?

    A: Primary concern
    B: Some
    C: Not at all
    "

    Simple? Sure, but it also takes a wider range of responses into consideration.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I typically don't take fluff into account when building Warmachine lists, but I do like to run theme forces from time to time. I do have a habit of developing mini-backstories for certain models, like Magic Head the Khadoran Battle Mechanik...

    ReplyDelete
  8. If you don't like the poll don't take it. And trying to prove a point while anonymous is unhelpful. An anonymous comment is invalid due to your being unwilling to log in and have an identity. Anonymity = trolling; trolling = invalid opinion. I'm done.

    I like the poll Dis. It, obviously, brings up the age old debate among war-gamers as to how you should conduct your list building. All Competition, all the time, "KILL MAIM BURN, KILL MAIM BURN!"

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not wanting to get up in anyone's grill about this, but there are reasons for not wanting a Google account of any sort, and some of them are hopefully valid enough to respect.

    Attaching some sort of name or identity - even if it's just two dashes and a handle at the end of a post - is probably still good practice, though.

    -- Von

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Attaching some sort of name or identity - even if it's just two dashes and a handle at the end of a post - is probably still good practice, though."

    That's all I ask for. I am not about to go through deleting every anonymous post like a power exercise out of Machiavelli's Prince, but I appreciate some sort of signature.

    As a side note google isn't the only way to sign the name and hopefully in a about a month or so we will have a better, more advanced comment system that will help alleviate the "anonymous" problem.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm not a competitive player, so most of the time I like building lists that seem flavorful, but Ill throw in any model that has endless utility.

    ReplyDelete
  12. My vote was "kinda". I like the fluff, but, to me, it doesn't go far enough. Where are the options for raiding factories and getting plans? The Cryx especially have this vibe of "we go in, we steal their best stuff, we Cryxify it.", that's explicitly stated in the established background for each unit, but I haven't seen any rules for how to do that.

    ReplyDelete