Today, Joseph is sharing with us his thoughts on what it means to be a ‘Fluffy’ player!
Hey guys, it’s Joseph here (@pertinaxpaints) with an article today on the ins and outs on what I believe what makes an army fun, and also ‘fluffy’.
First things first, it’s important for me to say I think that playing competitive is absolutely brilliant, and that this article mainly applies for pick up games at your FLGS’ and casual play. So without further ado, Let’s get into it:
What is Fluff?
It’s not what you find in your pocket, that’s called lint. Fluff is a sometimes-derogatory word to describe the rich, colourful, grimdark, fascinating histories of our wonderful hobby universes and has little to no bearing on the way the game is played. It is not in anyway crunchy – which is also not what you find in your pocket; that’s called crumbs.
Why be fluffy?
This is a question I think everyone knows the answer to already, but it’s still worth talking about. Being fluffy is the reason most people get into the hobby in the first place, either through being enchanted by the cool looking models in a shop window, by reading some captivating lore in a rulebook, or perhaps a black library jaunt. (Horus Heresy books will kill your heart, soul, and your wallet. They’re amazing…)
Fluff can also equal fun. At the end of the day, if you love your army, it means you’ll be playing them as they’re intended to feel. Now whether that’s guard gun-lines pouring out a solid wall of lasgun fire, or hordes of Orks blazing across the battlefield on trukks and bikes, fluffy play creates a sense of spectacle and awakens your imagination.
Another thing to recognise is that 40k, AoS and The Hobbit™ are all dice games. When you play a dice game at a competitive level, essentially you are trying to find ways to mitigate reliance on luck alone. So in ‘fluffy’ play, allowing luck to play a more important role in the game can spice things up. There are powerful stratagems and cool effects that only happen on a 1 in 6 chance, sometimes allowing lady luck to take the wheel can create incredible moments. Obviously both you and your opponent will have to be on equal footing with this reliance on luck, otherwise games could be one sided. But think of stray shots wounding huge monsters, a Land Raider dying a ridiculous death to overwatch, or a single model hanging on for longer than it should. All of these things are made hilarious because they’re unlikely.
To that end, I feel like there are a few definable things that can make an army fluffy:
· Aesthetic: How does the army look? Does it deviate from the background and how? Or maybe it follows the provided iconography and hierarchy to the letter, or is a creation of its own.
· Play style: How does the army list/style relate to their background? Is the list a classic that you’d normally see? Or maybe it’s an interesting new play style.
· Weakness: Most armies have a weakness of some sort. Some have loads, but either way, a good player will be able to cover their army’s weaknesses most of the time, or they’ll plug in another faction/ally that will cover it. Providing an opponent with a clear way to defeat you is fun (albeit risky), but there’s got to be a clear way to defeat them too…
Case example: Orks
Walk up to any Warhammer player and ask them if they’re a fan of Orks. Most will say either that they’re fun, or perhaps they love them. Some might scream “waaaaaagh” signalling their adoration, and a small percentage may be indifferent. So why the love for Orks? Well in my opinion there are a few things that add into their likeability, ranging from their very distinct aesthetic all the way up to their interesting rule mechanics.
Aesthetic:Ork models can’t be confused with any other in the entire range (to be fair I argue that all GW mini’s have their own unique style), their vehicles are eclectic and characterful, their infantry are distinct whilst showing clearly the hierarchy of the army (Nobz are bigger than boyz, Warbosses bigger than Nobz) and also they’re a converters dream: with the concept of looting you can turn anything into an Ork something or other!
· Playstyle: Ork rules are random, whilst there are some tasty things in the codex at the moment (mob rule, da jump etc), Ork armies have an inconsistency that makes them fun to play. Ramshackle on trukks, reducing damage to 1, or the fact that burna bombers explode on a 4+ and do 3 mortal wounds to everything within 6, or the weird ways to wound stuff that arise from Tellyport blastas or the Shokk attack gun.
· Weakness: When the Orks die, they die fast. With the average save of the codex being a 5+ tshirt save, very many bodies are needed to give them a serious competitive edge. Low leadership and a relatively glass cannon nature of the army means high skill is required to weild them well. However, one thing that makes the Ork codex stand out is that there are many ways to build ‘good’ Ork armies. Dread Waaagh anyone?
Now these same things I love, other people could hate, I know for a fact many people dislike playing as Orks because of their unreliability and high model count, but hey, if everyone loved the same thing the world would be a boring place.
How can I be fluffy?
So how does one go about building a fun and fluffy list? Well there are a few things to bear in mind:
· Unless it fits the theme of the army, bringing a lot of the same model/unit can be pretty boring to play against (unless it’s a troops choice) I feel like GW has addressed this with the rule of 3, but it’s always useful to bear in mind.
· Be a Rules As Intended (RAI) person, yes there are a few weird loopholes in some rules, but try not to base an army around exploiting it. Think: “If my opponent doesn’t let me exploit this, would my tactics fall apart?”
· One thing that we saw a lot of in older competitive play was making up weird fluff to explain odd army lists: 9 Tau commanders would never really go into war all together, and you can make up fluff to explain why, but if you’re working backwards and trying to link your army to the fluff, instead of basing its conception in the fluff, you’re going a little off course in my opinion.
· Try not to take a lot of ridiculous auto-include units. These kinds of units I’m talking about are things like Hive Tyrants, pre-FAQ Dark Reapers, Daemon Princes. These units do a lot of work, so setting up to find your opponent has brought multiples of them is quite demoralising, as it means you’re going to be shooting and interacting with the same stuff all game.
Writing a purposely weak list, or one that includes units that people would deem not amazing is all part of the fluffy game in some ways, you just have to make sure your opponent is playing by the same rules. One thing to bear in mind though is that some armies are weaker than others and if you’re playing an army that struggles to put out good units en masse you’ll probably not need to write a weak list per se – just don’t build towards the single strong build the army has. If you’re playing with a top tier army like Aeldari, that’s when you need to engage brain and think of more fun and gimmicky ways to play other than Wave serpent spam, Guardian bombs, more than 1 flier etc…
Overall hopefully this article has given you guys some ideas in how you can build fun and fluffy armies, but obviously these are just my opinions. Heck, 12 eldar fliers in one list can be right up fluffy street! It’s your money after all, if you want 12 aircraft roaming the board go for it!
Hopefully in the next article I’ll be able to elaborate on how to make names and background for your dudes™. Until next time!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Joseph! Looking forward to learning how to name my boys!