RIP Warhammer

[mbh]

I dunno, seems to be some confusion about what Oldhammer means - it is literally "Playing earlier editions of Warhammer, specifically editions 1, 2, 3" and that's it really,

Oldhammer Contract

I don't think that's being exclusive, or snobby or wanky, just a way of identifying a common interest. Nor do I think someone posting a goat or saying "modern toss!" should ever be taken too seriously, it's not like anyone is calling for the thread to be locked and deleted, just e because they don't like it or it doesn't fit with their individual view of what the forum should be about.

We've outgrown this

Sorry pal

 

[whiskey priest]

Get more dwarves and paint them up! Distance is no reason not to join in! What kind of pie?

Seriously though, there may be a bit of a language issue, the old two nations seperated by a common language thing, but to me the word 'wanky' means overly complex for the sake of it or snobby and pretentious. I'm quite open to the idea that it means something else down your way.
Just for context reasons, I have played 4th, 5th and 6th edition 40k, necromunda, Mordheim, inquisitor, warhammer 6th, 7th and 8th, Warhammer ancients 1, 1.5 and 2, legends of ....etc. all since I reconnected with the hobby 8 or so years ago. I think what I found here just feels warm and snuggly. It fits the kind of games I like. Rulesets are whatever are convenient to have a good time pushing toy soldiers about.

 

[Asslessman]

Rulesets are whatever are convenient to have a good time pushing toy soldiers about.

Allelujah ! (or whatever pleases your own god...)

 

[mbh]

yup

If I only played 3rd edition, I would have maybe one guy to play against. 8th edition gives me more opportunities to play and it's a fun game IMO.

 

[Chico]

We've outgrown this

This 100%

 

[Gareth the Grot]

So according to the general consensus here I could merrily play 8th edition WHFB using all new GW models and still claim to be playing 'Oldhammer'? As I wrote in my previous post on this thread I fully appreciate that there will be differing views and commitment levels et cetera to the 'Oldhammer' thang, but surely there must be some fairly specific, common strand that unites (most) of the users of this fine forum? A name has to mean something, right? Otherwise One Direction could justifiably claim to play Grindcore. And as any Grindhead would tell you, that's just bulls**t.

 

[Chico]

So according to the general consensus here I could merrily play 8th edition WHFB using all new GW models and still claim to be playing 'Oldhammer'?

Providing it's a game done in the spirit of Oldhammer, aka with a scenario and with lists not designed to rape each other but rather fluffed based (Or better yet no lists). Optional GM and of course the big point I'm my opinion painted and loved armies.

 

[whiskey priest]

I've never thought of it as 'playing oldhammer' I always thought of it as a label for a large range of overlapping approaches to gaming, drawing lots of people to the same place for lots of different reasons to show and share cool stuff that either is old or reminds us of the old stuff that we liked.

That's some shitty punctuation right there!

 

[Asslessman]

So according to the general consensus here I could merrily play 8th edition WHFB using all new GW models and still claim to be playing 'Oldhammer'? As I wrote in my previous post on this thread I fully appreciate that there will be differing views and commitment levels et cetera to the 'Oldhammer' thang, but surely there must be some fairly specific, common strand that unites (most) of the users of this fine forum? A name has to mean something, right? Otherwise One Direction could justifiably claim to play Grindcore. And as any Grindhead would tell you, that's just bulls**t.

The metal head in me gets the point, it feels like asking Metallica to quit their band name because everything they've done after the 4 th album was just radio poo.

Let's see this another way.

Most of us really do adhere to Zhu's contract and to the idea to "bring back the GM on the tabletops", and still you can find some people putting this idea into motion with more recent models or more recent rules...
2 choices :
- a lot of people here (including myself) are not "pure" oldhammerers and should only leave the 1st to 3rd ed WHFB stuff here
- the definition of Oldhammer has evolved and has been broadened

I tend to think it's the second but that's just me...
I'm interested in being explained why using any model we please is right and why using any ruleset is not.

Is there really an issue here, have we had killer combo threads, how to use X's army list at best topics or whole pages of silly centurion pastic space mrine? nope. I don't really see no big deal so far. We just enjoy our old lead with a bit of plastic or resin sometimes and we just use whatever ruleset our opponent is confortable with... Maybe we're closer to "coolhammer" but I don't see how it is not compatible with oldhammer..."

I really don't mean to challenge any of you guys, I just feel we all feel united by something that has no real definition and that some of us like to name "oldhammer".

EDIT : is the "old" for the old stuff (in which case the vast majority of people here are in the wrong) or for the old spirit (in which case all of us are in the right path) ?

 

[mbh]

So according to the general consensus here I could merrily play 8th edition WHFB using all new GW models and still claim to be playing 'Oldhammer'? As I wrote in my previous post on this thread I fully appreciate that there will be differing views and commitment levels et cetera to the 'Oldhammer' thang, but surely there must be some fairly specific, common strand that unites (most) of the users of this fine forum? A name has to mean something, right? Otherwise One Direction could justifiably claim to play Grindcore. And as any Grindhead would tell you, that's just bulls**t.

yes

you can do whatever you want and call it Oldhammer. we're super chill around here.

 

[Asslessman]

Well let's just take this the other way and agree on what is not, like :
- rules lawyering,
- winning at all cost
- playing with unpainted stuff
- being a **** about what colour should the kneepad of x's space marine of the y's company of z'chapter be...
- whining about which amry is the cheesiest/coolest/whatever
-...

if you don't tick any of those boxes, then you pretty much fit in the old spirit of WHFB and RT when the games could be played with whatever models you had (even plastic toys, Gijoes) from whatever range you liked. Is bei close to the old spirit enough to being "oldhammer"? I'll leave the answer to others.

EDIT : And I believe Galdrin's posts below is just the most accurate view on this subject.

 

[Zhu Bajie]

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's my own opinion. Seriously, you see the same "poor model, good paint job" post all the time when someone shows a more recent model, or the "how is this relevant" one here in a section full of off topic threads. Nobody is crying over it, or the odd cry of "modern toss!" as Zhu said, certainly not me but it does get old.

Seriously, what gets old is discussions about

_ GW's business going down the pan
_ complaining about price-hikes
_ complaining about big plastic kits,
_ complaining about not having Army List X updated
_ blah blah blah
_ deathstars, congalines

Or maybe I should spend less time on Dakka and Warseeer ;-P

And for the record, while I might draw peoples attention to the origin of the phrase and its original intention, in NO WAY EVER am I going to go out of my way to physically stop people using the word "Oldhammer" or this forum, to discuss whatever they like, not am I going to say "your definition is totally invalid" - although I might say "there is a prior definition" and goats. And yes of course, people were still playing earlier editions of Warhammer, but a convenient sign to put up and discuss wasn't around. It's much like OSR in D&D.

you can do whatever you want and call it Oldhammer.

I wouldn't go that far - not sure playing MtG is anyones definition of Oldhammer.

 

[Galadrin]

I'd have to tentatively agree with Zhu and others, although I appreciate Assless's constructive approach. When I left the former to tackle real-life issues shortly after joining, there was no doubt that Zhu's contract stood as the general constitution of the community. When I rejoined recently, the landscape of the forum had changed immensely—not only away from Trep's server to a new one, but demographically the community had grown immensely. Inevitably when you welcome the tired and the needy of the global village, you will find that a wide diversity of views have immigrated into your forum as well.

That's all fine and good, of course. Different people are sick of different aspects of the contemporary "official" gaming culture. Some people are happy with most everything about WFB 8th Edition (models included), but just don't like the tournament scene and are inspired by the idea of narrative scenarios. Some people just don't like the newer models (or their prices!) and want to play modern rule sets with the models they remember from their early years in the hobby. As the community becomes younger, this definition of "models from the early years" changes with it—I personally will be 30 this year and while I love the 3rd edition models, I have a bigger soft spot for many of the 4th/5th edition models of my youth. It's perfectly feasible that "Oldhammer" will eventually mean Finecast for many, given another year or two.

So what do you do with all this diversity? Potentially rules are not sacred, nor miniatures. We can come up with a working definition of this community for this moment (such as "Oldhammer is not win-at-all-costs"), but this might feel just as silly and outdated in the next transformation.

So then, what defines us? I think the notion that we must be perfectly liberal and open-ended, effectively becoming a flimsy adjunct for Warseer.com, is a truly impoverished view of our future. There really is no need for "another" general forum about Warhammer, and when people get that, they will eventually abandon this server like Macharia's Battle Glade was abandoned for the Asrai forums years ago. Or perhaps this forum will continue in a pale diminished form.

In any case, I don't think we should be afraid to say that we don't want to redefine "Us" to accommodate ultimately divergent interests. There are places online for everyone, and here too everyone is welcome. But it is not wrong to expect Oldhammer forum goers to engage with each other on a common ground. As we say in the university, you can bring any of your own experiences and knowledge to the table, as long as you bring it back to the text (the common point of engagement where all our diversity of views can communicate clearly with each other). So it is just a matter of figuring out a text that is not too narrow to entirely alienate the general interests of the community and not so broad that it doesn't engender any kind of constructive engagement or building projects like the BLOOD retro-clone.

The problem is that Oldhammer seems to mean one of two things: (1) old figurines (for those members that really care more about painting and collecting than playing) or (2) old rule sets (or, more loosely, the presumed ethos behind those old games—scenarios, cooperation, story-telling etc.). We all seem to have either one or both of those interests, even if our rigidity in adherence to them varies. I'd suggest that we do adopt Zhu's contract as the constitution of the community (as it had been since the beginning), but with an interpretive lens of the former two categories (which can be potentially loosely defined and more or less rigorously adhered to, acknowledging that the definition of "old" depends on the age of the forum goer, but nevertheless in productive tension with community expectations of "old" meaning "not new").

That way, you can throw down your Newhammer Finecast models and be playing some 4th edition Herohammer, or you can put down some 1987 Old Lead and play up some 8th edition with your mates. And all of this more or less satisfies the interpretive lens of our constitution, without denying that it may still be debated and in productive tension with our expectations as a community. After all, a forum is a place of conversation—it is just important to have a central "text" or notion to bring it all back to.

And yes, I typed this all out on an iPad...

 

[Erny]

yes

you can do whatever you want and call it Oldhammer. we're super chill around here.

I guess if you say so. Of course nobody owns the term but the community as a whole does own it and you'll find it is self policing. So long as the majority of the community are happy with what the community as a whole is generating then the community will persist. If it gets to the point that there is no difference between ourselves and warseer then I guess there will be no point in us being here.

Oldhammer certainly meant playing old versions of Warhammer (sort of works don't you think). It was a good label to stick on things so people would get what you were up to. It still is and shouldn't be completely ignored however if the church has broadened enough to include games of 8th using new minis no problems from me if it is generally agreed to be good quality and what is generally expected. I guess we will see lots of posts about just that and enthusiasm for such posts.

Perhaps the best way to know is to post it and see what amount of positive interest you get, I look forward to the coolness.

 

[Padre]

Just caught up with this thread. Last time I looked had only reached page 4. Good to hear that Asslessman and Zoggin-Eck like the threads I am putting up, and think that what I do and how I do it is happily 'Oldhammer'.

The issue has intrigued me. I always thought of myself as an 'Oldhammerer' but for somewhat different reasons to those that have been mentioned so far. Yes I have recently played old edition games, but I thought of myself as embodying Oldhammer because I have been playing WFB since 1983 and 1st ed., and because I still use armies including figures from that time. (I stuck with 3rd ed right through 4th and 5th, but that probably bolsters my case.)

The term Oldhammer also felt appropriate for my hobby because I gamed in a world of campaigns, stories, roleplay, homemade rules and lists, and gamesmasters. Just like I always have, usually with me being the gamesmaster. I have run several WFRP campaigns, from around 1986 onwards, and have even got published scenarios (next is due out in the final edition of Warpstone). This RPing in the warhammer world always influenced my wargaming in the warhammer world. I have never even vaguely enjoyed tournament type play, min/maxing lists and all that sort of competitive thing.

But the idea that has intrigued me is that I am not actually playing what is generally supposed to be Oldhammer, I am playing a style of Warhammer which has evolved for me out of 3 decades of playing. I ran campaigns from long before Mighty Empires came out, then ran campaigns using modified versions of those lists. I joined internet campaigns (as you can see from my Old Campaign threads) and explored what one can do with them from the player's perspective. And now I have emerged from all this to do what I do now, playing Warhammer the way I do now, thick with written stories, painting projects, home rules and lists, photographs and such.

I am an Oldhammerer therefore, in the sense that I am one way in which a very old player of Warhammer Fantasy Battle might turn out if he sticks with it, and evolves, over decades. I get very little enjoyment out of simply playing one of equal pointed battles, apart from the social side of such which I love. I have played all the one offs I ever need to. But I have a LOT more playing to do in campaigns, a lot more exploring of the Warhammer World to do.

I wanna explore this more, but I have instructions to go and mash some potatoes. Oooh, I love mash.

 

[mbh]

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's my own opinion. Seriously, you see the same "poor model, good paint job" post all the time when someone shows a more recent model, or the "how is this relevant" one here in a section full of off topic threads. Nobody is crying over it, or the odd cry of "modern toss!" as Zhu said, certainly not me but it does get old.

Seriously, what gets old is discussions about

_ GW's business going down the pan
_ complaining about price-hikes
_ complaining about big plastic kits,
_ complaining about not having Army List X updated
_ blah blah blah
_ deathstars, congalines

Or maybe I should spend less time on Dakka and Warseeer ;-P

And for the record, while I might draw peoples attention to the origin of the phrase and its original intention, in NO WAY EVER am I going to go out of my way to physically stop people using the word "Oldhammer" or this forum, to discuss whatever they like, not am I going to say "your definition is totally invalid" - although I might say "there is a prior definition" and goats. And yes of course, people were still playing earlier editions of Warhammer, but a convenient sign to put up and discuss wasn't around. It's much like OSR in D&D.

you can do whatever you want and call it Oldhammer.

I wouldn't go that far - not sure playing MtG is anyones definition of Oldhammer.

it depends on what sets you're using

 

[Asslessman]

Can we say pure old hammer is old rules (WHFB or RT) played with old models in the old fashion

and

Oldhammer friendly is anything with one or more of the 3 prior ingredients.

That way, anything on this forum has either to be pure oldhammer OR oldhammer friendly at least to be here (and everything here)

 

[mbh]

I'd have to tentatively agree with Zhu and others, although I appreciate Assless's constructive approach. When I left the former to tackle real-life issues shortly after joining, there was no doubt that Zhu's contract stood as the general constitution of the community. When I rejoined recently, the landscape of the forum had changed immensely—not only away from Trep's server to a new one, but demographically the community had grown immensely. Inevitably when you welcome the tired and the needy of the global village, you will find that a wide diversity of views have immigrated into your forum as well.

That's all fine and good, of course. Different people are sick of different aspects of the contemporary "official" gaming culture. Some people are happy with most everything about WFB 8th Edition (models included), but just don't like the tournament scene and are inspired by the idea of narrative scenarios. Some people just don't like the newer models (or their prices!) and want to play modern rule sets with the models they remember from their early years in the hobby. As the community becomes younger, this definition of "models from the early years" changes with it—I personally will be 30 this year and while I love the 3rd edition models, I have a bigger soft spot for many of the 4th/5th edition models of my youth. It's perfectly feasible that "Oldhammer" will eventually mean Finecast for many, given another year or two.

So what do you do with all this diversity? Potentially rules are not sacred, nor miniatures. We can come up with a working definition of this community for this moment (such as "Oldhammer is not win-at-all-costs"), but this might feel just as silly and outdated in the next transformation.

So then, what defines us? I think the notion that we must be perfectly liberal and open-ended, effectively becoming a flimsy adjunct for Warseer.com, is a truly impoverished view of our future. There really is no need for "another" general forum about Warhammer, and when people get that, they will eventually abandon this server like Macharia's Battle Glade was abandoned for the Asrai forums years ago. Or perhaps this forum will continue in a pale diminished form.

In any case, I don't think we should be afraid to say that we don't want to redefine "Us" to accommodate ultimately divergent interests. There are places online for everyone, and here too everyone is welcome. But it is not wrong to expect Oldhammer forum goers to engage with each other on a common ground. As we say in the university, you can bring any of your own experiences and knowledge to the table, as long as you bring it back to the text (the common point of engagement where all our diversity of views can communicate clearly with each other). So it is just a matter of figuring out a text that is not too narrow to entirely alienate the general interests of the community and not so broad that it doesn't engender any kind of constructive engagement or building projects like the BLOOD retro-clone.

The problem is that Oldhammer seems to mean one of two things: (1) old figurines (for those members that really care more about painting and collecting than playing) or (2) old rule sets (or, more loosely, the presumed ethos behind those old games—scenarios, cooperation, story-telling etc.). We all seem to have either one or both of those interests, even if our rigidity in adherence to them varies. I'd suggest that we do adopt Zhu's contract as the constitution of the community (as it had been since the beginning), but with an interpretive lens of the former two categories (which can be potentially loosely defined and more or less rigorously adhered to, acknowledging that the definition of "old" depends on the age of the forum goer, but nevertheless in productive tension with community expectations of "old" meaning "not new").

That way, you can throw down your Newhammer Finecast models and be playing some 4th edition Herohammer, or you can put down some 1987 Old Lead and play up some 8th edition with your mates. And all of this more or less satisfies the interpretive lens of our constitution, without denying that it may still be debated and in productive tension with our expectations as a community. After all, a forum is a place of conversation—it is just important to have a central "text" or notion to bring it all back to.

And yes, I typed this all out on an iPad...

+ 1000 points for doing that on an iPad

I'm 100% sure that we never have to worry about becoming a warseer substitute for anyone, ever. That's just not the crowd that frequents this board. If someone wants a warseer option, there are many choices before this forum.

I'm not sure why there is even the slightest concern over the definition of Oldhammer. Like you said, it's going to be different for different people. But the board seems to run smoothly any way.

If there is a thread that doesn't fit a member's definition for Oldhammer, they can simply avoid it. It shouldn't really matter to anyone. I couldn't care less if someone else disagrees with my idea of Oldhammer. I

 

[mbh]

Can we say pure old hammer is old rules (WHFB or RT) played with old models in the old fashion

and

Oldhammer friendly is anything with one or more of the 3 prior ingredients.

That way, anything on this forum has either to be pure oldhammer OR oldhammer friendly at least to be here (and everything here)

That sounds about right but is it even worth labeling any of this?

 

[Padre]

BTW, I know my previous post sounded a bit 'me, me, me', but I just wanted to explore if and how what I do does fit the term Oldhammer, and I intended to write more (not about me) but the mash potatoes got in the way.

I am also one of those who think that a strict definition of the term Oldhammer is unnecessary, other than that is the term for our community. If I was to try and define how exactly I see the community then I could say we might be older players or players of older games, or both, and we might use old figures (and still paint with enamels!), and we might do these things exclusively or simply as a component part of a wider hobby.

I have played some 3rd ed recently, even some 1st ed. In fact it was playing and reporting the 1st ed game that somehow (can't recall the details) drew me into this forum. I do feel a little bit of an outsider in that my own attitude to the collection of models seems a bit different to many. I have no urge to complete sets of figures, or amass every model in this or that range, or by this sculptor. I could not tell you the designer's name of any model, expect for the obvious ones like the Perry twins probably designed Perry Miniatures' models. Every urge I have to buy and paint models comes from the campaign projects I am working on - the costume, armament, etc of the model - whether it suits the game world. I am rubbish at bidding on ebay, having only dipped my toe in such activities, and I have made only one trade through the forum (which was a great experience). Whereas I feel that there is a fairly stronger collectors' ethos here on this site with the trading and catalogueing (sp?) etc.

But none of this is in a spirit of complaint. I enjoy seeing what you collectors get up to, and learning a bit about the figures. Best of all is when I see something and think "That's be great for my campaign."