Which has the better lore?
>>46727000
It's like asking which color is better - blue or pink. Some like fantasy better, others prefer 40k. Some even like AoS. This is a retarded question. 1/10 made me reply.
>>46727000
WHFB hands down. It had actual characters that evolved, places that characters would return to, and readers grew familiar with, and an actual world to delve in. Not to mention the tons of books that formed the lore over the decades. Pre-BL and whatever. Books like"The undead Genevieve"
40k's books are mostly on some random, and exchangeable numbered world, and its biggest draw is the setting itself, not the lore. It's a constant repetition.
30k however is pretty good, at least in my opinion. It offers the consistency for the lore to settle, that 40k needs.
>>46727000
>alive vs dead
>Which has the better lore?
Isn't it obvious?
>>46727000
One of those two flopped so hard that GW needed to kill it.
Hard question
Is this the real life?
Is this just Fantasy?
>>46727000
40k.
>>46727055
>It had actual characters that evolved, places that characters would return to, and readers grew familiar with, and an actual world to delve in.
40k has all those things. Just look at any novel series.
>>46727000
The one that's not dead.
>>46730069
>>46731717
>>46729594
>Sales drop due to lack of updates and ridiculous prices.
PEOPLE MUST NOT LIKE THE LORE LET'S KILL IT AND REPLACE IT WITH SPACE MARINES
>>46731717
>>46729669
>>46730157
>flop
>dead so we kill it
>never picked up any fantasy material, most likely teens or barely 20's
>Because the setting that has been going since GW, and only ended a year ago is a flop, and the fact that its dead is due to it being bad, not because the game was mishandled and unupdated in favor of "muhspessmurhreenz"
I bet you kids think halo and StarCraft are super original.
>>46729669
That is not the order of events
First it was killed, then it flopped
>"We at Games Workshop are proud of not doing any market research"
>>46732023
>>46732901
>Both settings have high prices,unsupported armies, and bad rules
>One of them died
Because it was shit that nobody played.
I prefer fantasy, but 40k is also nice.
>>46727000
What is Warhammer Fantasy, is that like Age of Sigmar?
When was the last edition where Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40K shared enough rules to play against each other?
>>46733562
3ed fantasy/rogue trader when they literally shared supplement books and were the same setting and several units were exactly the same in both comes to mind
>>46733594
Thanks! Time to start buying old Rogue Trader books.
>>46733562
2nd edition 40k. So 1994-97.
>>46730157
>40k has all those things. Just look at any novel series.
No there's a significant difference. Like you said "look at any novel series" - that's already proof. 40k lore needs a series to even establish some consistency, while FB manages to do this by default, and is not bound to it.
40k lore is a boring and endless repetition, but I give you the benefit of the doubt to confuse lore with the setting. Because otherwise, picking 40k is outright stupid and shows no knowledge about both settings and their lore.
>>46733624
Look into the realm of chaos books. You can literally have chaos space marine vs chaos warrior campaigns if it pleases you to do so.
Imo those are also the best two versions of their respective games but that's personal taste.
>>46733517
It's the setting that was killed, and replaced with the abomination that Age of Skubmar is
>>46733395
40k at least gets an update or a new faction every few months.
WHFB hadn't really gotten shit until AoS.
>>46733467
delete this
>>46733395
>>Both settings have high prices,unsupported armies, and bad rules
>>One of them died
Seems to me like one of them has retards still paying high prices for a bad game, the other had smarter guys who realized what you wrote and left
