Stillmania - The 3rd Ed 40k project.

[jetengine]

Being both a grumpy old grognard, and equally dissatisfied with the modern state of Games Workshop and its prices, I look back towards what many consider 40k's Golden Age

At 33 years old, I was quite literally the prime target for 3rd Edition 40k when it was released. Unfortunately I was more into fantasy and poorly fumbled my way through Warhammer Fantasy Battle 6th ed. Nevertheless, 40k always looked cool.

I'm very well aware of my own nostalgia and rose tinted glasses, but I honestly feel 40k was at it best during this period. The choking hand of investment types hadn't quite grasped at full strength yet, and artists were allowed to flourish (to a certain degree, as the Gorkamorka fiasco shows). Grimdark hadn't quite fallen into full parody either,
 and the satire still lived strong. It wasn't perfect, and 3rd ed afaik was a bit of a messy beast at times, but it had character and allowed the players to use their own initiative.

As such, I'm delving back into an era I never quite took part in, coupling it with the focus of Stillmania. Yes, Stillmania. We're keeping things to a certain order, within reason, and I'm hoping it'll help me from falling apart.

So let's begin the journey, eh?

[Major_Gilbear]

This sounds like a rally good project!

I feel 40k peaked around late 2nd edition in terms of background and visual appeal, but 3rd edition was definately an era when the issue of plastic sets was ramped up, and so all the publications exhorted lots of conversions and variations - of models, armies, and settings - which I agree was a really great thing to see.

If I may be uncouth enough to offer a couple of thoughts of my own on the project prior to your getting stuck in?

1) By the time 3rd was finished, the rules had received a fair bit of reworking in the Chapter Approved series, and this was honestly both necessary for the game but also somewhat messy to follow. Unless you are sticking exclusivey to the BBB ("Big Black Book", AKA the core rulebook) as it was originally published, I would *strongly* consider using 4th edition rules for your 3rd edition project instead. By all means keep all the units, look/feel of the period, codexes and such the same (even the army lists in the 3rd edition rulebook if you wish!), but 4th edition is a much cleaner and tidied-up version of 3rd that works right out of the gate with everything else published in 3rd (i.e., no rules conversions necessary). Also, the 4th edition main rulebook also included rules for smaller 400pt Combat Patrol games, and for single-squad Killteam games, which may be of interest as you get your first few models/squads finished.

2) This next comment is not really specific to this project, or even 40k; rather, I feel this is true for all GW core games from about 1990 onwards. Stillmania advocates collecting in 500pt chunks or similar, as did many other articles and advice segments. However, although it's a nice round number, I feel 500pts is a weird size of anything in GW games! I would tweak this to 600pts instead. This also makes it easier to play games with after the second chunk is done, since 1200pts is really the minimium size for a meaningful game experience. Also, 1800pts was a very popular game size in 3rd/4th, so you could reasonably stop after your third chunk if you feel the project is complete enough.


Anyway, best of luck whetever you do - I'll definately be looking forward to this, and hopefully I can offer you encouragement as you go.

[Ragsta]

Interestingly, I recently bought myself the 3rd ed codexes for my old armies (SM, IG, Eldar and Nids) and picked up the rulebook too. I really liked the artwork and fluff inside all these, and tho I never played after 2nd edition I think I would have liked to get into 3rd.

Major Gilbear's suggestion of 4th has me thinking now... Happily I mostly build and paint these days but perhaps if I see a cheap copy.

Looking forward to what you get up to, jetengine!

[Rick]

The 3rd edition codicies work fine with 4th edition. In actual fact, only a very few of the 3rd codicies were ever updated for 4th and some of these are mainly cosmetic. The 3rd/4th/5th editions for 40k are very much of a set, with only a few differences between them - 4th updates 3rd with some of the Chapter Approved changes whilst 5th streamlines it a little bit and adds a few more troop types and fewer special rules (similar special rules are grouped together rather than having seperate entries that do more or less the same thing). I prefer 5th to the previous two as I, personally, feel it's the culmination of the evolution of the 3rd/4th/5th rules. Any of the 3rd-5th codexes should just about work with any of these rules (although you might need the appropriate rulebook to get the special rules) so my advice would be to get a cheap copy of 4th and, maybe, 5th, play them and see which is best for you.
6th goes a touch further than 5th, adding flyers and a bit of complication that 5th was supposed to streamline, so I'm less interested in that set.
Hope this helps rather than complicating matters. Enjoy your games.

[Major_Gilbear]

@Ragsta:
That's the nice thing about the 4th book, it includes small-format games that are actually quite fun, and only need limited forces to play with. Even if you don't play much, there's still something for you in the book.

@ Rick:
Yeah, I pretty much agree with all your points. Each edition after 3rd did change some stuff, and not always for the better, but the progression of the games was clear. In fact, as all the editions are so similar, it's actually trivially easy to just mix-n-match the bits you like without breaking the game. I liked 5th a lot apart from the vehicles and and the multi-wound model shennaningans, and I would also leave out the flyers and superheavies too (I have Epic for that). 6th was rather blah, as was 7th, but I did like the melee weapon profiles in 7th a lot. So for me, it's: army books from 3rd, main rules from 4th, but with the Rending rules from 5th, and the melee weapons from 7th. A proper rules salami...! 

@ jetengine:
Sorry man, didn't mean to derail your thread! 

[jetengine]

It's fine Major Gillbear, don't worry about it

One of the fun things about Stillmania is the permanence of your decisions. While I'll post the relevant image below, one of its core crux's if that, once written, you never amend your army list. Ever. The idea is to force you into becoming a better gamer and gain more attachment to your units. You can't just buy the new, overpowered, death-murder-bolt-blaster unit to increase your win/loss/draw ratio. Oh no, you've got to earn that victory the old-fashioned way. Which is rather useful considering that 3rd and 4th edition (which does also seem a useful tool here) are full of interesting missions that involve more than just blowing each other to bits.

As mentioned, you also grow attached to your units. Not just from the act of naming them, but through seeing their victories, their losses, and all the awkward bits in-between.

As such, I've been putting heavy thought into the lists, trying to create something that's both fluffy and not too beardy. Since I'm relatively new to this era of 40k I'd rather not inadvertently step into pitfalls when building and be stuck, a miserable time all around.

There's a strong narrative in my design, though. As an author, I'm all about telling a story, and Wargaming fulfils a similar niche. In this case, I'll be building two forces depicting what I dub, The Relief Of Ametrine

In M38.4 the Research World Ametrine, a newly claimed site undergoing study by the Cult Mechanicum, transmitted a distress signal through Astropathic relay station. The message was brief, and clearly sent in haste. 'Xenos Attack. Send Aid. Omnissiah Save Us All.'
Out in the inky blackness, the message was heard. Ametrine would have their aid, and then some, with the Blood Angels Strike Cruiser Sanguine Retribution exiting the Warp mere weeks later over the world in question.

[Daeothar]

Ah yes, 3rd/4th edition 40K; my favourite era, and (not) coincidentally also the 40K rules I played the most. I got into the hobby on the tail end of Rogue Trader, and visually and modelwise I've been well and truly indoctrinated by 2nd edition; they're still the 40K miniatures I like the most. But then; most of those carried over to 3rd (for a while, until replaced by modern plastics). But I only ever played my first game of 40K in 3rd edition (although I did play a lot of Necromunda in uni before that).

All in all, I'd say that 4th would be my favourite set of rules, considering it's the culmination of 3rd and all its Chapter Approved and other articles into one complete set of rules. But just as has been said before; the 3rd edition codices did have a bit more flavour than their 4th edition counterparts (and some never got upgraded at all!).

Fluffwise, the 2nd edition codices cannot be beat, but other than that, I also suggest going with 4th rules and 3rd codices

As for your narrative; an excellent idea! I did the same back when. My system of choice I named Vorten's Gem, a remote agri world that had a bit of everything: PDF/Guard and a small SoB contingent on the planet, Dark Eldar pirates occasionally raiding the system, an AdMech outpost on a moon of a gas giant further out in the system, which was digging a bit too deep and encountering a small Necron tomb. The shadow of a Tyranid hivefleet tendril masking off the Empyrian, causing a Space Marine strike cruiser to become stranded in the system, etc, etc.

I wrote quite a few stories detailing how the encounters occurred too. I found that adding the narratives really made my armies come to life and gave them a lot of personality and history too.

Please keep us updated on how you get along; it's a wonderful project to start and make grow

[Major_Gilbear]

I think Mr Stillman ("Stilmanicus") published some longer articles in WD prior to that summary.

Whilst I don't think the rigidity implied was supposed to be quite so strict really; rather, I interpreted it as a call to focus on what you had, not get distracted, and to appreciate why you bought the models you did.

In any case, I like the Stillman approach generally, and look forward to seeing your progress.

[Basementboy]

I don't think this is rose-tinted glasses- I think that 3rd ed 40k is heaps better than what we have today, and find Stillman's articles an inspiration- and I wasn't even born during this period of 40k!
Looking forward to seeing what get's cooked up!

[Storm Wolf]

I don't think this is rose-tinted glasses- I think that 3rd ed 40k is heaps better than what we have today, and find Stillman's articles an inspiration- and I wasn't even born during this period of 40k!
Looking forward to seeing what get's cooked up!

Agreed, far to much blah-blah-blah and special rules and exceptions to said special rules in everything from 6 onwards, the new rules 8-9-10 are just the same, I like the core of the newer rules but they are then are buried under a crap-ton of special rules, exceptions and flipping stuff, plus GW couldn't create a good cheatsheet for the rules if they actually tried   

[Daeothar]

...GW couldn't create a good cheatsheet for the rules if they actually tried...

Actually they did a pretty good job of those. In 2nd and 3rd edition... 

[Storm Wolf]

Actually they did a pretty good job of those. In 2nd and 3rd edition... 

Oh I agree completely, I meant the newer rules iterations 8th onwards 

[Rick]

Oh I agree completely, I meant the newer rules iterations 8th onwards 

But. But. If they did a good cheatsheet, nobody would need to buy the rules... 

[Storm Wolf]

But. But. If they did a good cheatsheet, nobody would need to buy the rules... 

Quite possibly, but that’s no excuse for shoddy work is it???

[Rick]