CDO Forums

Your e-mail is fine, I have already forwarded my copy to the events@games-workshop.co.uk address to which I got this reply this afternoon:


------------------------------------------------------------------
David,



Chaos Dwarfs have been excluded from the GT’s. This is because they do not currently have a standard Warhammer Armies Book and the only rules currently available are out of date. In order to ensure that we have a level playing field at out GT’s we have taken the step of standardizing which armies can be used and have used the Warhammer Armies books as the most reasonable and practical point of reference.



In order to try and minimize the impact on our players we introduced the Counts as rule to allow people to use any miniature from their Citadel range to represent an alternative unit. For example, the Chaos Dwarf models could represent Dwarfs using the Warhammer Armies: Dwarf book as the foundation to the list.



Of course, if at some point in the future GW decides to redevelop the Chaos Dwarfs and release a new Warhammer Armies book then they too would be allowable in our GT’s again.



I hope that goes some way to explaining the decision.

Brian Aderson

Warhammer World Events & Hospitality Manager
0115 9004469
07919 321434

Any opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual and not necessarily the company.
This e-mail and any accompanying attachments may contain information which is, or maybe confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this e-mail in error you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance to the contents is strictly prohibited, and that this e-mail and any attachments should be returned to the sender immediately.

Although this e-mail and any attachments have been scanned by anti-virus software, and are believed to be free of any viruses it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that they are virus free and no responsibility will be accepted by Games Workshop Ltd for any loss or damage caused from receipt.

Games Workshop Ltd Registered Office: Willow Road, Lenton, Nottingham. NG7 2WS. Registered No. 1467092 http://www.Games-Workshop.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dave Corden [mailto:david.corden@tesco.net]
Sent: 19 August 2007 11:46
To: Warhammer World Events
Subject: UK GT



To whom it may concern,

Reading over the Warhammer Grand Tournament Rules Pack for the UK in 2007/8, I have noticed that "Unless otherwise noted, only the main lists from the Warhammer Armies books may be used." If I understand correctly, this means the Ravening Hordes list for Chaos Dwarfs is not valid for use in these tournaments.

Being a Chaos Dwarf general, this has me very concerned. I would also like to request that an amendment to the Rules Pack be made to allow the use of Chaos Dwarfs, otherwise I would like to know the reasoning behind their exclusion from this list.

Concerned gamer,
-David Corden

-------------------------------------------------------------------
We should get everybody emailing in and see if we can sway this with weight of numbers.  I think we should put more emphasis on being allowed to use the Ravening Hordes list fo CD's as a substitute for an army book.

If we all send the same e-mail, mr Aderson will know it's come from a group, and will be well aware that we are probabl discussing our replies.  I think we need to include, though, a request that RH be updated to keep us on "a level playing field" as he stated in his email.

To the end of:

To whom it may concern,

Reading over the Warhammer Grand Tournament Rules Pack for the UK in 2007/8, I have noticed that "Unless otherwise noted, only the main lists from the Warhammer Armies books may be used." If I understand correctly, this means the Ravening Hordes list for Chaos Dwarfs is not valid for use in these tournaments.

Being a Chaos Dwarf general, this has me very concerned. In the spirit of the game, all races should be present at the Grand Tournament as it is a prodigious event.  To that end, I would like to see the Ravening Hordes list updated for 7th Edition Warhammer, as well as request that an amendment to the Rules Pack be made to allow the use of Chaos Dwarfs, otherwise I would like to know the reasoning behind their exclusion.

Concerned gamer,
-***Insert Name Here***

I will also reply to Mr Aderson's email and will let you know how things go from there, although I do not expect to receive a further reply.

I think if we get enough people e-mailing in it might work, as long as we all ask for the same thing.  They need to know that we are a group that are working together.  To use a rather weak analogy, it's easy to fight a thousand individuals but much more difficult to fight an army 1000 strong.  If they know we communicate, they may be a little more reluctant to fob us off with the same reply.  The more interst that is generated, the more likely they are to deal with it, as no one wants to receive tons of the same e-mail everyday.

The Reply came frome whworldevents@games-workshop.co.uk by the way.

I have replied to mr Adersons email with this:

Mr Aderson

I apologise for my persistence first and foremost as I know you are very busy.

I understand the reasoning behind the exclusion of the out of date Ravening Hordes list hence the removal of Chaos Dwarfs from the allowable list.  However,

I am one of a number of Chaos Dwarf gamers who are concerned with this and write to you in representation of a large Chaos Dwarf gaming community.  Having played Chaos Dwarfs for years in some cases, it is unfair to ask us to use our army in ways other than it was intended to be, or to ask us to play our second choice army.  A level playing field for most is still not a level playing field.  It is also confusing hence unfair for our opponents when every unit in our armies would ‘count as’ something else from a different army. The ‘Counts As’ rule does not allow the Chaos Dwarfs to be fielded in a manner that reflects their unique background and so goes against what is the fundamental spirit of Warhammer.  

We think it is a viable solution for the Ravening Hordes army list for Chaos Dwarfs, which is still available for download on the Games Workshop website, to be updated and posted as Tournament Legal for the UK Grand Tournament, even if just a stand alone PDF file that could be downloaded by all competitors.  Especially as Games Workshop has not to date indicated when there will be a Chaos Dwarf army book, or indeed if.  Would this result in Chaos Dwarfs being excluded from the UK Grand Tournament for what could be several years, or indefinitely?

Recently, White Dwarf featured an article publishing the Blood Angels Codex update as official rules allowing them to be accepted in the UK 40k Grand Tournament.  Whilst I am aware this may be beyond your area of management, why couldn’t this be done for Chaos Dwarfs seeing as they are the only army that would require it?

In summary,

We don’t believe the ‘counts as’ rule is a viable option to field a full army, as this is unfair to both parties, confusing, and against the spirit of the game.
We would like to see the Ravening Hordes list updated or an article in White Dwarf that would allow us to field Chaos Dwarfs in the Grand Tournament.  If not, we would like confirmation of when/if an official army list of some sort will be available for us to use in future Warhammer Grand Tournaments.

If you are unable to help us, we would appreciate it if you could direct us to somebody who may be able to help.

Finally, we would like to thank you greatly for your time, and we fully appreciate what you have explained to us this far.  

I hope you can understand our concern and frustration.

Regards

David Corden

Concerned Gamer  


-------------------------------------------------------------

I will keep you informed, although I don't expect a reply to this one

Well, no reply as yet, he is either really looking in to it or it has just been ignored as I had feared.  I think we should get as many people as possible sending e-mails to this guy  events@games-workshop.co.uk

Finally got a reply yesterday:

Hi David,



At this point in time the rule stands for the GT. It may seem unfair to some players (and that is understandable) but we have to maintain a level of consistency for all our players. This is the fairest and most practical way of maintaining that level and until the Chaos Dwarf list is revisited the GT position will stand.



As for issues of official rules, that is out of our remit. I will happily pass on your thoughts and comments to the games designers as everyone’s feedback is valuable.



Many thanks for your understanding and mature comment.

Brian Aderson

Warhammer World Events & Hospitality Manager
0115 9004469
07919 321434

If he does pass on our comments to the game designers, that can only be a good thing.  I'm afraid we have come to a dead-end on this front.  It gets me to thinking about a petition again.  If we use strength of numbers for our cause, we are more likely to be successful.  It's easy for us to be dismissed if they think it's just a few of us.

Space Dwarfs were ridiculous. FACT. Their USP was they were short people.  All their units were rubbish versions of IG or SM units.  Their war engines were stupidly unbalanced and the models were rubbish.  They were written off because not only were they unpopular, they were crap. IMO, obviously!

Petition created and posted as new thread.

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/CD4GT/petition.html

Of course you realize many people (other than us that is) look at Chaos Dwarfs and say the same things.

Absolutely, the main difference being, of course, that they are wrong!  

1.  We have a background which is an explanation rather than an excuse (after millenia living in high gravity atmosphere and mining they got short, oh please.)

2.  We have heritage, our own entity.  We answer the question of 'what happened to the Dwarfs who strayed too far east' rather than 'lets find a way to make an equivelant of dwarfs in 40k and sell more figures without much effort'

3.  We fit in with the history and the geography of the old world rather than just being a small system that could easily be consumed by tyranids should GW see fit to rid themselves of them, and completely write them off because they never really had anything to do with the history of the imperium anyway.  

4.  We have a small range of miniatures that up unitil recently, fitted in with the other ranges without looking out of place.  They still don't look too outdated IMO.

5.  Squats were rubbish, we are not!!

Obviously, this is just my opinion, and that's the good thing about them:- everyone is allowed their own!!

(however, if somebody says to me they thing CDs are stupid then stand by gentlemen. Stand by.)

You are "preaching to the choir" on this site methinks!

While a noble gesture I have a feeling it won't help. Give it a go though anyways.

We need to beef it up with signatures from this site first.  Honestly, it takes a couple of seconds to fill in, it's for a good cause and it can do no harm.  I envisioned people e-mailing links to their friends etc and hoped to slap GW with a hefty 500 signatures as a minimum.  I didn't think it would be too much to ask seeing as there are over 300 members on this forum, god knows how many on HoH, plus names from the wider GW community.  I have got my wife, my sister and my brother in-law to sign and they don't even know what CDs are! So why is it that people who have a direct interest in any outcome are reluctant to sign?  Spread the word my friends, I can't say it enough.  Get everyone you know to sign it, post a link on other forums you use.  This needs to have a lot more support if it is to stand any chance of working.

LOL

The point I was making was that we are intertwined with the history of the dwarfs, have someting to do with the Ogres, make war engines for HoC.  They could not feasibly say we were just wiped out.  Where as on the other hand, squats didn't have anything to do with anybody, and it was easy to just say 'the tyranids wiped them out'.  That is only mentioned for the benefit of the older players anyway, most of the newer gen of gamer thinks a squat is something you do with a barbell!

Squats also don't really fit with the modern ethos of 40K - their backstory is a blatant contradiction of how the Imperium works these days. If you read their older fluff it talks about how they have a peaceful trading relationship and how the Squats (a race of mutants) are allowed autonomy within the Imperium (a monolithic fascist theocracy) to govern their own affairs.

They really didn't work, and no one misses them much except the ones who owned the models (who can still use Imperial Guard rules anyway).

Chaos Dwarfs, on the other hand, have an established presence in the geography of  Warhammer, and are connected to no less than four other armies. If they get retconned out of existence, it leaves a big gap. So, even if they never get another army book, they'll always be 'there' in the background, like the Norse of Skeggi, Cathay, Araby, etc.

Hi all,
sorry to drag up an old topic (and sorry for being away, I hope to get my broadband installed soon!) but I received this e-mail from none other than Jervis Johnson himself, unfortunately, it seems we really have hit a dead end with this!

Dear David,

Recently Brian Aderson sent me a copy of your email about the Chaos Dwarf army, and asked if I could explain our position about the issues you raise.

I can understand your desire for a new 'tournament' army list, either by using the Ravening Hordes list, or by printing a list in White Dwarf as we did for the Blood Angels. Unfortunately, publishing such a list would create an immediate demand for the models in the army to be made available, and we're simply not in a position to satisfy such a demand at the present time.

I know this is a bitter pill to swallow. However, we really do feel that if we are ever to re-launch the Chaos Dwarfs then it has to be with a proper army book that is released alongside a new range of miniatures that includes one or more plastic regiments. We've tried alternative methods in the past and, as I'm sure you're painfully aware, they haven't worked out all that well. We really don't want to compound the situation.

On a more positive note, I would like to say that we consider the Chaos Dwarfs an important, integral part of the Warhammer background, and one that is not going to go away or be forgotten about. Because of this Chaos Dwarf armies will always be welcome at our events, but you will need to make creative use of the 'counts as' rule in order to field them, for the time being at least. I hope you can understand that while we would love to see lots of Chaos Dwarf armies at our Grand Tournaments, we can't do so in a way that will create unrealistic expectations about the army that we won't be
able to satisfy.

Thank you for taking the time to write. Please don¹t hesitate to write again, either about my reply or about anything else you want to talk about.


Best regards,


Jervis Johnson

Games Workshop Limited
registered office: Willow Road, Lenton, Nottingham,
Nottinghamshire, NG7 2WS

Comments for a reply to Mr Johnson please!

i concur with metro. while i like the big hats and small hats and masks and the whole deal.. really regardless of what way they take a new list, I just want to see them have a new list. If someone doesnt like daemonic stuff and more chaos influences then really just play the list and reduce the amount of the stuff or simply rename it in your armies fluff, instead of daemonic war machines you could call them Warmachine with arcane sorceries or with Machine Spirit. and GW has always sypported and in someways encouraged players to play with a multitude of their miniature from previous editions. so your Big hats would be great as most of the base units would be around and the new units could be easily converted. as shown many times in articles here and elsewhere.

My vote is simple: GW do what you think is best and get the gears grinding.

I don't think they will look here to see what we want, but I am sure they will have a gander to help their research if/when they do decicide to redo the CDs.

Maybe they have kept us out of the picture for so long so that they can totally reform the image of the CDs to be something totally different.  Most of the newbies would just think "wow, what a cool new race" instead of "OMG!!! They've completely changed the whole army and none of my models fit in any more! Screw GW for making such a mockery of me and my wasted, hard-earned cash!"

Anyway, back to the JJ letter.  I've had some time to give this a lot of thought now.  I agree that we should not push our luck, but I don't think it would be too cheeky to ask for a covert pdf publication.  I will also attach some of the showcase models that people have done on this site.  I'm sure JJ, being the champion of the hobby's traditions, will be impressed.  It may just persuade him to try a little bit harder, or to loosen his tongue to privvy info!

Any suggestions for what models to attach?

I'm thinking a couple of heroes/units/warmachines.  Some painted some not, and preferably the converted/scratch built stuff, as I'm sure he's seen plenty of big hats in his time!

Ah, new I dea then, we could invite JJ to have a look at this forum by emailing a link. So, in summary, ask him about the possibility of an errata style pdf update for rules queries about BCs SGs and such, and also invite him to see the dedication of our members by putting in a link to the showcase/conversions section of this forum. Then, he wont have to look at the pics if he doesn't want to.

OUCH!

Ok, an end to this.  Flicking through this post has got me feeling dizzy, and I never anticipated this much reaction with this much passion.  So, I have simply replied to JJ, thanked him for his reply, asked if there was any possibility for a PDF, in with the GT pack that would allow CDs to be used in nextyears UKGT similar to the one used by the US with a few minor clarifications, thanked him again for his time and left it at that.  As nice as it would be to ask him everything that people have asked, I didn't want to send a massively long e-mail.

I may get a reply, I may not.  I don't particularly mind either way, because at the end of it, I will have tried and will feel good about that.  What is IMO upsetting is people (with the best of intentions I am sure) being so steadfastly negative.  I am sure you've done it/seen it all before, and it is worthwhile pointing that out.  However, it is one thing to offer advice and another to break the spirit of those you advise.

To be zen about it, I look at it this way

Nothing Happens.  You get to say 'I told you so' but don't actually achieve anything. We don't mind because we never reallyexpected anything in the first place.

We get some sort of positive response, you look sheepish as you were wrong, but we have actually achieved a step toward our goal.  

You can probably guarantee that the wright brothers were told that 'men will never fly, I've seen that tried before and it never worked etc etc.

That's not to say you shouldn't say stuff has been done before, or express doubts about wther it will work, but don't bang on about it. Say your piece then leave the rest of us to hope, because without hope, what is the point?  The happiest people I know are those who are endlessly optimistic.

If we do get a response, I will post it immediately, but please, no negativity or biccaring (spelling?)

Agreed, If we get a reply I'll stick it on a new thread.