The word »fork« has been used to mean »to divide in branches, go separate ways« as early as the 14th century.

In software engineering, a project fork happens when developers take a copy of source code from one software package and start independent development on it, creating a distinct and separate piece of software. The term often implies not merely a development branch, but also a split in the developer community; as such, it is a form of schism. Reasons for forking are varying user preferences and stagnated or discontinued development of the original software.

My 40k journey started with the 2e box set, though I did read White Dwarf for some time before and knew the final Rogue Trader (40k 1e) era from its pages. 3e for me changed too much; both in terms of rules and »flattening« the setting I loved into »it is all grimdark war«, very codified (pun intended) – whereas before it was more of setting that was still being built, allowed more freedom, allowed for more experimentation by the design studio, included a plethora of races, creatures, even flora and fauna, that all got lost already with 2e, but at the latest with 3e.

Don't get me started on Squads – gone. And no, the Leagues of Votann are not Squads brought back, different background, different vibe.

The rules also became less narrative driven (1e even needed a Games Master according to the rules), more and more tournament driven – something I don't do, and I like narrative games.

And the rules became »streamlined«, aiming for faster play, loosing detail – I love detail. In my mind, this makes a game much more tense and fun. I do not mind the extra time spend on determining little things and the extra bookkeeping required.

Let me illustrate this with a concrete example:

One of the areas that turn me off from today's Warhammer 40,000 editions compared to the original Rogue Trader are the vehicle rules. No different speed settings, destroying specific weapons, shooting out tyres… you get the idea.

One of the most hilarious moments of my Warhammer 40,000 games was, when in a very small game using 2nd edition rules, the Marines had a Rhino on the table, and the hardest hitting weapon of my Orks (mind, Orks - not Orcs) was a melter. The melter was not able to penetrate the Rhino's armour. Except the turret armour. Bravely, my Ork Boss moved in front of the Rhino, fired the melter, hit the turret and penetrated the armour. The roll on the armour chart caused an explosion which triggered another roll on the body damage chart, triggering an explosion in the body as well which resulted in the crew getting killed and sending the Rhino out of control. The brave Ork boss was rewarded with the out of control Rhino careening around him, rolling randomly across the board for two turns, before crashing into some trees.

This kind of experience I try to recreate with this ruleset.

Was 1e and/or 2e perfect? Far from it. 1e more or less openly admitted it, that is why there was a Games Master. Often you had to make do; rules might clash or might not cover specific situations. This made it a bit more »your game«, as another group of gamers for sure handled the same challenges differently.

In the mid 2000s I learned of Star Grunt II by Ground Zero Games. This is the best SiFi rule set I ever played. So the next logical step was to combine Star Grunt II with 40,000 1e/2e.

So far, this is still work in progress, but as I managed to built my own version of Warhammer Fantasy Battles (see Warfork Fantasy Battles), I know I can do it, it is just a matter of time…