Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi,

I was going to post this in the YMDC section but it's not really rules - just a discussion of sportsmanship. Although there may be an actual rules bit in scenario two...

So the question is about how much information to volunteer during a game.
In both scenarios my opponent is familiar with wind wall and it's effects (non-ranged magic attacks auto-miss the target) and this is a semi-competitive game between players of same skill level - not an intro game to a new player or anything. Also assume that this is mid-game and opponent was reminded of wind wall at least one other time during the game.

Scenario 1:
I announce that Borka is casting Wind Wall - I put down a marker with Wind Wall written on it in plain view.
Do some other stuff
Say something like, "Ok these guys are here, Borks has two fury with Wind Wall up and it's your turn."
Opponent does a few things and then starts moving shooters to threaten Borka - he is their obvious target. He says he is shooting Borka, I remind him of Wind Wall. He asks if he can target another model - I agree.

Scenario 2:
Same as Scenario 1 except before moving the shooter unit he shoots at Borka with a solo who misses with a roll of double 1s or something. The attack and roll was made quickly before I can say anything and, offhand, I don't know whether that solo has a magic ranged attack or not. He then begins moving his shooters as per scenario 1 indicating he has probably forgotten about wind wall....

So... questions:
In scenario 1, would you interrupt your opponents movement to remind him of Wind Wall? Would you force him to commit to the shot once announced? Would you let him choose a new target and/or re position models? Would you make a point of reminding him of wind wall in other ways?

In scenario 2, how would you handle the shot you don't know about? Are you required to first find out if it was magical and then, if not, inform your opponent that his shot that missed also auto-missed?

Beyond this specific scenario
There seems to be more annoyance from opponents when it's a spell or effect vs. a normal stat. When someone charges an enemy they can't damage or barely damage I've never heard anyone say - "I forgot he was armor 20 can I charge that guy instead". But when it's a spell or effect it feels like "I" forgot to give them that information they needed and I personally feel like I should let them have re-dos. So where do you draw the line?
Here's another wrinkle - what happens when you both honestly forget about a spell? He moves up... shoots.... hits 5 times and is about to roll damage when you say.... oh yeah Wind Wall...D'oh!

By the rules, nothing gets checked until after the target was declared and the hit attempt is made. Broadly speaking I'd generally let my opponent choose new targets, but not interrupt their movement as it's presumptions and can come off a bit rude to read too much into their movement.

Exactly how generous I am with allowing new targets or like at what point is too late for "Backsies" pretty much depends entirely on my mood, how much I like the person, and our history. Like I'll be more lenient with folks I've been beating recently so playing me isn't as unfun, while I'll take everything I can get against the guy who has been an uphill battle recently.

I think there is a bit of difference between someone making a long shot like POW 10 vs ARM 20, and doing something that is a certain failure due to public game information: Shooting gorman with a fire attack, attacking a stealthed target with a non-aoe weapon from outside 5".

Like if there is literally no way for the action to do anything, why be a stickler about it?

By the rules you need to have the spell announced and a marker in play that clearly demonstrates this.

After that you aren't required to do anything more, but I personally would let my opponent select another target for shooting if he asked. I wouldn't take advantage of the same offer if the roles were reversed neither would I hold any type of grudge if someone didn't allow that particular "take back". The rules are the rules after all and different people will draw the line on breaking them in different places.

You announced you were casting Wind Wall. No other information needs to be volunteered until your opponent either shoots at Borka or asks what Wind Wall does.

I don't believe you can wait till your opponent has rolled to hit Borka. The instant he targets him you ask if the attack is magical, if not then it misses. If it is, he can then roll to hit normally.

I might allow take-backs in a friendly game, but otherwise its snooze you lose. You can ask for my cards at any time or ask what any of my abilities do. Its your fault for forgetting.

Both you and your opponent are responsible for making sure all information is available and that the game state is never compromised (regardless of who it may favour). Announcing the spell and putting down a token covers you for making the information available.

Here's a variant scenario. I was playing against Cygnar- Siege- and I had Vindictus up forward with a bunch of zealots. My opponent was familiar with zealots and he looked over Vindictus before the game (as well as previously read him in the book). But he never put the combination together- he never realised that when zealots use Greater Destiny they're virtually indestructible and Vindictus of course has Sacrificial Pawn Zealots. Ranged attacks are just not going to get the job done. I watch him assign focus to his jacks, watch the rangers come sprinting in, watch him move Siege up and feat- his intent is obvious and I know it's going to fail. Not only is he going to fail but he's critically compromised his caster and next turn I'm going to smash his face in with a reckoner. But at which point do I tell my opponent? It's almost cruel to watch such preparation and self sabotage, doubly so given he's already on the back foot in the game. Should I have said more? I don't think so and yet for that guy it was a profoundly negative play experience.

Depends on who I am playing. Tournament? Nope, not going to say much more than needed.

Friendly game at the LGS? I'm going to let people take things back as long as they are willing to let me do the same.

With my buddies. It depends on what we are doing. If we are practicing for a tourney or trying out a "hard" list then we play hard. But if we are just putzing around then no worries. One of my buddies is still learning and trying out a couple different casters. So I take it easy on him and we even discuss strategy midgame.

So really it comes down to the social situation you are in. Are you guys both their to have a fun game or to win a tourney? My rule of thumb is, I treat them as they are treating me. If I let them take something back, then I expect them to give me the same treatment.

Warmachine suffers badly from a high level of complexity and a huge amount of information. I think there are two sides to this.

It's really very easy for someone to forget a detail of a unit or the game state, especially with units or casters they have never seen before (and because of the immense numbers of different units and combinations, even quite experienced players often run into ones they aren't familiar with or forget). Because of this, people frequently can just instantly lose the game because they didn't think of something. One player instantly losing tends to rob both players of a good game and is extremely frustrating for whoever lost.

On the other hand, though, remembering all the things is a skill and part of the game. If you're in a cutthroat battle, maybe you want to go for that.

Basically, it comes down to preference. There's so much to remember that in many games I would remind my opponent of something if I thought it would cause them to instantly die or if there was no reason for them to make a certain move (like firing at a unit with stealth from too far away). I wouldn't break it down into tournament vs non-tournament, either, because Warmachine tournaments can be really genial if you're not vying for the top spots (or even if you are?). It's just a matter of what sort of game you and your opponent want to play.

I would tend to err on the side of volunteering information, though, because it's so easy for a game of Warmachine to come down to "oh, I forgot that could do that" and those games tend to not be fun for anyone.

On the subject of taking things back, like scenario 2 - I'm totally fine with that player taking that back and shooting at something else. The most common one I notice is people forgetting to leech or pay upkeeps, and when it doesn't matter either way I'm happy for people to do that if they forgot (though ideally I'd notice and remind them first). YMMV in a tournament scenario but again, people come to tournaments to have fun too and I don't think there's any point being too hard on people if you're not in the running for the top three.

Just remember this is an open information game. For example If you measure your control area and you sweep it in an arc your opponent can ask the distances between your caster and everything the tape passed over.

I would recommend not playing a game of gotcha with rules. It does not make for a fun game in or out of a tournament.

It's like anything else be a good person and a fun opponent and win or loose you will have a much better time.

Grey Templar wrote:You announced you were casting Wind Wall. No other information needs to be volunteered until your opponent either shoots at Borka or asks what Wind Wall does.

I don't believe you can wait till your opponent has rolled to hit Borka. The instant he targets him you ask if the attack is magical, if not then it misses. If it is, he can then roll to hit normally.

Both good points. The way I consider it - a clearly announced, written, and placed marker is akin to text printed on a card. It's visible and open for all to see.

I had forgotten about the auto-miss clause. You're right - it's very clear that no to-hit roll is made. So in the scenario 2 case where the to-hit roll is made quickly before you can react it sounds like you do have an obligation to back up and, check if Magic, and then remind of Wind Wall.

Kojiro wrote:Both you and your opponent are responsible for making sure all information is available and that the game state is never compromised (regardless of who it may favour). Announcing the spell and putting down a token covers you for making the information available.

Here's a variant scenario. I was playing against Cygnar- Siege- and I had Vindictus up forward with a bunch of zealots. My opponent was familiar with zealots and he looked over Vindictus before the game (as well as previously read him in the book). But he never put the combination together- he never realised that when zealots use Greater Destiny they're virtually indestructible and Vindictus of course has Sacrificial Pawn Zealots. Ranged attacks are just not going to get the job done. I watch him assign focus to his jacks, watch the rangers come sprinting in, watch him move Siege up and feat- his intent is obvious and I know it's going to fail. Not only is he going to fail but he's critically compromised his caster and next turn I'm going to smash his face in with a reckoner. But at which point do I tell my opponent? It's almost cruel to watch such preparation and self sabotage, doubly so given he's already on the back foot in the game. Should I have said more? I don't think so and yet for that guy it was a profoundly negative play experience.

Agreed with you there.

That is a very good example and dovetails with what another poster mentioned about judging the other players intent and the fine line between "slim chance" and "technically impossible". Maybe he knew it was a slim chance, but since he was losing anyway he would risk it for a shot at a win. You don't always know ... Especially in that case where it sounds like there were so many moving parts - at what point do you stop him and say "It looks like you're planning X and it's going to fail..." ? I think in that case you pretty well have to let it play out and be a learning case.

As a new player I like it when someone explains their minis pregame, but I usually ask to see the cards anyway, or ask about the stats of a model or spells they cast as the game goes on. One guy explained every part of his cryx army before I played him, and it made me feel like it was a much fairer loss. In tournament play I'd never give more information than I had to though.

My general rule of thumb in tournaments is that I will remind people of things first turn, and maybe second, even if I think it is something they forgot. "You didn't activate that guy over there I don't think; did you want to?" "Just a reminder, my feat does X... just sayin'" Backsies are fine in those first bits when it isn't as important.
Turn 3, it is on, and it matters. No backsies asked or offered. (unless it actually doesn't matter at all.) Turn 2 might matter too.

Last tournament I was in, I was playing Cassius for the second time ever. First turn, ported Wormwood up into the zone across from some satyxis and about a billion thralls. Did a bunch of stuff, passed turn. My opponent looked at me sort of strangely, looked at the board, then charged those satyxis into Wormwood through the empty space that should have been a bloody forrest had I remembered to say "Cassius is going to feat." Absorbed 40+ damage in one turn on my warlock... Still, it mattered to the game and the tournament, so I didn't even think to ask if I could pretend I had remembered to Feat. Asking for a mulligan at that point was really asking "Do you mind replaying the match so maybe I can win the tournament?"

Usually I play casual games with Jin, and both of us pretty much have stopped asking for mulligans on things we should have asked about or been more thoughtful of. Forgot to deploy a model? No problem. Forgot to feat on a critical turn? Well, that's how we learn. I surely haven't forgotten to feat turn one with Cassius since!