I order a big sqiggoth from FW last week and i have an important question. I am planning to field it quite soon and i didnt tell anybody that i will bought this awsome model. I was wondering if i need to ask my opponent to field some FW model because the rules and stuff are in FW book... Is it like when we play unbound? Can he say no?
In tournaments players are bound by the rules they accepted when enlisting. In friendly play anyone can do as he like. If you field an army I do not wanna play I just won't play it. I will have to live with the consequences (such as you being pissed off and others who notice it labeling me - rightfully - as a sissy).
In short: communication, baby. Talk to your opponent. If he doesn't want to play vs FW stuff maybe you can ease his fears. Or you can offer him a mirror match with your stuff next time, provided you trust him with your minis.
Really, you need permission for anything in any game. If someone doesn't want to play against Abaddon or Grots or Eldar, they don't have to play it. Forgeworld isn't any different really. Some people get weird about Forgeworld so sometimes it's best to give them a heads up, but really (and especially as far as GW in concerned) FW stuff is no different than anything else.
I am not getting in any weird over power unboud army. Its just that i want to surprise one of my opponent and i dont want im to see my squiggoth before the game. Just for a little surprise. I am sure their is no problem with im but if i play against other people. i wanted to know if FW models and rules was the same as the models in my codex (if i play with the organisation chart, no one can really say a thing...nobody will complain if i have 1 hq and 2 troop... come on guys...) or if it was more like when you play unbound ( you need to ask permission). I know before it was not really legal and everybody was complaining about FW in regular game...
exactly as Thairne says, it was " illegal" but no more. where those it say that? where dos it mentionned that i can use FW in any game and its ok?
I am not getting in any weird over power unboud army. Its just that i want to surprise one of my opponent and i dont want im to see my squiggoth before the game. Just for a little surprise. I am sure their is no problem with im but if i play against other people. i wanted to know if FW models and rules was the same as the models in my codex (if i play with the organisation chart, no one can really say a thing...nobody will complain if i have 1 hq and 2 troop... come on guys...) or if it was more like when you play unbound ( you need to ask permission). I know before it was not really legal and everybody was complaining about FW in regular game...
exactly as Thairne says, it was " illegal" but no more. where those it say that? where dos it mentionned that i can use FW in any game and its ok?
I think you missed the point
Your opponent can say "I'm not going to play because it's sunny outside", You can be refused for anything under the sun, including "I don't want to play your gargantuan creature". What everyone is getting at is that while you can be refused for basically any reason, "Your model is not legal" is not one of those reasons. Would probably pay to mention that you would like to bring it along and see if he/she is ok with it.
I think it's common courtesy to forewarn your opponent that there'll be a Gargantuan/SH on the field ahead of time, as was said above, imagine if your friend surprised you with a Warhound or a Transcendant C'tan.
There's definitely been a change in attitude to FW units in threats few years, but, for example, a Decimator isn't a Squiggoth so it's probably better to ask, he may feel obligated to allow you to try your surprise giant model that you're excited about but that doesn't mean he'll enjoy it.
Also, in my experience, you don't need permission to play unbound.
I would advise against it. I would ask if it's okay with your opponent if you field a super- heavy. That way you won't go into a game he has absolutely no chance of winning and make him mad so that he'll never want to go against it again.
But if he's got stuff to at least fight it you'll both have more fun
Our point is simple.
He has just as much right to refuse to play against a Squiggoth as to Ork Boyz from a rules-point.
One player may freak out because he thinks it's awesome while another might freak out and refuse to play.
An opponent can't say your list is illegal, but he can still refuse to play because he's whining over it.
If you want to surprise him - I can totally understand that, take a pic of his face for us - just make sure you bring an alternative list without it. This way you can offer him to chicken out and make it more probable for him to accept the challenge.
If it's a close enough group that you feel it'd be cool to surprise them with it then it's probably a close enough group that they'd be happy to play with you at least once
If you are really concerned, just let him know you got a new unit you would like to try out. Don't tell him what it is, just let him know to expect a LOW, next game.
This way you still get to surprise him with the model, and he isn't left unprepared.
How do you prepare for a LoW. If someone said he is bringing a ctan to next weeks game, there is not much you can do about it. Sure one could technicly buy a new army or new ally, but that is a lot of money..
I'd say you would have to show him the rules for it.
As a strictly FW player myself the last thing I would want to do is just show up and thrash someone who has never heard or encountered a FW unit or army.
I'd say you aren't likely to get someone to just play against your Squiggoth without looking through the rules unless they are good mates with you and are not serious
So I'd say if you want to be able to rematch the players you verse with your Squiggoth, I suggest you let them have a look at the rules.
Makumba wrote: How do you prepare for a LoW. If someone said he is bringing a ctan to next weeks game, there is not much you can do about it. Sure one could technicly buy a new army or new ally, but that is a lot of money..
You can't always prepare. However, if a person only plays a few armies, you can expect somewhat what sort of LOW they are bringing.
For example, an IG player is most likely bringing a giant tank. An Eldar player more than likely bringing a Titan (although some of their SH tanks are friggin sweet). Tyranids will be bringing a Gargantuan Creature. It is highly unlikely that when an Ork player tells his opponent "I'm bringing a LoW next week" he is referring to a Transcendent C'Tan.
From 'Choosing Your Army' in the Warhammer 40,000 7th edition rulebook:
Before any game, players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use.
So if both players agree not to use Forge World, then Forge World is 'illegal' for that game. If the players can't come to an agreement, then no game occurs (and probably for the best).
No list has ever been "illegal", barring tournament and club rules, who are still going to place their own limitations on what they'll allow at an event.
40k is what you make of it, whether that's codex-only, FW or homebrewed. Your opponent must agree. The whole "legal/illegal lists" only came about because GW is really bad at communicating its intent - it's quite similar to how the community invented the whole "canon setting" fantasy.
None of this is new in 7E. What Games Workshop did was making it progressively clearer what they actually wanted, and what their vision for the game was. From the previous edition's rulebook:
"With the points limit agreed, players need to pick their forces. The best way to do this is to make use of the army list in the relevant codex, although, of course, players are free to either adapt the army lists or use their own systems as they wish."
The thing is that the more your list deviates from what the people you play with perceive as "the norm", the less likely they are to say yes. So it should be in everyone's interest to talk these things through before setting up a big game and then throwing a fit because nobody wants to play due to various surprises you brought to the table. Explain, ask, and hope they say yes. Simples.
Bartali wrote: This thread illustrates perfectly why 7th ed was a bad idea, and why I don't game outside of a group of close friends
Pretty much.
OP, your opponent can refuse to play you for any reason they want. If you bring a Squiggoth and go "Surprise I am fielding this LoW!" and they don't think it would be a fun game, they can decline a game. Your army isn't illegal because you're fielding the Squiggoth, and technically you do not have to ask permission to bring one. However it's generally considered polite to not bring superheavies or things like that to a game without letting your opponent know beforehand or, at the very list, asking them if they're cool with it. While they might be legal models it doesn't mean that everyone enjoys playing against them. This might not be a big deal if you play with a close-knit group and one-upsmanship is something you do (e.g. I see your 3 Riptides and raise you a Revenant!), but if you want to just turn up at a store and field a Squiggoth just because you can, it's pretty much a d-bag move and you shouldn't be surprised if people ask you to not field it or if you are adamant about it refuse to play against you.
Think of it this way: Would you rather demand to use a Squiggoth and end up with no game at all, or not use the Squiggoth and get a game?
The only time someone is compelled to play against you (or concede) is a tournament, where everyone agrees to the tournament rules. In this case, bring what you want as long as it's permitted in the tournament (which might have limits or exclusions on certain types of units).
Otherwise, as pretty much everyone else has stated, if you field a legal unit that your opponents generally feel they don't want to play against, the real consequence is that you may have fewer people who want to play against you, and it's not like you can force them. It's gonna be a pretty sad game if your opponent is using the units from Dark Vengeance
The other thing is, there are usually some people who like/want games with exotic units. Seek them out!
Ok, don't get me wrong about all this, i am not doing this to broke the game, its a squiggot (stop saying its gargantuan, its just monstrous...) its just a lovely model a little bit expensive for what it is. Plus, i am playing with a group of friend and i know they will all have something to bring down this beast.
I just wanted to know if in the community, bringing a FW models (with the rules with me) to a game was nice, acceptable and legal like any other unit in the codex or cheesy and not really acceptable.
Its funny that the comment of Sheokronath didnt make any reaction. As stated in the 40k 7th edition rulebook page 116: players must agree how they are going to select their armies. Its ure that you need to ask your opponent if you play unbound. I think its even more broken then if you put a forge world model... Imagine 10 helldrake no troop and thats more ok to fild then a FW models?
My main question was exactly as Thairne said it
However the REASON for why he refuses you should not be "FW is illegal", cause that is no longer the case.
I just wanted to make sure i can legally ask my opponent (friend or stranger) to play my squiggoth without being a "special" demand. Where i play, one guy told me that i can play FW model like my squiggoth or a Super Heavy Tank for exemple without having any problem because forge world is now accepted by GW and its cool. A other guy told me it was super cheasy and it was not nice to play model from Forge world because they are not in the original codex of the army and its not really stated by games workshop that you can play FW models.
Ok, don't get me wrong about all this, i am not doing this to broke the game, its a squiggot (stop saying its gargantuan, its just monstrous...) its just a lovely model a little bit expensive for what it is. Plus, i am playing with a group of friend and i know they will all have something to bring down this beast.
I just wanted to know if in the community, bringing a FW models (with the rules with me) to a game was nice, acceptable and legal like any other unit in the codex or cheesy and not really acceptable.
Its funny that the comment of Sheokronath didnt make any reaction. As stated in the 40k 7th edition rulebook page 116: players must agree how they are going to select their armies. Its ure that you need to ask your opponent if you play unbound. I think its even more broken then if you put a forge world model... Imagine 10 helldrake no troop and thats more ok to fild then a FW models?
My main question was exactly as Thairne said it
However the REASON for why he refuses you should not be "FW is illegal", cause that is no longer the case.
I just wanted to make sure i can legally ask my opponent (friend or stranger) to play my squiggoth without being a "special" demand. Where i play, one guy told me that i can play FW model like my squiggoth or a Super Heavy Tank for exemple without having any problem because forge world is now accepted by GW and its cool. A other guy told me it was super cheasy and it was not nice to play model from Forge world because they are not in the original codex of the army and its not really stated by games workshop that you can play FW models.
Thats what i wanted to know...
Then short answer: Yes you can legally ask your opponent to play your squiggoth without it requiring his permission (being a "special" demand). However, your opponent is within their rights to say "No" and then you have a choice to either not play the Squiggoth or not play that person.
calarok wrote: Its funny that the comment of Sheokronath didnt make any reaction. As stated in the 40k 7th edition rulebook page 116: players must agree how they are going to select their armies. Its ure that you need to ask your opponent if you play unbound
You've misread it. Page 116 isn't saying you need permission to use an Unbound army. It's saying that players need to agree how they are going to select armies - whether to use points limits, or some other system.
If you choose to use the army selection system in the rulebook, then both Battle Forged or Unbound are equally legal options. Unbound isn't an 'alternative' system. There are simply two different methods of building an army.
I just wanted to make sure i can legally ask my opponent (friend or stranger) to play my squiggoth without being a "special" demand..
And the answer is: It depends.
The only place that GW have actually stated that Forgeworld stuff is 'legal' for 40K is in Forgeworld publications, which some people feel is not actually sufficient.
For others, regardless of how technically 'legal' Forgeworld stuff is, their unfamiliarity with Forgeworld units and the comparative difficulty of obtaining their rules makes them not as welcome on the table without advance warning.
So it really comes down to the people you play with and how they feel about the whole thing. I would definitely advise against just plonking your Squiggoth down on the table with no prior discussion about how Forgeworld stuff would be received unless you are really friendly with the people you are playing.
Yeah op already said it but I'll reiterate to put an end to the confusion. He's using a Squigoth, the overpriced MC that's the size of a Tervigon. He's not using the Gargantuan Squigoth that's bigger than a Hierophant.
insaniak wrote:The only place that GW have actually stated that Forgeworld stuff is 'legal' for 40K is in Forgeworld publications, which some people feel is not actually sufficient.
Technically, the 40k rulebook(s) state that anything is "legal", as long as the opponent agrees. This can be anything from codex units to the FW Squiggoth to my homebrewed SoB Novices.
In a way, you could see the official publications as "suggestions" on what to use, and it just seems that different players place different levels of non-existing authority on these publications, with army codices being the most common denominator, followed by WD articles, followed by Forgeworld and Citadel Journal, followed by homebrewed. In the end, just like with the "canon", it comes down to what you make of it. GW just wants to sell miniatures and for the players to have a fun time.
Forge World rules may be legal, but Forge World Miniatures are illegal. It clearly says in the rule book Citadel Miniatures. No mention of Forge World miniatures at all.
So yes FW minis are illegal.
And I do hope so people see the smiley face and not ignore it and go off in a tantrum.
Orock wrote: To avoid drama I decline all fw stuff except as cool proxies. Our whole area has no fw and that's how we like it
How exactly is enforcing a policy of "that stuff you might want to use is banned" supposed to avoid drama? By shunning all the players who might want to use rules you don't approve of and limiting your group to people who are willing to obey your rules?
Psienesis wrote: A lot of areas work that way, not always to that extent, but such things for a club that may only be 10 or 15 people is not unusual.
I know it can be common, but it's a terrible policy to have unless you're obsessed with having everyone around you agree with you and willing to drive off anyone who doesn't.
Its funny how the on the first page people were saying it was ok to play with forge world model and it wasn't illegal, just need to ask your opponent if it's ok with him. Now, 2 in a row are saying its completely illegal... (by the way's what the citadel book you are talking about? what page?)
Hi's there any good source of information or people that like FW are saying its ok and people who doesn't liked it are saying its completely illegal?
Funny how different people see things...
I wish all who have respond to this post are seeing why i am asking if its a "special" demand or if its ok to play FW without having problems with some player out their...
Peregrine wrote:
How exactly is enforcing a policy of "that stuff you might want to use is banned" supposed to avoid drama? By shunning all the players who might want to use rules you don't approve of and limiting your group to people who are willing to obey your rules?
You say they like it's a bad thing.
If that's the way that the players in his area like to play, then having a clear policy in place is the best way to avoid misunderstandings.
It's almost like the forward of every single Imperial Armour book, including the one that contains the rules for the Squiggoth specifically answer your question (see the attached pic below).
So ask your opponent if he's okay playing a game using Forge World models, and if he is, then you can 'surprise' him with your Big Squiggoth.
No need to ask anyone online, the rules are in the book you need to have to use the model.
If that's the way that the players in his area like to play, then having a clear policy in place is the best way to avoid misunderstandings.
I say it like its a bad thing because it is a bad thing. It's a clear policy, but clarity doesn't make up for it being a terrible policy. It only avoids conflict when everyone in the group coincidentally doesn't use any FW rules in their armies, in which case no policy is needed (just like you don't need to have a "no orks" policy just because nobody plays orks right now). The policy only becomes relevant when someone decides they want to use FW rules, in which case you have three choices: you can abandon the policy and let them play the army they want to use, you can force them to comply and deal with having an unhappy player who thinks you're all TFG, or you can shun them from the group and preserve the purity of your "FW sucks" club. If you choose the first option your policy was pointless, if you choose the second or third option you've created pointless conflict just so you can have veto power over everyone's army.
Psienesis wrote: ... but don't be surprised if it's the last game with that player and that model on the table.
If your opponent ragequits and refuses to play again because you used a FW unit then you should be happy that you don't have to play against that person again.
Well, if you showed up at my house with a "little" surprise like a Squiggoth, I'd be more than happy to play you. I might tweak my list a little bit if it was more fluff than crunch, just to even the odds, but I wouldn't say no.
Same thing goes for anything really, I think what the OP really wanted to know was whether or not such a surprise would be considered to be in bad taste. I think the answer is no, resoundingly. If you planned this little caper in order to drop an unexpected power-list on someone the results would be different, but shocking your friends with a new toy on the battlefield is nothing to worry about. Taking it to the LGS? Maybe you wanna let people know about it...
The way I see it, the rules passage I quoted HERE is GW's answer. Forge World is just as valid a source of 'official' rules as the main rulebook and the codices, but it is up to the players to decide what is 'legal' and what is 'illegal' for that specific game. Established groups may have an understanding as to what is expected to be 'legal' or 'illegal' by agreeing to a game.
Peregrine wrote: The policy only becomes relevant when someone decides they want to use FW rules, in which case you have three choices: you can abandon the policy and let them play the army they want to use, you can force them to comply and deal with having an unhappy player who thinks you're all TFG, or you can shun them from the group and preserve the purity of your "FW sucks" club.
...or they accept that the group has rules against using Forgeworld and just save their Forgeworld units for games played elsewhere.
In the same way that I accept that some venues have rules against the use of non-GW models, and so would not use my non-GW models in those venues. I'm not going to get bent out of shape about it and start calling people names over it. It's a game of toy soldiers.
Players are perfectly entitled to impose or ignore whatever rules they want within their own groups. Whether or not you personally agree with those rules doesn't have to enter into it in the slightest.
insaniak wrote: ...or they accept that the group has rules against using Forgeworld and just save their Forgeworld units for games played elsewhere.
That's assuming that the person has a complete non-FW army (not everyone who uses FW rules has one) AND is willing to put up with pointless arbitrary restrictions on what they can bring to a game AND can find enough games elsewhere to be satisfied. If either of those things isn't true then it's very easy for resentment and TFG feelings to happen. For example, I don't have a non-FW army so if you say "no FW" to me what you're really saying is "you're not welcome here". I'm not going to play against you, and even if I can find games elsewhere I'm still going to think you're TFG.
Players are perfectly entitled to impose or ignore whatever rules they want within their own groups. Whether or not you personally agree with those rules doesn't have to enter into it in the slightest.
Of course it has to enter into it, assuming I'm in the area and want to join the 40k community. If a group of players has decided to make the local community their personal "FW sucks" club then it has a huge impact on my enjoyment of the game. They obviously have a right to do it, but I'm still going to think they're a bunch of TFGs.
Peregrine wrote: The policy only becomes relevant when someone decides they want to use FW rules, in which case you have three choices: you can abandon the policy and let them play the army they want to use, you can force them to comply and deal with having an unhappy player who thinks you're all TFG, or you can shun them from the group and preserve the purity of your "FW sucks" club.
I'm never quite sure why we talk in such absolutes in these discussions. There are options beyond "abandon all policies", "someone is shunned" and "everyone is TFG".
It's amazing, I know, but there is actually the possibility that people can negotiate mutually enjoyable games
I've only had the opportunity to play one game against an opponent that pulled out a FW model before asking if it was ok.
It was the fire raptor. In a 1000 point game. Although I wasn't expecting to face *any* flyers, and I knew it would tear my army apart, I figured what the hell and just like that picture of the fish jumping into the gators mouth I went for it.
Ultimately, it was a slaughter. But it was a very close one and I had fun.
That said a number of people don't like those kinds of surprises and are more than happy to just say no. So have a backup list just in case.
know how many arguments we get from people that sound like "well forgeworld unit A is ok, but B is bullcrap, you cant use that one" zero. By not allowing any you don't have to listen to someone bitch about "waaa my flying tau monstrous creature is just as balanced as those imperial guard wearing gasmasks" you don't have to make special rules for tournaments. and nobody walks away butthurt because they spent 2000 dollars on forgeworld cheese that nobody wants to play against. And as for regular codex cheese, guess what? The guy who always showed up with 7 wave serpents? He stopped getting games, and got the picture. Now he shows up with much more toned down lists, and actually get games. If your playing in a tournament, you have to expect BS. But unbound was completely removed after 2 tournaments, one where 3 lists showed up with 2 transcendent ctan each, and the next when 4 people showed up for the tournament total after revealing it would be another unbound allowed.
Orock wrote: know how many arguments we get from people that sound like "well forgeworld unit A is ok, but B is bullcrap, you cant use that one" zero. By not allowing any you don't have to listen to someone bitch about "waaa my flying tau monstrous creature is just as balanced as those imperial guard wearing gasmasks" you don't have to make special rules for tournaments. and nobody walks away butthurt because they spent 2000 dollars on forgeworld cheese that nobody wants to play against. And as for regular codex cheese, guess what? The guy who always showed up with 7 wave serpents? He stopped getting games, and got the picture. Now he shows up with much more toned down lists, and actually get games. If your playing in a tournament, you have to expect BS. But unbound was completely removed after 2 tournaments, one where 3 lists showed up with 2 transcendent ctan each, and the next when 4 people showed up for the tournament total after revealing it would be another unbound allowed.
So let me get this straight: you solved the codex balance issues by people refusing to play against the overpowered stuff, but you can't solve the much less severe balance issues with FW rules without a blanket ban? It sounds like the issue here isn't the potential for overpowered armies that aren't fun to play against, it's that you don't know very much about game balance and would rather veto your opponent's army choices and/or shun them from the community than learn how the rules work.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm never quite sure why we talk in such absolutes in these discussions. There are options beyond "abandon all policies", "someone is shunned" and "everyone is TFG".
It's amazing, I know, but there is actually the possibility that people can negotiate mutually enjoyable games
There are absolutes because that's just how it works. I have a FW army, I can not play a non-FW army because I don't have the models or rules for it (and even if I did, I'm not giving you veto power over my choices). There are two possibilities here: you accept the army that I brought, or you claim veto power and we don't play. There is no compromise position because I don't have a second army list to compromise with. And if you refuse to play a game just because you don't like which official and current GW products I took my rules from then I'm going to think you're TFG, just like if you refused to play a game against a pure codex C:SM army because you don't like tactical squads.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
clively wrote: That said a number of people don't like those kinds of surprises and are more than happy to just say no. So have a backup list just in case.
Would you give the same advice about surprising someone with the new (codex) Land Raider kit you just bought? And would you think the other player is being reasonable if they refused to play because they didn't think you were going to bring a LR?
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm never quite sure why we talk in such absolutes in these discussions. There are options beyond "abandon all policies", "someone is shunned" and "everyone is TFG".
It's amazing, I know, but there is actually the possibility that people can negotiate mutually enjoyable games
There are absolutes because that's just how it works. I have a FW army, I can not play a non-FW army because I don't have the models or rules for it (and even if I did, I'm not giving you veto power over my choices). There are two possibilities here: you accept the army that I brought, or you claim veto power and we don't play. There is no compromise position because I don't have a second army list to compromise with. And if you refuse to play a game just because you don't like which official and current GW products I took my rules from then I'm going to think you're TFG, just like if you refused to play a game against a pure codex C:SM army because you don't like tactical squads.
It's rarely that black and white. I'd hazard a guess and say you might be one of the few exceptions who has an entire FW army and no other army. Even then, DKOK can be used as IG, you might not be able to use your entire collection but I'm almost certain you can make some sort of IG army out of your DKOK.
There's always room for discussion. If your opponents genuinely don't want to try and discuss something and just shoo you away based on the models without even discussing how they might be used, ok, they might be dicks... so why are you wanting to play against dicks in the first place? If you're the one unwilling to have a discussion then you can label yourself TFG as much as you can label them TFG's.
I'm not saying that the result of the discussion is always going to be one which results in a game, but to pretend that it's black and white is a bit disingenuous.
40k is a game that requires discussion simply because the rules are so poorly written. Sometimes that discussion will go down the path of army selection.
For someone who is so negative with GW's rules I'm surprised you're not more open to the idea of discussion and compromise.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Even then, DKOK can be used as IG, you might not be able to use your entire collection but I'm almost certain you can make some sort of IG army out of your DKOK.
Yeah, maybe I could manage to get a 750 point codex army, if I could borrow a copy of the codex and my models didn't have to be perfectly WYSIWYG. It would probably suck, it wouldn't include most of my favorite models/units, and I wouldn't have any fun using it, but hey, at least it doesn't have any FW rules!
so why are you wanting to play against dicks in the first place?
Because I didn't know they were TFGs? If I just show up to 40k night at the local store I don't know in advance that the local players are TFGs who demand veto power over their opponent's army and insist on enforcing their own house rules. I'm certainly not going to want to play against them after the "no FW" conversation, but by then it's too late to avoid them entirely.
For someone who is so negative with GW's rules I'm surprised you're not more open to the idea of discussion and compromise.
I'm not open to discussion and compromise because this isn't a situation where poorly-written rules require a compromise. There is nothing ambiguous or broken about the published rules, the only issue is that certain players have invented their own rules and insist that everyone else follow them.
Peregrine wrote: If I just show up to 40k night at the local store I don't know in advance that the local players are TFGs who demand veto power over their opponent's army and insist on enforcing their own house rules.
If you are walking into a new venue populated by an established group and not expecting them to enforce their own house rules, you're going to be fairly assured of running into problems.
the only issue is that certain players have invented their own rules and insist that everyone else follow them.
That's not an issue. It's exactly how GW tells us to play their games.
Peregrine wrote: Because I didn't know they were TFGs? If I just show up to 40k night at the local store I don't know in advance that the local players are TFGs who demand veto power over their opponent's army and insist on enforcing their own house rules. I'm certainly not going to want to play against them after the "no FW" conversation, but by then it's too late to avoid them entirely.
You make it sound worse than it is. At any point during a conversation in which you discuss the use of FW and possible compromises, you can decide the people are dicks and say "actually, nah, don't worry, I'll just play someone else".
There's no need to pre-emptively label anyone who disagrees with you as "TFG".
For someone who is so negative with GW's rules I'm surprised you're not more open to the idea of discussion and compromise.
I'm not open to discussion and compromise because this isn't a situation where poorly-written rules require a compromise. There is nothing ambiguous or broken about the published rules
I disagree. I think the complete lack of limitations on what you can take at different points levels is a fundamentally broken system. I don't necessarily think that a blanket ban on FW is a great idea, but whatever, if that's what people want to do I don't really care, I can kind of understand why they might feel that way.
The rules rather explicitly talk about introducing your own limitations or allowances to create the game you want to play. While I wish 40k with a more solid set of core rules that you can build on, it's the other way around, so you're pretty much always going to be discussing things with your opponent, and sometimes that discussion will have to be on army construction... it's not black and white, it's discussion.
It only becomes black and white when you pre-emptively think everyone who disagrees with you is "TFG".
the only issue is that certain players have invented their own rules and insist that everyone else follow them.
...what exactly is wrong with people insisting you play by the rules THEY like when you are actually playing against them??
I would find it just as annoying when people insist on playing by the RAW when I think the RAW suck.
People can't force you to do play by their rules when you aren't even playing against them. I feel like you're making a mountain out of mole hill.
Psienesis wrote: ... but don't be surprised if it's the last game with that player and that model on the table.
I take it you're not one of those people who reads things already posted in a thread before responding? It's been mentioned numerous times that op is using a Squiggoth which is an overpriced MC, he's not using a Gargantuan Squiggoth.
Psienesis wrote: ... but don't be surprised if it's the last game with that player and that model on the table.
I take it you're not one of those people who reads things already posted in a thread before responding? It's been mentioned numerous times that op is using a Squiggoth which is an overpriced MC, he's not using a Gargantuan Squiggoth.
Even if it was the G.Squiggoth isn't exactly a good monster either, it's..pretty adequate last time I saw it on the table, depending on what you use it for, but GW's WS2 or WS3 is just killer at times for monster type creatures.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: There's no need to pre-emptively label anyone who disagrees with you as "TFG".
I'm not preemptively labeling anyone, I'm labeling them after interacting with them and being told that I'm not welcome in their tournament/gaming group/whatever because I won't obey their arbitrary house rules about army construction.
I think the complete lack of limitations on what you can take at different points levels is a fundamentally broken system.
I agree that the game is broken with expensive "death star" units in low-point games, or with unbound lists in high-point games where you can spam dozens of copies of a unit. However, FW has nothing to do with this. All of those "what you can take" problems exist with codex units, so making rules about what is legal based on which book the rules were printed in does absolutely nothing to fix the problem.
...what exactly is wrong with people insisting you play by the rules THEY like when you are actually playing against them??
What is wrong is that their reasons are stupid and their policies exclude people for no good reason. I would see it differently if they were making changes to address a significant issue and improve the game, but all FW bans do is get rid of a particular set of units that one player doesn't want to use in their army. It's nothing more than "I get no benefit from letting you do this, so I'm going to limit your options and help my chances of winning".
People can't force you to do play by their rules when you aren't even playing against them. I feel like you're making a mountain out of mole hill.
Obviously they can't force me to obey their rules, but they can limit the number of gaming opportunities I get. This is not an irrelevant issue.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: There's no need to pre-emptively label anyone who disagrees with you as "TFG".
I'm not preemptively labeling anyone, I'm labeling them after interacting with them and being told that I'm not welcome in their tournament/gaming group/whatever because I won't obey their arbitrary house rules about army construction.
I think the complete lack of limitations on what you can take at different points levels is a fundamentally broken system.
I agree that the game is broken with expensive "death star" units in low-point games, or with unbound lists in high-point games where you can spam dozens of copies of a unit. However, FW has nothing to do with this. All of those "what you can take" problems exist with codex units, so making rules about what is legal based on which book the rules were printed in does absolutely nothing to fix the problem.
...what exactly is wrong with people insisting you play by the rules THEY like when you are actually playing against them??
What is wrong is that their reasons are stupid and their policies exclude people for no good reason. I would see it differently if they were making changes to address a significant issue and improve the game, but all FW bans do is get rid of a particular set of units that one player doesn't want to use in their army. It's nothing more than "I get no benefit from letting you do this, so I'm going to limit your options and help my chances of winning".
People can't force you to do play by their rules when you aren't even playing against them. I feel like you're making a mountain out of mole hill.
Obviously they can't force me to obey their rules, but they can limit the number of gaming opportunities I get. This is not an irrelevant issue.
On the third point in particular there is a good chance that the more vocal and domineering players are enforcing these rules and the quieter less confrontational players obey them. Just because a group of players all agree on a rule does not mean the majority are happy about it.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: There's no need to pre-emptively label anyone who disagrees with you as "TFG".
I'm not preemptively labeling anyone, I'm labeling them after interacting with them and being told that I'm not welcome in their tournament/gaming group/whatever because I won't obey their arbitrary house rules about army construction.
I think the complete lack of limitations on what you can take at different points levels is a fundamentally broken system.
I agree that the game is broken with expensive "death star" units in low-point games, or with unbound lists in high-point games where you can spam dozens of copies of a unit. However, FW has nothing to do with this. All of those "what you can take" problems exist with codex units, so making rules about what is legal based on which book the rules were printed in does absolutely nothing to fix the problem.
...what exactly is wrong with people insisting you play by the rules THEY like when you are actually playing against them??
What is wrong is that their reasons are stupid and their policies exclude people for no good reason. I would see it differently if they were making changes to address a significant issue and improve the game, but all FW bans do is get rid of a particular set of units that one player doesn't want to use in their army. It's nothing more than "I get no benefit from letting you do this, so I'm going to limit your options and help my chances of winning".
People can't force you to do play by their rules when you aren't even playing against them. I feel like you're making a mountain out of mole hill.
Obviously they can't force me to obey their rules, but they can limit the number of gaming opportunities I get. This is not an irrelevant issue.
I think the biggest legitimate reason that someone wouldn't want to play against FW stuff is the way the rules are presented. 40k is very much about knowing your enemy. You can know your own army as well as you like, if you have no fething idea what your opponent's army is but they know your army, you're probably going to lose.
Getting to know a FW army is significantly trickier than getting to know one of the standard armies because they are less common, their rules are harder to obtain and often have several versions over various (expensive) books and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules.
That's probably the main legitimate reason I think people wouldn't want to play against a FW army or FW models.
Peregrine wrote: I'm not preemptively labeling anyone, I'm labeling them after interacting with them and being told that I'm not welcome in their tournament/gaming group/whatever because I won't obey their arbitrary house rules about army construction.
*snip*
Obviously they can't force me to obey their rules, but they can limit the number of gaming opportunities I get. This is not an irrelevant issue.
Well, you kind of are pre-emptively labelling them because your list of possible outcomes is "they concede and their rules are pointless or else they are TFG".
But either way, I still don't see why you'd desire to play against people who act like that. To me it's no loss to be excluded from a group who would decide they're going to exclude you and be dicks about it. I've stopped playing in certain groups for the sole reason I didn't like the way the people acted. They weren't excluding me at all, I just didn't like the behaviour so I stopped playing there.
40k is a social game, the game itself is pretty crap, the only reason I play it is to get together and have a laugh with mates.
That's why I mostly see it as irrelevant I guess... because either you get people who are willing to discuss it and figure out a solution, you can't come to a solution so you mutually decide to not play a game (and no one has to be "TFG") or else you get dicks who are rigid and unyielding (lol) and then who gives a crap because I wouldn't want to play against them anyway
"and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules"
Then ask FW. Its not tricky.
The old "the rules are difficult to get hold of" excuse is quite tiresome though - they are available on the internet to order, you can find out, easily, where the rules are for the army, and you can *gasp* ask to have a look threough your opponents IA before you play, or get the to talk you through the main points of their army. Social interaction, again...
nosferatu1001 wrote: "and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules"
Then ask FW. Its not tricky.
The old "the rules are difficult to get hold of" excuse is quite tiresome though - they are available on the internet to order, you can find out, easily, where the rules are for the army, and you can *gasp* ask to have a look threough your opponents IA before you play, or get the to talk you through the main points of their army. Social interaction, again...
I think you totally missed the point. Every FLGS I've been to carries a full range of the printed codices, so you can go read about an army before you play it.
FW books are expensive and though they aren't hard to buy, they do take time to get to you and just because you buy the one you THINK you need your opponent is probably the only one who (hopefully) knows which one you need for their specific army.
Of course you have the same problem with WD armies and digital only armies... and not surprisingly you get people who are less than happy to play against WD armies and digital only armies as well
You could borrow the appropriate book off your opponent before playing... not always the most practical thing in the world to do. I sure as hell don't lend my expensive books out to strangers.
Simply discussing the army in question is a good idea and one I'd suggest... you'll note that I've repeatedly championed the idea of discussion in this very thread shocking I know. Though I can understand why some people might not want to go to the effort.
nosferatu1001 wrote: "and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules"
Then ask FW. Its not tricky.
The old "the rules are difficult to get hold of" excuse is quite tiresome though - they are available on the internet to order, you can find out, easily, where the rules are for the army, and you can *gasp* ask to have a look threough your opponents IA before you play, or get the to talk you through the main points of their army. Social interaction, again...
The rules only says they have to show the rules of a codex, not an IA book, nor what printing the books is. You would have to own more or less every FW book out there to be sure which one is he using and if it the one with newest printed rules.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: ]FW books are expensive and though they aren't hard to buy, they do take time to get to you and just because you buy the one you THINK you need your opponent is probably the only one who (hopefully) knows which one you need for their specific army.
To be fair, only a few are particularly expensive, many are roughly codex priced, some are dirt cheap (i.e. Imperial Armour Volume 5 is half the price of a codex book right now...). Hell, you can get IA9, 10, and IA2 second edition in a bundle, for less than three codex books, and have tons of cool new units and some cool new army lists. Most of the books that are expensive not only include tons of new units for an army, they come with a new army list as well (e.g. IA 13 has CSM and Daemon units that aren't in the codex, and a Traitor IG army, and it's about 1.5x the cost of a codex).
Given that prices for basic Codex books currently are 250% of what they were seven years ago, the IA books no longer seem particularly expensive, especially if that price expansion keeps going at the same rate, codex books and IA books will be on par in a few years anyway. We've seen that convergence with other units, the new plastic Tempestus Scions and the repackaged Dire Avengers being identical in cost to the similar Death Korps Grenadiers and the like, and most FW characters being only a few cents more (maybe a dollar or two at most) than GW plastic clam-pack characters.
nosferatu1001 wrote: "and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules"
Then ask FW. Its not tricky.
The old "the rules are difficult to get hold of" excuse is quite tiresome though - they are available on the internet to order, you can find out, easily, where the rules are for the army, and you can *gasp* ask to have a look threough your opponents IA before you play, or get the to talk you through the main points of their army. Social interaction, again...
The rules only says they have to show the rules of a codex, not an IA book, nor what printing the books is. You would have to own more or less every FW book out there to be sure which one is he using and if it the one with newest printed rules.
Or you could look up any of the handy lists online (such as the one on this very website) that tells you which book has the latest rules for which unit. This really isn't rocket science, if you can't figure that out in like 2 minutes of google-fu, then other problems are going to be more pressing and immediate.
All that notwithstanding, we get very similar problems with GW stuff. Right now we've got two different rules for Chimeras for instance. Codex: Astra Militarum says that Chimeras are 65pts with Lasgun arrays and two fire points, but Codex: Inquisition says that Chimeras are 55pts with no lasgun arrays and 5 fire points.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I think the biggest legitimate reason that someone wouldn't want to play against FW stuff is the way the rules are presented. 40k is very much about knowing your enemy. You can know your own army as well as you like, if you have no fething idea what your opponent's army is but they know your army, you're probably going to lose.
IOW, the reason is "I'm afraid of losing and I'd rather ban your army than risk losing a game because I haven't had enough time to figure out how to beat you". It's just a game, not a high-stakes gambling event, spend a few minutes reading the FW player's rules before you start the game and then play.
Also, this would be a much more compelling argument if I didn't encounter so many people who don't understand codex rules for armies they don't play. For example, the guy who accused me of cheating when I told him that my (old codex) Chimeras had five fire points, or the many people who say "nope, what do they do?" when I ask them if they know how common codex units like LRBTs/Basilisks/etc work.
Getting to know a FW army is significantly trickier than getting to know one of the standard armies because they are less common, their rules are harder to obtain and often have several versions over various (expensive) books and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules.
Then read the book briefly before the game starts. If the FW player has their rules with them (like you should regardless of what sources you're using) this isn't a problem at all.
But either way, I still don't see why you'd desire to play against people who act like that. To me it's no loss to be excluded from a group who would decide they're going to exclude you and be dicks about it. I've stopped playing in certain groups for the sole reason I didn't like the way the people acted. They weren't excluding me at all, I just didn't like the behaviour so I stopped playing there.
I don't really want to play against them once I know how they act, but that doesn't justify their behavior. Even if I don't ever ask to come back I'm still going to be annoyed at the situation and wish they had been better people.
nosferatu1001 wrote: "and you may not know where to look for the most recent rules"
Then ask FW. Its not tricky.
The old "the rules are difficult to get hold of" excuse is quite tiresome though - they are available on the internet to order, you can find out, easily, where the rules are for the army, and you can *gasp* ask to have a look threough your opponents IA before you play, or get the to talk you through the main points of their army. Social interaction, again...
The rules only says they have to show the rules of a codex, not an IA book, nor what printing the books is. You would have to own more or less every FW book out there to be sure which one is he using and if it the one with newest printed rules.
Not true. They have to explain the rules for the units they are using, regardless of the publication they are in. If they refuse to do so, then you dont play them.
Really the only reason people would not like FW is because of the superheavies and stuff (which IMHO still have no place in regular games). I doubt anyone is going to see a DKoK army and go "Nope, it's FW" and if they do they are just being unreasonable. Now if you wanted to field a Warhound Titan in a regular pick-up game I could see your opponent not being too happy with that, and to be honest I'd agree with them.
FW used to be unofficial because it also tended to be the broken/overpowered/untested stuff, and that stigma remains. It's kind of like in 3rd edition D&D there were a lot of third-party splatbooks that were just completely unbalanced (Mongoose's books spring to mind) and basically caused the majority of groups to outright ban third party material so they didn't have to go through individual things to see what was good and what was bad.
Same thing here. I don't think it's right to disallow all FW stuff just because it's from FW, but at the same time I think one of the worst things GW ever did for 40k is just have a blanket "everything is legal" because it makes someone who refuses to play against a Titan or other superheavy look like the bad person for "changing the rules".
calarok wrote: Its funny how the on the first page people were saying it was ok to play with forge world model and it wasn't illegal, just need to ask your opponent if it's ok with him. Now, 2 in a row are saying its completely illegal... (by the way's what the citadel book you are talking about? what page?)
Hi's there any good source of information or people that like FW are saying its ok and people who doesn't liked it are saying its completely illegal?
Funny how different people see things...
I wish all who have respond to this post are seeing why i am asking if its a "special" demand or if its ok to play FW without having problems with some player out their...
I think you're missing the point.
GW opened the floodgates to allow everything, and left it up to the players to sort out what kind of game they want.
You need to discuss what kind of game you want, and with what types of units to make the game enjoyable for both players.
Ask your opponent if they don't mind you using the Squiggoth, and show them the rules. It's more likely you'll get more games in with your Squiggoth this way.
Rather than not discussing it and going "Suprise !" and trying to make your opponent play it because of any 'legality'.
If one of my friends surprised me by showing up to a game with a new FW model, I would be thrilled. I would definitely let them field it for at least one game. If it was obviously on another level than what we normally play (like a Titan or LoW) I'd ask to leave it out on game 2, with the understanding that it will be fair game once I purchase a comparable unit.
Escalation among friends can be a blast. I'm still fairly new to the game, and love seeing models I haven't seen in person before.
To the head maybe. Nothing kills any setting faster then one or two dudes that can spend that have access to stuff other don't get. When I started to play MtG we always did drafts which were and are super fun. Only problem are those dudes that buy multiple boxs to pick the best booster pack combination or even bring two boxs of their own.
Not true. They have to explain the rules for the units they are using, regardless of the publication they are in. If they refuse to do so, then you dont play them.
If they are in a codex or rule book, neither mention IA as a source of rules. The ETC rules don't let FW be used either.
Then read the book briefly before the game starts. If the FW player has their rules with them (like you should regardless of what sources you're using) this isn't a problem at all.
Only you can ask them to explain when there are any rule questions, before the game you don't know what FW units do, unless you play FW units too. So of course you can check the rules durning the game and hope that the rules aren't experimental , out dated or the opponent has just a scan of it or print out, which both may be modified.
Hell, you can get IA9, 10, and IA2 second edition in a bundle, for less than three codex books, and have tons of cool new units and some cool new army lists. Most of the books that are expensive not only include tons of new units for an army, they come with a new army list as well (e.g. IA 13 has CSM and Daemon units that aren't in the codex, and a Traitor IG army, and it's about 1.5x the cost of a codex).
Sure dude on top of my codex , the ally codex I have to buy, the fortification codex, the rule book and LoW codex I need to know what rules they have, I have to buy FW books, with the 23% additional vat for books we have here and the crazy pound to zloty exchange rate no bank has ever had since the 1980s, at the above 3 codex cost just to check what if my opponent is cheating or not. Or how about I don't and buy an infinity army with it and actualy get to play games.
Or you could look up any of the handy lists online (such as the one on this very website) that tells you which book has the latest rules for which unit. This really isn't rocket science, if you can't figure that out in like 2 minutes of google-fu, then other problems are going to be more pressing and immediate.
Oh sure. Am going to stop the game in the middle of it. Go back home , check in which IA book the rules are , google search an illegal pdf. download it crossing my fingers it is the newest one and then take the 30min bus drive back to the shop to finish the game. Hope no othe rule questions will pop out after that.
It is the duty of the player to provide the rules for what they are using, so no, you do not need to but buy the IA book if your opponent is using FW units (and I won't even bother with adressing the 'need' for Stronghold, Escalation and Allies).
If you don't trust the person you're playing to have the right rules, then maybe you need to think again about who you're playing.
Sure dude on top of my codex , the ally codex I have to buy, the fortification codex, the rule book and LoW codex I need to know what rules they have, I have to buy FW books, with the 23% additional vat for books we have here and the crazy pound to zloty exchange rate no bank has ever had since the 1980s, at the above 3 codex cost just to check what if my opponent is cheating or not. Or how about I don't and buy an infinity army with it and actualy get to play games.
Infinity being super cheap aside, you know what hobby you're getting into (and again, as noted, that "3 codex cost" gets you three books with way more content than most codex books).
Oh sure. Am going to stop the game in the middle of it. Go back home , check in which IA book the rules are , google search an illegal pdf. download it crossing my fingers it is the newest one and then take the 30min bus drive back to the shop to finish the game. Hope no othe rule questions will pop out after that.
Or you could expect that your opponent has the rules on them. *GASP*
Poland isn't exactly the boonies here, does nobody have a phone with internet capabilities to use google to check a list? If they don't have the appropriate book, then its no different than someone not having the appropriate codex.
Really, you're going way out of your way to make this as absurdly overcomplicated as possible.
Sure dude on top of my codex , the ally codex I have to buy, the fortification codex, the rule book and LoW codex I need to know what rules they have, I have to buy FW books, with the 23% additional vat for books we have here and the crazy pound to zloty exchange rate no bank has ever had since the 1980s, at the above 3 codex cost just to check what if my opponent is cheating or not. Or how about I don't and buy an infinity army with it and actualy get to play games.
Infinity being super cheap aside, you know what hobby you're getting into (and again, as noted, that "3 codex cost" gets you three books with way more content than most codex books).
Oh sure. Am going to stop the game in the middle of it. Go back home , check in which IA book the rules are , google search an illegal pdf. download it crossing my fingers it is the newest one and then take the 30min bus drive back to the shop to finish the game. Hope no othe rule questions will pop out after that.
Or you could expect that your opponent has the rules on them. *GASP*
Poland isn't exactly the boonies here, does nobody have a phone with internet capabilities to use google to check a list? If they don't have the appropriate book, then its no different than someone not having the appropriate codex.
Really, you're going way out of your way to make this as absurdly overcomplicated as possible.
Before I moved here, we had a guy at my old store who used the contemptor mortis dread, but the old superior rules. He had the book, but nobody knew it was toned down since. When a new guy called him out on it, he fought back and everyone took the good ol boys side, and the new guy never came back after coming a month straight every wed and sat. Then a week later someone on a whim looked it up and printed it out, and the guy acted like it was no big deal, and we could use whatever codex we want if we wanted against him. Had no remorse that he pretty much made someone shame quit, or at least find somewhere else farther away to try and play. So please don't try and make it out to sound like its just as easy to check up on the official gw codex, because that is a straight faced lie.
Sure dude on top of my codex , the ally codex I have to buy, the fortification codex, the rule book and LoW codex I need to know what rules they have, I have to buy FW books, with the 23% additional vat for books we have here and the crazy pound to zloty exchange rate no bank has ever had since the 1980s, at the above 3 codex cost just to check what if my opponent is cheating or not. Or how about I don't and buy an infinity army with it and actualy get to play games.
Infinity being super cheap aside, you know what hobby you're getting into (and again, as noted, that "3 codex cost" gets you three books with way more content than most codex books).
Oh sure. Am going to stop the game in the middle of it. Go back home , check in which IA book the rules are , google search an illegal pdf. download it crossing my fingers it is the newest one and then take the 30min bus drive back to the shop to finish the game. Hope no othe rule questions will pop out after that.
Or you could expect that your opponent has the rules on them. *GASP*
Poland isn't exactly the boonies here, does nobody have a phone with internet capabilities to use google to check a list? If they don't have the appropriate book, then its no different than someone not having the appropriate codex.
Really, you're going way out of your way to make this as absurdly overcomplicated as possible.
Before I moved here, we had a guy at my old store who used the contemptor mortis dread, but the old superior rules. He had the book, but nobody knew it was toned down since. When a new guy called him out on it, he fought back and everyone took the good ol boys side, and the new guy never came back after coming a month straight every wed and sat. Then a week later someone on a whim looked it up and printed it out, and the guy acted like it was no big deal, and we could use whatever codex we want if we wanted against him. Had no remorse that he pretty much made someone shame quit, or at least find somewhere else farther away to try and play. So please don't try and make it out to sound like its just as easy to check up on the official gw codex, because that is a straight faced lie.
Where did I say that? I just said that it wasn't the absurd exertion it's being made out to be. Let's also put aside the "Official GW codex" nomenclature, because FW books are "Official GW" books as well, published by GW with GW copyrights and are written by GW employees who work at GWHQ, they're just sold through a different sales channel.
And honestly, most of that is an issue with the gaming group being jerkwads more than a problem with the rules themselves.
Sure dude on top of my codex , the ally codex I have to buy, the fortification codex, the rule book and LoW codex I need to know what rules they have, I have to buy FW books, with the 23% additional vat for books we have here and the crazy pound to zloty exchange rate no bank has ever had since the 1980s, at the above 3 codex cost just to check what if my opponent is cheating or not. Or how about I don't and buy an infinity army with it and actualy get to play games.
Infinity being super cheap aside, you know what hobby you're getting into (and again, as noted, that "3 codex cost" gets you three books with way more content than most codex books).
Oh sure. Am going to stop the game in the middle of it. Go back home , check in which IA book the rules are , google search an illegal pdf. download it crossing my fingers it is the newest one and then take the 30min bus drive back to the shop to finish the game. Hope no othe rule questions will pop out after that.
Or you could expect that your opponent has the rules on them. *GASP*
Poland isn't exactly the boonies here, does nobody have a phone with internet capabilities to use google to check a list? If they don't have the appropriate book, then its no different than someone not having the appropriate codex.
Really, you're going way out of your way to make this as absurdly overcomplicated as possible.
Before I moved here, we had a guy at my old store who used the contemptor mortis dread, but the old superior rules. He had the book, but nobody knew it was toned down since. When a new guy called him out on it, he fought back and everyone took the good ol boys side, and the new guy never came back after coming a month straight every wed and sat. Then a week later someone on a whim looked it up and printed it out, and the guy acted like it was no big deal, and we could use whatever codex we want if we wanted against him. Had no remorse that he pretty much made someone shame quit, or at least find somewhere else farther away to try and play. So please don't try and make it out to sound like its just as easy to check up on the official gw codex, because that is a straight faced lie.
Where did I say that? I just said that it wasn't the absurd exertion it's being made out to be. Let's also put aside the "Official GW codex" nomenclature, because FW books are "Official GW" books as well, published by GW with GW copyrights and are written by GW employees who work at GWHQ, they're just sold through a different sales channel.
And honestly, most of that is an issue with the gaming group being jerkwads more than a problem with the rules themselves.
You say it like forgeworld is bought for fluff and looks, and not the power hungry WAAC players 90 precent of the time. Nobody ever shows up here and asks if they mind if they proxy their DKoK for guard, they show up with mechanicum 30k armies, rvanna riptides back when they were retardedly broken, saber platforms which are far better than points costs would indicate, land raiders with 5 hull points and immunity to melta, ect...
And before you bemoan and say not everyone is like this, these were all top sellers on launch for forgeworld for months, even outstripping new releases 2 or 3 months later with less compareable power. All everyone in our area has experienced is the super saiyan of WAAC players with it. And I imagine that is pretty common consensus considering how taboo it is in a lot of areas. Forgeworld users are a niche of a niche and probably make up less than 10 precent of 40k players total. And the ones who use it for fluff and fun as opposed to using for alternative power units to plug gaps in their power armies is even or probably higher.
You are going to have to learn to live with your stigma. People are ruining it for you every day. And only GW could fix that, but just saying "lol everything is ok in geam!" Means jack squat to everyone who has watched them throw all pretense of any kind of balanced game out the window in the hopes making rules like unbound will get lil timmy to shell out 150 bucks for that imperial knight to go along side his tau riptides.
You say it like forgeworld is bought for fluff and looks, and not the power hungry WAAC players 90 precent of the time.
Unless you have something to back that up, I'm not buying that number. I've played in many events where FW has been allowed, and probably half a dozen major metro areas in the US and that's just not my experience. Maybe if you're just looking at Adepticon Gladiator...
I've been running a FW army lists for about two years now for most of my games. My win rate with them isn't stellar, either with a DKoK Assault Brigade or Armoured Battlegroup. Most of the time I see people running an FW unit, it's something like a single contemptor, Tau Hazard suits, or something like that.
Nobody ever shows up here and asks if they mind if they proxy their DKoK for guard, they show up with mechanicum 30k armies
Is there something about the AdMech list I'm missing here? I'd love to have an AdMech army...
rvanna riptides back when they were retardedly broken
Which were initial playtest rules at the time?
saber platforms which are far better than points costs would indicate
The ones that are Ld7 and snapfire at ground targets?
land raiders with 5 hull points and immunity to melta, ect...
The ones that are just under Knight cost and die like normal Land Raiders to Lascannons, Railguns, Smash attacks, etc?
And before you bemoan and say not everyone is like this, these were all top sellers on launch for forgeworld for months, even outstripping new releases 2 or 3 months later with less compareable power.
The R'varna was yeah, but again, experimental rules and nobody is going to be terribly butthurt if you say "I don't want to play that thing with test rules". Nobody is going to be butthurt either if you just don't like one specific unit. I've seen people refuse games against armies with codex units they didn't want to deal with, like Knights or Heldrakes. That's fine, it's when you just blanket deny everything just "because it's FW" as opposed to just not liking that one unit.
All everyone in our area has experienced is the super saiyan of WAAC players with it.
Which, going by the previous post, sounds like a gaming group issue rather than a FW issue.
And I imagine that is pretty common consensus considering how taboo it is in a lot of areas.
Usually, as just demonstrated by the Titan thread there was, a result of ignorance and/or people playing stuff wrong. Or they just hear "Forgeworld" and instantly think Titans...
If someone pulled out a Squiggoth like the one proposed by the OP I personally wouldn't mind. It would be fun to play.
I don't understand why people have trouble with this sort of stuff. I was recently part of a Facebook conversation arranging a friendly beginners game at a local gaming group. One guy said he'd like to play and suggested he being along his world eaters featuring Angron. Which is fair enough, but when it became clear that the people in the thread wanted a simpler, fairer game than that he suggested he bring a selection of his 9000pt ork list accompanied by a Stompa!
It's not a FW model, but we stopped the conversation there and set up the game privately instead.
Orock - please don't pull numbers out your butt like that. No, 90% of forgeworld is not bought for power. Counter example, the rvarna was in sale prior tot the rules being out, ditto sicaran. Both did extremely well prior to the rules. I know this for a fact, as I bought the tenth to go in sale (rvarna) at games day, and spoke to the designer about it. Biggest selling single tank? Macharius Vulcan, with one of he worst sets of rules ever.
The vast majority of forgeworld players I know buy the stuff cos it's cool. I won't be so crass as to make up a number, but the clear majority get them for the looks. Now, it cold be you game wi some dicks that would abuse otherwise, but if you can't see your group is quote the exception....
To the head maybe. Nothing kills any setting faster then one or two dudes that can spend that have access to stuff other don't get. When I started to play MtG we always did drafts which were and are super fun. Only problem are those dudes that buy multiple boxs to pick the best booster pack combination or even bring two boxs of their own.
Sounds like the issue is with you. Combination of boosters is highly unlikely to have any bearing on the relevance of a draft unless one set is drastically overpowered in relation to the others. Which assuming you are playing from the same block is extremely unlikely. Even then, it's still completely random, and even then, that booster is passed around the entire table and everyone gets cards from it.
It seems more as though you are the type of player who isn't good at handling your losses and try to find some external reason as to how your opponents got some advantage over you through external means, to blame when you lose. If you don't like people using FW you don't have to play it, however you are the person who is limiting yourself from a portion of the game and holding back your own capability to improve. I'm sure I'll get some response about blah blah blah titans OP and yeah there is some stuff thats OP and theres plenty thats not, you are the person blanketing the lot of it together, not I. Same imbalances exist in regular 40k anyway.
Orock wrote: Before I moved here, we had a guy at my old store who used the contemptor mortis dread, but the old superior rules. He had the book, but nobody knew it was toned down since. When a new guy called him out on it, he fought back and everyone took the good ol boys side, and the new guy never came back after coming a month straight every wed and sat. Then a week later someone on a whim looked it up and printed it out, and the guy acted like it was no big deal, and we could use whatever codex we want if we wanted against him. Had no remorse that he pretty much made someone shame quit, or at least find somewhere else farther away to try and play. So please don't try and make it out to sound like its just as easy to check up on the official gw codex, because that is a straight faced lie.
Your issue is that everyone picked his side for no reason whatsoever.
You can't really blame GW/FW for a lack of effort from the players, cause seriously.. this group argued for a month without anyone having access to the internet?
Orock wrote: You say it like forgeworld is bought for fluff and looks, and not the power hungry WAAC players 90 precent of the time.
I too find it easy to win forum arguments when I make up ridiculous statistics to support my claims.
And before you bemoan and say not everyone is like this, these were all top sellers on launch for forgeworld for months, even outstripping new releases 2 or 3 months later with less compareable power.
I'm shocked that a giant anime robot sold well when GW has a popular army full of giant anime robots and the GW plastic giant anime robot kit the FW one was based on is also a big seller. Are the various space marine infantry kits (which have no special rules) on that top sellers list also overpowered and only bought for their rules? Or could it possibly be the case that popularity is not based only on rules?
You are going to have to learn to live with your stigma.
Translation: "LEARN TO DEAL WITH THIS STEREOTYPE I INVENTED FOR YOU AND STFU ABOUT IT."
Before I moved here, we had a guy at my old store who used the contemptor mortis dread, but the old superior rules. He had the book, but nobody knew it was toned down since. When a new guy called him out on it, he fought back and everyone took the good ol boys side, and the new guy never came back after coming a month straight every wed and sat. Then a week later someone on a whim looked it up and printed it out, and the guy acted like it was no big deal, and we could use whatever codex we want if we wanted against him. Had no remorse that he pretty much made someone shame quit, or at least find somewhere else farther away to try and play. So please don't try and make it out to sound like its just as easy to check up on the official gw codex, because that is a straight faced lie.
So a player lied and cheated, you trusted them instead of verifying the rules yourself, and you had problems with other players siding with the long-time member of the community instead of the new guy just because the new guy wasn't really part of the group yet. What exactly does this have to do with FW legality? Do you ban codex rules because someone with a pure codex army cheats?
Yeah Orock's argument is really weak and shortsighted. I'd recommend going back and rethinking exactly what your standpoint on the matter is Orock - everyone who owns a FW model is a filthy WAAC player grasping for some in game advantage that GW sells at a higher price than the rest? Ok. Let us know when you actually want to play miniatures.
SHUPPET wrote: Yeah Orock's argument is really weak and shortsighted. I'd recommend going back and rethinking exactly what your standpoint on the matter is Orock - everyone who owns a FW model is a filthy WAAC player grasping for some in game advantage that GW sells at a higher price than the rest? Ok. Let us know when you actually want to play miniatures.
You know its bad when even I'm defending buying FW stuff for fun and fluff. It has nothing to do with "WAACOP" stuff.
FW Top Sellers in September wrote:
10Mortarion The Reaper Primarch of the Death Guard
9 Horus The Warmaster Primarch of the Sons of Horus
8Legion MkIII Iron Armour
7Salamanders Legion Fire Drakes
6 Archmagos Draykavac / Archmagos
5House Terryn Upgrade Kit
4Cerastus Knight-Castigator
3The Horus Heresy Book Three: Extermination
2Imperial Armour Volume 4 - The Anphelion Project, Second Edition
1 Vulkan Primarch of the Salamanders
Hard to make an argument for power hungry WAAC making up 90% of FW sales when 50% of the top ten are units that don't exist in 40K, 2 out of 3 of the top three are books 30% are likely to spend most of their life as display models and one of them is just to make an existing GW kit prettier and another is simply alternate Tactical Marines!
Automatically Appended Next Post: But I guess I have to concede..
That MK III Iron Armour? That's, like, totes broken, man, like, you don't even know!
Yeah Orock's argument is really weak and shortsighted. I'd recommend going back and rethinking exactly what your standpoint on the matter is Orock - everyone who owns a FW model is a filthy WAAC player grasping for some in game advantage that GW sells at a higher price than the rest
Has to be a totaly different buying culture then, we have here. No one here would buy bad stuff, even less if they had invest in to books to run it. Sure there are people who buy and paint FW stuff, but those dude are mostly painters or do commisions . Pre nerf escalation gave my area 5 recast eldar titans , but that doesn't realy count as FW and not a single one of them was from UK.
Sounds like the issue is with you. Combination of boosters is highly unlikely to have any bearing on the relevance of a draft unless one set is drastically overpowered in relation to the others. Which assuming you are playing from the same block is extremely unlikely. Even then, it's still completely random, and even then, that booster is passed around the entire table and everyone gets cards from it.
Ok made an error here we call both real drafts and seal deck drafts . The dude that buy boxs just have a wider range of boosters to chosen from and it hard to check, if he opened 2x3 like everyone else or did 2x3+ and just picked the boosters with stuff he liked better.
Poland isn't exactly the boonies here, does nobody have a phone with internet capabilities to use google to check a list? If they don't have the appropriate book, then its no different than someone not having the appropriate codex.
Connection is bad, often breaks up and checking anything then mails is hard AND you have to pay for using internet on a phone. And the problem is not him having a book, FW isn't accepted here anyway, but the fact that there would be very hard for me to check, if he is not cheating me. I could do it post game, but how does it help me, if I already lost?
Makumba wrote: Ok made an error here we call both real drafts and seal deck drafts . The dude that buy boxs just have a wider range of boosters to chosen from and it hard to check, if he opened 2x3 like everyone else or did 2x3+ and just picked the boosters with stuff he liked better.
This is why you open the packs at the store with everyone else, you don't let people bring in a pile of cards and say "trust me, I opened these without cheating". It sounds like your problem isn't FW rules, it's that either you have too many cheaters to have a functioning gaming community or you're way too paranoid about the possibility of someone cheating and you're sacrificing the quality of your games as a result.
I could do it post game, but how does it help me, if I already lost?
Then you call the person a cheater and kick them out of the group. You sacrifice one game to find out that the person is not someone you want to ever play against again, and improve the overall quality of the community.
Poland isn't exactly the boonies here, does nobody have a phone with internet capabilities to use google to check a list? If they don't have the appropriate book, then its no different than someone not having the appropriate codex.
Connection is bad, often breaks up and checking anything then mails is hard AND you have to pay for using internet on a phone. And the problem is not him having a book, FW isn't accepted here anyway, but the fact that there would be very hard for me to check, if he is not cheating me. I could do it post game, but how does it help me, if I already lost?
Really?
You have to pay for Internet on your phone?
Seriously, I'm a mobile phone retailer of over a decades experience, and I know that mobile network provision is Poland isn't significantly different from the UK, from having conversations with the many Polish nationals that live in the area and have come in to shops where I've worked and having needed to check on multiple occasions for UK nationals travelling that way.
Now, if you mean that your particular network doesn't offer great coverage where you game, that's one thing, but I'm beginning to harbour deep suspicions that you have no reservations in misrepresenting your gaming environment and the country you live in if it suits the point you're trying to make.
Remember, the Internet is the greatest repository of human knowledge to ever have existed, and many posters on here have real life knowledge outside of wargaming, if your going to make spurious claims be prepared that someone can easily disprove them should they feel motivated to do so.
I think one of the major issues at the heart of this matter is that players, regardless of type, do not want to spend six hours at a UN Summit conducting negotiations before a game. Obviously I'm exaggerating a bit, but we've hit a point in 40k's development where it is so incredibly easy for players to end up in grossly lopsided match-ups that the question of "Will I have fun with this pairing of armies?" is no longer a trivial issue. Nowadays it is very important to be clear about what both players' expectations are for the game, otherwise they run a fairly substantial risk of one or both players leaving unhappy.
The issue with FW is a perception of strength that may or may not be valid (depending on exactly what is being fielded), as well as an unfamiliarity with the rules which will necessitate further game delays as you read through all of the rules. Part of the issue as well, I believe, is the lack of Forgeworld products on the main GW site, which may contribute to the stereotype that they aren't "real" GW rules.
So what you end up with is the possibility of big delays combined with a fear of rushing into an un-fun game, which leads to the all-too-common result of players refusing to play.
Nevertheless, the real solution here is to better educate players about the rules both in codex books and IA. Unfortunately, the expense of the rules (or lack of access to/knowledge of "alternative" sources) means that many players may feel pressured into playing from a disadvantage. One solution that I think would go a long way to alleviate this would be to have all the official rules collected together, online, in one place (as well as having each book be entirely self-contained - any cross-book stuff would always be separate detachments, something FW sometimes has trouble with due to duplicate units/book updates). Having something like this would allow players to get a feel for possible opponents' lists at a glance, without having to go searching through a bunch of fluff/volumes/codices.
EDIT: Oh and by the way Azrael13, I can't speak for Poland, but in the States it's not uncommon to have to pay for internet on your smartphone. If I go over my data plan, my carrier charges me a fee. I know because it happened once when some idiot physically disconnected my house and I had to use my phone uplink to access the Internet
FW Top Sellers in September wrote:
10Mortarion The Reaper Primarch of the Death Guard
9 Horus The Warmaster Primarch of the Sons of Horus
8Legion MkIII Iron Armour
7Salamanders Legion Fire Drakes
6 Archmagos Draykavac / Archmagos
5House Terryn Upgrade Kit
4Cerastus Knight-Castigator
3The Horus Heresy Book Three: Extermination
2Imperial Armour Volume 4 - The Anphelion Project, Second Edition
1 Vulkan Primarch of the Salamanders
Hard to make an argument for power hungry WAAC making up 90% of FW sales when 50% of the top ten are units that don't exist in 40K, 2 out of 3 of the top three are books 30% are likely to spend most of their life as display models and one of them is just to make an existing GW kit prettier and another is simply alternate Tactical Marines!
To be fair, it could be people buying the 30K stuff in the hopes of being WAAC TFGers playing their 30K army against 40K, right (and they getting roflstomped by Eldar and Tau, anyway)? That's how it is supposed to work, isn't? Everything from Forgeworld is only for the purposes of being OP and broken?
Hell, there were people who claimed the Red Scorpions chapter tactics were OP.
I think one of the major issues at the heart of this matter is that players, regardless of type, do not want to spend six hours at a UN Summit conducting negotiations before a game. Obviously I'm exaggerating a bit, but we've hit a point in 40k's development where it is so incredibly easy for players to end up in grossly lopsided match-ups that the question of "Will I have fun with this pairing of armies?" is no longer a trivial issue. Nowadays it is very important to be clear about what both players' expectations are for the game, otherwise they run a fairly substantial risk of one or both players leaving unhappy.
The issue with FW is a perception of strength that may or may not be valid (depending on exactly what is being fielded), as well as an unfamiliarity with the rules which will necessitate further game delays as you read through all of the rules. Part of the issue as well, I believe, is the lack of Forgeworld products on the main GW site, which may contribute to the stereotype that they aren't "real" GW rules.
So what you end up with is the possibility of big delays combined with a fear of rushing into an un-fun game, which leads to the all-too-common result of players refusing to play.
Nevertheless, the real solution here is to better educate players about the rules both in codex books and IA. Unfortunately, the expense of the rules (or lack of access to/knowledge of "alternative" sources) means that many players may feel pressured into playing from a disadvantage. One solution that I think would go a long way to alleviate this would be to have all the official rules collected together, online, in one place (as well as having each book be entirely self-contained - any cross-book stuff would always be separate detachments, something FW sometimes has trouble with due to duplicate units/book updates). Having something like this would allow players to get a feel for possible opponents' lists at a glance, without having to go searching through a bunch of fluff/volumes/codices.
EDIT: Oh and by the way Azrael13, I can't speak for Poland, but in the States it's not uncommon to have to pay for internet on your smartphone. If I go over my data plan, my carrier charges me a fee. I know because it happened once when some idiot physically disconnected my house and I had to use my phone uplink to access the Internet
Check your sarcasm detector, I think it needs new batteries.
Whether built into a plan or pay as you use, you always pay for data access one way or another.
Xca|iber wrote: Nevertheless, the real solution here is to better educate players about the rules both in codex books and IA. Unfortunately, the expense of the rules (or lack of access to/knowledge of "alternative" sources) means that many players may feel pressured into playing from a disadvantage. One solution that I think would go a long way to alleviate this would be to have all the official rules collected together, online, in one place (as well as having each book be entirely self-contained - any cross-book stuff would always be separate detachments, something FW sometimes has trouble with due to duplicate units/book updates). Having something like this would allow players to get a feel for possible opponents' lists at a glance, without having to go searching through a bunch of fluff/volumes/codices.
I certainly agree that easy and reliable access to the most up to date rules would be ideal. Unfortunately, FW or not, all of the rules are just getting to be too expensive for an individual player to be able to collect them all (legally). But, as you say, better education is very important. Too many people rely on internet hearsay and rumor. There are still people who think the Lucius drop pod allows the dreadnought to assault on the turn it arrives (which hasn't been true for some years, now).
Xca|iber wrote: Nevertheless, the real solution here is to better educate players about the rules both in codex books and IA. Unfortunately, the expense of the rules (or lack of access to/knowledge of "alternative" sources) means that many players may feel pressured into playing from a disadvantage. One solution that I think would go a long way to alleviate this would be to have all the official rules collected together, online, in one place (as well as having each book be entirely self-contained - any cross-book stuff would always be separate detachments, something FW sometimes has trouble with due to duplicate units/book updates). Having something like this would allow players to get a feel for possible opponents' lists at a glance, without having to go searching through a bunch of fluff/volumes/codices.
I certainly agree that easy and reliable access to the most up to date rules would be ideal. Unfortunately, FW or not, all of the rules are just getting to be too expensive for an individual player to be able to collect them all (legally). But, as you say, better education is very important. Too many people rely on internet hearsay and rumor. There are still people who think the Lucius drop pod allows the dreadnought to assault on the turn it arrives (which hasn't been true for some years, now).
Considering how poor the dreadnought is anyways, it'd be a nice reprieve for the meleenaught.
Let me get this straight. People dont want to see the awesome forgeworld models on the table because they could potentially be cheated about the rules by their opponent?
My solution would be to find a different place to play if there are enough people that would do such stuff. If you cant just ask your opponent if you can have a look at the rules before the game and if he cant provide you with the rules for his models why the feth is he even unpacking them for a game?
The "balance" argument doesnt hold any water at all since we know that 40k isnt balanced at all ... so forgeworld doesnt make any difference here.
Its unbelievable how people are limiting themselves because of a false sense of entitlement.
FW Top Sellers in September wrote:
10Mortarion The Reaper Primarch of the Death Guard
9 Horus The Warmaster Primarch of the Sons of Horus
8Legion MkIII Iron Armour
7Salamanders Legion Fire Drakes
6 Archmagos Draykavac / Archmagos
5House Terryn Upgrade Kit
4Cerastus Knight-Castigator
3The Horus Heresy Book Three: Extermination
2Imperial Armour Volume 4 - The Anphelion Project, Second Edition
1 Vulkan Primarch of the Salamanders
Hard to make an argument for power hungry WAAC making up 90% of FW sales when 50% of the top ten are units that don't exist in 40K, 2 out of 3 of the top three are books 30% are likely to spend most of their life as display models and one of them is just to make an existing GW kit prettier and another is simply alternate Tactical Marines!
Automatically Appended Next Post: But I guess I have to concede..
That MK III Iron Armour? That's, like, totes broken, man, like, you don't even know!
I will never get tired of seeing made up statistics being undeniably shut down to an earth shattering degree. Exalted.
Yes, your opponent can refuse to play your for any reason.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Murenius wrote: In tournaments players are bound by the rules they accepted when enlisting.
Actually s/he can still refuse. If he wants to take the loss & possibly be removed from the tournament. I've seen people refuse the final game before because their opponents list didn't look like it'd be a fun game & they'd rather just get home early. Unsportsman like sure, but I can understand.
Everyone: Stop saying he can refuse for any reason, what you guys are thinking?i dont know that? like if i am going to ducktape my oppenent to the chair and force him to play ?
Their is something like 10 guys who say he can refuse because of your t shirt... thats why theres is 100 reply on the post. 50 will have been enough without those comment.
I was asking more about a legal, rules,sportship reason.. thank to the other who respond something usefull!
calarok wrote: like if i am going to ducktape my oppenent to the chair and force him to play ?
Well, you know, if that's your thing.
Who are we to judge?
You must be a pro psyker to play while duct taped to a chair
The original question was valid, but the smartest answers aren't unexpected, either. There is a section in the rulebook called "Spirit of the Game". If more people would just read that again and be reasonable, people would probably enjoy the game more
40k (and almost any game for the matter) is all about the social contract between 2 players. You have to be mutually in agreement to play.
P1 - hey, want a game?
P2 - sure! 40K?
P1 - Yup, 1750 ok?
P2 - no probs, I would prefer battle forged though
P1 - all good. Happy with that - you ok with my FW (insert unit here)?
P2 - you got the rules handy for me to read?
P1 - here you go!
See how easy that is!
Of course someone can say no to many points in the above but the key is an open dialogue. When you both agree the game is much easier as the expectations are met on both sides. Telling the opponent its your tourney list would be good manners, as would be using a FW unit. This again sets expectations as they know what type of game they are in for.
The thing is there's no legal or rules debate. You can house rule whatever you want. Anyone can say "Well the rules say this so I can" and the opponent can just say "Yeah but I don't want to play that way, so let's find other opponents".
It's like D&D, my players can kick & scream that "the book says I can draw any number of cards from the deck of many things I want" Yet I can say "feth off, DM says otherwise, you get ONE card"
So strictly within the confines of the BRB no, he cannot refuse because you brought forgeworld, but saying "well these are the rules too bad" makes you sound like a dick.
Also any TO can say "no forgeworld" and that's that, no forgeworld. The rules are more like guidelines that can be changed, if you don't like the changes someone plays with, don't play them.
Personally I see no issue with that sportsmanship wise. I want to enjoy the game, my opponent wants to enjoy the game. If we wouldn't enjoy playing each other why would we?
Besides your question was Can he say no? ot "My opponent can't refuse?" and anyway you slice it the answer is yes, he can say no & yes he can refuse. If you want to tout "Well its in the official rules so you're wrong" argument, that's fine. You'll just come off as a dick. The #1 rule is have fun, and if your opponent doesn't have fun playing against FW stuff then he is fully within the rules to refuse.
Please stop posting answer like : He can refuse if he want for any reason! ( DUDE, TRUST ME, I KNOW!!)
That wasnt the main question... or the main answer a was looking for (because i had my answer several time in this thread)
Don't post on a public forum, if your looking for a answer. As your not likely to get the one you want unless you post on the "tow the line forums". Becouse it seems you don't like the answer.
Is "they are jerk for not playing vs. my FW unit I just put on the table without asking first" closer to what you want. Otherwise the answer they can refuse for any reason is that best answer.
we have all sorts of players here, some like to power game, some like casual, none care about FW legality (ok one did, but that was purely from a WAAC angle and he admitted that was the case as he isn't shy about admitting it lol) we all have some FW models and I regularly play 30k vs 40k, and I also play 40kFW vs normal 40k.
the FWOP argument is dead and should remain so, FW hasn't been op since 3rd and that was only due to selling just super heavies at the time, some units are op, but 40k is much much worse in that manner.
all that said there is ettiquite, to consider, you cannot just turn up to a game and dump things on people and expect them to play, its insulting and making it seem that you have little respect for there feelings or opinion, inform them before hand that you intend to use a new unit (codex or FW it exactly the same) and let them read the rules.
calarok wrote: I
That wasnt the main question... or the main answer a was looking for (because i had my answer several time in this thread)
Your main question is in the subject: My opponent can't refuse?
The end all no arguments answer is yes, they can refuse.
If you're looking for a specific answer don't post. And in 40k there is a main DM. It's called you & your opponent. If I want to ally Chaos daemons & grey knights I am free to do so If me and my opponent agree. D&D and 40k are both rule systems. Rule systems free to be changed, modified & rewritten however you and your opponent / the TO want.
if you want a game with rigid iron clad rules with no room for interpretation go play chess.
Happyjew wrote: It is highly unlikely that when an Ork player tells his opponent "I'm bringing a LoW next week" he is referring to a Transcendent C'Tan.
Unless he really really wants to win of course.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'd be happy to see a Squiggoth.
And then I would table you because it's a really weak choice.
I don't think I can be pissed when my opponent doesn't cheat+win.
Since Squiggoth is neither cheat nor win, I don't mind.
Apparently, some people get all sandy when FW is mentioned, or Imperial Knights, or non 6x4 tables.
calarok wrote: Like i said, they were at least 10 good answer/opinion about my question. All good. Few of them wasn't usefull at all...
I am keeping my point, bad exemple to use D&D... really not the same thing...
If the thread has answered your question, stop replying to it and let it die. Otherwise yes, you will get the same answers given to you over and over again.
Massaen wrote: 40k (and almost any game for the matter) is all about the social contract between 2 players. You have to be mutually in agreement to play.
P1 - hey, want a game? P2 - sure! 40K? P1 - Yup, 1750 ok? P2 - no probs, I would prefer battle forged though P1 - all good. Happy with that - you ok with my FW (insert unit here)? P2 - you got the rules handy for me to read? P1 - here you go!
See how easy that is!
Of course someone can say no to many points in the above but the key is an open dialogue. When you both agree the game is much easier as the expectations are met on both sides. Telling the opponent its your tourney list would be good manners, as would be using a FW unit. This again sets expectations as they know what type of game they are in for.
Your list doesn't mention detachments, formations, LOW, Knights, large fortifications, etc that are new to 40k in the last two years and plenty of folks don't like playing against but are now unfortunately completely legal. There is a lot of stuff that GW has crammed down "regular" 40k's throat from the apocalypse side that plenty of players don't appreciate facing in normal sized games. A formations/detachments that gives you a bunch of bonuses for ZERO points making it a no brainer if you've got those models? Knights that are effectively LOW that you can field multiples of in a "normal" game? Minmaxed mashups from a half dozen sources in a 1500pt game (whether battleforged or unbound) that resemble a 5 year old's Thundercats teaming up with Ninja Turtles to help their buddies the Autobots on the battlefield that is under the coffee table more than a traditional wargame? Every game of 40k now is potentially a 5th edition apocalypse game.
If you prefer a more traditional 40k wargame experience, there is alot more to "negotiate" before a game than your overly simplistic example indicates. I'm not saying that any of the above is illegal but rather that it is legal. GW has shifted the stuff above from legal in apocalypse and permission only in 40k to just plain legal as a ham fisted attempt to sell every model to every player at the expense of the semblance of balance in the game. I don't play much 40k (and buy almost nothing more importantly) because of the changes that GW has chosen as the direction the game is heading and it doesn't seem like I'm the only one from their recent sales data.
warboss wrote: I don't play much 40k (and buy almost nothing more importantly) because of the changes that GW has chosen as the direction the game is heading and it doesn't seem like I'm the only one from their recent sales data.
Which does make your opinion slightly less relevant amirite ?
Sometimes I wonder why people who have "forsaken" 40K feel the need to share their doom and gloom with those who obviously haven't.
Which does make your opinion slightly less relevant amirite ?
Sometimes I wonder why people who have "forsaken" 40K feel the need to share their doom and gloom with those who obviously haven't.
We are still having fun, too bad you aren't.
Because they would like to get more out of 40k, and would love to support GW if they pulled their head out of their ass?
Unless all you want to hear is a self-congratulatory circle jerk of people praising GW, get used to people who are on their way out, partly out, or contemplating getting out posting on these forums.
Posts like yours are completely useless, not to mention the fact that you are dismissing a good post because the person said they aren't playing that much.
warboss wrote: I don't play much 40k (and buy almost nothing more importantly) because of the changes that GW has chosen as the direction the game is heading and it doesn't seem like I'm the only one from their recent sales data.
Which does make your opinion slightly less relevant amirite ?
Sometimes I wonder why people who have "forsaken" 40K feel the need to share their doom and gloom with those who obviously haven't.
We are still having fun, too bad you aren't.
As an author, I take my critics' opinions far more seriously than I take praise. The critics are the ones telling you what to fix. If anything, a criticism is more valid than praise. It's to GW's detriment that they refuse to listen.
MWHistorian wrote: As an author, I take my critics' opinions far more seriously than I take praise. The critics are the ones telling you what to fix. If anything, a criticism is more valid than praise. It's to GW's detriment that they refuse to listen.
Yes, but this is a thread about what a guy fielding Forge World should expect.
Should he really expect people who said they don't like anything new, don't like 40K, barely even play it, etc. ?
MWHistorian wrote: As an author, I take my critics' opinions far more seriously than I take praise. The critics are the ones telling you what to fix. If anything, a criticism is more valid than praise. It's to GW's detriment that they refuse to listen.
Yes, but this is a thread about what a guy fielding Forge World should expect.
Should he really expect people who said they don't like anything new, don't like 40K, barely even play it, etc. ?
Maybe not.
As a new player, yes, I'd want to be aware of any potential problems before I start and weigh the pros and cons. Not hearing the cons isn't helping anyone.
MWHistorian wrote: As an author, I take my critics' opinions far more seriously than I take praise. The critics are the ones telling you what to fix. If anything, a criticism is more valid than praise. It's to GW's detriment that they refuse to listen.
Yes, but this is a thread about what a guy fielding Forge World should expect.
Should he really expect people who said they don't like anything new, don't like 40K, barely even play it, etc. ?
Maybe not.
As a new player, yes, I'd want to be aware of any potential problems before I start and weigh the pros and cons. Not hearing the cons isn't helping anyone.
Exactly this. It's not helping anyone to just say yes, you have to preface it (as I did) that yes you can but it's frowned upon to spring it on people.
Persoally, if i were a new playe who warted to know if you cared if I used a FW model or not, I'd want a simple yes or no not an hour long tirade about how evil GW is or how great it is. ESPECIALLY one oth sides telling the other they are right or wrong and that their opinions and views are invalid.
It is ALWAYS a good idea to discuss it with your locals and local TO. When you go online, you should expect a soapbox convention that turns into a barroom brawl.
I'm beginning to think thats why people start these threads every other week, just to watch the baroom brawl. lol
MWHistorian wrote: As an author, I take my critics' opinions far more seriously than I take praise. The critics are the ones telling you what to fix. If anything, a criticism is more valid than praise. It's to GW's detriment that they refuse to listen.
Yes, but this is a thread about what a guy fielding Forge World should expect.
Should he really expect people who said they don't like anything new, don't like 40K, barely even play it, etc. ?
Maybe not.
As a new player, yes, I'd want to be aware of any potential problems before I start and weigh the pros and cons. Not hearing the cons isn't helping anyone.
Exactly this. It's not helping anyone to just say yes, you have to preface it (as I did) that yes you can but it's frowned upon to spring it on people.
I think that buying FW models is a terrible idea for new 40k players. Aside from the problems that just stem from unfamiliarity by other players, they're expensive (in terms of real money), generally don't provide much of an "advantage", and certainly don't replace learning by playing. They're also all resin and significantly harder to work with than plastic models. Plus, because you have exotic game pieces, people have higher expectations of your game skill
I certainly have nothing against FW, and I love seeing them in a game; I just think that it's better to start with more conventional units. Sure, there are some FW models that are superior to their non-FW counterparts, but not so much that it's game-breaking.
warboss wrote: I don't play much 40k (and buy almost nothing more importantly) because of the changes that GW has chosen as the direction the game is heading and it doesn't seem like I'm the only one from their recent sales data.
Which does make your opinion slightly less relevant amirite ?
Sometimes I wonder why people who have "forsaken" 40K feel the need to share their doom and gloom with those who obviously haven't.
We are still having fun, too bad you aren't.
No, urnotrite. You're in fact incredibly wrong and I'm glad folks responded before me because a response commensurate with the level of ignorance you show in that response would likely break Rule #1. In a nutshell, if you personally buy out my 18,000pts of fully painted and based 40k models only then is my opinion slightly less relevant. Just because I don't like the IMO short-sighted directions GW has taken recently doesn't mean that my existing rather large investment of time and money in the game along with my opinion suddenly becomes less relevant.
And, btw, I didn't forsake 40k. It is more correct to say that players who prefer the 3rd through 5th edition style of one army per player "standard" games without all the trappings of apocalypse were forsaken by GW.
@the OP:
Basically, yes, you *SHOULD* still tell your opponent ahead of time. The FW rules say you should in effect tell your opponent ahead of time (as quoted by Yak) and the main rules say that you should *AGREE* with your opponent ahead of time about how to make up your armies. Common accepted courtesy (regardless of a few outspoken "FW is legal and you can't stop me!" diehards) indicates you should discuss it ahead of time and not just spring something uncommonly seen from an alternate (but still official) source on a stranger if you ever want to play against them again. I say that as someone who owns and uses FW models and FW rules. I'd also suggest trying if possible to come up with a codex "alternate" use for your model in case the person says no. I've got two primarchs that I'm working into a small Space Wolf force at the moment. In apocalypse or really big games, I plan on playing them as primarchs. I'm also trying to model them so that I can use them within the Space Wolf codex in smaller games or when my opponent objects to LOW or FW rules. A quickie solution would be (and this is coming from a way out of date ork player) is to compare the size of the squiggoth to the models in the codex and to model it as a possible "counts as" battlewagon or somesuch in case you encounter resistance. It's not wise IMO to make a FW army list that can't at all (whether at the same or less points) be played as a "codex" one.
warboss wrote: I don't play much 40k (and buy almost nothing more importantly) because of the changes that GW has chosen as the direction the game is heading and it doesn't seem like I'm the only one from their recent sales data.
Which does make your opinion slightly less relevant amirite ?
Sometimes I wonder why people who have "forsaken" 40K feel the need to share their doom and gloom with those who obviously haven't.
We are still having fun, too bad you aren't.
No, urnotrite. You're in fact incredibly wrong and I'm glad folks responded before me because a response commensurate with the level of ignorance you show in that response would likely break Rule #1. In a nutshell, if you personally buy out my 18,000pts of fully painted and based 40k models only then is my opinion slightly less relevant. Just because I don't like the IMO short-sighted directions GW has taken recently doesn't mean that my existing rather large investment of time and money in the game along with my opinion suddenly becomes less relevant.
I was merely pointing out that the opinion of those who do not play (or barely) 40K is not very relevant to someone who's asking about people he IS going to play.
Which are unlikely to be you because you barely play 40K and are so pissed about everything new or ForgeWorld that you probably protect yourself from it by not accepting any pick-up game.
I was merely pointing out that the opinion of those who do not play (or barely) 40K is not very relevant to someone who's asking about people he IS going to play.
And everyone else is pointing out how incredibly moronic your point is.
morgoth wrote: I was merely pointing out that the opinion of those who do not play (or barely) 40K is not very relevant to someone who's asking about people he IS going to play.
Which are unlikely to be you because you barely play 40K and are so pissed about everything new or ForgeWorld that you probably protect yourself from it by not accepting any pick-up game.
If you don't think that he's ever going to bump into someone who is at the store looking for a game that only plays occasionally but is unhappy with the current mindset of GW regarding the direction 40k is taking yet is still looking for a game, that's a pretty naive assumption. Players come in all sizes and flavors from "Derp...I'm happy that I can use everything!" unbound types all the way to "Hrumpf... Why can't I use my Rogue Trader beastmen band like I use to!" old timers. I still bring a 40k army with me every time I go to the games store but it went from my game of choice to the "backup" game that I'm likely to be able to get in just in case the one I actually want to play is cancelled. That is the effect that the cramming of apocalypse into normal 40k has had on my own interest. If GW got their heads out of the sand and returned some semblance of balance and organization to the game again, I'd give it another shot. Unfortunately, the premature cash grab 7th edition doubled down on the insanity.
As for the FW comment, I've been buying, building, and using FW stuff for over a decade. I generally (with a few exceptions) have no problems facing it as long as the opponent gives me the common courtesy of telling me ahead of time and having the MOST RECENT rules there for me to refer to as needed.
Gentlemen, the tone ITT is way too hostile. This is a forum about the fun of playing with toy soldiers. Please take a break if you find yourself irritated with other users to the point of making harsh posts. Thanks!
Azreal13 wrote: I think anyone who's been involved in a discussion about 40K with Morgoth knows to prioritise his opinion appropriately.
Except he's not incorrect this time? I get that it's Morgoth, but if he's right, he's right. The opinion of someone that doesn't actually play the game and simply lurks in the corner of the Internet hating the new direction of the game matters little to me, compared to someone actually playing the game that hates the new direction.
The main question is whether or not that direction is good. I can't complain. People say that you have to negotiate, but at most you just have to negotiate the point range. I don't care if LOW or FW is used since they're part of the game, and it's not my fault someone simply can't accept that.
Azreal13 wrote: I think anyone who's been involved in a discussion about 40K with Morgoth knows to prioritise his opinion appropriately.
Except he's not incorrect this time? I get that it's Morgoth, but if he's right, he's right. The opinion of someone that doesn't actually play the game and simply lurks in the corner of the Internet hating the new direction of the game matters little to me, compared to someone actually playing the game that hates the new direction.
The main question is whether or not that direction is good. I can't complain. People say that you have to negotiate, but at most you just have to negotiate the point range. I don't care if LOW or FW is used since they're part of the game, and it's not my fault someone simply can't accept that.
No, he is not. Absolutely everyone is entitled to their opinion, and if it is informed opinion, then it's validity should be weighed against everyone else's.
I haven't played 40K in about 6 weeks, does that suddenly make my opinion less valid than someone who played at the weekend? Does the opinion of a 20 year vet who stopped 6 months ago count for more or less than a 3 month rookie who's been playing 4 times a week since his first game?
No, it is a stupid assertion, every thought, opinion and argument should be considered on it's own merits, if someone is poorly informed because they've not played in a long time, then their arguments won't hold up, if they're well informed enough to effectively argue a point, then the last time they rolled dice in anger becomes irrelevant.
The poster in question that Morgoth so eloquently dismissed had provided nothing but accurate information and the potential downfalls of the system 40k is headed towards. The same poster also said that they play less, but that they still play. The reasons for not playing are relevant, as questions of 'legality' and list building and negotiation wear people out.
The issue with Morgoth is that he dismissed a poster out of hand because they don't play often. Frankly, its ludicrous. As long as the post is informed and correct, I see no reason the level of play of someone has on the discussion and their validity.
If you want to take other factors surrounding a certain poster into account, consider that Morgoth thinks Wave Serpents aren't broken. That speaks volumes more to me than someone who is getting out of 40k for reasons relevant to this discussion.
In short, Morgoth is very incorrect. He is very far from right.
As for the negotiation thing, it provides barriers to pick up games. That's the issue. The negotiating can be easy; it can end at any point when someone disagrees on something. Which is part of the issue. Further to this, the notion of a TAC list is slowly vanishing, when you have to prepare for everything you used to, plus flyers, superheavies, and fortifications.
Everything is part of the game, but that's not what a lot of people want.
I was happy having Apoc as its own game. Now, every game is Apoc, like it or not. Colour me not surprised when people recoil against it or leave entirely.
Happyjew wrote: It is highly unlikely that when an Ork player tells his opponent "I'm bringing a LoW next week" he is referring to a Transcendent C'Tan.
Unless he really really wants to win of course.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'd be happy to see a Squiggoth.
And then I would table you because it's a really weak choice.
I don't think I can be pissed when my opponent doesn't cheat+win.
Since Squiggoth is neither cheat nor win, I don't mind.
Apparently, some people get all sandy when FW is mentioned, or Imperial Knights, or non 6x4 tables.
i am gonna ask this and its OT. why do you play 40k on a non 6x4? i dont think iv ever played a "standard" sized game on anything other. and only go bigger at the 4k+ points a side.
I would have thought most opponents would love to see a well painted new model and will relish the challenge of trying to kill it. Depends on the person of course. You could always take it and take some alternatives just in case.
calarok wrote: I found your comparison really bad... D&D, really? their is a DM, the god of the rules! The DM is always right, their is no such thing in W40k!
Please stop posting answer like : He can refuse if he want for any reason! ( DUDE, TRUST ME, I KNOW!!)
That wasnt the main question... or the main answer a was looking for (because i had my answer several time in this thread)
What do you want then?
If you want to know if FW is legal to use and we say "yes" - then that answer alone means nothing. What if your opponent denieds to play against FW? Would you rub the page with the rule on it under his nose, shouting "YOU MAY NOT REFUSE" at him?
Rules are rules. Ultimatively, your opponent decides if he plays or not. Regardless of the rules.
Talk to your opponent. If he doesn't want to play vs 
