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

Recently, a friend of mine felt cheated when he played against a SW player with Njal and 2 rune priests, all of them using Living Lightning.

By his reading of the rule, SW psykers can't share any psychic powers at all. By his opponent's reading of the rule, they could each have one that was the same, and that he was just doing the tactically sound thing to shore up a weakness in his army (lack of long-range capability).

When the debate spilled over to our local forums, people argued quite vehemently for one side or the other, and the thread ended up getting locked because people started cussing at each other. Mind you these are people who mostly know one another.

Regardless of what you think the RAW is, and keeping in mind that both of the players involved are actually tons of fun to play against (though the SW player is admittedly very weak in his rules knowledge), I found this dilemma to be very harmful to my gaming community. I now have two friends who won't play against one another.

I know that many "casual" 40kers will argue that the rules don't have to be very tight, because they're willing to just "dice it off" or "let the other guy have it." However, I think the reality doesn't match that very well. GW writing poor rules means that many players will have less fun with the game.

How has GWs sloppy rules writing affected your or your local community?

First of all your friend should not feel cheated as the SW codex author did the same thing (double rune priests with the same power) in a WD army list so if it is cheating he is in good company.

The wording says psychic powers (plural) not psychic power (singular) so the SW player should be correct.

Even so the best way to deal with rule ambiguities is to do what is best for the opponent until a faq or errata is released. This way the opponent does not feel cheated if it turns out the rule is being misinterpreted and it maintains harmony in the group.

willydstyle wrote:How has GWs sloppy rules writing affected your or your local community?

A lot. Not a week went without some sort of Argument I was called in to moderate.

GW are over 20 years old, they should have gotten this perfected now, but sadly because they have a monopoly, they do not feel they have to.

I can't really think of it ever really impacting us to that extent. We're not the most hard core players though.

*cough DEFF ROLLA PETITON cough*

Nope no idea what that feels like.

Polonius wrote:I can't really think of it ever really impacting us to that extent. We're not the most hard core players though.

Neither is most of the crowd around here. The biggest event in the area OFCC has some really ambiguous comp restrictions. I'm pretty much the most hard-core rules guy 'round these parts, but I generally only interject when other players want me to, which is actually frequent.

So, the fact that poor rules writing has had such an impact is very surprising.

Oh yes, I have seen some big disagreements. A campain was shut down due to "unfriendly rules lawering at high volumes" upon an issue that was difinatively resolved the week earlier.

You still cannot mention Planetary Empires in my neck of the woods without the tar and feathers coming out.

Illeix wrote:Oh yes, I have seen some big disagreements. A campain was shut down due to "unfriendly rules lawering at high volumes" upon an issue that was difinatively resolved the week earlier.

You still cannot mention Planetary Empires in my neck of the woods without the tar and feathers coming out.

And yet campaigns are considered to be "fluffy" and "just for fun" by most gamers.

Thats why I laugh to myself anytime someone mentions the whole GW saying 40k isnt supposed to be a competitive game

KingCracker wrote:Thats why I laugh to myself anytime someone mentions the whole GW saying 40k isnt supposed to be a competitive game

Exactly. An FPS can be fun, but many times when you play online it is even more fun.

The same holds true for 40k. If it were merely dress-up for little plastic men, then not nearly as many people would play it. It's the competitive aspect of the game that makes it fun.

willydstyle wrote:

KingCracker wrote:Thats why I laugh to myself anytime someone mentions the whole GW saying 40k isnt supposed to be a competitive game

Exactly. An FPS can be fun, but many times when you play online it is even more fun.

The same holds true for 40k. If it were merely dress-up for little plastic men, then not nearly as many people would play it. It's the competitive aspect of the game that makes it fun.

Truer words were never spoken (Except perhaps by Monty Python). GW are out of touch as to what their playerbase actually wants, and sadly their stock is inflated to ridiculous levels (Last I checked it was like £36m in stock) which means the fans can't even attempt a buyout!

We need to get Vin Diesel on our side!

And then on the flipside many will say (including me) that GW rules have gotten better and better over the years.

This edition is also surprisingly balanced as well, there are no real 'instant win' kind of lists.

I haven't had any real problems with GW's rules and my main opponent nowadays is a SW player.

While I agree that the main rulebook functions fairly well...

If you think that the SW codex is anything but a gigantic leap backwards in rules writing, you don't know the rules well enough.

willydstyle wrote:While I agree that the main rulebook functions fairly well...

If you think that the SW codex is anything but a gigantic leap backwards in rules writing, you don't know the rules well enough.

I think there's a lot of overblown and unnecessary hyperbole, yes. Gigantic leap backwards...nah. Rules haven't put a damper on my community and they've gotten much better over the years. Sorry it doesn't coincide with your view

Njal's storm not working on your opponent's turn?

Rending not actually doing anything as a special rule?

Duplicate psychic powers?

Bjorn letting you re-roll who gets to go first when there is no such roll?

Many of the rules in the book simply aren't written to work well within the framework of the rules we are given in the BRB.

willydstyle wrote:Njal's storm not working on your opponent's turn?

Rending not actually doing anything as a special rule?

Duplicate psychic powers?

Bjorn letting you re-roll who gets to go first when there is no such roll?

Many of the rules in the book simply aren't written to work well within the framework of the rules we are given in the BRB.

Lets not forget Bjorns "save" doing nothing, Berserk Charge doing nothing and Skyclaws and Swiftclaws not even getting a non working berserk charge

Oh, I forgot that one, because invulnerable saves may only be taken against wounds.

willydstyle wrote:Oh, I forgot that one, because invulnerable saves may only be taken against wounds.

Damn right.

Wolf Scouts do not have the Scouts USR!

Gwar! wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Oh, I forgot that one, because invulnerable saves may only be taken against wounds.

Damn right.

Wolf Scouts do not have the Scouts USR!

Which are local problems, not worldwide ones...

1hadhq wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Oh, I forgot that one, because invulnerable saves may only be taken against wounds.

Damn right.

Wolf Scouts do not have the Scouts USR!

Which are local problems, not worldwide ones...

Glad to see the German Codex has Scouts correctly

But for berserk charge, I was referring to the fact Berserk Charge says they get the +2 when they charge. There is no such thing as charging, there is Assaulting, but no such thing as charging.

Furthermore, Berserk charge only states Blood Claws get the bonus. Swiftclaws and Skyclaws are not Blood Claws

Gwar! wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Oh, I forgot that one, because invulnerable saves may only be taken against wounds.

Damn right.

Wolf Scouts do not have the Scouts USR!

Which are local problems, not worldwide ones...

Glad to see the German Codex has Scouts correctly

But for berserk charge, I was referring to the fact Berserk Charge says they get the +2 when they charge. There is no such thing as charging, there is Assaulting, but no such thing as charging.

Furthermore, Berserk charge only states Blood Claws get the bonus. Swiftclaws and Skyclaws are not Blood Claws

Bloodclaws get their boni for " angreifen " ( to assault / to attack ), the same wording as the BRB uses ( page 33 to 42 ):

-angreifende einheiten bewegen
-sag an welche feindeinheit sie angreift
-etc

consistent wording here. Sorry to disappoint.

Plus, C: SW references the sky/swift- claws at page 32/33 back to bloodclaws at page 25 to seek out "berserk charge".
May be some evidence is the fluff of these pages:
- skyclaws beeing formed from bloodclaws.
- swiftclaws beeing formed from bloodclaws too.

Must be the installed proofreaders fault......

1hadhq wrote:Bloodclaws get their boni for " angreifen " ( to assault / to attack ), the same wording as the BRB uses ( page 33 to 42 ):

-angreifende einheiten bewegen
-sag an welche feindeinheit sie angreift
-etc

consistent wording here. Sorry to disappoint.

Well, in the english one it isn't

Plus, C: SW references the sky/swift- claws at page 32/33 back to bloodclaws at page 25 to seek out "berserk charge".
May be some evidence is the fluff of these pages:
- skyclaws beeing formed from bloodclaws.
- swiftclaws beeing formed from bloodclaws too.

Must be the installed proofreaders fault......

Yeah, but does the German one say "Blood Claws get the +2 Attacks"? If it does, then Skyclaws and Swifclaws don't get it

Gwar! wrote:Yeah, but does the German one say "Blood Claws get the +2 Attacks"? If it does, then Skyclaws and Swiftclaws don't get it

No, say "sie erhalten..."

And you know, any space wolf would intreprete ( sie ) "they" as: "I am part of it or should be, therefore get it too".
I see your argument, but cant see any chance to refuse a SW player his berserk charge.....

lol, am i the only one that first read that as wolf scout strudel?

Mmmm wolfscoutstrudle...

Back on topic, My group and I don't let the rules get in the way of having fun. We tend to play 'rules as intended' which eliminates stupid codex wording etc and will often allow poetic drama overrule tactical sense.

"My TH/SS termie squad just called your winged daemon prince a big girl!"
"Oh really? We'll see about that!! BLarrrghdeathcharge!"

Damn you Germany and your lack of spaces!

warboss wrote:

lol, am i the only one that first read that as wolf scout strudel?

Quite possible.

Everything ends here on ...rudel in the SW codex.

-wolfsgarderudel
-wolfsscoutrudel
-graumähnenrudel
-blutwolfrudel
-himmelswolf-sturmrudel
-sturmwolf-bikerrudel
-fenriswolfsrudel
-wolfsfangrudel

and additionally the wolfguard becoming a rudelführer.

Isnt misread here. Good to have some fun in a thread of a sad issue.

BoT:

We seem to lack the urge to benefit from GW's typos/mistakes. So i believe we're only partially hit by rules issues.
Maybe a glance, sometimes a complete miss.
Does the channel give us a cover save?

Someone needs to find GW Germany's proof-reader/editor and send him to HQ pronto!

Scott-S6 wrote:Someone needs to find GW Germany's proof-reader/editor and send him to HQ pronto!

Seconded! Great Ghu! They actually have editors. Glad I was already sitting...

As for OP: Yes, my regular group is relatively rules conscious and we generally try to stay on top of major issues before they escalate. Recently I have successfully advocated the adoption of the INAT FAQ as a general reference.

I play 40k with friends for fun so do not have rules problems with them. The closest we get is telling people to change there list for the next game.

The poor quality of the 40k rules would be a major reason why I would not play in a tournament. There are other games out there with much better rule sets.