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.

Wonderwolf wrote:
Why is it a bad habit to just briefly ask of your opponent is fine with 5 points extra, rather than making him (or her) wait unnecessarily and bore yourself with the most stupid part of playing the game, the list, instead of throwing down some dice and getting the most out of your free-time?

Also, if I agree to the extra points, two people did agree on it. What's the problem?

I am befuddled.
I don't think that "the list" - or rather the process of building one - is the most stupid part of the game. Rather, it is a part of the strategic planning.

For the part (in a later post) about just bringing models, an option is that of preparing some lists in various sizes (500, 750, 1000, 1500, 1750, 1850, 2000 etc), for casual friendly games.

Friendly pre-arranged games give much time to build a list...

But, staying within the point limit is not inflexibility, but rather also a form of respect towards the opponents.

Depends on the game and who I'm playing. If it is a tourney or something like that, no. Friendly games....it depends. An experienced player, I frown on it and let them know I disaprove. A new player learning, I allow it and explain why it is bad form to go over.
Myself? Never ever do I go over.

If someone can't get the points right in a list they have all the time they need to make, how can they count how many dice passed a roll why playing the game. Just play some one else unstead, that way you don't have to count their dice for them.


I like to think the people I play games with that have a heavy focus on numbers and math, have you know passed math class.

I just play casual games, so I sometimes go 1-2 points over in a 1500 game, but I always check with them first if they'd still like to play. Sometimes I just tell my opponent that we're playing a 1502pt game.

"Grace points"?

Oh, you are talking about cheating by not following the agreed-upon rules......no, we don't allow that.

In any format other than a casual/narrative game between friends, you're being TFG if you ask for extra points.

You may think you're not, but what TFG doesn't?

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
This is TFG logic that basically shames people for disallowing soft cheating. .

Yah "TFG" for being easy going and allowing my opponent to play with whatever even if it puts him at an advantage. I know they probably aren't cheating because anyone who cares enough about winning to cheat in a friendly game isn't someone I would enjoy playing anyway. Not everyone enjoys spending over an hour on lists like I do (Often times at work O_o ) so whatever he slaps together is fine whether he had more time or not.

If points aren't a big deal, then abide by the rules that we decide upon when we decide to play a game at X points.

So to paraphrase, "If point limits aren't a big deal, then abide by them precisely and without error as if they mattered a great deal" ... ???

vipoid wrote:As a question, to those who are fine with going over the limit, why not just change the limit?
I mean, if you're allowing 5pts over the limit, when why not just play 1505pts?

That's a thought, but I think the end result is more or less the same, you're putting it on the other guy to change his list to match yours.

Azza007 wrote:If it is possible to do it then go ahead, however I would rather play someone a couple of points over if they can't than play someone who has had to go under a lot more points (10-15 say) .

This guy gets it, the spirit of the game. +1

 Blacksails wrote:

...It'd be like asking your mate to show up at a certain time to eat at a restaurant, or watch a movie. I expect my friend to arrive at or before the given time, unless some unforeseen circumstance holds them up. Same goes for a point limit in 40k. Be at or below the value unless some other circumstance prevents that within reason...

I think this really highlights the difference in opinion between the two sides. If my mate was 3 minutes late I would not care one iota, despite the agreed upon time. This is especially true in light of how points, unlike time, comes in chunks. Like others have said they think it would be better if you played down 50 points rather than up by 1 because that's the rules. This is analogous to your friend who rides the bus that only comes once every 50 minutes. You ask to meet somewhere at 5:00, he agrees and takes the bus that would get him there 1 minute late. A single minute. In this analogous situation you expect him to take the bus that gets him there 49 minutes early and wait for you. Id rather wait 1 minute than make my friend wait 49 just like I'd rather play 1 point down than 49 points up. He could've written a better list sure, just like he could've ridden his bike instead of the bus and shown up exactly on time, but either way I don't really care.

 EVIL INC wrote:
Depends on the game and who I'm playing. If it is a tourney or something like that, no. Friendly games....it depends. An experienced player, I frown on it and let them know I disaprove. A new player learning, I allow it and explain why it is bad form to go over.
Myself? Never ever do I go over.

this sums up my sentiment on this issues perfectly.

 Lobukia wrote:
In any format other than a casual/narrative game between friends, you're being TFG if you ask for extra points.

You may think you're not, but what TFG doesn't?

I wouldn't even mind it if we were doing a 1750 point game and my opponent asked if we could go to 1850 so he could field a unit he really wants to field. I would consider that just fine as hes not telling me hes going to go over and asking permission to change the agreed upon size for both players in a manner that gives both players something.

JubbJubbz wrote:
Not everyone enjoys spending over an hour on lists like I do (Often times at work O_o ) so whatever he slaps together is fine whether he had more time or not.

You don't have to spend an hour fine-tuning a list to be under the point limit. Just remove stuff until you're under the limit. If you truly don't care about list optimization then it shouldn't take you more than a minute to make the necessary changes.

So to paraphrase, "If point limits aren't a big deal, then abide by them precisely and without error as if they mattered a great deal" ... ???

No, you're missing the point here. The limit itself is important, the thing that supposedly "isn't a big deal" is the extra points. The person with an illegal list will frequently claim that the extra points "don't really matter", so it's unreasonable to complain about their illegal list. Ok, fine, those extra points aren't that important, so just remove them from your list. After all, if they aren't important then you won't miss them.

This guy gets it, the spirit of the game. +1

So the spirit of the game is "blatant cheating is ok, as long as you can figure out a way to call your opponent TFG if they don't let you cheat"?

 Peregrine wrote:
No, you're missing the point here. The limit itself is important, the thing that supposedly "isn't a big deal" is the extra points. The person with an illegal list will frequently claim that the extra points "don't really matter", so it's unreasonable to complain about their illegal list. Ok, fine, those extra points aren't that important, so just remove them from your list. After all, if they aren't important then you won't miss them.

I agree -- either they matter or they don't. If they don't really matter, don't make an issue of it, and remove it If they do matter, be honest about it, and deal with it however way your opponent agrees to.

 Peregrine wrote:

This guy gets it, the spirit of the game. +1

So the spirit of the game is "blatant cheating is ok, as long as you can figure out a way to call your opponent TFG if they don't let you cheat"?

Well, yes and no. The original sprit of the game thing was saying, "I'd rather my opponent be 2 points over than 15 points under." I do understand the point.

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

I wouldn't even mind it if we were doing a 1750 point game and my opponent asked if we could go to 1850 so he could field a unit he really wants to field. I would consider that just fine as hes not telling me hes going to go over and asking permission to change the agreed upon size for both players in a manner that gives both players something.

If my opponent asked me that, I'd certainly raise an eyebrow.

Um,,, what unit is so massive that you can't even fit it into a 1750pt list?

On games up to 2000 points: zero allowance for going over.

On games that are either just thrown together or above the 2k number: points really don't matter too much anymore. Honestly, on larger games a 5 or 10% point difference is unlikely to translate into real issues over the course of 6 turns.

 vipoid wrote:

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

I wouldn't even mind it if we were doing a 1750 point game and my opponent asked if we could go to 1850 so he could field a unit he really wants to field. I would consider that just fine as hes not telling me hes going to go over and asking permission to change the agreed upon size for both players in a manner that gives both players something.

If my opponent asked me that, I'd certainly raise an eyebrow.

Um,,, what unit is so massive that you can't even fit it into a 1750pt list?

TWO revenant titans?

My group has a law of 7 points over, as long as a single upgrade does not do it.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Klerych wrote:

Quoted for truth. Why do we have to endorse and help the development of bad habits when we (as those who discourage/disallow that) are called the inflexible while it's those people who would argue to be able to exceed the agreed points who are inflexible. Let's look at the available options:

Being cool and getting on with playing the game isn't a bad habit.

Getting your panties in a twist over a few points here and there, however, is. So I'd recommend you start working on losing that bad habit and not encourage other to follow your bad example by being an old miser about point values. online or at the table.

Well, I really wish you would also comment on the rest of that post of mine, because I clearly explained how is that a bad habit. Saying "Being cool and getting on with playing the game isn't a bad habit." is really twisting the whole subject. I never said that it's a bad habit. I said that -expecting- someone to allow you that, instead of trying a bit harder and using a bit more of your brain while making a list is a bad habit.

Of course I could write up another post full of examples, but I've already said that once or even twice. The golden rule is to put more effort yourself rather than expect someone to just cope with your sloppy work - that applies to everything in our lives. It's a bad habit to expect someone to do that and a good habit to work a bit harder yourself. Sure, it's nice if he's cool with that and allows it, but you have no right to demand that nor try to make him feel bad for not doing it - he should not be expected to do that, it's up to him.

Also no panties twisting, I'm a very understanding person but I also like when the agreed rules are followed. If someone says he has to be 5pts over the limit I ask if he can't swap out some equipment option for one few points cheaper or drop something(a model, upgrade, whatever) to meet the required limit as I have.

When me and my friends/brother play, we allow grace points. we normally play 4th and 5th ed and there are some wierd point units that will not end up in a sum of 5. I really don't care if someone is 1, 2, 3 or 4 points over, if someone is 5 over I will just add 5 points of wargear. I've had several weird point cost games where we use a 1525 point games list because we wanted to fit in one more man, I'm ok with that.

 vipoid wrote:

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

I wouldn't even mind it if we were doing a 1750 point game and my opponent asked if we could go to 1850 so he could field a unit he really wants to field. I would consider that just fine as hes not telling me hes going to go over and asking permission to change the agreed upon size for both players in a manner that gives both players something.

If my opponent asked me that, I'd certainly raise an eyebrow.

Um,,, what unit is so massive that you can't even fit it into a 1750pt list?

i was just using it as an example it would rarely come up in that size game.

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

I wouldn't even mind it if we were doing a 1750 point game and my opponent asked if we could go to 1850 so he could field a unit he really wants to field. I would consider that just fine as hes not telling me hes going to go over and asking permission to change the agreed upon size for both players in a manner that gives both players something.

If my opponent asked me that, I'd certainly raise an eyebrow.

Um,,, what unit is so massive that you can't even fit it into a 1750pt list?

i was just using it as an example it would rarely come up in that size game.

Well, sure. Proportionately, 100 points (which is a lot... lol) is less than 6% of 1750, but going from 500 -> 600 is a huge jump. The debate was more generally about a few points (like, single digits), I think.

That being said, 1850 is a point limit for a game that isn't meant to last too long. Besides, then I could field both my Revenant Titans, and have 50 points left over. But could I go over by 1 point, please, so that I can have a bike squad (51 points)?

In case anyone misconstrues it, I'm joking about my two revenant titans. Sadly, I don't even own one. :(

I don't have a problem with it, and that's because people pay tons of money to play this game. A 2,000 point army is usually going to cost at least 1,000$ - that's a pretty penny just to play a game.

People talk about "just switch something around" but it's often not that simple. If they're not a couple points over because of a melta-bomb, but because they crammed another unit in there? Telling a player without a whole ton of models to lose those 1-2 points could mean losing some crucial upgrade (klaw on a Warboss for example), or even an entire unit depending on what they have. Lots of players don't have the funds to get the spare models to make it as simple as "turn that lascannon into a missle-launcher", they might just have to take the entire devastator unit out and be at a huge disadvantage.

So, in short, I've no problem with people going slightly over, I'll generally just attribute it to being the best they can do. If I lose a game because of a 1-20 point disadvantage, then I simply could've won via playing better or (and this is much less likely) the dice gods really showed me what for.

The whole point of having a limit is so that you have to make those hard choices about what's critical and what isn't.

Telling a player without a whole ton of models to lose those 1-2 points could mean losing some crucial upgrade (klaw on a Warboss for example), or even an entire unit depending on what they have.

That would only be true, if someone bought models at random and then tried to build a list out of them.Normal people make a list of what ever points are played localy and then buy models after testing the list. If someone is stupid enough buy stuff at random, then the only way to make him unlearn acting like that, is making him feel how it is to spend 50+$ and not being able to use the unit or model.

 Blacksails wrote:
The whole point of having a limit is so that you have to make those hard choices about what's critical and what isn't.

You miss the point. Many players (especially those below 30 years) may not have a choice to make. If they can't run all lascannons on their devastator squad, they can't take the squad at all. They don't have enough literal income to afford the extra models, so if you crack down on them being a couple of points over the limit.. They dont have any replacements. They're down an entire squad - which could very well be a critical one.

I got into 40k when I was 12 years old, so I'm speaking from experience here. I remember games from back then when I had to run over 100 points below the points limit because I didn't have anything to substitute, and marines cost way more points back then and my opponent wouldn't give me an inch - they'd prefer I just knee-cap myself. I remember some older players griping because my tac squad sergeants had a power sword / chain sword and bolt pistol modeled, but I just ran them with a bolter to meet the points requirement. The dudes I put on the table were the only models I could afford, but they were upset that a 13 year old kid couldn't shell out the 30$ on the spot to buy another box of tactical marines JUST to make a sergeant with a bolter to switch back and forth.

This game costs money and lots of it - people may not have many (or any) more models than what you see on the table, so what are you going to do in that case? If you're not willing to give them a few points of leeway, or some WYSIYG leeway, you'll be taking a literal dump on their experience. Believe it or not new players are important, and not everyone jumping into the hobby has the $$$$ to shell out for a well planned force with plenty of options on the outset.
on

Makumba wrote:

Telling a player without a whole ton of models to lose those 1-2 points could mean losing some crucial upgrade (klaw on a Warboss for example), or even an entire unit depending on what they have.

That would only be true, if someone bought models at random and then tried to build a list out of them.Normal people make a list of what ever points are played localy and then buy models after testing the list. If someone is stupid enough buy stuff at random, then the only way to make him unlearn acting like that, is making him feel how it is to spend 50+$ and not being able to use the unit or model.

Or if someone had models bought for them, and had to use everything to hit the points limit.

Or if a new codex dropped and shook up the points costs for various things on a player that doesn't have a lot of spare models.

Or if, heaven forbid, someone just getting into the hobby decided to buy what they thought looked / sounded awesome, as opposed to sitting down for a few hours to read multiple books, then going online to do research, and finally busting out a calculator to add stuff up before purchasing any models.

Don't be a donkey-cave, there are several legitimate reasons why someone could be in this situation. A hobby like ours should be friendly and greet new players with open arms, not scold them for failing to understand the system immediately and make them play with assinine disadvantages as punishment until they sink more money into an already expensive pass-time.

Frankly, I'm disappointed in a lot of what I'm seeing here. There's a distinct difference between encouraging bad habits amongst the player base, and simply corn-holing players who are new or don't have the kind of money thrown at this hobby that you do. New players are the life blood of our hobby, and anyone should be welcome regardless of disposable income. For shame, Dakka. For shame.

Makumba wrote:

Telling a player without a whole ton of models to lose those 1-2 points could mean losing some crucial upgrade (klaw on a Warboss for example), or even an entire unit depending on what they have.

That would only be true, if someone bought models at random and then tried to build a list out of them.Normal people make a list of what ever points are played localy and then buy models after testing the list. If someone is stupid enough buy stuff at random, then the only way to make him unlearn acting like that, is making him feel how it is to spend 50+$ and not being able to use the unit or model.

This is surely the intelligent thing to do, and with limited funds (and time) to build one army to play, that makes sense. However, two reasonable situations arise when it isn't so anymore.

First, people don't usually buy 1850 points at once or even collect towards that. Instead they buy stuff in bits and make it work as they go along.

Second, I often collect an army and model it long before I turn it into a fighting force. Therefore, for the first few months that I play it, the army will not be optimized (plus, I mag try different things or change my mind).

 morganfreeman wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
The whole point of having a limit is so that you have to make those hard choices about what's critical and what isn't.

You miss the point. Many players (especially those below 30 years) may not have a choice to make. If they can't run all lascannons on their devastator squad, they can't take the squad at all. They don't have enough literal income to afford the extra models, so if you crack down on them being a couple of points over the limit.. They dont have any replacements. They're down an entire squad - which could very well be a critical one.

I got into 40k when I was 12 years old, so I'm speaking from experience here. I remember games from back then when I had to run over 100 points below the points limit because I didn't have anything to substitute, and marines cost way more points back then and my opponent wouldn't give me an inch - they'd prefer I just knee-cap myself. I remember some older players griping because my tac squad sergeants had a power sword / chain sword and bolt pistol modeled, but I just ran them with a bolter to meet the points requirement. The dudes I put on the table were the only models I could afford, but they were upset that a 13 year old kid couldn't shell out the 30$ on the spot to buy another box of tactical marines JUST to make a sergeant with a bolter to switch back and forth.

This game costs money and lots of it - people may not have many (or any) more models than what you see on the table, so what are you going to do in that case? If you're not willing to give them a few points of leeway, or some WYSIYG leeway, you'll be taking a literal dump on their experience. Believe it or not new players are important, and not everyone jumping into the hobby has the $$$$ to shell out for a well planned force with plenty of options on the outset.

Proxy . No one s has said you need to be 100% WYSIYG.

 morganfreeman wrote:
If they can't run all lascannons on their devastator squad, they can't take the squad at all.

Nonsense. The devastator squad box doesn't come with all lascannons, so if you're running an all-lascannon squad it's because you've invested in extra models beyond the bare minimum. Also, a devastator squad doesn't have to take the maximum number of heavy weapons. You can always just drop a heavy weapon entirely and replace it with a bolter marine. So what "I can't take the squad at all" really means is "I can't take the perfectly-optimized squad that I really want to take".

Noir wrote:

 morganfreeman wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
The whole point of having a limit is so that you have to make those hard choices about what's critical and what isn't.

You miss the point. Many players (especially those below 30 years) may not have a choice to make. If they can't run all lascannons on their devastator squad, they can't take the squad at all. They don't have enough literal income to afford the extra models, so if you crack down on them being a couple of points over the limit.. They dont have any replacements. They're down an entire squad - which could very well be a critical one.

I got into 40k when I was 12 years old, so I'm speaking from experience here. I remember games from back then when I had to run over 100 points below the points limit because I didn't have anything to substitute, and marines cost way more points back then and my opponent wouldn't give me an inch - they'd prefer I just knee-cap myself. I remember some older players griping because my tac squad sergeants had a power sword / chain sword and bolt pistol modeled, but I just ran them with a bolter to meet the points requirement. The dudes I put on the table were the only models I could afford, but they were upset that a 13 year old kid couldn't shell out the 30$ on the spot to buy another box of tactical marines JUST to make a sergeant with a bolter to switch back and forth.

This game costs money and lots of it - people may not have many (or any) more models than what you see on the table, so what are you going to do in that case? If you're not willing to give them a few points of leeway, or some WYSIYG leeway, you'll be taking a literal dump on their experience. Believe it or not new players are important, and not everyone jumping into the hobby has the $$$$ to shell out for a well planned force with plenty of options on the outset.

Proxy . No one s has said you need to be 100% WYSIYG.

exactly, if my oppnent had to trim some points and had to change the las dev squad to some other cheaper weapon to come in under points then thats fine if he proxies them for a game. most people I know will just take out stuff even if it is something they wanted to field because they agreed to the point level and decided to abide by the point limit without even thinking of asking to get grace points.

I allow up to 5 points over the limit, personally, but I'd be less inclined at a tournament or some such.

For my own lists, I'd rather be three or four points under the limit then over it by any margin.

 morganfreeman wrote:

You miss the point. Many players (especially those below 30 years) may not have a choice to make. If they can't run all lascannons on their devastator squad, they can't take the squad at all. They don't have enough literal income to afford the extra models, so if you crack down on them being a couple of points over the limit.. They dont have any replacements. They're down an entire squad - which could very well be a critical one.

I got into 40k when I was 12 years old, so I'm speaking from experience here. I remember games from back then when I had to run over 100 points below the points limit because I didn't have anything to substitute, and marines cost way more points back then and my opponent wouldn't give me an inch - they'd prefer I just knee-cap myself. I remember some older players griping because my tac squad sergeants had a power sword / chain sword and bolt pistol modeled, but I just ran them with a bolter to meet the points requirement. The dudes I put on the table were the only models I could afford, but they were upset that a 13 year old kid couldn't shell out the 30$ on the spot to buy another box of tactical marines JUST to make a sergeant with a bolter to switch back and forth.

This game costs money and lots of it - people may not have many (or any) more models than what you see on the table, so what are you going to do in that case? If you're not willing to give them a few points of leeway, or some WYSIYG leeway, you'll be taking a literal dump on their experience. Believe it or not new players are important, and not everyone jumping into the hobby has the $$$$ to shell out for a well planned force with plenty of options on the outset.
on

I'm not missing the point at all.

If you cannot build a list that's under an agreed upon point limit, and do not have absolutely any alternative models to bring it below the point level, maybe try playing another point level.

Ignoring the incredibly small chance someone has an exact 2005pts list that in no way can be altered, and refuse to play anything other than 100% WYSIWYG.

Again, the challenge of building a list is figuring out what's important to you and what's not.

A single point of anecdotal evidence about a very specific case does not convince that holding your opponent to an agreement is anything but the right and reasonable thing to, with some exceptions. In a case as oddly specific as you mentioned against a 12 year old with little to no money, I'd probably let it slide. Alternatively, I'd just suggest playing a lower point level where you have more options.

 morganfreeman wrote:
Telling a player without a whole ton of models to lose those 1-2 points could mean losing some crucial upgrade (klaw on a Warboss for example), or even an entire unit depending on what they have.

But that's entirely the point.

The points limit limits what you can fit into your army. That's a totally intentional side-effect of the points system. If you need to move stuff around or drop stuff in order to fit that extra power klaw in, or you just can't make it fit because you absolutely need to have some other option in there instead, well, that's the points system working as intended.

If my friends were to ask first, I would probably be okay with any amount of "grace" points. We typically play pretty casually though. Playing the game with a newcomer to 40k, I am only concerned with them having a good time and remaining engaged. Take 200 points!