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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
No one is saying they should be "forced" to play the game or we'll break their kneecaps or something.

We're saying they're being unreasonable. I would also say someone who bans Codex: Chaos Space Marines is being unreasonable as well. They're allowed to, and I'm not going to advocate violence or coercion as the alternative. But that doesn't mean I can't make fun of the person for being hilariously misinformed or condemn them for being disingenuous or comment negatively that they're being unreasonable.

>You play a toy soldier minatures game
>want to make fun of people for not playing the same way as you
i have a feeling people that refuse to play with you would be making the right choice reguardless of their resoning

Asmodios wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
No one is saying they should be "forced" to play the game or we'll break their kneecaps or something.

We're saying they're being unreasonable. I would also say someone who bans Codex: Chaos Space Marines is being unreasonable as well. They're allowed to, and I'm not going to advocate violence or coercion as the alternative. But that doesn't mean I can't make fun of the person for being hilariously misinformed or condemn them for being disingenuous or comment negatively that they're being unreasonable.

>You play a toy soldier minatures game
>want to make fun of people for not playing the same way as you
i have a feeling people that refuse to play with you would be making the right choice reguardless of their resoning

Today I learned:
Giving the reason you make fun of someone doesn't mean the person you are talking to will understand the reason.

I'm not making fun of them for not playing the same way as me. I'm making fun of them for - ah hell, let me just give you the original quote but cut down so it's short enough for you to understand this time:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
that doesn't mean I can't make fun of the person for being hilariously misinformed

"Being hilariously misinformed" is a good reason to make fun of a lot of people, if they refuse to inform themselves. And has nothing to do with "playing the game the same way as me." I make fun of people who are hilariously misinformed about math, politics, philosophy... hell, I consider being hilariously misinformed as just making yourself a target. What's worse? I think it's fine if other people do it to me, too, because if I'm unwilling to learn something then that's a problem.

Asmodios wrote:

StrayIight wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
If people want to refuse a game for whatever reason is fine. It would have been nice for him to let you know before you showed up for the game at the store but it might be common in the area he's in and he assumed you wouldn't bring FW. It's no different IMO then saying "I don't play against unpainted miniatures, we don't allow proxies, we play first-floor ruins block LOS, ect" Most areas or tournaments have slightly different ways of playing so it's just best to adapt like you did and get a game in.

Yeah, it's not fine. Not really.

It simply isn't fair to expect anyone to play anything but by the rules of 40K in a public setting. Now, if you want to change up the rules in a private setting - have at it. Otherwise you simply don't get to fundamentally alter the game either by addition or omission because you don't like something and expect to be seen as behaving reasonably.

This is seeming more and more like nothing other than a case of people wanting to stack the game in their favour by clutching at a tired excuse they think will allow them to dictate what their opponent can field.
If you really have an issue with certain FW units, the correct place to try and change them is via GW or FW. Until that happens, play privately with others of a like mind, or accept things as they are in public and play.

The rules are the rules. There is no debate to be had.

Yup, you're right it's not fine to let people choose how they want to play..... If someone refuses to play me in the future or they try to play by any sort of non GW official ruling or house rule I will physically beat them
Its the logical thing to do

Yeah, and you can choose to play a round of golf by picking up the golf ball, running down the green with it in hand and dropping it in the hole. Golf clubs are part of the rules, but we have the right to treat them as optional right?

Yes you do. But go ahead and see how that goes down at the golf club. You'll be ridiculed and then probably banned. And rightly so.

Why is it any more acceptable in our game, for people to choose to play by - or omit - whatever rules they feel like, and then expect the rest of us to automatically be ok with it? That they can make that choice (and I accept they can), doesn't make the choice any less foolhardy if you are playing outside of your own private location or without implicit agreement beforehand.

I'll ignore the comment about physically beating people - it just doesn't warrant a response.

StrayIight wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Legal or otherwise, you are not obliged to play against anything in this game if you don't want to, regardless of what it is that you don't want to play against.

I have little interest in playing against 'names', super-heavies and flyers, for example, outside of specific scenarios. Simple reason being that these things do not necessarily lend themselves To the types of games I want my 40k games to be about. All those things, just like forgeworld, are perfectly legal, all perfectly fair game, and you are entitled to like them, and to want to take any of them to a game that you want.

But you might end up playing against someone else other than me. Neither of us is necessarily wrong.

You do have that right. You're not 'wrong' to exercise it.

But you are essentially playing 'Deadnights basic infantry battles' a game based heavily on the popular miniatures game Warhammer: 40,000 that the rest of us play.
I truly mean no offense to you personally, but this attitude as a whole just smells of singling out people who won't play the game by your own preferences. It feels a lot like a form of elitism...

The thing is straylight, everyone plays (with, or against) a 'subset' of the popular miniatures game warhammer:40,000. Plenty folks are no different to me. Tournament players will only ever look at about 5% of the options of the game as 'worth it' for example. Plenty groups have an 'understanding' of 'no flyers',for example. Plenty people build armies with a specific theme in mind - they will only field armour, because they are tread heads for example. No one is necessarily 'wrong'.

In terms of 'singling out people', it's not actually about singling out people that don't play the game by my preferences, it's the opposite way round - it's about singling out those who do play on something of the same wavelength. For the sole purpose of playing games. And there really is no elitism there. At all. It's not about that. I am no better or worse than any one else.As I see it, if you want to get the most out of your hobby/gaming time, you need to 'play with likeminded folks'. There is no point playing games that you don't enjoy, playing types of games you don't enjoy, or,playing against people you,don't enjoy playing against. This doesn't mean you can't be friends, or friendly, and socialise with those that play 'other' games. And furthermore, I'm just married (yay!). I work full time, and travel quite a bit. I hit the gym often. I run. I have plenty other life commitments that I didn't have when I was a kid in college. I have to be far more selective with my time, because my gaming time is limited and precious. It's precious 'currency' - I cannot afford to spend it on games that I don't enjoy, hence being a bit more selective, rather than just settling for whatever is on offer, just because it's a game, and somehow I'm obliged to play it, despite my preferences.

I appreciate your point of view, and for what it's worth, I am as far from 'elitist' as you can go. I take no offence to what you say, as I fully believe that no offence waa meant on your part in saying it. On mine, I won't turn my nose up to anyone, I won't look down on anyone either. Play the game you want to play - if you're happy, more power to you.

What I will do is, as we chat, say what kind of games I prefer playing (and it's a step above 'deadnights basic Infantry battles' - I prefer small scale 'raids' where the biggest thing on the board is a dreadnought, sentinel or a blight drone, and where a single power weapon is a big bloody deal). I won't force my preferences on you, or claim that I am right or better than you for liking what I like, And even if we are not having a game, I'll still socialise. We can still chat, and whatever else. But if you like big battles, or tournament preps, or whatever, I'll politely refuse. If you don't want to play a raid, then do the same. Politely refuse. I promise you I will not be offended and my ego will not be bruised. No harm, no foul. And I'll wish you the best in your game.

I simply have a preference for a specific type of game (that I, and my group, I may add, tend to prefer). Maybe it's because I started playing in an era when the biggest baddest thing on the board was a wraithlord, or a land raider, but the 'scale creep' that has happened to 40k is simply something I a man not really interested in. Also to note is my other games - lotr, infinity and warmachine/horses tend to be on the 'skirmish' side of the spectrum, rather than 'mass battle'. I much prefer those kinds of games. I prefer more narrative games. I prefer 'not-optimal' lists as I find the principle of 'do the best you can with what you have to hand' far more interesting than 'here is a power list. Game ends on turn 2'. I think they are far more interesting. And I am lucky in that I have found a group that enjoys sci-fi skirmishes much more than 40k:apocalypse parking lot.

StrayIight wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

StrayIight wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
If people want to refuse a game for whatever reason is fine. It would have been nice for him to let you know before you showed up for the game at the store but it might be common in the area he's in and he assumed you wouldn't bring FW. It's no different IMO then saying "I don't play against unpainted miniatures, we don't allow proxies, we play first-floor ruins block LOS, ect" Most areas or tournaments have slightly different ways of playing so it's just best to adapt like you did and get a game in.

Yeah, it's not fine. Not really.

It simply isn't fair to expect anyone to play anything but by the rules of 40K in a public setting. Now, if you want to change up the rules in a private setting - have at it. Otherwise you simply don't get to fundamentally alter the game either by addition or omission because you don't like something and expect to be seen as behaving reasonably.

This is seeming more and more like nothing other than a case of people wanting to stack the game in their favour by clutching at a tired excuse they think will allow them to dictate what their opponent can field.
If you really have an issue with certain FW units, the correct place to try and change them is via GW or FW. Until that happens, play privately with others of a like mind, or accept things as they are in public and play.

The rules are the rules. There is no debate to be had.

Yup, you're right it's not fine to let people choose how they want to play..... If someone refuses to play me in the future or they try to play by any sort of non GW official ruling or house rule I will physically beat them
Its the logical thing to do

Yeah, and you can choose to play a round of golf by picking up the golf ball, running down the green with it in hand and dropping it in the hole. Golf clubs are part of the rules, but we have the right to treat them as optional right?

Yes you do. But go ahead and see how that goes down at the golf club. You'll be ridiculed and then probably banned. And rightly so.

Why is it any more acceptable in our game, for people to choose to play by - or omit - whatever rules they feel like, and then expect the rest of us to automatically be ok with it? That they can make that choice (and I accept they can), doesn't make the choice any less foolhardy if you are playing outside of your own private location or without implicit agreement beforehand.

I'll ignore the comment about physically beating people - it just doesn't warrant a response.

Just for your example
There’s both
>golf
>frisbee golf
People have fun playing both. Same basic game two different ways of playing. I play ice hockey, some people play broom hockey, floor hockey, sled hockey.... there’s tons of different leagues that play 5 man, 3 man, half ice, no boards ect. It’s all hockey.... just pic the type you prefer

Not Online!!! wrote:
[

Great, whilest i agree that was not very civil way of conduct, your argument for this is atleast equally bad: "Because somebody said something not nice i now have to throw all the people that play with those armies in the same bin"
10 /10 logic.

No, what I am saying is I was on the fence about playing an random opponent showing up with FW stuff in as I am largely unaware of what it can do but full aware of the issues they can create. The vitrol about this hesitation pushed me into the, 'Nah, I good with not playing them.' It might be fine after a few games and I get to know that person better or I knew them beforehand, but just meeting a stranger for some random game with units I don't even know exist and just expecting me to say no problem is a little presumptuous. It isn't even about whether the unit is good or bad. It is something completely unexpected that a player could easily lie (which I know they likely won't) about how it works among other issues it creates.

In many other miniatures wargames I have played, there were many units that were considered restricted socially while they had absolutely no game mechanics stopping a player from taking them. They were just determined to be too disruptive for a good game and as such few players fielded them (vehicle flamethrowers or more locally inexperienced mortar teams in 1st ed Bolt Action are good examples). There is usual social contract about these things most places I have game. It I take something a little odd or unexpected, I check with my opponent if they are fine with it, especially if they don't know me, I have a contingency plan in place in case they decide they aren't conformable with the inclusion. What I don't do is call them or hypothetical players like them names and demean their objectives because I don't like them.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


Good. You just made me want to buy even more.

I am sure Forge World will be glad for your business. It literally doesn't affect me though unless I can somehow convince them to give me stuff for increasing their sales.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
No one is saying they should be "forced" to play the game or we'll break their kneecaps or something.

We're saying they're being unreasonable. I would also say someone who bans Codex: Chaos Space Marines is being unreasonable as well. They're allowed to, and I'm not going to advocate violence or coercion as the alternative. But that doesn't mean I can't make fun of the person for being hilariously misinformed or condemn them for being disingenuous or comment negatively that they're being unreasonable.

I don't see it as being unreasonable perhaps not to my liking, but not unreasonable. It is very possible that some players like 40K, but thet find the more demonic elements for moral reasons beyond the pale for them to enjoy the game. I have met a few players that absolutely won't play evil (read: demonic) elements of many games. As a Chaos player I completely disagree with that, but I am not going to be bothered or negative towards someone that hold such an opinion. I am not likely to change their position and they aren't hurting anyone. Plus, If they aren't enjoying the game, I am not enjoying the game. Making fun of someone over it as that seems like very immature way to deal with not getting your way.

People who refuse to play against FW are babies.

Deadnight wrote:

StrayIight wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Legal or otherwise, you are not obliged to play against anything in this game if you don't want to, regardless of what it is that you don't want to play against.

I have little interest in playing against 'names', super-heavies and flyers, for example, outside of specific scenarios. Simple reason being that these things do not necessarily lend themselves To the types of games I want my 40k games to be about. All those things, just like forgeworld, are perfectly legal, all perfectly fair game, and you are entitled to like them, and to want to take any of them to a game that you want.

But you might end up playing against someone else other than me. Neither of us is necessarily wrong.

You do have that right. You're not 'wrong' to exercise it.

But you are essentially playing 'Deadnights basic infantry battles' a game based heavily on the popular miniatures game Warhammer: 40,000 that the rest of us play.
I truly mean no offense to you personally, but this attitude as a whole just smells of singling out people who won't play the game by your own preferences. It feels a lot like a form of elitism...

The thing is straylight, everyone plays (with, or against) a 'subset' of the popular miniatures game warhammer:40,000. Plenty folks are no different to me. Tournament players will only ever look at about 5% of the options of the game as 'worth it' for example. Plenty groups have an 'understanding' of 'no flyers',for example. Plenty people build armies with a specific theme in mind - they will only field armour, because they are tread heads for example. No one is necessarily 'wrong'.

In terms of 'singling out people', it's not actually about singling out people that don't play the game by my preferences, it's the opposite way round - it's about singling out those who do play on something of the same wavelength. For the sole purpose of playing games. And there really is no elitism there. At all. It's not about that. I am no better or worse than any one else.As I see it, if you want to get the most out of your hobby/gaming time, you need to 'play with likeminded folks'. There is no point playing games that you don't enjoy, playing types of games you don't enjoy, or,playing against people you,don't enjoy playing against. This doesn't mean you can't be friends, or friendly, and socialise with those that play 'other' games. And furthermore, I'm just married (yay!). I work full time, and travel quite a bit. I hit the gym often. I run. I have plenty other life commitments that I didn't have when I was a kid in college. I have to be far more selective with my time, because my gaming time is limited and precious. It's precious 'currency' - I cannot afford to spend it on games that I don't enjoy, hence being a bit more selective, rather than just settling for whatever is on offer, just because it's a game, and somehow I'm obliged to play it, despite my preferences.

I appreciate your point of view, and for what it's worth, I am as far from 'elitist' as you can go. I take no offence to what you say, as I fully believe that no offence waa meant on your part in saying it. On mine, I won't turn my nose up to anyone, I won't look down on anyone either. Play the game you want to play - if you're happy, more power to you.

What I will do is, as we chat, say what kind of games I prefer playing (and it's a step above 'deadnights basic Infantry battles' - I prefer small scale 'raids' where the biggest thing on the board is a dreadnought, sentinel or a blight drone, and where a single power weapon is a big bloody deal). I won't force my preferences on you, or claim that I am right or better than you for liking what I like, And even if we are not having a game, I'll still socialise. We can still chat, and whatever else. But if you like big battles, or tournament preps, or whatever, I'll politely refuse. If you don't want to play a raid, then do the same. Politely refuse. I promise you I will not be offended and my ego will not be bruised. No harm, no foul. And I'll wish you the best in your game.

I simply have a preference for a specific type of game (that I, and my group, I may add, tend to prefer). Maybe it's because I started playing in an era when the biggest baddest thing on the board was a wraithlord, or a land raider, but the 'scale creep' that has happened to 40k is simply something I a man not really interested in. Also to note is my other games - lotr, infinity and warmachine/horses tend to be on the 'skirmish' side of the spectrum, rather than 'mass battle'. I much prefer those kinds of games. I prefer more narrative games. I prefer 'not-optimal' lists as I find the principle of 'do the best you can with what you have to hand' far more interesting than 'here is a power list. Game ends on turn 2'. I think they are far more interesting. And I am lucky in that I have found a group that enjoys sci-fi skirmishes much more than 40k:apocalypse parking lot.

In all honesty I agree with almost everything you're saying. Personally I play fluffy lists of units I enjoy - certainly nothing that would stand up at a tournament, and I'm not that fussed about winning or losing either.

My only argument is that if you're in a GW store or other public place playing with strangers, the only real basis for play between you is that you're using the same ruleset. I don't think - in that scenario - any of us can start dictating to another person 'you can't use that unit', or 'if you use x I won't play'. Not without starting to sound really unreasonable.

Unfortunately, I think that's exactly what many people in this thread are advocating.

If we want to play a specific way - and you're right, often we all do - the GW store or FLGS is probably not the place to do it. Unless you're going there for a game with someone you know.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:
I am largely unaware of what it can do

Why is your opponent responsible for your ignorance about the game? It's not exactly difficult to find this information, you're no more reasonable than a person who bans C:SM because they play Tau and have never bothered to read the marine codex.

Asmodios wrote:

Just for your example
There’s both
>golf
>frisbee golf
People have fun playing both. Same basic game two different ways of playing. I play ice hockey, some people play broom hockey, floor hockey, sled hockey.... there’s tons of different leagues that play 5 man, 3 man, half ice, no boards ect. It’s all hockey.... just pic the type you prefer

Agreed! And that's fine.

What isn't fine is going to a golf course and expecting the people there to play golf, to switch to frisbee golf for you. That's my issue really. And I think that's what many are advocating.

You be you. I fully support people playing however they want - but you can't go to a public place like a FLGS and expect to tell another random player they can't play by the official 40K rules, or they can't use a legal unit because you don't like it. Not without being unreasonable really.

@ OP

I hope you got a game. My only comment is go true blue.

StrayIight wrote:

In all honesty I agree with almost everything you're saying. Personally I play fluffy lists of units I enjoy - certainly nothing that would stand up at a tournament, and I'm not that fussed about winning or losing either.
My only argument is that if you're in a GW store or other public place playing with strangers, the only real basis for play between you is that you're using the same ruleset. I don't think - in that scenario - any of us can start dictating to another person 'you can't use that unit', or 'if you use x I won't play'. Not without starting to sound really unreasonable.
Unfortunately, I think that's exactly what many people in this thread are advocating.
If we want to play a specific way - and you're right, often we all do - the GW store or FLGS is probably not the place to do it. Unless you're going there for a game with someone you know.

Why not?

Firstly, I'm still playing by the exact same rules as everybody else in the store. Whether it's warmachine mk3, infinity n3, 40k eighth ed, whatever. Saying 'no' is not unreasonable. Saying there's stuff you (or they) don't want to play against is not unreasonable, basic social contract stuff here.

Secondly, why would I play with strangers? Recipe for disaster if you ask me. If I don't know you, I don't play you. I've met far too many folks that I've not enjoyed playing against for me to just simply 'throw down' just because they're there with an army that you feel I am obliged to play. Geek social fallacies. You don't owe anyone a game.

StrayIight wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Just for your example
There’s both
>golf
>frisbee golf
People have fun playing both. Same basic game two different ways of playing. I play ice hockey, some people play broom hockey, floor hockey, sled hockey.... there’s tons of different leagues that play 5 man, 3 man, half ice, no boards ect. It’s all hockey.... just pic the type you prefer

Agreed! And that's fine.

What isn't fine is going to a golf course and expecting the people there to play golf, to switch to frisbee golf for you. That's my issue really. And I think that's what many are advocating.

You be you. I fully support people playing however they want - but you can't go to a public place like a FLGS and expect to tell another random player they can't play by the official 40K rules, or they can't use a legal unit because you don't like it. Not without being unreasonable really.

He wasn’t telling the guy he couldn’t play FW.... just that he wouldn’t play him if he used FW. I’ve played at stores that didn’t allow x,y or z and people that didn’t want to play x, y or z. If I want to play them then I’ll follow whatever the rule is and if I don’t like it I’ll go play somewhere else.

If you think it's okay to deny Forge World, I hope you also think it's okay to deny playing against Space Marines, Custodes, T'au, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tyranids, Sisters, Inquisition, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Genestealer Cults, Chaos Marines, Chaos Daemons, Knights, Assassins, AdMech, Orks, etc etc etc - everyone except Imperial Guard.

After all, I don't know the rules and am not familiar with the other armies - I only know Imperial Guard, and I can't be bothered to research the other armies in the game.



/sarcasm

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If you think it's okay to deny Forge World, I hope you also think it's okay to deny playing against Space Marines, Custodes, T'au, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tyranids, Sisters, Inquisition, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Genestealer Cults, Chaos Marines, Chaos Daemons, Knights, Assassins, AdMech, Orks, etc etc etc - everyone except Imperial Guard.

After all, I don't know the rules and am not familiar with the other armies - I only know Imperial Guard, and I can't be bothered to research the other armies in the game.



/sarcasm

That’s fine.... play against whoever you want. Why would I care if someone doesn’t want to play against certain codexes. Play the game how you like

Deadnight wrote:

StrayIight wrote:

In all honesty I agree with almost everything you're saying. Personally I play fluffy lists of units I enjoy - certainly nothing that would stand up at a tournament, and I'm not that fussed about winning or losing either.
My only argument is that if you're in a GW store or other public place playing with strangers, the only real basis for play between you is that you're using the same ruleset. I don't think - in that scenario - any of us can start dictating to another person 'you can't use that unit', or 'if you use x I won't play'. Not without starting to sound really unreasonable.
Unfortunately, I think that's exactly what many people in this thread are advocating.
If we want to play a specific way - and you're right, often we all do - the GW store or FLGS is probably not the place to do it. Unless you're going there for a game with someone you know.

Why not?

Firstly, I'm still playing by the exact same rules as everybody else in the store. Whether it's warmachine mk3, infinity n3, 40k eighth ed, whatever. Saying 'no' is not unreasonable. Saying there's stuff you (or they) don't want to play against is not unreasonable, basic social contract stuff here.

Secondly, why would I play with strangers? Recipe for disaster if you ask me. If I don't know you, I don't play you. I've met far too many folks that I've not enjoyed playing against for me to just simply 'throw down' just because they're there with an army that you feel I am obliged to play. Geek social fallacies. You don't owe anyone a game.

We'll have to agree to disagree here I think.

My opinion still is that effectively stating 'it's my way or the highway' over someones use of a perfectly legitimate unit is unreasonable. And I'm not sure in doing so you are playing by the exact same rules as everybody else. It still just feels like someone enforcing their view (which isn't inline with the game as intended by GW) on others, and if they don't agree, they're not allowed to play you.

You totally have the right to do it - and i support that. I just think it's a little sad to encounter such an uncompromising mindset in that environment.

Asmodios wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If you think it's okay to deny Forge World, I hope you also think it's okay to deny playing against Space Marines, Custodes, T'au, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tyranids, Sisters, Inquisition, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Genestealer Cults, Chaos Marines, Chaos Daemons, Knights, Assassins, AdMech, Orks, etc etc etc - everyone except Imperial Guard.

After all, I don't know the rules and am not familiar with the other armies - I only know Imperial Guard, and I can't be bothered to research the other armies in the game.



/sarcasm

That’s fine.... play against whoever you want. Why would I care if someone doesn’t want to play against certain codexes. Play the game how you like

So you'd honestly have no problems about turning up to a game, perhaps one of the only times you get to play, and finding out that they will only play against certain codexes? Ones you might not even have?

Especially on the reasoning that "I don't know X codex" - despite you probably having X codex on hand, so you can't cheat and can show them every rule?

StrayIight wrote:

We'll have to agree to disagree here I think.

My opinion still is that effectively stating 'it's my way or the highway' over someones use of a perfectly legitimate unit is unreasonable. And I'm not sure in doing so you are playing by the exact same rules as everybody else. It still just feels like someone enforcing their view (which isn't inline with the game as intended by GW) on others, and if they don't agree, they're not allowed to play you.

You totally have the right to do it - and i support that. I just think it's a little sad to encounter such an uncompromising mindset in that environment.

It's a bit more nuanced than 'it's my way or the highway'. There's plenty other folks to play with, I will not stop you, or tell you that you are in an you way, shape or form wrong. I will chat away to you. I just have a limited amount of time, and prefer a specific type of game. Far from unreasonable. You don't actually owe me anything. Don't want to play a 'raid'? Then don't. Totally fine. Take care. Have a good game. Chat to you soon.

And I am playing by the same rules as everyone else, using the current edition of the rulebook. Trying to say this is somehow not in line with how gw 'intended' it to be I said asinine - gw don't enforce a 'proper' way to play. There is no dogma. No absolute infallible god. The game gw intended it to be is essentially a sandbox - play the game you want to play, and they provide plenty of options as to what to use. Not everything has to be used, all of the time.

As to 'enforcing' my view - telling folks over the course of a conversation what kind of game I like to play, and playing that, and politely declining games I would not enjoy is not 'enforcing' anything. I don't put a gun to your head. Im not banning you from playing, or forcing you to play my way. In the same way,I don't appreciate you looking down on me and calling me unreasonable when you are trying to force me into a game I don't want to play because 'obligation'. I'm simply being responsible to myself and my potential opponents. Social contract and all. Play with like minded folks. End.

And the comment about being sad and uncompromising is a bit unfair if you ask me. I wouldn't force you into playing a game you're not interested in. Why should I, or anyone else be somehow obliged to play a game I'm/thry're not interested in? I think that is extremely unfair, on both parties. It's like calling someone unreasonable because they want to play infinity, when you have 40k.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:
There is usual social contract about these things most places I have game. It I take something a little odd or unexpected, I check with my opponent if they are fine with it, especially if they don't know me, I have a contingency plan in place in case they decide they aren't conformable with the inclusion.

So basically you just ask permission to play with your own models.

Why don't you just say you want someone to write your list for you?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If you think it's okay to deny Forge World, I hope you also think it's okay to deny playing against Space Marines, Custodes, T'au, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tyranids, Sisters, Inquisition, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Genestealer Cults, Chaos Marines, Chaos Daemons, Knights, Assassins, AdMech, Orks, etc etc etc - everyone except Imperial Guard.

After all, I don't know the rules and am not familiar with the other armies - I only know Imperial Guard, and I can't be bothered to research the other armies in the game.



/sarcasm

That’s fine.... play against whoever you want. Why would I care if someone doesn’t want to play against certain codexes. Play the game how you like

So you'd honestly have no problems about turning up to a game, perhaps one of the only times you get to play, and finding out that they will only play against certain codexes? Ones you might not even have?

Especially on the reasoning that "I don't know X codex" - despite you probably having X codex on hand, so you can't cheat and can show them every rule?

yeah, the only times I've played against "random" people I've set up games with I've been very clear to ask exactly what and how we are playing (points, rules packets, faq, ect). I'm not just gonna message some dude online and say "wanna play a game" and not check the particulars. If i dont like what they are playing or restricting im not gonna play them. No different then when a guy asked me if i wanted to play in their apocalypse game and said "no thanks I don't play apocalypse"

Yeah, but if you don't play Forge World that's not the default, you're obligated to say that up front.

Deadnight wrote:

StrayIight wrote:

We'll have to agree to disagree here I think.

My opinion still is that effectively stating 'it's my way or the highway' over someones use of a perfectly legitimate unit is unreasonable. And I'm not sure in doing so you are playing by the exact same rules as everybody else. It still just feels like someone enforcing their view (which isn't inline with the game as intended by GW) on others, and if they don't agree, they're not allowed to play you.

You totally have the right to do it - and i support that. I just think it's a little sad to encounter such an uncompromising mindset in that environment.

It's a bit more nuanced than 'it's my way or the highway'. There's plenty other folks to play with, I will not stop you, or tell you that you are in an you way, shape or form wrong. I will chat away to you. I just have a limited amount of time, and prefer a specific type of game. Far from unreasonable. You don't actually owe me anything. Don't want to play a 'raid'? Then don't. Totally fine. Take care. Have a good game. Chat to you soon.

And I am playing by the same rules as everyone else, using the current edition of the rulebook. Trying to say this is somehow not in line with how gw 'intended' it to be I said asinine - gw don't enforce a 'proper' way to play. There is no dogma. No absolute infallible god. The game gw intended it to be is essentially a sandbox - play the game you want to play, and they provide plenty of options as to what to use. Not everything has to be used, all of the time.

As to 'enforcing' my view - telling folks over the course of a conversation what kind of game I like to play, and playing that, and politely declining games I would not enjoy is not 'enforcing' anything. I don't put a gun to your head. Im not banning you from playing, or forcing you to play my way. In the same way,I don't appreciate you looking down on me and calling me unreasonable when you are trying to force me into a game I don't want to play because 'obligation'. I'm simply being responsible to myself and my potential opponents. Social contract and all. Play with like minded folks. End.

And the comment about being sad and uncompromising is a bit unfair if you ask me. I wouldn't force you into playing a game you're not interested in. Why should I, or anyone else be somehow obliged to play a game I'm/thry're not interested in? I think that is extremely unfair, on both parties. It's like calling someone unreasonable because they want to play infinity, when you have 40k.

I don't feel it is more nuanced than that.

If you refuse to play anyone that won't give you the exact game you're after (and you're potentially expecting them to compromise for you in doing so here - they may have come with other ideas), it's exactly your way or no dice.

You're right, GW don't 'enforce' a proper way to play. They don't have a team of corporate Ninjas who hunt down those who change a rule (though that would be cool... O.o), nor am I looking down on you and trying to force you, or anyone else into a game. I'm saying if you turn up to a FLGS and say to someone who's from out of town and wants a game, that you won't play them unless they don't use that perfectly legal unit that you just don't happen to like, you are being an uncompromising jerk. The very definition of 'that guy'. It is you (to be clear, not you personally, a general 'you'), who is trying to force someone into a game on your terms in that scenario - and you're doing so by holding hostage your participation. Maybe there was no-one else in store that the OP could have played?

You're right about the 'sad' thing though - apologies. I second guessed myself there even as I submitted the post. 'Disheartening' is a better word. 'Sad' is inflammatory in a way that wasn't intended.

Look, at end of it all, this is something we do for fun. We should all expect to enjoy our hobby. But sometimes that may mean coming to an agreement about a game that suits both parties - and not being so hard line about how you feel you want to play that you'll exclude yourself or others from play. Especially when it's you (general 'you' again) who is asking for the exception to the accepted, normal state of play. Surely, that's the mature, grown up way to go about things?

I don't like to play against Forgeworld. I never had had a game where it was fun to play against. Between Special Rules, and opponents never having the rules on hand to let me read what the unit actually does(a "trust me, this is the rule"), I don't play against Forgeworld. From what I am reading on this thread, I am a problem player.

 conker249 wrote:
I don't like to play against Forgeworld. I never had had a game where it was fun to play against. Between Special Rules, and opponents never having the rules on hand to let me read what the unit actually does(a "trust me, this is the rule"), I don't play against Forgeworld. From what I am reading on this thread, I am a problem player.

If they don't have the rules, then nobody is going to hate on you for refusing to play against it, but that has nothing to do with FW in particular, people should have their rules no matter what it is.

That said, given the core Studio rules and codexes, if you have a problem with special rules, Forgeworld shouldn't be anything special or out of the ordinary

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


So basically you just ask permission to play with your own models.

Why don't you just say you want someone to write your list for you?

Isn't that exactly what you are doing when you say you ask to play any miniatures game? I am not stopping you from playing with your miniatures. I am stopping myself from playing with you.

As for your second point, I am pretty sure I can manage to make a list all on my own without including a single Forge World model. I am pretty sure the Citadel model line is large enough to accomplish that. I would hazard to guess most army lists in fact don't have any Forge World units within them. So asking if I want someone to write my list for me is highly disingenuous.

Wow, I turn down games I don't think will be fun all the time. This person's a jerk, I'm going to pass. That person has a reputation as a cheater, no thank you. This guy looks like he's going to start throwing his models at the wall every time he starts loosing, I think I'll let him chill. My hyper competitive friend who doesn't loose and can't dial it down, sure I'll play because I'll know it'll be fun at least.

I've been around since Special Characters usable only with your opponent's permission, let alone FW. I don't see it as a problem letting my opponent know I want to use either and they ask me not to, presuming they play by the same restrictions. I can understand not wanting FW as, I may have a working knowledge of how the base armies work in 40k, keeping track of the 100 or so imperial tank variants from FW is another matter. I might be fine with it if the person seems nice enough and has the rules, but it doesn't seem like something terrible if another person doesn't want to play.

The OP seemed to be able to compromise and ended up having a fun game. Throwing a temper tantrum because someone didn't want to play the way he plays would have just been childish.

Skaorn wrote:
Wow, I turn down games I don't think will be fun all the time. This person's a jerk, I'm going to pass. That person has a reputation as a cheater, no thank you. This guy looks like he's going to start throwing his models at the wall every time he starts loosing, I think I'll let him chill. My hyper competitive friend who doesn't loose and can't dial it down, sure I'll play because I'll know it'll be fun at least.

I've been around since Special Characters usable only with your opponent's permission, let alone FW. I don't see it as a problem letting my opponent know I want to use either and they ask me not to, presuming they play by the same restrictions. I can understand not wanting FW as, I may have a working knowledge of how the base armies work in 40k, keeping track of the 100 or so imperial tank variants from FW is another matter. I might be fine with it if the person seems nice enough and has the rules, but it doesn't seem like something terrible if another person doesn't want to play.

The OP seemed to be able to compromise and ended up having a fun game. Throwing a temper tantrum because someone didn't want to play the way he plays would have just been childish.

I guess the issue is WHY the other player wanted to not play. Their reasoning for that was flawed.

Steve is a cheater? Yeah, don't play with him. But if Steve's not ACTUALLY a cheater, well, you're being unnecessarily mean to him.

Likewise, Forgeworld is OP and only WAAC gamers use it? Sure, don't play with jerks who only want victory, but when FW isn't OP...

I feel like a fair question to ask someone who is opposed to playing against FW units is if they played against that unit in the past. If so, what happened? Was it unfun to play against? If so, why?

If they haven’t played against it, what makes them so hesitant to do so? Would they be willing to give it a shot and see what happens? At least then if they hated it they’d potentially have a reason to.

There are lots of OP things in the game, and not all of them are from FW. Refusing to play against any of them is fine, but if they refuse FW and play the rest, that’s just dumb. Sure, it’s their prerogative, but it’s silly. Like claiming to hate the taste of something, never having eaten it, because it’s reputed to taste bitter, but continuing to eat other bitter things. Eh, I dunno...

Dissecting someone's logic for not wanting to play is like trying to dissect a Big Mac. It's going to be ugly, there's no way it's good for you, and you're not going to discover anything that's worth your time.

People have all kinds of superstitions about FW. Better to just leave them entombed in the thick walls of ignorance and move on.

I don't personally care if someone objects to my models or not, the point is to enjoy the game. Swapping something out of my army is usually not a big deal, but I need to ask myself if I really want to go to the trouble for that person.

If he has good hygiene, uses proper grammar, appears to understand the rules, and his dice are free from grease and oily substances, then sure. If he's just some tightly-wound ninny who doesn't feel comfortable in his own skin, I just wish him good luck.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


So basically you just ask permission to play with your own models.

Why don't you just say you want someone to write your list for you?

Isn't that exactly what you are doing when you say you ask to play any miniatures game? I am not stopping you from playing with your miniatures. I am stopping myself from playing with you.

As for your second point, I am pretty sure I can manage to make a list all on my own without including a single Forge World model. I am pretty sure the Citadel model line is large enough to accomplish that. I would hazard to guess most army lists in fact don't have any Forge World units within them. So asking if I want someone to write my list for me is highly disingenuous.

Most army lists don't have Valkyries or Genestealers or Trukks either, what's your point? The distinction you're making is one you're forcing between one sales channel and another of the same organization, not anything based in the rules, lore, source, or anything else.