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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Then the game halts, because I posit you have not complied with the rule, and you will not show you have.

Game halts, as you will refuse to,provide compliance.

And well done. You've successfully managed to halt a game into a stalemate because there is no rules supporting your perspective and thus no rules that can be argued against it. If this rule has no correct outcome when argued rules wise, why would you try to play it?


But then it's irrelevant you have this line under units in transports.

"When the unit embarks, remove it from the table and place it aside, making a note that the unit is being transported."

seems that you have to keep track of where units go regardless

Game construction supports my position. BOth players need to ensure rules are being followed.

Or I move 9" and refuse to allow you to check how far they went. HOw about that. You just have to trust I mvoed correctly.

If I'm paying attention and I watch you move, how could I possibly not know that you moved 9"? If you moved 10" and I'm paying attention, I'll see what you did. This feels like a ridiculous argument as movement occurs in the open, visible to both players.

But yes, in general I'll be playing with people I trust to follow the rules. If you don't trust that your opponent is following the rules, you have deeper issues that Transport embarkations and should probably find new opponents or work on your trust issues.

Quite an odd discussion here, well below the usual standards of dakka, and has clearly touched a nerve of many.

"you can't withhold this information from me"
"you're required to swap lists"

There is no clear rule about this, the point that says "make a note of it" i can write it in a cyphered code or in a second language if you want to be super difficult about this.

Ultimately we can debate theory til the cows come home, the reality situations are as follows:

casual club game: either roll for it, or agree with your opponent before the game, but probably before you even pick the list
serious club game: agree beforehand as above
local tournament: email the organisers asking whether its allowed and whether it will be against the spirit of the event
serious tournament; email the organisers

it's quite a hard mechanic to abuse and given the lists out there it would certainly not be too antisocial.

I've stated my view, and anyone getting too upset over this has to remember the above scenarios, and that in any situation where they have any say in the outcome, they get to veto it, and if they don't, then the organiser does.

 Kriswall wrote:
Clearly marking the Transports prevents any sort of shell game wherein a dishonest player can change the contents on the fly. Simply agree which face down note corresponds to which Transport before the game and you've eliminated the chance for dishonesty.

So, given that the "he might change which Transport he said these guys were in" argument is measurably bad and very easily avoided... it sounds like whether or not you choose to disclose where your embarked squads are is a matter of local community convention. It sounds like many people consider it poor sportsmanship to keep this info secret while others consider it a normal and extra layer of tactical decision making.

The rules simply require us to make a note, but don't stipulate that you your opponent gets to see the note. Even the loosest definition of sportsmanship would require that you show the note when the models hit the table for the first time.

This thread might as well be locked. It's not so much a rules debate as it is a debate on whether or not keeping your specific embarkations secret until models disembark is fair and sporting. That's going to vary from player to player, community to community and tournament to tournament.

I agree with this. If you make your note clearly and put it with the transport it belongs to then there will be no question later when units disembark/rhino gets popped. What's the issue with this?

 Kriswall wrote:
But yes, in general I'll be playing with people I trust to follow the rules. If you don't trust that your opponent is following the rules, you have deeper issues that Transport embarkations and should probably find new opponents or work on your trust issues.

Or a majority of the people you DO play around take the phrase "if you aren't cheating you aren't trying" as standard. While I can't say that is the case with my local group, I do know there are snakes waiting in the corners to do just that because one hears stories and one usually doesn't get a face with who they are until AFTER the game is done (one way or another).

As I have said, it is all in the approach. You bring this up during game setup where we can discuss it, I don't have a problem with it.

You bring it up in Turn 3, I get the feeling you like to announce House Rules (and it IS a House Rule as nothing addresses it) just to work to your advantage. That right there feels like cheating. So I have no problem with just packing up when I fel like someone is trying to cheat me.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Game construction supports my position. BOth players need to ensure rules are being followed.

Or I move 9" and refuse to allow you to check how far they went. HOw about that. You just have to trust I mvoed correctly.

I re-read your post 5 times over and I cannot work out how it's doing anything but arguing another reason of exactly why you shouldn't be hiding which units are in which transports

You quoted the exact line I already quoted earlier in the thread.

Kriswall - again. Basic game construction. BOTH players have the right to know the rules are being followed, if they so wish

Without question.

Not a trust issue. The note is by definition "open" because its the only way to verify the rule has been complied with

SImilarly I could erect a GM screen round my units, then move them. You can just "trust" that I moved correctly. Or I can accuse you of having trust issues...

There are no secrets in this game except where specifically noted - such as the old DWA rule.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You quoted the exact line I already quoted earlier in the thread.

Kriswall - again. Basic game construction. BOTH players have the right to know the rules are being followed, if they so wish

Without question.

Not a trust issue. The note is by definition "open" because its the only way to verify the rule has been complied with

SImilarly I could erect a GM screen round my units, then move them. You can just "trust" that I moved correctly. Or I can accuse you of having trust issues...

There are no secrets in this game except where specifically noted - such as the old DWA rule.

To which I would respond, "quote the rule saying you get to look at my note whenever you want". I'm instructed to make a note. So long as you see me write SOMETHING down, I've obeyed the rule to make a note and you've seen me make a note, validating that I followed the rule.

The thing is that the rules assume we're following the rules. The rules don't provide a mechanism for the OTHER player to validate that we're following the rules. Obviously, if you see something wrong, you raise your hand. That Tactical Squad moves 9" in the Movement Phase? Raise your hand. Your opponent doesn't remove a model when he takes wounds to a unit? Raise your hand. A Command Squad disembarks from a Transport that doesn't match the note that was made during deployment? Raise your hand.

Ergo, there is no rule being broken by keeping this information secret. Whether or not it's sporting is entirely dependent on your local crew. It's perfectly acceptable with the people I play with. This isn't You Make Da Sportsmanship Call.

Is this a rules issue? Feels more like most people just think it's not fair if they don't know which Rhino to focus fire on. Issues of "not fair" tend to go away when you become a better player.

 Kriswall wrote:

The thing is that the rules assume we're following the rules. The rules don't provide a mechanism for the OTHER player to validate that we're following the rules.

Indeed. What's the punishment for cheating as per the rulebook? Public flogging?

I'm not saying a rule us being broken

I'm requiring you to prove the rule was complied with.

Until you do, the game halts.

 Kriswall wrote:
Is this a rules issue? Feels more like most people just think it's not fair if they don't know which Rhino to focus fire on. Issues of "not fair" tend to go away when you become a better player.

For some it is to know which to shoot at, but that indicates a situation where they know certain units are already embarked.

For some it is the simply trying to avoid the Rhino Shell Game where they all have internal portals to avoid having their good units lose their ride before their ready.

Timing and communication are what are needed to avoid problems in this area.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'm not saying a rule us being broken

I'm requiring you to prove the rule was complied with.

Until you do, the game halts.

Exactly this.

Rules need to be followed. All players should know that the rules are being followed. This is with any game.

I think this is rather pointless. All we're doing here is saying "do it the way you agreed upon with the other player", and the only voice saying anything differently is nosferatu, claiming that having to tell is clearly rules as written while failing to provide a rule which actually says that. All you came up with is a line where a note of "this unit is being transported" is required, which does not have to contain anything else - including WHO is transporting that unit. "that it is being transported" is all you have to write down as per the rules.

You clearly should also have a means to prove you're not playing the shell game, but the rules don't tell us HOW to achieve that. Tell a third party, write it down and only reveal it when it becomes relevant in the game or just tell your opponent right away all achieve that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'm not saying a rule us being broken

I'm requiring you to prove the rule was complied with.

Until you do, the game halts.

It's the same thing, you're simply shifting the burden of proof to the other guy.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Is this a rules issue? Feels more like most people just think it's not fair if they don't know which Rhino to focus fire on. Issues of "not fair" tend to go away when you become a better player.

For some it is to know which to shoot at, but that indicates a situation where they know certain units are already embarked.

For some it is the simply trying to avoid the Rhino Shell Game where they all have internal portals to avoid having their good units lose their ride before their ready.

Timing and communication are what are needed to avoid problems in this area.

Well, the Rhino Shell Game is ridiculously easy to avoid by just agreeing which Rhino is which at the beginning of the game. I can't believe this is even a legitimate concern. Taking 5 seconds to make sure you agree with how your opponent is differentiating Transports at the start of the game is trivial and allays any concerns you might have about potential shenanigans. You'll immediately know if they cheated as soon as they disembark a unit and you see the note they were required to make. Deal with cheaters how you normally would, talk it through and either resolve the issue or find a new opponent.

It seems like the only real concern is wanting to know which Rhino to shoot at to hurt your opponent the most. Coming from a group where we don't tell each other which unit is in which Transport until a disembarkation occurs, claiming that I have to tell you seems a little whiny/needy. You don't get to know my strategies ahead of time. You want to know what's in that Rhino? Light the sucker up and see who crawls out. But again, this second point isn't a rules issue, but a HIWPI/local convention issue. From a rules standpoint, you just have to make a note, presumably so you don't forget. Showing your opponent the note when you disembark seems extremely reasonable to set his mind at ease that you didn't cheat, but isn't actually required by the rules.

I have to agree that the note has to be verifiable some way.

I don't care if its me who gets to verify it, but somebody besides yourself has to be able to look at it and verify that you have satisfied the rule.

If you want to keep the info secret, that's fine, have a friend come in and look and verify that you wrote it down and are sticking to it.

But if there is no one else around, and your opponent asks to verify that you did follow the rule, you are going to have to cough it up.

Alternatively, a house rule could be something like this: you both could agree to set it aside somewhere, and you can look at it as much as you want during the game, but after the game is over, but before the models are picked up, your opponent can look and verify that you had the appropriate squads embarked on the correct vehicles. If you cheated, you lose the game automatically, and never get to play with them hidden again.

nekooni wrote:
claiming that having to tell is clearly rules as written while failing to provide a rule which actually says that.

Its not a written rule, it is a function of all game rules.

With any game all players need to ensure the rules are being followed.

As such when you make a note of which unit embarks all players must be allowed to check if the rule was followed and it was a legal embarkation.

Therefore you MUST tell your opponents what is is which transport.

Yes you do, because you have to tell your oponent what all is in your army and declare what units doing what (such as joining a squad) at the begining of the turn. Meaning you have to declare that your IC is joining unit X and unit X has a dedicated transport that it will be in. Now lets say you take 3 fast atk rhinos with no units other then your IC in them. I beleive you still have to declare what units are embarked when saying what is in play and what is im transports. Otherwise you did not declare and could randomly change your mind... look under the first little bit about setting up on the rule book.

 DeathReaper wrote:

nekooni wrote:
claiming that having to tell is clearly rules as written while failing to provide a rule which actually says that.

Its not a written rule, it is a function of all game rules.

With any game all players need to ensure the rules are being followed.

As such when you make a note of which unit embarks all players must be allowed to check if the rule was followed and it was a legal embarkation.

Therefore you MUST tell your opponents what is is which transport.

Can't wait for the BRB rules quote on that rule.....

kambien wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

nekooni wrote:
claiming that having to tell is clearly rules as written while failing to provide a rule which actually says that.

Its not a written rule, it is a function of all game rules.

With any game all players need to ensure the rules are being followed.

As such when you make a note of which unit embarks all players must be allowed to check if the rule was followed and it was a legal embarkation.

Therefore you MUST tell your opponents what is is which transport.

Can't wait for the BRB rules quote on that rule.....

There isn't one, it is a function of any ruleset. All players, in any given game, must ensure that all of the rules are being followed.

It is like this for all games.

 DeathReaper wrote:

kambien wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

nekooni wrote:
claiming that having to tell is clearly rules as written while failing to provide a rule which actually says that.

Its not a written rule, it is a function of all game rules.

With any game all players need to ensure the rules are being followed.

As such when you make a note of which unit embarks all players must be allowed to check if the rule was followed and it was a legal embarkation.

Therefore you MUST tell your opponents what is is which transport.

Can't wait for the BRB rules quote on that rule.....

There isn't one, it is a function of any ruleset. All players, in any given game, must ensure that all of the rules are being followed.

It is like this for all games.

So when the actual rule tells me to make a note in your world it means I have to immediately show it to you? What then, as has been pointed out, my note said "unit in a transport C" and each of my transports had the letter (different, mmkay?) in the bottom to say which transport it is, you would insist that I must also show you where each of the transports are? If you answer yes, then you need to produce the rule for that.

I have satisfied the rule as written, I have also satisfied your curiosity, why are you still unhappy?

 DeathReaper wrote:

kambien wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

nekooni wrote:
claiming that having to tell is clearly rules as written while failing to provide a rule which actually says that.

Its not a written rule, it is a function of all game rules.

With any game all players need to ensure the rules are being followed.

As such when you make a note of which unit embarks all players must be allowed to check if the rule was followed and it was a legal embarkation.

Therefore you MUST tell your opponents what is is which transport.

Can't wait for the BRB rules quote on that rule.....

There isn't one, it is a function of any ruleset. All players, in any given game, must ensure that all of the rules are being followed.

It is like this for all games.

So when we are playing poker you get to look at my cards to verify that i do not have any jokers in my hand right ? you must be a blast at poker games

 Kriswall wrote:

Well, the Rhino Shell Game is ridiculously easy to avoid by just agreeing which Rhino is which at the beginning of the game. I can't believe this is even a legitimate concern. Taking 5 seconds to make sure you agree with how your opponent is differentiating Transports at the start of the game is trivial and allays any concerns you might have about potential shenanigans. You'll immediately know if they cheated as soon as they disembark a unit and you see the note they were required to make. Deal with cheaters how you normally would, talk it through and either resolve the issue or find a new opponent.

It seems like the only real concern is wanting to know which Rhino to shoot at to hurt your opponent the most. Coming from a group where we don't tell each other which unit is in which Transport until a disembarkation occurs, claiming that I have to tell you seems a little whiny/needy. You don't get to know my strategies ahead of time. You want to know what's in that Rhino? Light the sucker up and see who crawls out. But again, this second point isn't a rules issue, but a HIWPI/local convention issue. From a rules standpoint, you just have to make a note, presumably so you don't forget. Showing your opponent the note when you disembark seems extremely reasonable to set his mind at ease that you didn't cheat, but isn't actually required by the rules.

That's a very narrow view point on the situation. Wouldn't assuming that one is asking just to make sure just to nail a specific unit is as equally reprehensible as assuming the other is doing the Shell Game?

Again, proper communication, including timing, is all that is needed to avoid any problems, including any accusations of cheating. On that, it seems we are agreed.

If you plan on closed lists including Embarked units, you should make sure that is idea is amenable to the other player instead of springing it on them mid-game, even if it is just from prior experience. This is a simple case of sportsmanship.

kambien wrote:
So when we are playing poker you get to look at my cards to verify that i do not have any jokers in my hand right ? you must be a blast at poker games

Not at all a similar situation and a red herring.

However, all players should check the deck before play to ensure the deck is not stacked or missing any cards or have any extra cards...

Naw wrote:


So when the actual rule tells me to make a note in your world it means I have to immediately show it to you?

To ensure compliance with the rules? Yes.

What then, as has been pointed out, my note said "unit in a transport C" and each of my transports had the letter (different, mmkay?) in the bottom to say which transport it is, you would insist that I must also show you where each of the transports are? If you answer yes, then you need to produce the rule for that.

Or I could ask you to show me, or get a mirror and look myself... If you don't show me then I can not verify that the rule has been complied with. no rule in the book needed, it is just verification that all rules are complied with.

I have satisfied the rule as written, I have also satisfied your curiosity, why are you still unhappy?

You may have satisfied the rule as written, but without knowing how can your opponent know that you are not breaking the rules?

Naw - when I roll my say twenty to-hit dice, I will do so in secret. After all, nothing says you have to verify the result. I'll even take a photo and you can check at a time of my choosing

Oh wait, but already those who don't like rules verification say that's not acceptable. But not allowing your opponent to verify your compliance with another rule is perfect fine ?


Naw - follow the embarking rules. Show where you can embark simultaneously. If you fail to specify the transport vehicle then I csnnot verify you may embark either.

Basic function of a rule set.

Except, I wouldn't have said "it's a secret." I'd would have said "4th edition rules say that I don't have to say, and you can't ask, and later editions are silent on the matter."

Had you insisted on the matter, I would have divulged the information.

Your hypothetical response to this strikes me as utterly unsportsmanlike.

You do realize that everything from previous editions are null and void. Stop being TFG and just tell your opponent want inside your transports, dude. You really have no excuse not too unless your playing Alpha Legion.

You guys realize it tells you that you have to show your oponent an army list of they ask so they know what you have. Such as 3 tact squads in rhinos...

Then if you guys would read the rule book on page 166 for Independent Characters it states... " An independemt character can begin the the game already with a unit, either by.... .. ,BY YOU INFORMING YOUR OPONENT WHICH UNIT HE HAS JOINED!

If he is in reserves or in a transport then you MUST inform your oponent.

 DeathReaper wrote:

kambien wrote:
So when we are playing poker you get to look at my cards to verify that i do not have any jokers in my hand right ? you must be a blast at poker games

Not at all a similar situation and a red herring.

However, all players should check the deck before play to ensure the deck is not stacked or missing any cards or have any extra cards...

Its not a red herring , its the exact situation . You are using the guise of "I need to check and make sure you are following the rules , therefore i get to see what you have" for the excuse of seeing what is being held. You could ask to see the note after the unit disembarks or uses weaponry/powers but no you are demanding to see it now completely nullifying the purpose of withholding it ( aka so you don't shoot something squishy/important off the table more making something very slow spend the entire game walking across the table ) . Go try that in a poker game . Tell people to show you their cards to verify they are in compliance with the correct number of cards and making sure they have a card that is from 2 to Ace and of a correct suit.

You even admit it yourself you have ZERO rule basis to do so (so permissive rule set , you don't get to ) , I'm not sure why you are so adamant that you are allowed to

 DeathReaper wrote:

Naw wrote:


So when the actual rule tells me to make a note in your world it means I have to immediately show it to you?

To ensure compliance with the rules? Yes.

And why must it be shown immediately , why can it not be shown when it becomes relevant ? Like when they disembark

 DeathReaper wrote:

What then, as has been pointed out, my note said "unit in a transport C" and each of my transports had the letter (different, mmkay?) in the bottom to say which transport it is, you would insist that I must also show you where each of the transports are? If you answer yes, then you need to produce the rule for that.

Or I could ask you to show me, or get a mirror and look myself... If you don't show me then I can not verify that the rule has been complied with. no rule in the book needed, it is just verification that all rules are complied with.

Stop doing things you don't have permissions to do ! None of that is listed of things you can do in the BRB

 DeathReaper wrote:

I have satisfied the rule as written, I have also satisfied your curiosity, why are you still unhappy?

You may have satisfied the rule as written, but without knowing how can your opponent know that you are not breaking the rules?

kambien wrote:

Because 40k rules are written under the assumption that all rules are followed. Where does the rule book state you are the checker of all rules ? It doesn't !!!. When you can check rules without compromising the game go ahead , but in this situation you cannot do so , how can you verify the contents of the note immediately without knowing the contents of the note ? Its not possibly. Stop doing extra things you have no permission to do that effect the game.

Like all tabletop games, its written in a manner so that both players can be sure at all times that the rules are being followed. There is no exception to this, outside of the excerption you are trying to make for this specific rule right here, which should tell you all you need to know right away. Your opponent checking rules states are being followed isn't compromising the game, you refusing to be transparent with all your models and lists is compromising the game.

 SHUPPET wrote:

kambien wrote:

Because 40k rules are written under the assumption that all rules are followed. Where does the rule book state you are the checker of all rules ? It doesn't !!!. When you can check rules without compromising the game go ahead , but in this situation you cannot do so , how can you verify the contents of the note immediately without knowing the contents of the note ? Its not possibly. Stop doing extra things you have no permission to do that effect the game.

Like all tabletop games, its written in a manner so that both players can be sure at all times that the rules are being followed. There is no exception to this, outside of the excerption you are trying to make for this specific rule right here, which should tell you all you need to know right away. Your opponent checking rules states are being followed isn't compromising the game, you refusing to be transparent with all your models and lists is compromising the game.

There is zero reason to know what unit is inside what transport immediately , since its all written down and can be verified when relevant. Its compromising as soon as he learns the contents of said transports before he opens them up or the units inside takes some sort of action. I am also being 100% transparent with all my models as well . Everything is labeled and put in their proper place. Like i said , go ahead and check compliance with the rules, as long as you get nothing besides the conformation that i have done so , this includes finding out what is inside the transports

kambien wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

kambien wrote:

Because 40k rules are written under the assumption that all rules are followed. Where does the rule book state you are the checker of all rules ? It doesn't !!!. When you can check rules without compromising the game go ahead , but in this situation you cannot do so , how can you verify the contents of the note immediately without knowing the contents of the note ? Its not possibly. Stop doing extra things you have no permission to do that effect the game.

Like all tabletop games, its written in a manner so that both players can be sure at all times that the rules are being followed. There is no exception to this, outside of the excerption you are trying to make for this specific rule right here, which should tell you all you need to know right away. Your opponent checking rules states are being followed isn't compromising the game, you refusing to be transparent with all your models and lists is compromising the game.

There is zero reason to know what unit is inside what transport immediately , since its all written down and can be verified when relevant. Its compromising as soon as he learns the contents of said transports before he opens them up or the units inside takes some sort of action. I am also being 100% transparent with all my models as well . Everything is labeled and put in their proper place. Like i said , go ahead and check compliance with the rules, as long as you get nothing besides the conformation that i have done so , this includes finding out what is inside the transports

its relevant as soon as it becomes you shooting phase and you wish to know the contents of your opponents vehicles. You don't get to hide your dice for a turn, you don't get to hide your list till halfway through a game, you don't get to hide the movement of your units not in transports, not sure why you think you are allowed to hide your models inside transports, especially when the only time you have ever been allowed to do that in the game's history, it was specifically stated in the rules that you could.

 SHUPPET wrote:

kambien wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

kambien wrote:

Because 40k rules are written under the assumption that all rules are followed. Where does the rule book state you are the checker of all rules ? It doesn't !!!. When you can check rules without compromising the game go ahead , but in this situation you cannot do so , how can you verify the contents of the note immediately without knowing the contents of the note ? Its not possibly. Stop doing extra things you have no permission to do that effect the game.

Like all tabletop games, its written in a manner so that both players can be sure at all times that the rules are being followed. There is no exception to this, outside of the excerption you are trying to make for this specific rule right here, which should tell you all you need to know right away. Your opponent checking rules states are being followed isn't compromising the game, you refusing to be transparent with all your models and lists is compromising the game.

There is zero reason to know what unit is inside what transport immediately , since its all written down and can be verified when relevant. Its compromising as soon as he learns the contents of said transports before he opens them up or the units inside takes some sort of action. I am also being 100% transparent with all my models as well . Everything is labeled and put in their proper place. Like i said , go ahead and check compliance with the rules, as long as you get nothing besides the conformation that i have done so , this includes finding out what is inside the transports

its relevant as soon as it becomes you shooting phase and you wish to know the contents of your opponents vehicles. You don't get to hide your dice for a turn, you don't get to hide your list till halfway through a game, you don't get to hide the movement of your units not in transports, not sure why you think you are allowed to hide your models inside transports, especially when the only time you have ever been allowed to do that in the game's history, it was specifically stated in the rules that you could.

But your not shooting a the units inside , your shooting transport X. Why do you think you get to know the contents of the unit before they come on the table or do some sort of action ? Are you not the one who is now gaming the system of checks just to learn of a target that you should have no information about ?
Hiding my dice for a turn ? I'm not sure what dice you think i could possibly hide for a turn where the roll is not relevant to what happening. Maybe the warlord roll ? i'm ok with that . As long as you keep the dice roll available and off to the side to show you didn't cheat , you know for sportsmanship.