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.

So due to the fact that one of the two playing tables at my buddies' house is ENTIRELY covered in bits, sprues, etc and he apparently has no intention of cleaning it up, we've taken to playing almost entirely 2v2 battles. An issue cropped up a while ago where one of the guys (greyknights) was teamed up with a chaos player (ya ya I know, but you get really bored being in "fluffy teams" playing with/against the same people all the time), who wanted to use a DH teleport beacon to deepstrike in his terminators. Actually it may have been guard not DH, though doesn't really matter for the debate.

Basically, we got into an argument over whether a teammate should be allowed to gain access to equipment/bonuses offered by their teammate.

The more vocal players ended up deciding no, and everyone just kind of left it at that. However, I'm interested to know what you guys think, or if your group has a similar/opposite rule?

When we've had this question arise, we've normally said yes, but have agreed before hand that the technology has to be 'compatible'. So say for some reason you had marines with chaos with deamons.

CSM could use the teleport homers, and the daemons icons, but the SM terminators couldn't come off icons. we do however have some restrictions, such as daemons coming of infiltrating chosen's icons, just too accurate, too close

In the end though talk about stuff like this first to avoid confrontation later.

First off, the rules are written for 1 vs. 1 games, so anytime you play with additional players you'll have to come to some agreements on how to play things.

Second, the Homing Beacon is pretty unique because as written it technically applies to all deep striking units regardless of what player is performing the deep strike.


But in GENERAL it is a good idea to limit the effects of an army's abilities to its own models unless the special rule specifies otherwise. If you don't you can end up in some pretty silly situations especially in games where the same army type is facing each other, with Tyranids from opposite sides providing Synapse to each other and Necrons getting back up and joining the opponent's Necron units, etc.

Out of curiousity, I made a poll.

Team play is only covered in an apoc. With that said, I think near the back of the apoc book, there was some sort of mention of some units that would fight together, but I am not too sure if there were any rules associated with that *could someone fill this in if there were please*.

I would totally allow it if it made sense, (examples include two nec players using each other's monolith to TP other units in range, SM chapters would sometimes use each others homers for sure, ummm.. in the negative though It would be weird to see Chaos/SM team players utilizing each others TP homers though.)

padixon wrote:Team play is only covered in an apoc. With that said, I think near the back of the apoc book, there was some sort of mention of some units that would fight together, but I am not too sure if there were any rules associated with that *could someone fill this in if there were please*.

I would totally allow it if it made sense, (examples include two nec players using each other's monolith to TP other units in range, SM chapters would sometimes use each others homers for sure, ummm.. in the negative though It would be weird to see Chaos/SM team players utilizing each others TP homers though.)

The problem comes when you have two nid players, or two SM players say, playing against maybe a tau and marine team, or nids and necrons. Now you have one team with incredible synergy, giving each other's units teleporting and synapse, while the other has none of that. It lends some advantage to one team over the other...

This is why I'm torn on the issue. On one hand, it's cool to use your friend's homers to get your deathwing army onto the field. On the other hand, it can sometimes be unfair. Is that luck of the draw, if teams are randomized, so it's totally fine? Or is that some players getting an advantage because of similar armies?

The wargear you buy for your army is just that; FOR YOUR ARMY.
There's no legitimate reason why you should be allowed to share wargear.

There are only 3 regular players in our group. To make things easier, we just play 2 armies. Adopt that habit, and you'll be better off.

Playing a 2000 point game? No prob. Decide on teams, then play 2 games. On the first game, wach team playes their own "Army A" (or decides at random). On the second game, they play the other army.

It'll make things a lot smoother.


Eric

I agree that it's generally best to default to not sharing equipment or benefits. As you say, especially with different armies pairing up, sometimes it's going to be a big benefit to one side and not to the other.

That said, if you agree to it ahead of time, and let both teams plan for it in their list building, it can be really fun.

We do alot of 2v2's at my lfgs. We always have troubles as there are alot of marine players and if anyone doesn't play marines allowing the double marine team to teleport in using each others gear gives them an unfair advantage out of the gate....as if they needed an advantage in their current condition.

You can pretend that they two marine chapters both showed up and are acting independently. They could be using different radio freq's so they can't hone into each others homers.

I never get to pass my KFF save to my team mates no matter how much it may benefit them

In general I feel it's a for your own army thing however most rules have some sort of distinctive term to tell you what was meant.

If a rule says "your" whatever then that applies to only yours.
If you were to look at the Witchhunter's codex you'll notice a lot of their wargear specifficly says "allies" get the bonus, in that case iI'd say anyone you were allied with for whatever reason.

of course some inconsitencies might be seen when as the previus poster said necrons standing up for the wrong player but