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.

The rules are so fethed up its untrue!
I was using my 1500 point Nurgle WoC army against Ogres. The magic rules almost caused a big argument on a couple of occasions-
First one, I cast Plague Squall wanting to hit a unit behind a giant and a unit of Gnoblars. My opponent says I can't as I need to be able to see my target, fair enough, that's what the rules say. The target I wanted to hit is 22" away, the Gnoblars 19" and the giant 6" away, all in line with each other. I asked what was stopping me guessing around 22" even though the giant and Gnoblars were in the way. My opponent says that I need to make a realistic guess but it doesn't say that in the rules... (I didn't do it in the end as even I thought it was cheating!).
Next I have a unit with a sorcerer on the end in combat with the giant, following the rules the sorcerer can't cast a spell on the giant (his biggest threat) but he can cast a spell on another unit, not engaged in combat, which he has line of site to...
We gave up then and called it a draw. I am now looking for an alternative fantasy rules set!
Mick

Ok, first things first.

You could have guessed 22", how is that not a realistic guess? If there was a unit I wanted to hit that was 24" away and I guessed 12", I'd be waay off, but that's still legal.

Finally, unless the spell is a magic missile, you can cast the spell on the giant.

Your opponent was cheating so he could win the game.

He couldn't cast the spell on the giant as he was in combat with the giant unless the spell specifically say "can be cast into combat" but he COULD cast spells targeting any other unit except magic missiles as long as he meets all other requirements (line of sight, target not in combat etc.) that apply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
but seriously, the dud you were playing with sounds like a douche. If you played with me, I would educate you on the REAL rules, and tell you alternatives if what you originally wanted to do wasn't possible. Play with other people and you will enjoy the game.

Arion has it correct.

My rule-fu has, well, faltered...

1) Plague Squall fires as if a stone thrower. I'm not 100% on the rules for those (don't use them myself as mortars have slightly different rules), but if they require direct line of sight now, then you can't target a unit you can't see. 'Overguessing' is in bad taste in addition to being against the rules, and anyone who attempts it is both a cheater and a DB.

2) If one bit of frustration out of your misunderstanding of the rules is enough to cause you to quit the game, perhaps you should ponder why you were playing in the first place. That, or don't let your Soceror get into combat with a Giant.

'Overguessing?'

What do you mean? Was this a case of overguessing?

Cryonicleech wrote:'Overguessing?'

What do you mean? Was this a case of overguessing?

I think what OP is trying to say is , he want to hit the unit hiding out of LOS behind 2 units.
But his friend wont let him fire because well no LOS ( though not sure about rule of stone thrower )
Hence he says fine , he'll fire at the unit he can see , and over guess it on purpose hoping it would travel through
the 2 units in front and land on the targeted he wanted.

Oh, I understand then.

@OP:

1) In theory you are allowed to do what you did. Because if you didnt tell your opponent that you are actually trying to hit the unit hidden , they cant really do anything about it.
Because you did pick a target , and you are allowed to guess anywhere between the allowed range which you did.
I think the only reason a guess range weapon still need an appointed target to fire is , for example so we cant target say a lone unit hiding across the other side of a forest .
Tough luck to your opponent i guess to grouping them together !

2) It depends what spell you casted , you would need to tell us because there are too many different special rules.

What a Dbag!

Does the rule say you can't guess high? No! It says you guess, so guess 22" and call it a day. Next, they'll ban cannon sniping, because it's unfair to kill Bloodthirsters outside HtH...

It's not cannon-sniping unless the target is actually inside a unit and even then this is perfectly allowed within the rules.

Deliberately overguessing to hit a target you cannot target otherwise is cheating by the rules so I wouldn't call his opponent a douchebag that quickly.

However, it seems both players haven't looked at the relevant rules all that closely because, going from memory here, but IIRC Stone Throwers firing still do not require LoS for valid shooting so him guessing to hit a unit he couldn't see is pefectly within the rules. So what they should have done was looking closely at the way the spell is worded, picked up on the whole 'as a Stone Thrower' thing and then read the rules for guessing ranges & LoS with Stone Throwers.

I'll also agree on Manfred's comment that if one silly rules argument + the disagreement about how another rule works (the reason that wizards cannot cast inside their own combat is to stop other rules exploits, like said, play better next time and don't get your Wizard in combat with a Giant! He'll only end up as pants stuffing.) makes you want to quit the game you'll never find a ruleset you'll like.

Games have rules, the more intricate the rules the easier it is to have conflicts/overlook stuff. If you don't want any rules discussions then play as simple a game as possible (rules wise then, chess is complicated but within a very restricted rules environment).

Stone throwers still need LOS to be able to target a unit - if you can find somewhere that says otherwise, please let me know. The whole argument against overguessing is nothing new - people try using that when opponents use cheap skirmishing units to block LOS to their more expensive units (i.e. skirmishing skink meat shield protecting temple guard blocks). What I do with the overguessing thing when it comes up is that I see what unit they are targetting, eyeball the distance, then ask them to turn around while I measure it. Gross overguesses that I don't even need to measure I tell them sorry - if it's close, I'll ask them to reguess. Or play it even easier - if they want to overguess - let them. Just tell them the shot doesn't count and they can't fire that turn.

I hear you on the whole "magic into combat" argument - GW seriously needs to tighten up the rules on magic in combat because some spells say you can cast into combat, some don't say anything - the basic rule of "Well it doesn't say I can't" is countered with the "Well it doesn't say you can" - it's just a mess. Where I normally play uses the "it has to say something about being able to be cast into combat" to be allowed.

BAWTRM- last nights game was the straw that broke the camels back so to speak. My local club has been running a yearly WHFB league for 5 years now and I can't remember there being one game where there hasn't been a query/arguement over the rules or interpritation of them...

I've personally being playing WHFB since the first edition and have never seen so many questions raised as there have been with this and the last edition. If I do play again I think I'll go back to third edition if there are others at the club willing to do the same (I'm not the only one at the club giving up on this edition).

Mick

the basic rule of "Well it doesn't say I can't" is countered with the "Well it doesn't say you can"

Because that's what the rules say. The BRB rather clearly states that unless a spell specifically says that it can be cast into combat, then it can't be. People haven't been pulling this out of their bums, you know.

bye

Mick A, I feel your pain, I really do. We all know that the Warhammer rules are a festering mess, that new army books only make things worse, and that the only way to fix it requires that Games Workshop set up dedicated team of technical writers who will set up definitions and then enforce consistent wording across all the different books. Which GW ain't gonna pay for.

Good luck finding another game. I would suggest WotR but, being a GW rules set, it has its own ambiguities.

We are concidering WotR but only a couple of us have those rules...
Mick

Mattbranb wrote:What I do with the overguessing thing when it comes up is that I see what unit they are targetting, eyeball the distance, then ask them to turn around while I measure it. Gross overguesses that I don't even need to measure I tell them sorry - if it's close, I'll ask them to reguess. Or play it even easier - if they want to overguess - let them. Just tell them the shot doesn't count and they can't fire that turn.

See, now that's pure Bull.

None of that is permitted by the rules. None.

If you want to "protect" the rear unit, you should have to give up a perfectly centered hit on the forward target. Otherwise, suck it up and deal with the overguess.

Overguessing is:

a) Lame
b) A weak way to take advantage of the ambiguous ruleset
c) Probably legal (unless they FAQ'd it)
d) All of the above

My vote is D. It is one of the D-BAGGIEST things somebody that is trying to have a mutually enjoyable TWO PLAYER game can do. That being said, my Wood Elves take this into account when placing lone mages and such out of line of sight where, by all reasonable consideration, they should be safe.

There is, however, a nagging suspicion that this may have been fixed. Could somebody check the FAQ, as I cannot from work.

Pfft. Overguessing exists because not every army can field HtH monsters. It's a legit and useful counterbalance that keeps Empire and other "squishy" armies playable.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Pfft. Overguessing exists because not every army can field HtH monsters. It's a legit and useful counterbalance that keeps Empire and other "squishy" armies playable.

I agree! Where does it say you cannot guess any number you like? It sounds like the rules discussions above calling this "cheating" are just making up whatever rules you like. What would be the point in guessing if you couldn't over (or under) guess? The solutions posted above are much more complicated (and imho, cheating) than the original idea!

I just started playing fantasy, but I do use skinks to shield my expensive temple guard. AND I just played an empire player who used lots of guess range weapons and blew apart a lot of my units.

But what JohnHwangDD says above here is true- I had a carnosaur, a skink cheif on stegadon with war spear, and another stegadon. The first two of these got into hth on the last turn we played (we had to call it on I believe turn 4) and decimated his flank. He probably should have focused on taking these down; but still, I probably would have won the game if we'd had time to finish, not because I was a better general (I made tons of mistakes, since I just started) but because I had several monsters that owned in hth.

Anyway, I think this discussion is silly! What happened to YMDC being RAI (or even RAW)? All of the solutions posted above make guess-range weaponry not "guess" at all- completely silly, imho!!

Might I suggest that before starting the game you discuss with your opponent whether the game will be:

A) A merciless, literal interpretation of the rules.
or
B) An extension of role-playing

If you go for B, the reason you wouldn't guess 22 inches is because the big scary giant is only 6 inches away (which at the time should have easily been the "biggest threat," just as you said he was later to your caster when they met in close combat.)

That doesn't make sense as a way of looking at the rules either, ImparialTard, because what if the tiny little skinks are 6" away, and my scary temple guard with Slann are right behind? From a "does it makes sense" standpoint, of course you would ignore the skink (who are going to run away anyway) and shoot the temple guard / slann.

But when you're looking at rules, you can't always agree on a "what makes sense" interpretation... (people usually take the side that benefits them) so you have to go by what's written.

Or at least, somewhat! You can't make up rules about you measuring for your opponent, the shot disappearing, etc, etc. I'm taking this side of the argument, and I don't have any guess range weaponry! What I do have are salamanders, which have a rule that specifically states they can accidentally fire over a unit (they add an artillery dice roll to the flamer template) by the flames arcing over top of them. It makes sense that a stone-thrower could do the same thing... and since it's just a guess, there's no reason why you might not overguess by mistake. Would the shot then not count, either?

That just doesn't make any sense!

RiTides wrote:That doesn't make sense as a way of looking at the rules either, ImparialTard, because what if the tiny little skinks are 6" away, and my scary temple guard with Slann are right behind? From a "does it makes sense" standpoint, of course you would ignore the skink (who are going to run away anyway) and shoot the temple guard / slann.

But when you're looking at rules, you can't always agree on a "what makes sense" interpretation... (people usually take the side that benefits them) so you have to go by what's written.

Or at least, somewhat! You can't make up rules about you measuring for your opponent, the shot disappearing, etc, etc. I'm taking this side of the argument, and I don't have any guess range weaponry! What I do have are salamanders, which have a rule that specifically states they can accidentally fire over a unit (they add an artillery dice roll to the flamer template) by the flames arcing over top of them. It makes sense that a stone-thrower could do the same thing... and since it's just a guess, there's no reason why you might not overguess by mistake. Would the shot then not count, either?

That just doesn't make any sense!

You're absolutely right, of course. The role-playing option I suggested isn't meant to be a rule, but an attitude. And that attitude is totally up to the discretion of each player. You'd just have to trust the other guy that his actions aren't the product of meta-game thinking, which as I understand it is very difficult for most people. I don't blame anyone; it's only natural to compete, isn't it?

You're right... and if you both have that attitude, it'd probably be more fun. I haven't met too many (any?) opponents with that kind of attitude/sportsmanship, though :-/

SO what conclusion? Is this really going to be a permissive/restrictive rules debate? Are there any crunchy arguments for disallowing overguessing or are we sticking with the "oi, daz cheap" argument? So far, I'd have to agree with John. It's not an argument from rules but it's the best practical argument among those posted.

The conclusion is very simple:

1. Play with people who play compatibly with you.
2. The rules aren't perfect, but they are the rules.

If you want to play fast & loose, and the other guy wants to play tight & picky (or vice versa), then probably there's a problem.

If the rules don't make sense, then both players need to agree on any change, rather than somebody getting huffy and deciding to unilaterally change the rules.

I hate those awkward moments when you or your opponent (I only play with friends btw, not a *spit* tournament gamer myself) wants to do something clever and there's a question about if it's allowed AND we have no answer in the books. There's a lot of hemming and hawing until, inevitably, we say "okay, go ahead" or come up with a good practical argument like yours. So I guess my appeal was for conclusion other than "play with people you get along with" because I think the problem isn't totally solved even in friendly and casual play (they are different categories as OP makes apparent).

JohnHwangDD wrote:The conclusion is very simple:

1. Play with people who play compatibly with you.
2. The rules aren't perfect, but they are the rules.

QFT! Bottom line is the game is a game and is meant to be fun. If you are not having fun playing a certain opponent, don't play that person. It is to bad though that the OP played against a person who either did not know the rules, or flat out cheated to try and win.

Mick, good luck finding a new game system, but I can tell you that when you get a fun group to play with, WHFB can be a blast.

RiTides wrote:You're right... and if you both have that attitude, it'd probably be more fun. I haven't met too many (any?) opponents with that kind of attitude/sportsmanship, though :-/

Strange, isn't it? I plan on developing into a very honorable Bretonnian player. ;D