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.

Guy comes in to a game event with a chaos marine army, and wants to use an allied chaos knight. Gets upset and angry and belligerent when someone says its not legal.


Are you a douchebag when you say no to something like this?

Another time I remember a guy from another area came in with Nids allied with guard. His previous region had allowed it. The organizer took a vote and everyone was ok with it.

Thoughts?

General Hobbs wrote:


Guy comes in to a game event with a chaos marine army, and wants to use an allied chaos knight. Gets upset and angry and belligerent when someone says its not legal.


Are you a douchebag when you say no to something like this?

\
Nope. It is an illegal army. I'd be fine with it in a friendly game, but unless the event organizer said OK, I would not be fine with it at an event.

Another time I remember a guy from another area came in with Nids allied with guard. His previous region had allowed it. The organizer took a vote and everyone was ok with it.

Thoughts?

See above.

It really wasn't legal.

Meaning-in an EVENT, there is every reason to forbid it, even though it could make a nice and fluffy army, just like you cannot forbid a BA-necron alliance even though its silly.

In a casual game though, it would have been a bit douchy to not give it a go, unless the dude played a seriusly douchy list himself and took a knight for powergaming reasons (doubt it though)

As above. Friendly game, okay let's play, IF you ask beforehand and don't act like you're entitled to just plonk them down. At an event, no dice.

Yes....Yes you are. This is a fun game, have fun with it dont be a dbag.

Fundamentally, I'm fine with anything in a friendly game, as long as it isn't being done to blatantly break the game.

I haven't really played in any tournaments, so I don't know what the tournament opinion is in reality, but I would say that something like that would be a big no in that sort of setting, unless it was agreed prior to the event with some sort of reason why it should be allowed even so the rules say no.

It's totally fine to say no to playing against that.

And I'd actually say the opposite of the above posters- at the AdeptiCon team tourney, we just ran nids and guard because the event rules allowed it (any army was considered an ally of convenience for the event).

In a friendly game, if I was looking to practice a standard 40k game, I wouldn't want to face nids and guard, though.

I'd be much more likely to play against an opponent wanting to run a chaos knight, though, as I anticipate those will be coming eventually and it'd be good to get practice against it

No you're a terrible person for following a basic rule...

 namiel wrote:
Yes....Yes you are. This is a fun game, have fun with it dont be a dbag.

So you should be obliged to indulge someone who has taken it for granted that you'd be ok with them breaking the rules, and then use what may be a precious 2+ hours of gaming time playing them?

Sorry, no.

It's your time, if you're not alright with something that isn't within the rules and hasn't been agreed in advance, then it is your opponent who should be sucking it up, not making you feel bad.

For the record, I'd happily play what is mentioned in the OP in a non-competitive environment, but anyone who wouldn't be is totally within their rights to feel that way.

no its currently an illegal force so in an event its out of the question, in a friendly game its up to the player facing him of course.

It's ok to do whatever the heck you and your opponent agree to.


In general terms most players stick to the rules of the game as written and there is nothing wrong with saying no to deviations to those rules when a player asks. Simply do so in a polite fashion and if they don't want to play then just move on. No harm, no insult.

At tournaments its a touch different and will vary - major events are likely very close to the rules whilst smaller clubs might well be more open to variation. The key is to ask BEFORE and clarify so you don't turn up with something that isn't allowed.

It's illegal thus you must not do it.

Pretty darn simple if you ask me.

Absolutely not. Rules were made to be followed.

I think there's some wiggle room to play things RAI versus RAW, but there's no room for debate on these two examples.

From a fluff stand point, its a hell of a lot better than BA/Crons lists or many of the other ridiculous fluff defying "allies" lists out there... so wouldn't really bug me too much.

Personally, I'd have no issue playing against a Chaos Knight, but at the same time, I do recognise that it's not permitted by the rules.

At the end of the day, 40k requires consent between players, so you're perfectly within your rights to refuse a game on whatever grounds.

 Paradigm wrote:
Personally, I'd have no issue playing against a Chaos Knight, but at the same time, I do recognise that it's not permitted by the rules.

At the end of the day, 40k requires consent between players, so you're perfectly within your rights to refuse a game on whatever grounds.

It is permitted by the rule. It's players who are saying it can't be allowed. The rules tell you, you can change anything you want. Like you said, it is a consent between players (damn are we like GW now and everything is Lawyerish now?) so if someone wants to change something it's perfectly fine as long as the other agrees.

Sad thing, geeks and nerds can't handle anything that is outside of the book. Player creativity be damned.

I personally think Tyranids need to be able to ally with stuff, so I'd definitely let a Tyranids player ally with whatever he like as long as it isn't blatant powergaming and makes some sense. As for the Titan, I'd probably play just to see what it was like.

Overall it's your choice if you want to or not, but you do need to be polite. You can just say something like "Ya know, I'm just not into playing against ___ right now. But it looks nice, and I'm sure someone else will play with you!"

Well some sense is needed but in any game between 2 players, you need some flexibility long as game still makes sense, not too warped etc.

It's in the fluff, just because GW haven't gotten around to it doesn't mean that Chaos Knight Titans don't exist. For me, rule of cool applies. If someone had converted and painted a nice Slaanesh Knight Titan I would play it no questions. If it's unpainted stock plastic then maybe not.

Edit - oh, and Guard/Nids? Definitely - Genestealer cult obviously.

Player creativity can fill the gaps in GW rules logic. If you can point to a fluff reference, I'm happy. I'd even play against a homebrewed rules Squat army [actually I'd love to play against that]

Davor wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
Personally, I'd have no issue playing against a Chaos Knight, but at the same time, I do recognise that it's not permitted by the rules.

At the end of the day, 40k requires consent between players, so you're perfectly within your rights to refuse a game on whatever grounds.

It is permitted by the rule. It's players who are saying it can't be allowed. The rules tell you, you can change anything you want.

Fair point, and precisely why I avoided using the word 'legal', as the idea that the concept of legality exists in what is ultimately a social game between two players who have to agree for it to work is laughable.

I was simply referring to the commonly-held belief that the games must be played as per the guidelines listed in the rulebook and codexes, but yes, I do agree that anything goes so long as both players agree. I was just simplifying things to avoid a tangent.

I;'d have no problem playing against a chaos knight, but at the same time, per the rules, Chaos cannot take Imperial Knight allies. there is nothing wrong with not wanting to break the rules.
Chaos players, and I say this as someone with a chaos army, need to accept that they do not have a god given right to take anything with an aquilla on it, spike it up, add a chaos star and declare it's a chaos version, any more then Tau have a right to do so while declaring they're Tau defectors. or Tyranids have a right to, claiming "GENE STEALER CULTS!"


this is especially true when GW seemed to have gone out of their way to say how rare chaos knights are, and the few examples we have are all VERY VERY differnt from IKs

General Hobbs wrote:Are you a douchebag when you say no to something like this?

Declining to play a game never makes you a bad person. Nerdraging at people, on the other hand...

If its an illegal army, and he had it as a 'counts as' I would be fine...but if not...no.

If its supposed to be an official tourney or something with rules requirements...no.

 BoomWolf wrote:
In a casual game though, it would have been a bit douchy to not give it a go, unless the dude played a seriusly douchy list himself and took a knight for powergaming reasons (doubt it though)

It is never 'douchy' to want to play a game by the actual rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Davor wrote:
Sad thing, geeks and nerds can't handle anything that is outside of the book. Player creativity be damned.

That is a ridiculous generalisation, and patently untrue given how many gamers do come up with their own houserules, homebrew army lists, scenarios and conversions.

To be honest i would be fine with it in a casual game but in a competitive game absolutely not. This is why we have apocalypse

 insaniak wrote:

Davor wrote:
Sad thing, geeks and nerds can't handle anything that is outside of the book. Player creativity be damned.

That is a ridiculous generalisation, and patently untrue given how many gamers do come up with their own houserules, homebrew army lists, scenarios and conversions.

Furthermore, most of the posters have already said in a friendly game they wouldn't care.

I vote douchy....with limitations.
If you don't want to play against super heavies, go ahead and say that's not the kind of list you want to play against.

But is CSM so over powered that an IK would just throw everything off balance? No. Chaos has Knights, so they should have knights. Unfortunately GW forgot about that because they don't actually understand the game they make so we have to follow the rules. In a tournament, its what the tournament rules say. In a friendly game, it comes down to what the players agree on. This philosophy of "The rules are absolute! Never stray from the rules!" I find kind of slowed.

MWHistorian wrote:I vote douchy....with limitations. But is CSM so over powered that an IK would just throw everything off balance? No.

That assumes that douchiness is a direct byproduct of list strength.

I would say no. Not because its "illegal" but because of the knight..

If it looked super possessed and chaosy, then I might make a deal.

Really though, if its a tournament, he should ask before showing up with that .

If its a stranger you don't have to feel like a d bag for saying no.

If its your friend then you can feel like a d bag.