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.

I don't understand how it adds any sort of substantial length to the game.

I have all the codex pages of units in my army marked, allowing for easy reference; if someone asks to see it, I check the mark (half a second), flip to the page and pass it over (another half second) and let him glance over the statline (1-2 seconds), read the special rules (anything from 1 second to a good few depending on how many and how detailed etc.) and then pass it back (a final half second).

It should be 1 minute maximum added. If you're in a tournament, it could matter, but then again you'd be told to do it regardless, outside of a tournament where there are no time restrictions, what is the issue?

So the game takes an extra minute, why is that such a tremendous problem?

There is also the counter that whilst your opponent is reading your codex during your turn, you will have to recap every single one of the actions you made when he finishes. Surely that offsets the time he would've spent had he read it in his turn.

hisdudeness wrote:According to most people here it is in the rules that he has the right to stop the game and read your codex.

This, I think, is potentially the core of the disagreement.

It's not so much that he has the 'right' to stop the game and waste time reading your codex as that he has the right to know what the rules are. If he is unfamiliar with the rules that apply to a particular unit, then of course he can ask you what they are, or have a look for himself. Just like both players are free to pick the rulebook up at any time and remind themselves how Fearless works, or how fast Cavalry can move.

From my experience, few players run through every single rule that applies to their army before the game, and fewer players would actually remember it all if their opponents actually did so. So instead, we tend to spend some time flicking through books when we're unsure of something.

The game isn't supposed to be a just test of who can remember the most rules.

GBDarkAngel wrote:@hisdudeness - In all honesty m8 there seems little point in arguing this one as the others including US GT Judge (what exactly is that? Is that someone who sits on a chair at tournaments making decisions on rules that he obviously cant understand himself?) just seem to want to take the words from the paragraphs that suit them and combine them to make whole new rules that dont exist.
Im sure GW will receive a gazillion emails tomorrow demanding that rule be included in the 6th Edition.

I doubt it.

Plus, I wouldnt like to pit your knowledge of rules against Dons, I know who would win on that one.

GBDarkAngel wrote:
I prefer my games to be entertaining and require some thought.

Full disclosure engenders more thought than your attempt at half hidden disclosure when it suits you. Your version of the game devolves into a coin flip.

Oh, and your attempts at cheating by trying to get the opponent to tell you what theyre going to assault before you have to make a choice on what power to use? Does that help you require "more" thought, or less? I'm sure your opponents refusal to let you cheat had *no* bearing on your actions when he made the perfectly *legitimate* request to see and understand the special rules of your army?

This game is an open game on both sides, UNLESS you agree otherwise. P92 tells you this, if you'd bothered to read it properly.

GBDarkAngel wrote:or would not seeing your opponents list before hand prevent you from running to the toilet cubicle and list tailoring.

Wow, just wow. You have NO idea what you're talking about, do you?

You're clueless about the rules, and clueless about the phrase "logical fallacy" as well, it seems. Hint: I (and most others here, I would bet) play strict all comers lists, as tehre is normally a tournament (a real one, not the ones you pretend you have gone to that allow you to hide your list and rules from your opponent) I'm looking to go to, or a mission for a tournament i run i want to try out, to see if it seems balanced.

To the others that claim you "should have paid attention at the start" - have you played 4 2000 points games in one day before? Try remembering every little rule every SC has in theg ame when youve been playing for 12 hours already, THEN come back and say that. Even then your viewpoint is not valid, as you would be, by definition, the exception.

The STANDARD for this game is full disclosure, otherwise you are not playing the same game. Yes, like a lot of things in this game it *could* be used to time waste - but it isnt. Particpating in, and running, a number of tournaments over the years has shown me that. There are far simpler ways to time waste, if you wanted.

MisterMoon wrote:

Now, if this guy just wants to peruse your codex for a weakness, you need to make sure he understands that you'll let him, so he can learn the game better, but next time he'll need to plan tactics better. Or words to that effect.

The statement from Mistermoon is 100% accurate.
My opponent was under pressure and was starting to question every rule, distance etc.
He only plays 40k, i never play 40k.
His mandate was pretty much to keep me correct with my army also as he knows my army codex very well. (he has his own at home)
His choice was simple - Attack Castellan Crowe or Inq Corteaz. His only reason for wanting to scrutinise the codex was to acertain the easiest one to kill.

For the record i had a game at another club i attend last night and we had completed the game in just under 2 hours compared to over 3 hours for the one we are discussing in this thread.
It was a really good close game, there was a few rule clarifications etc but being 2 mature players we didnt debate everything to death.

I also ran this thread past a few of the older gamers (some who play 40k only) who have played since before most of you were born and 1 of them made a very good point.
His point was that you have to remember that the 40k target audience is actually 10 and 11 year olds.

GBDarkAngel wrote:
The statement from Mistermoon is 100% accurate.
My opponent was under pressure and was starting to question every rule, distance etc.

Which they are allowed to do - if you were being as shady as you appeared to be *I* would lose faith in your calls. Trust is a two way street.

GBDarkAngel wrote:He only plays 40k, i never play 40k

And? I have friends who play in 25+ tournaments a year, all over the country, with up to 120 players in each. THEY need reminding of special rules some times - not a lot, admittedly, but on occasion.
.

GBDarkAngel wrote:His mandate was pretty much to keep me correct with my army also as he knows my army codex very well. (he has his own at home)

And? DOes he use both SCs in the same army at the same time? Could you - as someone who does play the army - regurgitate the entire stat line and special rules for both, right here right now? You do realise how inane youre sounding - right?

GBDarkAngel wrote:His choice was simple - Attack Castellan Crowe or Inq Corteaz. His only reason for wanting to scrutinise the codex was to acertain the easiest one to kill.

Which you are perfectly entitled to do, in any game you play. I often ask to see what i think is worth taking a risk on, especially if its a close game - as easiest to kill is not always the best choice. However its important to know if im taking a risk or essentially committing suicide, hence you tell me your stats.

GBDarkAngel wrote:For the record i had a game at another club i attend last night and we had completed the game in just under 2 hours compared to over 3 hours for the one we are discussing in this thread.

the plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence"

GBDarkAngel wrote:It was a really good close game, there was a few rule clarifications etc but being 2 mature players we didnt debate everything to death.

So it is "immature" to ask to see your codex to understand the rules of two SCs? Really? I think you will find you are ever so slightly wrong.

GBDarkAngel wrote:I also ran this thread past a few of the older gamers (some who play 40k only) who have played since before most of you were born and 1 of them made a very good point.
His point was that you have to remember that the 40k target audience is actually 10 and 11 year olds.

AH, your incredibly thinly veiled, snide insults continue. I would suggest *not* categorising people on this forum as necessarily young. You have NO idea, NONE, how old people are on here.

I'd step away from this thread before you embarrass yourself more. If you truly believe that someone asking to see your codex is as bad as you're making out, and worthy of kicking up SUCH a fuss over as you have done here, then please PM me your name, and I'll make sure you never play in any tournament our club runs - and we run a few, quite large and well respected ones - as you would not get on with any of the people who game there.

@Nosferatu1001 - You protest too much m8.
I challenged you all to show me where in the Rule Book it said it was mandatory and i would concede graciously.

We have established it does not exist and also it is not Bad Sporsmanship so please excercise the same courtesy and concede.
You are beginning to sound like one of the Target Audience who just wont accept what it says in the Rule Book.

You know what happens next.....You go to the Naughty Stair without any Warhammer 40k.

Page 92. Unless otherwise noted the game is full disclosure. You've been shown this a few times, but sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending it doesnt exist is your only response.

Also - read the rules of the forum. I am not your "m8"

I don't see the problem with showing your opponents the stat line of one of your models. If it's a matter of finding the character then just go to the back of your codex. In most instances there is a list of all the different models and, on the same page, a list of all weapons available to the army.l Both lists are alphabetized so it shouldn't take much time to find the info.
The rules for sportmanship are not found in any book for most games of any nature. Those rules are difined by the community that plays that game. In my community you would be marked down for withholding your codex (for whatever reason) from your opponent. This does not mean that your opponent should not be marked down for his actions but one has nothing to do with the other. If either player's conduct becomes egregious then an official of the event should be called over and allowed to settle all the disputes.

I think we're done here. I'm going to lock the thread for flame prevention, since certain posters seem far more interested in throwing around thinly veiled insults than in participating in actual discussion.

Moving on.