What is some good Richard (Dickery) that youve had happen to you during a game, or seen?

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.

**thakabalpuphorsefishguy**

I once had a guy playing blood angles charge a building 6 inches away from his assault squad (first, why he thought he could designate a building as his assault target I dont know)

He then proceeded to tell me all of my long fangs inside the building (all on the second or third floor mind you) got pulled down into combat.

Rather than argue, I asked him to show me that rule in the BRB, and he stammered on about how how it was my guy reacting to his charge etc etc... I handed him the brb and ate my burger. He couldnt find anything so I asked him to move his assault squad back. He did, unhappily, because he knew what was coming... 4 plasma cannons (2 squads of 2 pcannons and 3 missile launchers) and 6 crak missiles.

It was... diverting to say the least

**rigeld2**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
n0t_u wrote:Poison just has a static to wound number unless stated otherwise. Not knowing the type DE has of course.

Poison can re-roll wounds if the S of the weapon is equal to or higher the T of the target.

In Close Combat.

True. I always forget that as Nids only have poisoned CC weapons.
But the given example was for CC.

**DeathReaper**

thakabalpuphorsefishguy wrote:I once had a guy playing blood angles charge a building 6 inches away from his assault squad (first, why he thought he could designate a building as his assault target I dont know)

He then proceeded to tell me all of my long fangs inside the building (all on the second or third floor mind you) got pulled down into combat.

Rather than argue, I asked him to show me that rule in the BRB, and he stammered on about how how it was my guy reacting to his charge etc etc... I handed him the brb and ate my burger. He couldnt find anything so I asked him to move his assault squad back. He did, unhappily, because he knew what was coming... 4 plasma cannons (2 squads of 2 pcannons and 3 missile launchers) and 6 crak missiles.

It was... diverting to say the least

You can assault a building since they act like immobile transport vehicles.

but the squad inside can not react to the assault because you are not assaulting the squad inside, you are assaulting the immobile transport vehicle.

Page79 in the BRB has the rules for how this works.

**rigeld2**

Also, you can only have one unit in a building at a time - just like a transport vehicle.

**SagesStone**

rigeld2 wrote:
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
n0t_u wrote:Poison just has a static to wound number unless stated otherwise. Not knowing the type DE has of course.

Poison can re-roll wounds if the S of the weapon is equal to or higher the T of the target.

In Close Combat.

True. I always forget that as Nids only have poisoned CC weapons.
But the given example was for CC.

Good to be corrected then I was only really familiar with the ranged version.

**DarknessEternal**

Lobukia wrote:
Wow, no. 5 power weapon wounds and 10 savable wounds to 5 identical 1 wound models without an invuln = 5 dead models. This is why people get so ticked about diverse Paladins and wound allocation. They CAN do what you're talking about, while 5 purifiers can't. Fundamentals folks.

A 5 man Purifier squad can have 5 differently geared models. It'd then be correct to assign wounds to them individually.

**ZebioLizard2**

DarknessEternal wrote:
Lobukia wrote:
Wow, no. 5 power weapon wounds and 10 savable wounds to 5 identical 1 wound models without an invuln = 5 dead models. This is why people get so ticked about diverse Paladins and wound allocation. They CAN do what you're talking about, while 5 purifiers can't. Fundamentals folks.

A 5 man Purifier squad can have 5 differently geared models. It'd then be correct to assign wounds to them individually.

Nearly ALL of the gray knights units can be made to take advantage of wound allocation, thanks in part to being able to equip everyone with different weapons in melee or range.

**Joey**

Brother Axel wrote:Once saw a Store Assistant in my local GW playing some guy.
The SA was actually from another store, and was off-duty.
Anyway, the two were playing when it got a bit heated during, what I think was, an assault phase.

Basically, it was something to do with distance or LoS or something.
In any case, after the two went back and to for a bit, the off-duty SA decided to put his foot down, placing both palms flat on the game-board, staring right at the other guy and said:

"You should remember who you're talking to, and where you are".

At which point the fellow conceded, obviously.
At the end of the game, both did the usual "yeah good game" and whatever, but the guy who had played the SA added:

"Yeah, was a good game but that still wasn't right, what you did".

To which the SA laughed, pretending he didn't know what was going on saying "Pft, haha. What do you mean?"

The guy just solemnly replied "You know what I mean".

And that was that.
It's something that'll always stick with me, as the SA couldn't of been much older than I, and I'm 21.
For a 21 year old, working as an SA in GW to think he has weight to throw around in a store he doesn't even work at just makes me cringe.
I mean, what a total douche.

I don't know if this has been mentioned by anyone else, but did you report this guy?
I'd definitely send an email to GW human resources. Intimidating customers is a sackable offense.

**Formosa**

DeathReaper wrote:
Basimpo wrote:Heres some good Richardy that i just encountered in my last game, with the opponent telling me i have no common sense and quitting after i moved my "immobilised" CCB.

Anyway, before the game starts we discuss the terrain, and label it. Anything else is considered clear terrain, or at least to my understanding.
He has CSM, i have Necrons.

Turn 3, he brings a landraider from reserves and sets it up on a "road" which looks like 2 muddy tracks going from top to bottom.
Movement, he says he gets to move an extra 6 because of being on the road and i disagree, saying that we didnt talk about it beforehand.
He cites page 57 in which i respond "Oh, you mean roads, which is after the part about discussing the effects of terrain on vehicles before the game starts?"

What i hate is finding out something new about terrain in the middle of the game that just so HAPPENS to be in the opponents favor, like, Oh, that middle building is blos for you, but i can see through it.

Do you feel i was wrong in this?

Yes, you were wrong.

I would have looked at you like you had a second head if you said that the road that was clearly on the table was actually not a road...

he is right dude, it could be a fluffy pink cloud that happens to look like a road, but unless you both go over the terrain before the game begins, all it is, is a bit of pretty table.

the ammount of things poping something like this on a player could effect is stupid, it would affect his deployment, whether or not he thinks that Raider coming on from off the board can reach him to assault the unit that just jumped out etc

deciding halfway through a game is just sloppy and sneaky

**DeathReaper**

Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

**SilverMK2**

DeathReaper wrote:P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

However, the point is that it is not a road unless both players agree it is a road before the game.

**DeathReaper**

Except roads are not terrain, as they do not appear on P.13-14 where terrain is defined.

Or on P.88 where terrain must be discussed.

probably a hole in the rules, but if it looks like a road...

**Formosa**

DeathReaper wrote:Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

yes its clearly defined, after the clearly defined part that says both players need to go over the terrain before hand, the point he is trying to make (and i agree with) is that not saying anything about a piece of terrain, and then claiming its x to get an advantage, is a douchey thing to do (not you, just in general), these things should be sorted before the game

**DeathReaper**

Formosa wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

yes its clearly defined, after the clearly defined part that says both players need to go over the terrain before hand, the point he is trying to make (and i agree with) is that not saying anything about a piece of terrain, and then claiming its x to get an advantage, is a douchey thing to do (not you, just in general), these things should be sorted before the game

Funny roads are not mentioned on P.13 or 14 where it defines terrain. Or on P.88 where it tells you how to set up a battlefield.

**rigeld2**

Formosa wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

yes its clearly defined, after the clearly defined part that says both players need to go over the terrain before hand, the point he is trying to make (and i agree with) is that not saying anything about a piece of terrain, and then claiming its x to get an advantage, is a douchey thing to do (not you, just in general), these things should be sorted before the game

And if you neglect to clarify before the game starts, does it make sense to play it as clear terrain, or as what it obviously represents?

**Formosa**

rigeld2 wrote:
Formosa wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

yes its clearly defined, after the clearly defined part that says both players need to go over the terrain before hand, the point he is trying to make (and i agree with) is that not saying anything about a piece of terrain, and then claiming its x to get an advantage, is a douchey thing to do (not you, just in general), these things should be sorted before the game

And if you neglect to clarify before the game starts, does it make sense to play it as clear terrain, or as what it obviously represents?

clear terrain unless stated otherwise, what you seem to be missing is in 99% of games you go "hey, is that a road? is that area terrain or just a ruin?" and the other dude go "yeah" this is totally fine, what is not fine is going
"this is area terrain and thats a ruin" roll on turn 3 "oh and thats a road and im gonna use it to assault from my land raider which is now in range" so you go "oh well we didnt say that, can i move back then as i didnt know?"
"no its clearly a road", this is totally wrong

**SilverMK2**

DeathReaper wrote:Except roads are not terrain, as they do not appear on P.13-14 where terrain is defined.

However, on p57 roads come under the heading of "terrain effects" on vehicles, therefore they are terrain. And on P89, a road is clearly pointed to as a terrain feature, along with woods, hills, and a building, noting their effects on gameplay...

**Formosa**

SilverMK2 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Except roads are not terrain, as they do not appear on P.13-14 where terrain is defined.

However, on p57 roads come under the heading of "terrain effects" on vehicles, therefore they are terrain. And on P89, a road is clearly pointed to as a terrain feature, along with woods, hills, and a building, noting their effects on gameplay...

a hill is not a hill until we say it is, a ruin is just a pretty scenery peice untill we say its a ruin, this is the whole point of I.Din terrain before the game, so BOTH players know whats happening and know what is what, as i said before it stops someone going "ok the ruins on my side are 2+ cover" after the game started and you foolishy decided to take the other side of the board

**Experiment 626**

My first game against GK's last year...

GK player noticed I was unloading Daemons from my case, pulled out a different list... That contained nothing but Strikes & Interceptors.

He won the roll for first turn and I failed to grab the initiative. I auto-lost because he passed 5 of his 6 psychic tests.

**BlapBlapBlap**

Experiment 626 wrote:My first game against GK's last year...

GK player noticed I was unloading Daemons from my case, pulled out a different list... That contained nothing but Strikes & Interceptors.

He won the roll for first turn and I failed to grab the initiative. I auto-lost because he passed 5 of his 6 psychic tests.

I hope you slapped him in the face over and over and over again until he cried.

Players like this make me not only vomit, they require me to be cryogenically frozen until they come out with an effective counter. True story.

**Basimpo**

Yeah, i learned to go in detail over terrain before i roll for initiative after something like turn 2 the ruins that were dt, 4+ cover, and you can draw los through became impass blos on my turn, to a vendetta so, i make a point to ask before every game Hey, what is everything? When everything is labeled or mentioned, I ask, ok, so, everything else is clear terrain right?

Also as another example, if there were "apparent" water features on the board, and i were playing Chimeras, i wouldnt Richard someone by springing on them that my chimeras treat that water terrain as clear terrain on turn 4 when i reach it after theyve set their skimmer transport up on an island with heavy long range infantry ready to pound away on my side. Id ask before hand, Hey, is that water? Ok, chimeras treat water as clear terrain, just so you know.

Pretty fair to do.

**Sleepysloth**

Basimpo wrote:Yeah, i learned to go in detail over terrain before i roll for initiative after something like turn 2 the ruins that were dt, 4+ cover, and you can draw los through became impass blos on my turn, to a vendetta so, i make a point to ask before every game Hey, what is everything? When everything is labeled or mentioned, I ask, ok, so, everything else is clear terrain right?

Also as another example, if there were "apparent" water features on the board, and i were playing Chimeras, i wouldnt Richard someone by springing on them that my chimeras treat that water terrain as clear terrain on turn 4 when i reach it after theyve set their skimmer transport up on an island with heavy long range infantry ready to pound away on my side. Id ask before hand, Hey, is that water? Ok, chimeras treat water as clear terrain, just so you know.

Pretty fair to do.

Me and a buddy of mine played against each other a fair few times as we were learning the game and there was plenty of such accidental Richarding going on. Plenty of games were ruined by "Oh by the way..." moments but since it was all understood to be practice it was no big deal.

I'd be upset if a player started using a "road" which wasn't discussed before hand. It's an aspect of the playing table which has an impact on the game, if you're going to even consider using it then be clear with your opponent about what it does.

**jgehunter**

Experiment 626 wrote:My first game against GK's last year...

GK player noticed I was unloading Daemons from my case, pulled out a different list... That contained nothing but Strikes & Interceptors.

He won the roll for first turn and I failed to grab the initiative. I auto-lost because he passed 5 of his 6 psychic tests.

I did that once just for the lolz, but then I just told him I was kiddin' and we restarted the match with me choosing my usual list.

**Skriker**

Experiment 626 wrote:My first game against GK's last year...

GK player noticed I was unloading Daemons from my case, pulled out a different list... That contained nothing but Strikes & Interceptors.

He won the roll for first turn and I failed to grab the initiative. I auto-lost because he passed 5 of his 6 psychic tests.

Yeah that sounds like a fun game for both of you....NOT. I just don't understand that kind of douchbaggery. Is he just looking to be able to tell his friends he won in the first turn after making 5 rolls? So what. The idea is to *play* the game...

People suck...

Skriker

**Experiment 626**

BlapBlapBlap wrote:
Experiment 626 wrote:My first game against GK's last year...

GK player noticed I was unloading Daemons from my case, pulled out a different list... That contained nothing but Strikes & Interceptors.

He won the roll for first turn and I failed to grab the initiative. I auto-lost because he passed 5 of his 6 psychic tests.

I hope you slapped him in the face over and over and over again until he cried.

Players like this make me not only vomit, they require me to be cryogenically frozen until they come out with an effective counter. True story.

I just told him afterwards how totally not sorry I was, that his balls had just left screaming out the open door because they needed to find a real man... Caused a fair bit of laughter from others in the store who'd seen what this moron had done, especially considering I'm a girl!

**DeathReaper**

Experiment 626 wrote:
BlapBlapBlap wrote:
Experiment 626 wrote:My first game against GK's last year...

GK player noticed I was unloading Daemons from my case, pulled out a different list... That contained nothing but Strikes & Interceptors.

He won the roll for first turn and I failed to grab the initiative. I auto-lost because he passed 5 of his 6 psychic tests.

I hope you slapped him in the face over and over and over again until he cried.

Players like this make me not only vomit, they require me to be cryogenically frozen until they come out with an effective counter. True story.

I just told him afterwards how totally not sorry I was, that his balls had just left screaming out the open door because they needed to find a real man... Caused a fair bit of laughter from others in the store who'd seen what this moron had done, especially considering I'm a girl!

Pic's or it didn't happen!

**Lobokai**

DeathReaper wrote:Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

It could have a sign with the word "road" on it, and have a giant "+6 inches" in rocks across it... not discussed before game, not going to happen... RAW, RAI, and basic etiquette,

**Kaldor**

Lobukia wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Roads are clearly defined on P.57

A road lets any non skimmer/non walker vehicle moving at cruising speed and following the road for the entire time moves an extra 6".

P.S. without actually seeing the game board it is a tough call, but from what he described, I envision a road.

It could have a sign with the word "road" on it, and have a giant "+6 inches" in rocks across it... not discussed before game, not going to happen... RAW, RAI, and basic etiquette,

Thats just as bad, if not worse as trying to use it as a road.

Many is the time I've gotten to turn three and realised we forgot to clarify what something was. If I suddenly asked my opponent 'Oh, do you think we should count those roads as actual roads?' and he stands to gain by it NOT being a road, you can bet london to a brick he's going to piss and moan about it.

I mean, techincally I could wave my hand kind of generally over half of the table and say 'So these buildings count as ruins?' and then on turn four I could shoot into one and not allow you to take a cover save. Why? Because I didn't specifically point at that building, and since it wasn't specifically discussed prior to the game, you get no cover save from it.

You can see how this gets into a grey area, through no one players particular fault. Often times it is simply forgotten or overlooked, or assumed, and it's a dick move on anyones part to argue about it when it will go in their favour. Get an independant referee, and be prepared to deal with whatever he rules. Or 4+ it.

**ZebioLizard2**

I mean, techincally I could wave my hand kind of generally over half of the table and say 'So these buildings count as ruins?' and then on turn four I could shoot into one and not allow you to take a cover save. Why? Because I didn't specifically point at that building, and since it wasn't specifically discussed prior to the game, you get no cover save from it.

Someone tried that at one of the shops my friends went to out of state.

Needless to say it ended up with a keyed car and slashed tires.

**Jidmah**

Yeah, because damaging property is always the right answer to a dispute about a tabletop game.