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.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I think the problem is more that you're saying nobody should be allowed to go over even if both parties agree and already know they agree that it's fine.

Obviously if both players agree they can do it. But it's pretty bad behavior if you ask for the extra points, unless you know before you ask that your opponent shares your "a few extra is fine" belief.

Preferably it should be discussed well in advance of the game and preferably in a more general context. Instead of just asking your upcoming opponent totally out of the blue, "Hey, mind if my list is two points over?" instead ask what they think of those people who go a few points over in their lists. If they say they don't really care about a few extra points and it doesn't bother them, THEN ask about your list in particular. If they say anything that indicates they don't like it when people do that, then don't even ask and just modify your list before the game so it's legally within points limits.

At least, that'd be the ideal way to go about finding out if your buddy is okay with extra points. Some of us have a tendency to blurt things out without thinking.

Also most of us who don't particularly care about a few points do agree that games against people who you're not already sure are on-board with a few extra points should be kept within the limits, period, because no one likes social pressure to do something you're not comfortable with and it's best to avoid that situation entirely.

I'm not really convinced of this, given how many people seem to treat those few extra points as something they should be entitled to by default and think that anyone who won't let them have the extra points is a bad person. I think a lot of people do ask for extra points in pickup games against strangers, and don't care one bit about the social pressure issue (if they're even aware that it could be a thing).

That's a fair point. I might be a bit more sensitive to the social pressure thing than some of the other casual gamers (though in video games I'm a bizarre casual-hardcore mix in that I play games a hell of a lot but never really want to progress beyond the easy modes and try truly challenging stuff) due to my social anxiety and tendency to be very, very polite and non-pushy with strangers in real life. If I did manage to solve my anxiety problem and start playing at a local store, I'd never turn up for a game with a list that's even 1 point over the maximum. I like to write lists in Battlescribe, and it's always strangely satisfying to make a list that includes a bit of everything I want to take and is exactly at the points limit.

Also, just, consider this. You're worried about social pressure making you feel the need to agree to a few extra points so you don't seem like the bad guy. Yet I don't think you'd worry about feeling like the bad guy if you said no to your opponent asking if infantry can move 7 inches in open terrain instead of 6, before the game actually starts, or if they wanted their lascannons to be strength 10 instead of 9. Doesn't the difference there kinda tell you that a few points are such a minor problem in 40k, even to you, as to be nearly insignificant?

It's different, but not in that way. The main difference between the those examples is that things like "my lascannons are STR 10" don't have support from the toxic "CASUAL AT ALL COSTS" element of the community, so it's much more likely that anyone asking for STR 10 lascannons is going to find themselves completely lacking in support if they get upset about having their request denied. And it's a lot less believable that such an argument would happen at all.

Makes sense. I guess you're right, the difference is that the social pressure gets worse the larger the group is that's pushing.

The limit is the limit, don't go over it. That's my opinion.

If if you're throwing together a quick list on the tableside, it's rarely necessary to go over, the easiest way is usually just to drop a model or two.

If I'm making a list on the spot and can't fit what I want in, I'll just ask my opponent "hey, mind if we add an extra 100pts?" or something like that.

If I'm not making it on the spot, I'll just make it fit the limit even if it means not taking everything I want, I expect my opponent to be polite enough to do the same.

Yeah, a limit is a limit, that's the point - I cut my teeth making lists with Necrons back when they were so limited that it was pretty to easy to go from 12 points under to 16 points over with just one needed model (yeah, I remember the cost of Immortals well).

The movement comparison is pretty good. Especially in a casual game, your opponent might be willing to give you that extra quarter inch your charge fell short by, but you'd also be a colossal dick if you got upset that they didn't.

1 point is too much.

If you agree between players that you can go over the limit, just set a new limit. If it's so difficult to play at 1500, change the limit to 1505.


Or just ditch that 5 point upgrade you so badly needed to make your whole army work. It's clearly necessary if you need to go over the limit.

 Griddlelol wrote:
Or just ditch that 5 point upgrade you so badly needed to make your whole army work. It's clearly necessary if you need to go over the limit.

This kind of demonstrates the paradox of the extra points: the extra upgrade/unit/whatever they pay for is simultaneously so essential that taking it out would be a huge burden, and so trivial that it's not a big deal at all if they go over the limit to have it. I'd say "make up your mind", but picking either of the two values would mean admitting that there's no justification for exceeding the point limit.

See... I sometimes end up 7 points under just because that's the way it works out.. Close as possible without going over... Now you come 2 points over... There's a 9 point difference... I could of added that extra pink horror for an additional body and warp charge and we would have the exact same points.. But I didn't bring that 1 more model for an extra advantage because we had agreed to a set point limit. A point limit is just that.. A LIMIT... That's your max.. Come in a few under if you have to.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Griddlelol wrote:
Or just ditch that 5 point upgrade you so badly needed to make your whole army work. It's clearly necessary if you need to go over the limit.

This kind of demonstrates the paradox of the extra points: the extra upgrade/unit/whatever they pay for is simultaneously so essential that taking it out would be a huge burden, and so trivial that it's not a big deal at all if they go over the limit to have it. I'd say "make up your mind", but picking either of the two values would mean admitting that there's no justification for exceeding the point limit.

Indeed, it's kind of ridiculous. I wish any codex I used had 5 or 10 point upgrades that could make or break a list.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Griddlelol wrote:
Or just ditch that 5 point upgrade you so badly needed to make your whole army work. It's clearly necessary if you need to go over the limit.

This kind of demonstrates the paradox of the extra points: the extra upgrade/unit/whatever they pay for is simultaneously so essential that taking it out would be a huge burden, and so trivial that it's not a big deal at all if they go over the limit to have it. I'd say "make up your mind", but picking either of the two values would mean admitting that there's no justification for exceeding the point limit.

Ehh, sometimes when I end up dithering on what to spend my last few points on, and I have all the actual stuff I want, I consider things like giving my squad leaders melta bombs in case their squad ends up in position to melee a vehicle.

Sometimes the squads that compose my army don't lend themselves well to the number of melta bombs I can buy, so I occasionally end up in a situation where if I don't go over the points limit at all, but buy just enough melta bombs to be exactly at the points limit, I'm going to end up in the situation with two or more identically-composed squads where one has an invisible melta bomb upgrade on the leader and the other doesn't. And I really want to avoid situations where it's impossible to remember which squad has it and which doesn't and it actually matters. Because there's no chance of my memory not being biased right then and there.

But I still want to use up those points to be at the points limit instead of being under.

Obviously the correct solution is to realize that I'm happy with my army without the melta bombs and just sit 5-20 points under the limit, but it's not always that easy when I'm actually building the list.

Usually my solution is to remember that I have an HQ who can take melta bombs in addition to the squad leaders, which almost always solves that problem right there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Griddlelol wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Griddlelol wrote:
Or just ditch that 5 point upgrade you so badly needed to make your whole army work. It's clearly necessary if you need to go over the limit.

This kind of demonstrates the paradox of the extra points: the extra upgrade/unit/whatever they pay for is simultaneously so essential that taking it out would be a huge burden, and so trivial that it's not a big deal at all if they go over the limit to have it. I'd say "make up your mind", but picking either of the two values would mean admitting that there's no justification for exceeding the point limit.

Indeed, it's kind of ridiculous. I wish any codex I used had 5 or 10 point upgrades that could make or break a list.

<.<

I mainly played Sisters of Battle. My infantry are all metal and monopose with weapons that are beyond my modeling skill to swap. Many of the squad leaders I have have bizarre loadouts like power weapons paired with boltguns. It kinda made it tough to make cheap squad leaders until I realized that squad leaders can take stormbolters and I have almost a half-dozen of those that are never used.

It's not so much that taking out an upgrade would've been a loss to my army's power level before I figured out what to do with those stormbolters, it's that I simply did not have the ability to take out that power weapon, as it would make telling who the squad leader is impossible as they would've been replaced with a standard boltgun-wielding model.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Griddlelol wrote:
Or just ditch that 5 point upgrade you so badly needed to make your whole army work. It's clearly necessary if you need to go over the limit.

This kind of demonstrates the paradox of the extra points: the extra upgrade/unit/whatever they pay for is simultaneously so essential that taking it out would be a huge burden, and so trivial that it's not a big deal at all if they go over the limit to have it. I'd say "make up your mind", but picking either of the two values would mean admitting that there's no justification for exceeding the point limit.

Whatabout where not taking upgrade means ripping piece of model to stay wysiwyg or drop entire model that might be 100pts+?

It's really not a relevant hypothetical.

But, if somehow, someway, you find yourself in such a silly situation... drop 100 points from somewhere else in your list.

tneva82 wrote:Whatabout where not taking upgrade means ripping piece of model to stay wysiwyg or drop entire model that might be 100pts+?

Simply indicate to your opponent, prior to the start of the game, what the model actually has equipped. "I know that my wraithknight LOOKS like it has two shoulder mounted scatter lasers. In fact, for all in game purposes, he does not. Ignore them scatter lasers."

Before, I always thought two points because if you're rounding, two would round down but three would round up.

Now with where 40k is with points some things are so screwy you can't just accept points at face value. You have to say "I don't want to play against 400pts of unaccounted vehicles or upgrades."

tneva82 wrote:
Whatabout where not taking upgrade means ripping piece of model to stay wysiwyg or drop entire model that might be 100pts+?

Maybe I would let you get away with it. However, if you even attempt to make this argument you'd better have an army that is 100% WYSIWYG and 100% painted and no alternative models available that could replace something in your list and bring it below the point limit without going below by 100+ points. Needless to say I don't think this happens very often outside of hypothetical questions.

Well, I'd say 1% is fine.

 Traditio wrote:

tneva82 wrote:Whatabout where not taking upgrade means ripping piece of model to stay wysiwyg or drop entire model that might be 100pts+?

Simply indicate to your opponent, prior to the start of the game, what the model actually has equipped. "I know that my wraithknight LOOKS like it has two shoulder mounted scatter lasers. In fact, for all in game purposes, he does not. Ignore them scatter lasers."

You know some people like to play WYSIWYG?

As it is I don't generally microtailor lists anyway. We have bunch of pre-made units with pre-made kit with the squad leaders etc and their stories. Forget nameless nobz with identical kits. Enter Dufffug Ugstuf with his marine killing 'uge choppa and his trusty deth skull boyz.

Bunch of those and done.

Makes army building also easier when you have bunch of unit cards to pick up rather than have to go through codex and start calculating units from scratch every time.

If one army is slightly off the nominal point list who cares. It's unlikely to be deciding factor anyway and it's story that's more important than the result anyway.

If you're going to be deadset on WYSIWYG at all costs, and have such a limited model count that you HAVE to use the 100 pt model, you have no one but yourself to blame. Ask your opponent to field it as having different wargear, or suck it up and don't use it.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I'd say 1% is fine.

Waaaaaay back in the day, the store I played at had the house rule... I forget what it was, but it tended to work out that the wiggle room was 25 points at 1500.

Wanna guess how many lists came in at 1500, and how many were 1525?

Basically the arguments put forth are now "I'm too lazy to remember which model has what/I can't be bothered to make everything WYSIWYG.

 Bookwrack wrote:
If you're going to be deadset on WYSIWYG at all costs, and have such a limited model count that you HAVE to use the 100 pt model, you have no one but yourself to blame. Ask your opponent to field it as having different wargear, or suck it up and don't use it.

Limited? 4000 pts orks(well more like 5000-6000 with 2nd ed rules likely. Haven't counted exact count yet).

But you know units don't tend to cost like 12 pts or 16 pts. More like 252, 293, 196.

Adding up those so it's precicely 1500 isn't that easy.

Tinkering to such a micromanagement isn't even going to be fun, interesting or even have notable effect on getting interesting story out of the game. It's "who cares" thing. It's much more important that the sergeant Nehemiah from Dark Angels gets to lead his assault marines in an attempt to vindicate his honour after getting beaten back last time by lowly grots(true story!) rather than drop the squad just to fit into some point limit.

 Griddlelol wrote:
Basically the arguments put forth are now "I'm too lazy to remember which model has what/I can't be bothered to make everything WYSIWYG.

It's not that I'm too lazy to remember which of the two identically-equipped squads has a melta bomb on the Superior. It's that once the game starts going and it actually ends up being relevant information for once, unless I've been keeping a marker with the squad as a constant reminder (not a bad idea but I never thought of it before just now), I really can't be trusted to be completely objective and there'd always be the suspicion that I fudged it.

I mean, let's say you're facing my Sororitas army. It has two squads that look identical when it comes to wargear and numbers. One of them has a melta bomb, the other does not. Are you REALLY going to want to rely on my memory of which squad has the melta bomb and which does not when you decide to charge a Dreadnought into one of those squads?

The marker you use is the melta-bomb she's carrying or has slung to her back. That way you and your opponent can immediately tell who's a threat to their tanks in melee, and who's not.

Neither are particularly hard to model, even on metal figures. I mean we all used metal captains/sergeants back in the day and never had a problem with WYSIWYG.

You argument is essentially "Instead sticking to an agreed limit, I made it so all my infantry squads are a threat to tanks in melee, that way I don't have to remember or make any decisions about which squads to place where."

 Griddlelol wrote:
The marker you use is the melta-bomb she's carrying or has slung to her back. That way you and your opponent can immediately tell who's a threat to their tanks in melee, and who's not.

Neither are particularly hard to model, even on metal figures. I mean we all used metal captains/sergeants back in the day and never had a problem with WYSIWYG.

You argument is essentially "Instead sticking to an agreed limit, I made it so all my infantry squads are a threat to tanks in melee, that way I don't have to remember or make any decisions about which squads to place where."

No, my argument is that I wanted to avoid any confusion and didn't want to glue on a melta bomb that gets swapped in and out of existence on my lists multiple times a day as I tinker, so I gave it to my Commander instead and avoided that whole issue of trying to remember which squad had it.

tneva82 wrote:

Limited? 4000 pts orks(well more like 5000-6000 with 2nd ed rules likely. Haven't counted exact count yet).
But you know units don't tend to cost like 12 pts or 16 pts. More like 252, 293, 196.
Adding up those so it's precicely 1500 isn't that easy.
Tinkering to such a micromanagement isn't even going to be fun, interesting or even have notable effect on getting interesting story out of the game. It's "who cares" thing. It's much more important that the sergeant Nehemiah from Dark Angels gets to lead his assault marines in an attempt to vindicate his honour after getting beaten back last time by lowly grots(true story!) rather than drop the squad just to fit into some point limit.

I'm with you on this one. In a competitive sense, I can see that points values are important, but my friends and I have always been very loose with points values, allowing up to a 100pt difference betwen armies at times.
My units are equipped with certain things and are WYSIWIG. I'm not going to drop a power fist to go under the points limit, because chances are we'll forget I droppped it and I'll end up using it in battle anyway.
And the storytelling and visual aspects are so important that looking at someone with a power fist and trying to pretend it's not there would be really annoying.

In my Bloodstorm army, there are several units of khorne berzerkers, and one of them is equipped with two-handed chainaxes. I have equipped them in the rules with chainaxes, even though 90% of the time they are facing space marines and the chainaxes have no effect.
I see the rules as a way of assigning points to things that are on the model. Obviously, some things aren't used in this way, such as psychic powers, ichor blood or other such upgrades, but if a model has a flamer, it has a flamer, and that is 5pts, and that's why I tend to prefer to be looser with the points limits for games. It don't think the standard of play I'm used to is such that 100points makes that much difference.

Y'all need magnets.

This is one of those, It depends moments for me. If they are one point over because they tried to squeeze something like a grav canon in the list, or laz pred, Nah fam, you gotta reorganize.

But if its like 5 points because he wanted a special on his tack squad and no matter which one he picked he would put him over by like a point, then i would let him take the flamer, (cheapest SM special weapon you can take)

If it's under 5 points over, I could care less.

Be wary, as there's a lot of people on this website who will equate going 1 point over with literally being Satan.

 jreilly89 wrote:
who will equate going 1 point over with literally being Satan.

Haha!

40k is such a large community, and there are so many ways to play this game that there are bound to be many people at each end of the spectrum. I think that's part of what makes it such an interesting hobby.

 jreilly89 wrote:
If it's under 5 points over, I could care less.

Be wary, as there's a lot of people on this website who will equate going 1 point over with literally being Satan.

Could care less means you care some!

If you were a point over, I wouldn't call you Satan. There are all manner of lesser imps and demons, jrelly89, but the great Satan hisself is red and scaly with a bifurcated tail, and he carries a hay fork. He probably plays Magic: the Gathering, anyway.

For the OP, if you agreed to a point limit, play up to, but not over that limit.

If you want the extra 5 points, then call the other players before hand, and don't wait until the day of. Give them the same opportunity to think about their list that you're assuming for yourself.

This is not Nam, this is 40k. There are rules.

Never over , even or under

I'm in the boat with the other people that think a limit implies limitations.

I never exceed it and prefer my opponent doesn't do it either.