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.
Imateria wrote: Good luck getting games in, I can see trying to convince/make everyone use DftS will make you very popular in your group.
Every other "optional" rule book that expanded the core rules met with initial resistance and then promptly became standard. I'd expect the next version of the core rule book to include these new flyer rules in the same way that the current version includes rules originally found in Escalation and Stronghold Assault.
History shows that trying to convince everyone to use rules that are obviously intended as standard rules won't be as much of an uphill battle as you think.
This is very true. In fact several people have stated this as the reason for why they're not getting DftS, why bother if it'll become part of the core rules whenever 8th drops. This doesnt mean that it should be taken as a wholesale replacement of the core rules within the BRB, they'd have to replace the BRB for that, put as an expansion that builds on them. That is how most people are going to treat it until it becomes part of the BRB.
I got to read the book last night, and I thought it quite funny that the start of the dogfight phase rules actually states that the phase itself is optional.
I am also going to refuse any game in which my opponent has flyers and I don't, IF he insists on using the new rules.
It is ludicrously easy to give an opponent -2 to reserve rolls just for not having a flyer.
If it just made flyers better, I wouldn't have a problem. Instead it seriously punishes anyone without one
"If you wait a few months, they'll pick one of the worst codexes and they'll nerf almost everything, its an abstract sort of balance, but it's the sort of balance gw likes... "
The Gw employee on the Facebook page that's posting all the faqs people plan to take as gospel said these rules replace the rules in the brb however you and your friends are free to play with whatever rules you like. (Aka house rule)
blaktoof wrote: the original DFTS was listed as optional within its cover.
this DFTS is not, an is said to replace existing rulebook rules.
Saying it is optional because it is an expansion is not really true, since it is not listed as an expansion.
Saying it is optional because it is a supplement is not really true, because it is not listed as a supplement:
Ironically the following are supplements:
Daemonic incursions
Angels of death
Waagh Ghazkull
Haemonoculi
Harlequins
All of the new SW/NID books outside of their main codex
tau units/formations from Kauyon books
etc.
Do people who think supplements are optional think those are optional? "I am sorry, skyhammer comes from angels of death which is a supplement, meaning its optional- you need to remove those models you just drop podded in" yeah right lol.
Not that it matters but stronghold assault and escalation were not written as optional either, that some people put their head in the sand and GW soon after released a version folding them into the RB so same said people who did not like them and looked for made up reasons to try and not allow people to play with what were core rules, although updated in another non expansion book, did not make those optional in any way.
Yes, they are optional. I do not need to abide by any of those that are not in use. I do not need to abide by anything I choose not to use. That is the definition of House Rule.
Would it be any more fair if I just started using Battle Missions without discussing it with my opponent? What about Planetstrike? Cities of Death? Spearhead?
Also, remember for the longest time, even codices were listed as supplements to the game. That is all any of these books really are in the end. They are there to enhance and improve the experience of the game.
But it will only do that if all players are on board.
The problem with that line of thinking is the things you refrence are actually told to be optional within their respective books, DFTS does not in contain any such language.
So it is as optional as the eldar codex, or rolling to hit against ballistic skill.
DFTS is essentially Codex fliers.
You have as much right to deny someone using it as they have to deny you using the adeptus astartes codex.
So yes everythin can be said to be.optional as a house rule, even playing by a points system. The reality however is that DFTS is not actually listed as optional so outside of playing by house rules it is part of the normal 40k game.
Good luck getting games in, I can see trying to convince/make everyone use DftS will make you very popular in your group.
The point is, which you missed, I don't have to convince anyone.
Optional rules you have to convince someone to use.
the normal rules both players have to agree not to use.
DFTS are not listed as optional rules anywhere.
DFTS are the normal rules for flyers now.
Just like someone can show up to play a game with the angels of death supplement to use cataphractii terminators and skyhammer, or a hive tyrant with a fighter ace rule from one of the baal supplements, I can show up with flyers from DFTS, and use all the rules which are not listed as optional within. Someone can of course decide they do not want to play with flyers, Just as someone could decide they don't want to play a game with any SHV or GMC.
Just as I can play a pick up game at a FLGS and decide to not play against someone because they are using Eldar, You can opt to not play against someone for using flyers.
All of this is fine, however if the poll on this forum is anything to go by then more than 3/4 of the player base will not be bothering to buy this book, or at least not get it any time soon. If you are going to stand by your idea that using DftS is absolutely mandatory then you may quickly find yourself without opponents because a lot of people wont have the rules and many of them seem not to want them.
I've played against players using codexes that I don't own, so have others. Not a problem for most people.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jokerkd wrote: I got to read the book last night, and I thought it quite funny that the start of the dogfight phase rules actually states that the phase itself is optional.
I am also going to refuse any game in which my opponent has flyers and I don't, IF he insists on using the new rules.
It is ludicrously easy to give an opponent -2 to reserve rolls just for not having a flyer.
If it just made flyers better, I wouldn't have a problem. Instead it seriously punishes anyone without one
Yep it's optional, and goes on to say that both players roll a d6 and the winner has the option to choose if There is a dogfight.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/05/12 01:05:47
blaktoof wrote: Please quote where in DFTS it says the rules are optional, as is done in Apoc, Cities of Death, Planetstrike, Spearhead, or any of the FW experimental rules to show the rules as written are listed as optional.
Right after you prove that it says that it IS mandatory.
I don't think there's any rules that say "THIS IS MANDATORY!!!".
Everything is optional. You can choose to ignore the close combat phase if you want, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say it's mandatory.
I would describe DftS as mandatory or as optional as any other rule in 40k.... that is, if you rock up for a game you should be expecting to use those rules up until you arrange with your opponent that you AREN'T using those rules, the same way you'd be expecting to play with the close combat rules unless you arrange before hand not to use them, or if your opponent rocks up with Eldar you'd be expecting them to play with the most current Eldar codex.
The only thing that makes it less optional than any other rule is that, being a separate book, there's a decent chance neither player is going to rock up with it at all.
"
