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.

 Crimson wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
This is a hard no from me.

The rule of 3 is good for the game.

I would refuse a game with you.

So you refuse to play with people that don't want to use your houserules?

It's definitely not a house rule buddy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
And for the vast majority who do not play tournaments, it makes no sense.

And yet almost everyone uses it anyway. Oh noes, five Hellflayers!! However do you counter that?

Baah.

Actually, it makes perfect sense for pick up games.

Tournament play is supposed to be the most balanced (Don't care right now about your thoughts on whether that's true or not), which is why people use them for games against strangers. While optional, it's a widely accepted optional rule that gets used frequently. Because of that it's a defacto standard rule.

 Horst wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:

Right, but you're the one ignoring practical considerations.

How?

Not really. It's sarcasm, I agree with you.

Doesn't work via text all that well, I guess.

Biggest practical consideration I see you both are missing is that it doesn't matter how you play, or how you want to play, it matters what OP's local group plays like.

I said the same thing in the fourth post in this thread.

Do keep up.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

It simply is not a rule, no matter how hard y'all want to pretend that tournament play is superior and somehow governing.

Its widespread use is no more than a symptom of the netlistification of 40K and the increasing inability of people to think for themselves.

It simply is not a rule, no matter how hard y'all want to pretend that tournament play is superior and somehow governing.

Its widespread use is no more than a symptom of the netlistification of 40K and the increasing inability of people to think for themselves.

*Looks at where it's written. Sees optional rule labeling it.

So yeah. It's very much a rule, and one that is apparently quite popular for it's apparent balancing effects.

Also, got to love your smug attitude towards your other players. Nothing says "I'm a jerk" more than attacking people because they don't follow your specific way of doing things.
Actually, there's a word for that...what was it...

It was used in video games quite a lot.

Oh, yeah. You're acting like a scrub.

 Mmmpi wrote:

It's definitely not a house rule buddy.

Using it outside tournaments is a houserule. There is no ifs or buts about it.

It's an official rule, made by the game designers. Nothing about that makes it a house rule.

ITs an Official Rule, part of the FAQ, that added a limit of models per certain points limit.
It isnt a house rule, it is a rule, and like most rules, it is optional.
However, adhering to this rule makes the most sense. Why?
It standardizes play across all games

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
ITs an Official Rule, part of the FAQ, that added a limit of models per certain points limit.
It isnt a house rule, it is a rule, and like most rules, it is optional.
However, adhering to this rule makes the most sense. Why?
It standardizes play across all games

It's an optional rule specifically for Organized Play events.
Pick up games most definetly aren't Organized Play, by definition.

I have never met a single person who used that rationale.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I have never met a single person who used that rationale.

*waves*
Hi, I'm Natalie, nice to meet you.

If someone specifically is looking for a tournament prep game, then, yay, Ro3.
If it's a random game, no Ro3.

 Blndmage wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
ITs an Official Rule, part of the FAQ, that added a limit of models per certain points limit.
It isnt a house rule, it is a rule, and like most rules, it is optional.
However, adhering to this rule makes the most sense. Why?
It standardizes play across all games

It's an optional rule specifically for Organized Play events.
Pick up games most definetly aren't Organized Play, by definition.

Actually, they are.
"Hey, want to play a game of 40K?"
"Sure."

Congratulations. You've just organized a game.

Besides, saying that it's for organized play is why most people use it. The perception that it's there to be the most balanced. Why wouldn't you use the most balanced rules?

(Note, I'm going off of general perception, not accusing you of anything)

Personally, if someone wanted to run 2000pts of only vanguard detachments in a game with me, i couldn't give a gak, at all haha

Build what ever list you want i say. Only thing i like to mention is, if your building a proper competitive/tournament list you want to try out , let me know beforehand so i dont bring one of my fluffy lists and get wiped out by turn 2!

 Crimson wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
This is a hard no from me.

The rule of 3 is good for the game.

I would refuse a game with you.

So you refuse to play with people that don't want to use your houserules?

Of course. Why wouldn't you?

Anyone who isn't using the rule of 3 would quickly change their mind after playing againgst 9 demon princes or 7 calidus grav tanks+ buffer characters.

 FEARtheMoose wrote:

Build what ever list you want i say. Only thing i like to mention is, if your building a proper competitive/tournament list you want to try out , let me know beforehand so i dont bring one of my fluffy lists and get wiped out by turn 2!

This. If you're gonna do something outside the expected norm (and for better or worse Ro3 is an expected norm), talk to your opponent first.

A smidgeon of courtesy and respect goes a long way.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Anyone who isn't using the rule of 3 would quickly change their mind after playing againgst 9 demon princes or 7 calidus grav tanks+ buffer characters.

ROT doesn't stop you taking 9 Daemon Princes. ROT doesn't stop you taking 12 Daemon Princes from a single book, another 12 from a different book plus the TS and DG DPs and the Special Character DPs all at one time, unless you believe that "same" doesn't actually mean "same".

So that's 30 DPs, plus Special Characters, all in compliance with ROT.

So not only is it an idiotic, overbroad "rule", it is also ineffective at curbing the mischief it was intended to address.

----------------------------------------------

I do so dearly appreciate being told that I am imposing my way of playing on others, by a person who wants to roll-out a suggestion for tournaments as a rule to bind everyone.

Logic and that.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Anyone who isn't using the rule of 3 would quickly change their mind after playing againgst 9 demon princes or 7 calidus grav tanks+ buffer characters.

Because 9 daemon princes is still possible with the RO3?

3 from CSM dex, 3 Thousands, 3 DG, 3 CDM

Soooooo the rule is not only ineffective but also rather stupid in effect.

Sure it is better then nothing, but there is a reason it is not in matchedplay yet.
Frankly this is also something i am going to bring up in their Community survey, mostly due to it hitting the wrong units but he.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
ITs an Official Rule, part of the FAQ, that added a limit of models per certain points limit.
It isnt a house rule, it is a rule, and like most rules, it is optional.
However, adhering to this rule makes the most sense. Why?
It standardizes play across all games

It's an optional rule specifically for Organized Play events.
Pick up games most definetly aren't Organized Play, by definition.

Actually, they are.
"Hey, want to play a game of 40K?"
"Sure."

Congratulations. You've just organized a game.

Besides, saying that it's for organized play is why most people use it. The perception that it's there to be the most balanced. Why wouldn't you use the most balanced rules?

(Note, I'm going off of general perception, not accusing you of anything)

Don't play that game.
Organized Play is obviously a reference to tournaments, leagues, or other similar things. Not pick up games.

But not if you expand the term to the point of meaningless, to support an incredibly tenuous 'point'.

Any game of 40K is organized. Obvious bad faith is obvious.

 Blndmage wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
ITs an Official Rule, part of the FAQ, that added a limit of models per certain points limit.
It isnt a house rule, it is a rule, and like most rules, it is optional.
However, adhering to this rule makes the most sense. Why?
It standardizes play across all games

It's an optional rule specifically for Organized Play events.
Pick up games most definetly aren't Organized Play, by definition.

Actually, they are.
"Hey, want to play a game of 40K?"
"Sure."

Congratulations. You've just organized a game.

Besides, saying that it's for organized play is why most people use it. The perception that it's there to be the most balanced. Why wouldn't you use the most balanced rules?

(Note, I'm going off of general perception, not accusing you of anything)

Don't play that game.
Organized Play is obviously a reference to tournaments, leagues, or other similar things. Not pick up games.

Why not? It's not like you're arguing in good faith on the subject.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Anyone who isn't using the rule of 3 would quickly change their mind after playing againgst 9 demon princes or 7 calidus grav tanks+ buffer characters.

The issue is the units themselves.

If Daemon Princes were all the sudden 25 points for no rhyme or reason, BUT you were only allowed one, is that balanced?

 Mmmpi wrote:
It's an official rule, made by the game designers. Nothing about that makes it a house rule.

So are the terrain rules and stratagems in in Urban Conquest. But using them on all games instead only in Urban Conquest missions would be a houserule.

 Crimson wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
It's an official rule, made by the game designers. Nothing about that makes it a house rule.

So are the terrain rules and stratagems in in Urban Conquest. But using them on all games instead only in Urban Conquest missions would be a houserule.

Which is why it sucks that GW didn't make the rules officially part of matched play. Oh well.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Anyone who isn't using the rule of 3 would quickly change their mind after playing againgst 9 demon princes or 7 calidus grav tanks+ buffer characters.

The issue is the units themselves.

If Daemon Princes were all the sudden 25 points for no rhyme or reason, BUT you were only allowed one, is that balanced?

Army composition plays a part, too. While there are obvious benefits to the current Detachment system in terms of flexibility (sales) and forging the narrative (sales), there are also obvious drawbacks in terms of balance.

ROT would not have been necessary, even in theory, under the old CAD.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
But not if you expand the term to the point of meaningless, to support an incredibly tenuous 'point'.

Any game of 40K is organized. Obvious bad faith is obvious.

This is not even unclear. The rulebook says 'organised even such as a tournament.' The intent is clear. Though I start to get the feeling that we are arguing with people who have not actually opened the rulebook and have gained all their knowledge of the game via cultural osmosis.

 Crimson wrote:
So are the terrain rules and stratagems in in Urban Conquest. But using them on all games instead only in Urban Conquest missions would be a houserule.

There is no pure, non-houseruled form form of 40k. Literally every game of 40k involves choosing from types of play formats, missions, army construction, etc. It's not a "house rule" to play with rule of three any more than it's a "house rule" only play power level maelstrom games.

Not all pick up games use organized play rules, but if I were to guess, I would say that the plurality of games of 40k played use Matched Play rules with all beta rules and other organized play elements. Depending on your environment, games played under organized play rule could be the overwhelming majority, or very scarce.

As for the OPs actual question, really, it comes down to the attitude and personality of the people you play with. The rule of 3 is a kludge, a jerry-rigged fix to the issues of balance in 40k. It works reasonably well, and most tournament players support it. Still, the reason it exists is that some units are so good for the points that too many of them is detrimental to the balance of the game. Sometimes it's units that are horribly cost effective (astropaths, mortar heavy weapon squads, ravagers) and others simply have too many layered abilities for their cost (flying hive tyrants, tau commanders). Veterans obviously are not an overpowered or unbalanced unit, so they don't really create a gaming problem. So, people that see rules as a way to prevent harm will allow it, because there is no harm. However, people that see rules as a way to create order will not, because rules are rules. And even then, there's a difference between pick up games (where you're really just agreeing to not play strict organized play) and tournament games.

Suggested for organized tournament events.

What do those words mean?

 Excommunicatus wrote:
Suggested for organized tournament events.

What do those words mean?

Excommunicatus, I think you'd agree that a lot of games (not necessarily a majority, but a lot) use Matched Play rules AND the tournament suggestions. I know in my local store, we do.

But, at the same time, can I get the people who are saying "Rule of Three for days!" to agree that the intent of the rule was not to stop players fielding four Veteran squads, and instead designed to stop stuff like PBC spam or Flyrant spam?

 Crimson wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
It's an official rule, made by the game designers. Nothing about that makes it a house rule.

So are the terrain rules and stratagems in in Urban Conquest. But using them on all games instead only in Urban Conquest missions would be a houserule.

No, that would be using all of the rules. They're still official rules, by the people who make the official rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


As far as it goes for people who've said what they play, the majority do use Ro3, and the other suggestion rules. Can't say if it's the majority or not, but it's the vast majority of people who talk about it.

And yeah, it was set up to stop 'good unit' spam. But if it's in effect, it's still a rule. Know your meta and if you think they won't mind, ask. Don't assume?

Rather than the rule of three I wish GW would put hard caps on certain units to make people have to build things closer to the fluff rather than just spamming the most effective things in a codex. Having more than one space marine captain or demon prince on a battlefield should be saved for apoc.

 Mmmpi wrote:
As far as it goes for people who've said what they play, the majority do use Ro3, and the other suggestion rules. Can't say if it's the majority or not, but it's the vast majority of people who talk about it.

According to a poll I did here on dakka you can safely assume that ~80% of the games are played WITH the "rule of 3". This matches anecdotal evidence and my experience across multiple stores and gaming groups as well.