Switch Theme:

Getting shot off the board turn one --- terrain question  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in fi
5th God of Chaos (O'rly?)





 Jidmah wrote:
How powerful are those sentinels compared to other shooting units? More on the strong side or average? Honest question, because compared to flash gits or intercessors, 4.43 damage doesn't seem too bad.


Strong. Their power comes from being mw(opponent save irrelevant), obscene range(not much 30" premove range) and ability to ignore los at near will(can't split attacks. Boo).

But 30 of those will put quite a dent to lots of stuff. There's also spell allowing rerolls vs target unit increasing mw output to 55%.

One of top shooting units in game. But not in terms of wipe any unit. Main offencing feature is deleting those key characters melee can't deal with because they are behind wall of heroes. Some armies find this particularly irritating. Nighthaunt without support heroes is sorry sight for example.

2021 painted/bought: 857/1043 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Getting back to the OP, there's a couple things you can do.

There's a fair few terrain videos on YouTube to watch. What's good about these is that they get you used to placing terrain and recognizing their uses.

For example, on one board you might have along the middle third on one side of the map a LOS blocking structure, which means you can hide your bigger stuff there turn on. The other side of the table might be open but have heavy cover or forest next to an objective.

As long as these terrain features are more or less in the center, they won't theoretically favor one player over another. If at all possible, try to avoid any sort of terrain in the deployment zones that will encourage turtling or even completely block LOS (instead, use that terrain in the center of the board so players will have to fight over it).

For your opponent, you have a couple options. You can accept that they're leaning into WAAC and you'll need to update your lists to be as competitive as his. Another option is to just find another player that's more concerned with having fun than winning (and can differentiate the two). Something else to consider is perhaps a change in format--see if you can find someone who can run a crusade for you or something similar until you're more comfortable with the ruleset. Right now I'm experimenting running a story campaign basically like a dungeon master with a handful of players and using my collection of minis to play the opposing forces whenever the players aren't going for the same objective and everyone's having a blast.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






....Again, I love the implication that somehow, a dude that took

-the space marine captain that comes in the starter box (walky cap with shield and sword)

-10 intercessors

-1 space marine dreadnought

Is somehow this evil sinister WAAC player...for not knowing which of the game's rules he's supposed to ignore to have a good time.

I'd hazard to say MOST people who are new to a game as their first instinct dont go 'hmm lets see now which of these rules should I not follow to avoid giving everyone a miserable time'?

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in pt
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp




I don’t think it’s an unfair list, that said people do struggle against Redemptors at 500 points.

The SM list is really easy to construct and pilot. Everything is solid and straightforward.

The Admech list is another story. Kataphrons don’t have the core keyword so 300+ points in this list is tied up in units thats don’t have any real synergy together.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 the_scotsman wrote:
....Again, I love the implication that somehow, a dude that took

-the space marine captain that comes in the starter box (walky cap with shield and sword)

-10 intercessors

-1 space marine dreadnought

Is somehow this evil sinister WAAC player...for not knowing which of the game's rules he's supposed to ignore to have a good time.

I'd hazard to say MOST people who are new to a game as their first instinct dont go 'hmm lets see now which of these rules should I not follow to avoid giving everyone a miserable time'?


I completely agree. It's another case of the blaming the player instead of the game. A list with a basic character, the army's most basic infantry and a single vehicle is hardly a heinous skew list and it definitely doesn't feel like an attempt to dominate a new player.

It's true that the game doesn't work too well below ~1000 points and that could be causing balance problems here. Again, that's not the fault of the players.
   
Made in pt
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp




I think the strategy here would be using Skitarii to take an objective with a 2+ save in cover, while ignoring -2AP shooting from Logi.

The Grav Kataphrons outrange the Intercessors and have a great offensive profile against Marines. They want to be held back and not exposed to fire immediately.

The Serberys Raiders are probably best used to steal objectives once other units start dying.

Cawl should probably just be replaced with a generic HQ and a Neutron Laser/2x Stubber Dunecrawer.

So basically:

- Tech-Priest, Logi
- 10x Rangers
- 3x Destroyers, Flamers
- 3x Serberys Raiders
- Dunecrawler, Neutron Laser, 2x Stubber

There’s a lot of options for Relics and Forge Worlds, but I think the -1 to hit from Stygies is going to be more forgiving for someone learning 40k. Games at this scale will always be swingy but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily unbalanced.
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Khorne Dreadnought




 the_scotsman wrote:
....Again, I love the implication that somehow, a dude that took

-the space marine captain that comes in the starter box (walky cap with shield and sword)

-10 intercessors

-1 space marine dreadnought

Is somehow this evil sinister WAAC player...for not knowing which of the game's rules he's supposed to ignore to have a good time.

I'd hazard to say MOST people who are new to a game as their first instinct dont go 'hmm lets see now which of these rules should I not follow to avoid giving everyone a miserable time'?


I love the implication a new player in their first few games willing ignores rules to take advantage of others like some sinister WAAC player.

It's not about ignoring the rules, it's about how you enlighten your opponent. Would it really hurt them to have said "it's true LOS btw and I can see that 1 gun barrell, did you mean to keep them all hidden?". Thats not even something that applies just to new players, you even see that happening in tournaments when they play by intent.

If they moved up, said "lol it's TLOS and I can see your gun barrell git gun noob" then yeah, they're being an ass to a new player.

You'll also note none of that is relevant to the list taken as it's down to the human behind the army.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 07:05:38


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Dudeface wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
....Again, I love the implication that somehow, a dude that took

-the space marine captain that comes in the starter box (walky cap with shield and sword)

-10 intercessors

-1 space marine dreadnought

Is somehow this evil sinister WAAC player...for not knowing which of the game's rules he's supposed to ignore to have a good time.

I'd hazard to say MOST people who are new to a game as their first instinct dont go 'hmm lets see now which of these rules should I not follow to avoid giving everyone a miserable time'?


I love the implication a new player in their first few games willing ignores rules to take advantage of others like some sinister WAAC player.

It's not about ignoring the rules, it's about how you enlighten your opponent. Would it really hurt them to have said "it's true LOS btw and I can see that 1 gun barrell, did you mean to keep them all hidden?". Thats not even something that applies just to new players, you even see that happening in tournaments when they play by intent.

If they moved up, said "lol it's TLOS and I can see your gun barrell git gun noob" then yeah, they're being an ass to a new player.

You'll also note none of that is relevant to the list taken as it's down to the human behind the army.


The problem is newer players often have no context for the etiquette in these situations. Maybe they consider taking advantage of positioning errors to be part of the game. All these conventions around playing by intent or when to allow players to go back to do something they forgot are social constructs that seem obvious to experienced players but may not be so for newer ones, especially if they learn the game away from an established group.

Again, it's perfectly possible to write better LoS rules than we currently have in 40k. Blaming the players for following the rules is the wrong approach, and basically calling them TFG for doing so is wrong without more context.
   
Made in pt
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp




You don’t need to be rules guru to understand the difference between:

- playing 40k with the overall goal of both players enjoying the experience; and
- playing 40k with the overall goal of maximizing your enjoyment at the expense of the other player.
   
Made in fi
5th God of Chaos (O'rly?)





It's easy to claim something is X when it's actually not so black and white. It's easy to claim the opponent is WAAC TFG.

I can assure you odds here is he's not though.

2021 painted/bought: 857/1043 
   
Made in pt
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp




I don't think so either. Even if both players are prosocial and cooperative, there's still lots of game interactions in 40k to trip over. Terrain, list building, rules interpretations, etc.

It's more about having constructive processes to resolve those issues than expecting that they never arise in the first place.
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

I think if we get the point that just playing the game by the rules gets you defined as tfg then we've got a problem with the rules by definition. It's just nonsensical to think about it in any other way.

A problem doesn't mean "throw the entire game out, it's garbage" it just means there's something in the rules that requires improvement.

   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Dudeface wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
....Again, I love the implication that somehow, a dude that took

-the space marine captain that comes in the starter box (walky cap with shield and sword)

-10 intercessors

-1 space marine dreadnought

Is somehow this evil sinister WAAC player...for not knowing which of the game's rules he's supposed to ignore to have a good time.

I'd hazard to say MOST people who are new to a game as their first instinct dont go 'hmm lets see now which of these rules should I not follow to avoid giving everyone a miserable time'?


I love the implication a new player in their first few games willing ignores rules to take advantage of others like some sinister WAAC player.

It's not about ignoring the rules, it's about how you enlighten your opponent. Would it really hurt them to have said "it's true LOS btw and I can see that 1 gun barrell, did you mean to keep them all hidden?". Thats not even something that applies just to new players, you even see that happening in tournaments when they play by intent.

If they moved up, said "lol it's TLOS and I can see your gun barrell git gun noob" then yeah, they're being an ass to a new player.

You'll also note none of that is relevant to the list taken as it's down to the human behind the army.


Or, lets say theyre both newer players, and one goes "I think I can see a little bit of that model - does it say anything in the rulebook about whether i'm allowed to target him?"

Again, to reiterate: It actually takes a bit of knowledge of the rules to know which rules are crap and you shouldn't use them to avoid giving your opponent a bad time. And also, a reminder: People are mostly proclaiming this guy a WAAC TFG because he...plays space marines and brought a fething dreadnought.

A new player is not going to know that there are 'tournament units' that you should only bring if youre a big stinky douchebag and 'fluffy units' you shouldnt bring because theyre like 3x worse than the tournament units. Theyre going to see points values and go 'oh, this is how much this unit is worth'.

Theyre not going to know you shouldnt bring X amount of your list as a single vehicle in a small pts game. Theyre also not going to know this rule and that rule should be ignored to 'give your opponent a pass' theyre going to go in with the expectation that the game is going to work.

This is like how in DnD 5e DMs are supposed to know that encounters with a party of adventurers against a single high-CR monster (You know, like is portrayed on the cover of EVERY DND BOOK EVER MADE) dont work like at all and you HAVE to give the large single monser a couple of minion creatures in order to keep them from getting dumpstered by action economy.

New players are going to walk face-first into 'dick moves' in 40k all the time because the game is so massively unforgiving. In a normal wargame, where a shot at a 99% obscured enemy is going to be 1% as effective as a shot against a 0% obscured enemy, this would be fine. You'd *maybe* be able to kill that one single guy you can spot, if you get super lucky and get past all the enhanced defenses that a cover system designed by a fully mentally capable adult would convey.

In 40k, however, if you spot that gun barrel you can literally vaporise not just that guy you can see, but ALL HIS BUDDIES YOU CANT SEE as well.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in ie
Ship's Officer





Yoyoyo wrote:
I don't think so either. Even if both players are prosocial and cooperative, there's still lots of game interactions in 40k to trip over. Terrain, list building, rules interpretations, etc.

It's more about having constructive processes to resolve those issues than expecting that they never arise in the first place.


But even if you disregard that two new players with no context to the game aren't going to immediately understand stuff like why D3+3 dmg is better than D6 dmg etc, or how a S7 weapon isn't much of an improvement over a S6 weapon, or in what context D3 mortal wounds are good. Thats stuff that only comes when you start really analysing the maths or from experience. Its entirely possible for two new players to inadvertently have incredible uneven armies because external balance in 40k is not great.

I wish Karol was here, hes been arguing this point for years.


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







Yeah.

Plus, the "informing your opponent" thing may or may not be acceptable to certain degrees.

Let's say our hypothetical new kiddos are coming from Chess. In chess, if your opponent is about to make a bad move (e.g. one that exposes their Queen to an uncontested capture), you don't butt in and say "maybe you should ~" - that kind of handicapping can actually get you looked at funny in Chess Clubs. (Now if you're playing someone DRAMATICALLY outside your skill level and helping them practice, that changes a bit, but for two random players who are approximately of equal skill? Nah).

So you're moving so that I can see your gunbarrel. Fair enough, but much like exposing your queen in Chess, that's on you. At least, it's on you until we realize how absolutely absurd the situation is ("oh, you see the front of my gun barrel, that's okay. I moved that guy badly, you deserve the shot - wait what? You wiped out him AND his buddies in one shot? WHAAT?")

That absurdity is really the problem, and that absurdity is completely down to the rules.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/10/27 12:50:13


 
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






So now the discussion has moved on from a new player getting burned by an experienced one who could easily have made the game a better experience, to two completely new players who instead of coming from another Warhammer game, have come from chess, all because people think that discussion between players after one has multiple bad games is a crazy expectation?
Am I the only one who thinks this line of thinking is just silly?
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

Do you not understand that rules that require players to know the bad bits to ignore have bad bits that should be fixed? Sorry, if that seems rude, but that is the point here.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







I suppose the meat and potatoes of the point is:

if the rules weren't bad in the first place, it wouldn't matter whether a player was new, coming from Chess, particularly WAAC or particularly CAAC. Whether he was or wasn't playing by intent, whether she was or wasn't going to interrupt their enemy whilst they made a mistake, etc. etc.

All of these social factors are ONLY relevant (and subject to both intense community judgement and are themselves very delicate) because the rules are crap.
   
Made in pt
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp




 the_scotsman wrote:
A new player is not going to know that there are 'tournament units' that you should only bring if youre a big stinky douchebag and 'fluffy units' you shouldnt bring because theyre like 3x worse than the tournament units. Theyre going to see points values and go 'oh, this is how much this unit is worth'.

Right, and Admech are particularly opaque as far as that goes. Skitarii infantry aren't particularly oppressive by their datasheet. It's more the combination of Forge World bonuses, buffing characters, stratagems, doctrines, and scaling the unit to 20 models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
All of these social factors are ONLY relevant (and subject to both intense community judgement and are themselves very delicate) because the rules are crap.

Sure. But aesthetics and lore are a huge draw in 40k as well. The rules aren't designed to be bulletproof, they're balanced against those considerations as well.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 13:49:38


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







Yoyoyo wrote:
Sure. But aesthetics and lore are a huge draw in 40k as well. The rules aren't designed to be bulletproof, they're balanced against those considerations as well.

Are they?

What about 9th edition is more lore-friendly or aesthetically pleasing than, say, 4th edition? (Other than models were less high quality in 4th edition; but that has very little to do with the rules)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 13:52:29


 
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




Yoyoyo wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
A new player is not going to know that there are 'tournament units' that you should only bring if youre a big stinky douchebag and 'fluffy units' you shouldnt bring because theyre like 3x worse than the tournament units. Theyre going to see points values and go 'oh, this is how much this unit is worth'.

Right, and Admech are particularly opaque as far as that goes. Skitarii infantry aren't particularly oppressive by their datasheet. It's more the combination of Forge World bonuses, buffing characters, stratagems, doctrines, and scaling the unit to 20 models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
All of these social factors are ONLY relevant (and subject to both intense community judgement and are themselves very delicate) because the rules are crap.

Sure. But aesthetics and lore are a huge draw in 40k as well. The rules aren't designed to be bulletproof, they're balanced against those considerations as well.


How so? What difference do the aesthetics make to the rules? (examples please). It is certainly a draw for the game, but I'm hard pressed to think of any place where it influences the rules.

As for the lore... GW has long ago convinced me that the narrative lore and the game are entirely separate. It was always a suspicion, but when they did the 'Movie Marines' article for WD, they absolutely nailed down they were entirely serious about it. When they doubled down on special characters for every trivial fight, they reinforced it. The two vaguely influence each other, but the game rules (and game on the table) are absolutely not related to or beholden to 'the lore.'

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/10/27 13:56:33


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






 Da Boss wrote:
Do you not understand that rules that require players to know the bad bits to ignore have bad bits that should be fixed? Sorry, if that seems rude, but that is the point here.

Really? Because I was under the impression that the OP was asking for help with their situation and not asking for yet another thread where people just whine about 40k, which is what this has turned into.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I suppose the meat and potatoes of the point is:

if the rules weren't bad in the first place, it wouldn't matter whether a player was new, coming from Chess, particularly WAAC or particularly CAAC. Whether he was or wasn't playing by intent, whether she was or wasn't going to interrupt their enemy whilst they made a mistake, etc. etc.

All of these social factors are ONLY relevant (and subject to both intense community judgement and are themselves very delicate) because the rules are crap.

Yet that is the situation we find ourselves in.
So what do you think is more helpful to a new player? Whining about how bad the rules are or actually giving them advice on how to approach the situation with their opponent?
By all means, have your opinion but how about offering help instead of making up random hypotheticals that aren't actually relevant to the OP's situation.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







 Gert wrote:
Yet that is the situation we find ourselves in.
So what do you think is more helpful to a new player? Whining about how bad the rules are or actually giving them advice on how to approach the situation with their opponent?

Por que no los dos?
One helps them solve the problem with one opponent.
The other warns them that maybe if they want to get into wargaming, 40k isn't the best ambassador of the whole world of excellent rulesets and not to get turned off of the whole affair.
.
 Gert wrote:
By all means, have your opinion but how about offering help instead of making up random hypotheticals that aren't actually relevant to the OP's situation.

Plenty of help has already been offered, but if you'd rather I fill the thread with the same replete banalities and repetitions as others, I'm sorry I can't indulge you.
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

I don't think it's helpful to give the new player the idea that their opponent is some sort of cut throat and unpleasant person.

   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Gert wrote:
 Da Boss wrote:
Do you not understand that rules that require players to know the bad bits to ignore have bad bits that should be fixed? Sorry, if that seems rude, but that is the point here.

Really? Because I was under the impression that the OP was asking for help with their situation and not asking for yet another thread where people just whine about 40k, which is what this has turned into.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I suppose the meat and potatoes of the point is:

if the rules weren't bad in the first place, it wouldn't matter whether a player was new, coming from Chess, particularly WAAC or particularly CAAC. Whether he was or wasn't playing by intent, whether she was or wasn't going to interrupt their enemy whilst they made a mistake, etc. etc.

All of these social factors are ONLY relevant (and subject to both intense community judgement and are themselves very delicate) because the rules are crap.

Yet that is the situation we find ourselves in.
So what do you think is more helpful to a new player? Whining about how bad the rules are or actually giving them advice on how to approach the situation with their opponent?
By all means, have your opinion but how about offering help instead of making up random hypotheticals that aren't actually relevant to the OP's situation.


Well, depending on whether he'll be playing in a wider group or just with this one friend, I have two different solutions I'd go for.

Wider group: You're basically left with 'Git Gud' or engage in the ol' classic 9th ed 40k "Nuclear Arms De-Escalation Negotiation" pre-listbuilding phase of the game where you try to finagle the game into a playable and enjoyable state by agreeing to not use the many many tools at your disposal to make the game a miserable experience.

One Player: Just houserule the terrain system to something that makes sense. I would suggest:

1) Penalties and bonuses to hit and wound only cap at +1/-1 if they're imposed by special rules, datasheet abilities, psychic powers, auras, or stratagems. Penalties and bonuses conveyed by battlefield rules, weapon types, and terrain rules can stack higher than +1/-1

2) If at any point during the resolution of a shooting attack all models in the attacking unit can no longer see any models from the target unit, the attack immediately ends and any remaining save rolls are treated as automatically passed.

3) All terrain features have the following 4 rules:

-All terrain features have the Obscuring trait (as described in the core rulebook) for any models physically shorter than the piece of terrain, rather than if the terrain feature is 5" or taller.

-All terrain features regardless of height have the Dense trait

-Any model within 1" or touching a terrain feature adds +1 to its save rolls if that terrain feature is closer to the attacking model than the target model

-models may only end their move on upper levels of any terrain feature if the entire base of the model can be placed over the terrain feature. Models without bases cannot end their moves on upper levels of terrain features. Models may freely move over terrain features by moving up, across, and down the feature using their normal movement, and may also move through terrain as if it were not there by giving up 1/2 of the movement that they would normally be allowed to make

(for example, a unit with a Movement of 12 that is making an Advance move and rolled a 2, could move 7" if it wished to pass through a terrain piece rather than going over it, and a unit making a Charge move that rolled a 9 could move 4.5" if it wished to pass through a terrain feature.)

4) bases, basing features, weapons, banners, antennae and other features not part of the main body of the model cannot be used for drawing line of sight to or from the model.

^to me, that's a terrain system that I can fairly quickly explain, has more versimilitude than GW's current system while also being much simpler, but also has enough abstraction to avoid weird situations like every terrain feature ever basically being a Death Box of No Movement Allowed for large models like Baneblades and Imperial Knights.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/27 14:28:12


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Khorne Dreadnought




 Da Boss wrote:
I don't think it's helpful to give the new player the idea that their opponent is some sort of cut throat and unpleasant person.


There's too much context missing to know one way or the other. All we know is that OP came away feeling a little hard done to because their opponent knows the rules better and didn't make exceptions for them. Without knowing how that was framed it's hard to say.

I don't think the rules being shoddy is ever a fair excuse for leaving someone feeling they had a bad time though. "The rules made me take advantage of a daft mistake you evidently weren't fully aware of!"
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Dudeface wrote:
 Da Boss wrote:
I don't think it's helpful to give the new player the idea that their opponent is some sort of cut throat and unpleasant person.


There's too much context missing to know one way or the other. All we know is that OP came away feeling a little hard done to because their opponent knows the rules better and didn't make exceptions for them. Without knowing how that was framed it's hard to say.

I don't think the rules being shoddy is ever a fair excuse for leaving someone feeling they had a bad time though. "The rules made me take advantage of a daft mistake you evidently weren't fully aware of!"


Boy Howdy, the number of times I have had to deal with someone getting huffy because I called them out for breaking the rules because their favorite unit isnt as good as they think they should be according to the lore...

I am 100% down with altering the rules of the game for mutual enjoyment. Love doing it. Absolutely a huge fan. But I do think its something you ought to be able to do prior to the game, before youve sat down with your opponent and started to play a game with mutually agreed-upon terms.

Would I choose to target an enemy model using only a tiny bit of a weapon or head? Nah, I wouldnt. But I do prior to the game point out to my opponent that I like to play by intent - as in, i'll ask my opponent 'are you aiming to hide that model behind that building?' and if they say yes, I'll make sure none of my stuff has LOS to it, and if on my turn I notice a little bit of it sticking out, I wont take advantage of that because we discussed it.


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in pt
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp




Voss wrote:
How so? What difference do the aesthetics make to the rules? (examples please). It is certainly a draw for the game, but I'm hard pressed to think of any place where it influences the rules.

I mean the interactions between fluff and crunch -- why Dark Eldar have so many negative leadership interactions, why a Warlord Titan has those stats on that datasheet, etc.
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Khorne Dreadnought




 the_scotsman wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
 Da Boss wrote:
I don't think it's helpful to give the new player the idea that their opponent is some sort of cut throat and unpleasant person.


There's too much context missing to know one way or the other. All we know is that OP came away feeling a little hard done to because their opponent knows the rules better and didn't make exceptions for them. Without knowing how that was framed it's hard to say.

I don't think the rules being shoddy is ever a fair excuse for leaving someone feeling they had a bad time though. "The rules made me take advantage of a daft mistake you evidently weren't fully aware of!"


Boy Howdy, the number of times I have had to deal with someone getting huffy because I called them out for breaking the rules because their favorite unit isnt as good as they think they should be according to the lore...

I am 100% down with altering the rules of the game for mutual enjoyment. Love doing it. Absolutely a huge fan. But I do think its something you ought to be able to do prior to the game, before youve sat down with your opponent and started to play a game with mutually agreed-upon terms.

Would I choose to target an enemy model using only a tiny bit of a weapon or head? Nah, I wouldnt. But I do prior to the game point out to my opponent that I like to play by intent - as in, i'll ask my opponent 'are you aiming to hide that model behind that building?' and if they say yes, I'll make sure none of my stuff has LOS to it, and if on my turn I notice a little bit of it sticking out, I wont take advantage of that because we discussed it.



That's all good and fair, onboard with that entirely, but I'd still give someone even more leeway on their intro game. As you say they don't know what to ignore yet, so better to teach them.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





For the record- I lost my first game of chess in 12 moves.

I didn't win until my 34th game.

No one is going to argue that chess is poorly designed. But why do we hold some games to different standards than others?

Again- not saying 40k can't be improved. Not saying it's perfect. Though of course, if you're SimLife and you're reading this, I know you'll ignore this line of text and accuse me of being a white knight anyways- I hope the rest of you appreciate (or at least recognize) the effort I put into diplomacy.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: