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.

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING POST IS IN NO WAY CRITICISM OF 40K


So, at my local GW there's a guy. This is a guy that I see in there about 99% of all the days I visit the store, which now is about 3 times a week, or in other terms, all 3 times during the week 40k is being played. When he's not playing with a 4 Riptide Tau army and fighting battles he hasn't a snowball's chance in losing, he's standing to the side, watching, adding no positive comment or humour and generally being a Rules Lawyer. He doesn't change a thing in that army for when he plays beginners, in fact recently I saw him tabling a kid in 3 turns, teaching him effectively nothing save for the gazillion minor rule errors he obviously made. Now I'm not a great judge of character but I had suspicions that he was a sneering, arrogant prat just from this sort of behaviour and other examples I won't state I'd seen before.

I generally do fairly well at my local GW, at least when I'm taking competitive lists. In some ways I'm kind of like this guy, because I've fielded 4 Russes, 2 max-executioners + Pask included before in games. But even in those games I often take units like Sentinels and at least one of the 4 Russes is a HB-Exterminator (model limitation). On a fair few occasions I take something that isn't within a mile of competitive just for the hell of it, like an all-infantry list. Against beginners I always give them the opportunity to kill something, even if they wouldn't have a snowballs chance otherwise. When I played the same kid as above I put my Cypher infantry blob up front when I could have just massacred him with tanks all game, and "forgot" the Shrouded bonus to cover saves. He still learnt that infantry in ruins are hard to dislodge as if he'd had to root them out with 2+ cover, but he also killed all of the 50 Guardsmen as a result. I played a guy who just begun Deathwing from DV, and I felt sorry for him for making that common mistake. I had my IG Gunline list and just played averagely, no rules manipulating (and by this I mean weird legal manipulations) at all. I killed a whole bunch of his Terminators still on the first turn, but some reached my lines. He killed 3 Sentinels, an SWS and a fair few more Guardsmen. I felt pretty bad still, this guy was funny and a great pleasure to talk to. We joked, pissing ourselves as in the final stand of my Platoon Commander, alone and cut off, he killed himself with his plasma pistol. In the following week I was told by the store manager that he'd been told by that person it was the best game of 40k he'd yet had.

I'm definitely not a saint. On some occasions I can become an accidental prat (and you know what, I apologise here for every time I've mistakenly done this on this forum) and I end up manipulating the rules in ways that result in BRB searches more often than I'd like. I do get a couple of rules disputes per game with some of the more competitive types. Fundamentally, I'm a firm believer in the idea that both players should have fun in every game I play. If my opponent hasn't had fun then I don't walk away glad (I make an exception for WAAC I actually beat) and during the end I won't be having fun. You do see people's faces drop, people sulk, rising frustration in their voices, dice clattering, etc.

But anyway, I hadn't played this guy for about 8 months, when he whooped my ass in a practice game, down to bad luck and bad tactics on my part. I decided I challenge him, because despite the fact I had negative suspicions I had faith the guy would at least make a pleasant game. I genuinely wanted a challenge that would really test me and teach me something.

So, today comes. My list, in the end, despite my preference to playing Guard, was Raven Guard Marines. SETH Chapter Master, Libby, Devastators, Stormwing, Mech Sternguard and Combi-Scouts. I did this for four reasons. First of all, I prepared for the prospect he was going to tailor to my usual AV14 circus with something like a Longstrike Hammerhead and buddy. Second, I wanted a balanced force, third, the idea of the list popped to me during lunch and I wanted to try it, fourth, there was the unavoidable prospect I'd need more than my usual amount of AP2 despite my natural aversion to tailoring. The entire way there I expected to lose to anyway, because I knew the guy knows the rules like they've been indoctrinated into him since birth, and that means rule manipulations and bending I'll never be able to anticipate.

I get there, we set up, and I look across under the table. In a clear plastic box is a Reaver Titan. He puts it on the board. The only other model he has is Horus, for a treasure trove of special rules that further guarantee I can't do jack to the Reaver. People obviously flock to see the Titan, there's the chorus of joking bets on how long I'll last, one eccentric guy declaring turn 2 at best. I at no point make any complaint or comment as I remember, I just continued putting my stuff on the board. The GW store manager even questions whether I want to play this guy. I carry on, knowing subconsciously I won't win.

Everything starts off favourably, surprisingly. I get invisibility on my Libby, the best psychic power there basically is, I get the initiative, and I have scouts and infiltrators in 2 Sternguard Rhino Squads and 2 Scout Squads, each with combi-meltas inside ready for an alpha strike.

At this point, just after I declare the end of my deployment, having plainly stated my scouting/infiltrate intentions, he tells me he took a 3 point Mechanicum upgrade on the Reaver that meant nothing could infiltrate or scout within 24'' of it, effectively making the Sternguard and Scouts way less useful. The rules lawyering begins. I change my mind and say I'll outflank the Rhinos instead, but oh boy. This is the WAAC archetype that will use the phrase "you declared it" until your eardrums burst. And he did, but I put my Rhinos off the board. He silently conceded the only thing he'd give me in the entire match.

He took a Warlord trait without rolling that then gave him a 3+ to seize the initiative, because, well, Horus. So he got first turn too.

So gradually over 4 turns he obviously wipes me out, down to several mistakes of my own and his army's inherent strength. Amongst other things, during the game he measures my flyers distance from the table edge and finds my Storm Raven is 17'' from point of entry, so declares it is auto-dead. That 24'' no infiltrate/scout bubble? I ask him if it extends from his homemade base (not much smaller than a Dominos Pizza box, so in other words about 5-6''' from each foot) and he proudly rambles on about how yes, apparently that is the case. I have a pair of Sternguard Marines with Kraken Rounds who are in the questionable zone of molecule width from being in range or not to Horus and he whinges at me until I even concede this. Throughout the entire game he is anal over every last thing humanly possible and acts like he has won in deployment and every moment with sneering comments like "won't make a difference / yeah, so what? " etc each time I get lucky or do something.

At one point he was literally pulling more mildly-volumed shouts at me. I sighed, and calmly pointed out how I found this impolite. I've dealt with some real characters over the years I've been playing 40k. I've played WAAC TFG's before. One guy who repeatedly told me he didn't need to be told about the Contemptor Mortis rules and then acted outraged when I used interceptor on his Ymgryls, packing up immediately before he changed his mind and realised how he was behaving. Another guy who was just, again, anal over everything, hard to like, who then whined, conceded the game, came back and said I had to continue because he saw a way he could have won, and this just off the top of my head. At least both of those people were friendly to at least some extent, and not in a sneering way either. They had a sense of humour.

I found absolutely nothing friendly or appreciable about this particular WAAC TFG though. No humour at any point, no friendly banter, just an exercise that equated to him punching my jaw. I regret just not presenting my cheek to him and telling him to do so as an alternative to the game we played. Did I mention he borrowed both models from the store's cabinet?

Remember how I said I thought I'd lose anyway? I prepared myself mentally for the prospect of losing to harsh things, things like insanely bad dice (gambler's fallacy indeed, but during the week I played Firestorm Armada and rolled enough sixes to kill a Battleship only with Frigates) or making a really bad mistake. At no point did I give him the satisfaction of whining or getting frustrated (save for telling him to stop shouting), I tried my hardest to smile throughout until I asked a friend to put the last Storm Talon on its side as it died. I then shook this his hand.

"Good Game."

For reasons that still bewilder me I realised just now he blocked me on Facebook, but using the powers of "log off" I discovered he'd made a public comment on a picture of the Titan on the store page simply saying "I killed EVERYTHING" Take what you will from that.

Why did I post this? I'm not complaining at all about unbound, or whether the HH Mechanicum is broken or not, or whether HH should be played with 40k, or even if Titans should be brought into normal 40k.



Mostly because I wanted to make a point about the different sorts of people you meet playing 40k. Today, despite hoping for the best in this particular person, I came across the most pathetic and unbelievable person I've ever met playing 40k. I wasn't even mad internally, and that surprises me.

You must be a saint.

Unfortunately, every hobby has the issue of unfortunate personalities.

I would have said:

"congratulations, you have won on easy mode, as usual"

Or something like that. Because effectively, that is what he is doing. What bugs me though, is how much people tolerate this. I would condemn this person every time I see him, not for his playstyle, but for his attitude and demeanor. Its simply disrespectful to those who share the same pass time as you do. All because he has some sick need to feel better about himself.

I dont know the full situation. But thats generally how I feel about those people. Its a pity to see.

Life's too short to deal with people like that. Don't play him.

30K rules plus a Reaver in a 40K game? Borrowed models none-the-less?


HAHAHAHAHAHAAHA! Good on you for finishing the game, you are better than me. I'd have walked away and played a pick up match or something.

I would simply call the person out on it, in a polite, backhanded way.

"Hey [WAAC player], I know how much killing everything is important to you, as you needed to borrow models to do it, but it would have been nice for me to have a picture of the game as well instead of you blocking me on Facebook when I don't grovel and whine to feed your fragile ego."

I fully agree with Swastakowey. There needs to be a little bit of public shaming over the way he plays. Getting several people to openly show intolerance of his attitude is the only way he'll either stop playing that way, or move on.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Life's too short to deal with people like that. Don't play him.

I agree. Life is full of people who get their jollies in ways that doesn't make sense to you and you find obnoxious.

Now that you've played someone who throws down a Reaver and Horus in a 2000pt game next time you come across something similar you can just say "nah, I've played games like that before and I don't find them fun".

As for his attitude, eh, too bad, move on, some people are bad sportsmen. I think throwing around terms like WAAC and TFG only serve to bring you down to his level.

As for the rules lawyering... I actually have no problem with people who want to play to the letter of the rules. If I don't know the rules well enough or play too sloppily, that's my fault. I may not have fun being that pedantic, but I won't judge people who are, it is, afterall, a wargame and many people play it to win. Unfortunately it's a poorly written wargame and doesn't scale well from people who are just screwing around to people who are trying their best to win. I don't blame people for that, I blame GW.

FWIW, things like not moving your fliers far enough or measuring the move for 1 model in the unit and then other models in the unit magically move further are some of the things that annoy me. It shows me you either are trying to cheat to get an advantage or are simply too lazy or careless to do it properly which I find disrespectful. I wouldn't declare it auto-dead (though he's somewhat in his right to do that), but yes, I would find it annoying.

If you weren't across the pond I'd find you and kiss your feet. If some slack-jawed manchild yelled at me during a tabletop game I probably would have shouted.

 Swastakowey wrote:
"congratulations, you have won on easy mode, as usual"

Countering bad sportsmanship with bad sportsmanship is not a good way to try and improve things IMO.

Shake his hand, say good game, if he ever asks you for another game say "No thanks, I just want to play a more balanced casual game" and move on with your life.

Sad to say, there will be a TFG in every hobby without exception. There was a thread in the tournament discussion about something similar but was closed due to the "violence is right" approach by internet tough guys and probably because it was a fake story and/or the OP was a kid (It is unknown but if you read the thread, it tends to lead on).

Your response to this guy was better than usual but I'd imagine it was hard to keep a straight face on throughout the whole game. The question is, Why bother entertaining someone like this? I understand how you wanted a challenge and prepared for stuff like list tailoring and etc. but wasn't there someone else to play a game with?

Then again, this is once again one side of the story. I was not there to witness the game or events that took place so I will reserve my judgement for the moment. This is not to downplay your post OP and I am sure your points are valid to an extent but I will not bash on either side for now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As much as I hate to admit it, I do support @Rivenskull's comment. If people are not going to voluntarily learn to be decent sportsmen, let social pressure force them to become decent sportsmen. Sometimes people just don't know or are not aware of their actions. Heavy backlash from social media might change their ways (not always but sometimes).

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
"congratulations, you have won on easy mode, as usual"

Countering bad sportsmanship with bad sportsmanship is not a good way to try and improve things IMO.

Shake his hand, say good game, if he ever asks you for another game say "No thanks, I just want to play a more balanced casual game" and move on with your life.

If he has the nerve to act that way, despite someone behaving as a normal person in front of him the whole time, I will not give that person the respect he does not deserve. I would simply comment it is while shaking hos hand at the end of the game.

There is obviously no other way he will learn anything.

Then I would proceed to carry on the way you describe. If he asks for a game, I would ask if he is gonna waste my time again? If so, I will decline and move on.

As I said in the last post, I am surprised nobody in the crowd spoke out against this.

 Swastakowey wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
"congratulations, you have won on easy mode, as usual"

Countering bad sportsmanship with bad sportsmanship is not a good way to try and improve things IMO.

Shake his hand, say good game, if he ever asks you for another game say "No thanks, I just want to play a more balanced casual game" and move on with your life.

If he has the nerve to act that way, despite someone behaving as a normal person in front of him the whole time, I will not give that person the respect he does not deserve. I would simply comment it is while shaking hos hand at the end of the game.

There is obviously no other way he will learn anything.

Being gracious in defeat even when your opponent is not is part of being a good sportsman. I don't know why you think being a bad sportsman would teach him any respect, I'm sure he'll just think you're a dick who can't deal with losing. You can't really take the morale high ground when you are lowering yourself to his level.

Tell him you don't want to play against him while he's playing like that but be respectful and conduct yourself as a good sportsman, he'll either run out of opponents or learn to play with a better attitude.

Then I would proceed to carry on the way you describe. If he asks for a game, I would ask if he is gonna waste my time again? If so, I will decline and move on.

Well, the OP did state they'd played this person before.

As I said in the last post, I am surprised nobody in the crowd spoke out against this.

Well the OP did say " The GW store manager even questions whether I want to play this guy"

I think the OP sounds like he behaved reasonably all things considered, though we don't really know what all the circumstances were. One gripe I have with the OP is that I personally don't like it when people come on the internet to rant about other individuals like this, to me, good sportsmanship doesn't end when you walk away from the table.

True, I know where you are coming from. But I personally wouldn't tolerate it.

Ironic really, I know.

 Swastakowey wrote:
True, I know where you are coming from. But I personally wouldn't tolerate it.

Ironic really, I know.

LOL, nah, it's understandable. I'd be fighting the urge to clip him over the ears. Actually I probably never would have arranged the game in the first place knowing the guy's history

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
True, I know where you are coming from. But I personally wouldn't tolerate it.

Ironic really, I know.

LOL, nah, it's understandable. I'd be fighting the urge to clip him over the ears. Actually I probably never would have arranged the game in the first place knowing the guy's history

And thats the best solution at the end of the day. No irony, no conflict, no time wasting and certainly no sour taste. Simply abstain.

I'm kinda suprised the GW manager let him borrow the reaver.

mostly cause I'm not sure I'd trust an immature moron like that with a 1000 dollar model

Being gracious in defeat even when your opponent is not is part of being a good sportsman. I don't know why you think being a bad sportsman would teach him any respect, I'm sure he'll just think you're a dick who can't deal with losing. You can't really take the morale high ground when you are lowering yourself to his level.

My uncle is a sportsman he won medals on the olympics and mom did judo and did well enough in euro championships, so I happen to know a lot of sports man, trainers and new people as I happen to be in a sports highschool too . If you think sportsman are "gracious" when they are losing then you have no idea about how sport on any level works.

Makumba wrote:

Being gracious in defeat even when your opponent is not is part of being a good sportsman. I don't know why you think being a bad sportsman would teach him any respect, I'm sure he'll just think you're a dick who can't deal with losing. You can't really take the morale high ground when you are lowering yourself to his level.

My uncle is a sportsman he won medals on the olympics and mom did judo and did well enough in euro championships, so I happen to know a lot of sports man, trainers and new people as I happen to be in a sports highschool too . If you think sportsman are "gracious" when they are losing then you have no idea about how sport on any level works.

sports·man·ship noun \-ˌship\
: fair play, respect for opponents, and polite behavior by someone who is competing in a sport or other competition

It has nothing to do with how people *do* act, but how they *should* act and has nothing to do with physical sports in particular, but with regards to any competitive endeavour. If the people you're referring to are not gracious in winning or losing, they're bad sports, bad sportsmen, have bad sportsmanship, however you want to say it.

Makumba wrote:

Being gracious in defeat even when your opponent is not is part of being a good sportsman. I don't know why you think being a bad sportsman would teach him any respect, I'm sure he'll just think you're a dick who can't deal with losing. You can't really take the morale high ground when you are lowering yourself to his level.

My uncle is a sportsman he won medals on the olympics and mom did judo and did well enough in euro championships, so I happen to know a lot of sports man, trainers and new people as I happen to be in a sports highschool too . If you think sportsman are "gracious" when they are losing then you have no idea about how sport on any level works.

My apologies if I did not word it correctly but I thought it was clear. When I say "a good sportsman", I'm talking about sportsmanship, that is, good sportsmanship, not good capacity to play sports:

sports·man·ship noun \-ˌship\
: fair play, respect for opponents, and polite behavior by someone who is competing in a sport or other competition

Full Definition of SPORTSMANSHIP
: conduct (as fairness, respect for one's opponent, and graciousness in winning or losing) becoming to one participating in a sport

Examples of SPORTSMANSHIP
He's a great player who's also admired for his sportsmanship.

First Known Use of SPORTSMANSHIP
1745

I'm surprised the GW manager still let's him play if he's doing stuff like that. My local manager would be asking him to leave on a first offense like that and telling him not to come back on the second. He has already blacklisted a few people for acting like that during league games.

Toofast wrote:
I'm surprised the GW manager still let's him play if he's doing stuff like that. My local manager would be asking him to leave on a first offense like that and telling him not to come back on the second. He has already blacklisted a few people for acting like that during league games.

Yeah I'm pretty sure the manager at my local GW would say something to stop the game ever occurring, especially if he knew the reputation of the guy who took the titan. Not that he wouldn't run a fun game where the objective is to bring down a Titan with whatever stuff you have, but I doubt he'd let someone pull out a Reaver for a 1v1 2000pt game.

The previous manager at one of my stores would probably end the thing by saying something like "Oh look, a rift into the warp appears!" and then deploy the store's khorne army and joining the fight in middle of the game.

He hated competitive players with passion, probably one of the reasons why he's gone.

People in here thinking the list is the issue. OP knew exactly what he would be up against, you can't blacklist someone from a store for bringing models you think are OP lol at least in my country anyway, pettiness aside its grounds for a discrimination lawsuit, although laws may be different for me of course.

That being said this guy deserves one for his attitude, abrasiveness during a friendly game should be never tolerated. Getting angry here is clearly losing the most. Just cheerfully inform him everytime he does something overly TFG that he just took one sstep in the wrong direction towards ever getting laid, having people's respect, being socially accepted, etc. It's harsh but we'll deserved just draw attention to him for being the ridiculous gakker that he is

That's my thoughts on it, this behavior should be more than discouraged.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Shake his hand, say good game, if he ever asks you for another game say "No thanks, I just want to play a more balanced casual game" and move on with your life.

This probably the best thing to do.

Dude sounds like a tool. Is he a baby seal clubber by trade?

 SHUPPET wrote:
People in here thinking the list is the issue. OP knew exactly what he would be up against, you can't blacklist someone from a store for bringing models you think are OP lol at least in my country anyway, pettiness aside its grounds for a discrimination lawsuit, although laws may be different for me of course.

I'd heard before that he played other armies from at least one other guy at the store, and I was 99% sure he would at least change his tactics to some degree to deal with my unusual list, given that I'm one of the very few people in there who make use of vehicles, much less AV14.

Also I am in no way suggesting he should be blacklisted, banned, publicly disgraced or anything like that.

 Byte wrote:
Dude sounds like a tool. Is he a baby seal clubber by trade?

He doesn't go around just challenging the most experienced players in the store, put it that way. He more or less just rolls over each person he comes across. He is undeniably capable and skilled at the game, particularly the rule manipulation, as well, its not like he wins just with extremely strong lists.

 SHUPPET wrote:
People in here thinking the list is the issue. OP knew exactly what he would be up against, you can't blacklist someone from a store for bringing models you think are OP lol at least in my country anyway, pettiness aside its grounds for a discrimination lawsuit, although laws may be different for me of course.

Just in case people get the wrong impression and think Australia is the most pansy country in the world...

Actually as long as it's not because of race, gender, religion, age, etc, you are totally within your rights to refuse service or entry to someone in Australia and there is nothing that compels you to interact with people you don't want to interact with. Much like the rest of the western world.

If there's a specific reason you can describe that's not race/gender/religion/age, you can tell them that and say they are banned from the store for that reason. As far as I'm aware that's totally legal in Australia.

What you describe in the 2nd half of your post is more likely to be illegal as it may constitute bullying (not sure, since it's not a workplace or school where these things are typically talked about, but I believe it's considered a violation of rights to intentionally make someone feel like crap even if it's not a workplace or school).

yhaha the guys a clown, next time your back in there and see him ask to see his list. and pore over every detail from the sidelines.

bringing 30k and mechanicum rules to a 40k game is flat out cheating. the reaver alone whilst not cheating.... well thats that. BUT to add mech bonus' to it? nope thats not allowed, and HORUS? hahahah wow. yeah not even a legal 40k list, and unbound allows so me serious shenanigans

Sounds as if it wasn't just another match for the other guy as well. Mr. Omega sounds like an accomplished player, and from the way he descrbed the situation, seemed like somewhat of a grudge match. Obviously, I could be totally mistaken.

Either way, it's unfortunate that the store owner has to put up with the WAAC player in question being one of his regulars. I wonder if he was conflicted at all in letting TFG borrow the models he used against ya...

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
People in here thinking the list is the issue. OP knew exactly what he would be up against, you can't blacklist someone from a store for bringing models you think are OP lol at least in my country anyway, pettiness aside its grounds for a discrimination lawsuit, although laws may be different for me of course.

Just in case people get the wrong impression and think Australia is the most pansy country in the world...

Actually as long as it's not because of race, gender, religion, age, etc, you are totally within your rights to refuse service or entry to someone in Australia and there is nothing that compels you to interact with people you don't want to interact with. Much like the rest of the western world.

If there's a specific reason you can describe that's not race/gender/religion/age, you can tell them that and say they are banned from the store for that reason. As far as I'm aware that's totally legal in Australia.

What you describe in the 2nd half of your post is more likely to be illegal as it may constitute bullying (not sure, since it's not a workplace or school where these things are typically talked about, but I believe it's considered a violation of rights to intentionally make someone feel like crap even if it's not a workplace or school).

If you ban people from a store for bringing a combination of GW models and do not ban everyone else who also brings GW models to the shop you have a case for discrimination. It would depend how deeply the court looks into the specifics of different models but even then I could easily see it getting ruled against the establishment. I may be wrong here, but I work in a pub and I'm just going off what my boss has told me about the justifications for the right to refuse service, and what I vaguely remember from my RSA. Laws may have changed since, or maybe we were never fully correct in the first place, but the realistic fact of the situation is, banning people for such petty, subjective crap such as having an unfriendly warhammer list, you are opening the door for a discrimination lawsuit whether it gets ruled in your favor or not, and that's something no store manager wants to deal with especially if he's just a GW employee.


The fact that you'd even suggest that you are more likely to have to worry about bullying charges for making comments is ridiculous lol, if it even did somehow make it to court (it never would), a quick mention that the "victim" yelled in your face over a game of warhammer or even some of the other anti-social behaviour exhibited in your direction would have it thrown out quick smart as an antagonized response as opposed to targeted bullying. Neither are impossible, but that discrimination case is 100 times more plausible than the bullying one.