Switch Theme:

Allowable number of free points  [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 ca
Confessor Of Sins





 vipoid wrote:
Colehkxix wrote:

I have my units configured how I want, and removing a melta bomb from one of them would be pretty sad. I have to remember which one didn't have the melta bomb.


Hmm, what was it I said yesterday? Oh yes:

 vipoid wrote:
The other aspect is that 99% of the time it's not a matter of 'can't' it's a matter of 'don't want to'. As in, the person has a lot of gear or other stuff that they could easily drop, but don't want to drop *any* of it.

And, they'd much rather just play with too many points than actually have to make a hard decision.



Grimtuff, can I borrow your 'I informed you thusly' meme?


So in this scenario, you'd rather play against someone who has multiple squads where the Sergeant has melta bombs, but in one particular identical squad the Sergeant does not have a melta bomb, with no differentiating characteristics on the models to figure it out because almost no one actually models melta bombs because they're either included or not on an almost random basis?

I mean, myself, I'd choose to build my list within the points values and find a way to equip my squads to avoid that, but I use Battlescribe for my list-writing (and later type up that info into a shorter form with a word processor), but apparently that isn't always the case for everyone.
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






Colehkxix wrote:
A lot of opinions are going on the idea that everyone prepares their army in advance, rather than coming to the store and coming up with a list on the spot. Two players agree on a a point amount to create an army, and they both create their lists accordingly. However in come cases they may end up wanting something in their army that puts their points just above the limit.

Why wouldn't you have a selection of lists already prepared unless you're list tailoring against your opponent? I mean, if you've got 1500/1750/1850/2000 then you've covered all of the common game sizes.

Why waste time when you could be prepared?
"Do you want a game?"
"Sure, just give me 15 minutes to scrawl indecipherable hieroglyphics on a piece of scrap paper."

And, far too often, this is accompanied by "So what army are you playing? Can I see your list?" before they make theirs...
   
Made in ca
Confessor Of Sins





 Scott-S6 wrote:
Why waste time when you could be prepared?
"Do you want a game?"
"Sure, just give me 15 minutes to scrawl indecipherable hieroglyphics on a piece of scrap paper."


Do people still write in cursive these days?
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 Pouncey wrote:

So in this scenario, you'd rather play against someone who has multiple squads where the Sergeant has melta bombs, but in one particular identical squad the Sergeant does not have a melta bomb, with no differentiating characteristics on the models to figure it out because almost no one actually models melta bombs because they're either included or not on an almost random basis?


I'd have no objection to that whatsoever. Just let me know which squad doesn't have melta bombs during deployment, and I'll keep it in mind.

To be honest, I doubt I'd even notice the melta bombs on the sergeants one way or the other. Not unless I specifically picked them up and scrutinised them. But, when they're on the other side of the table I can barely make out different guns, let alone whether or not they're carrying tiny grenades.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in ca
Confessor Of Sins





 vipoid wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:

So in this scenario, you'd rather play against someone who has multiple squads where the Sergeant has melta bombs, but in one particular identical squad the Sergeant does not have a melta bomb, with no differentiating characteristics on the models to figure it out because almost no one actually models melta bombs because they're either included or not on an almost random basis?


I'd have no objection to that whatsoever. Just let me know which squad doesn't have melta bombs during deployment, and I'll keep it in mind.

To be honest, I doubt I'd even notice the melta bombs on the sergeants one way or the other. Not unless I specifically picked them up and scrutinised them. But, when they're on the other side of the table I can barely make out different guns, let alone whether or not they're carrying tiny grenades.


Sorry, I'm used to people generally not liking stuff like that... Usually in a thread about proxies people complain about being expected to remember which of their opponent's identically-equipped models actually have which wargear throughout the course of the game.
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

No worries. My group is pretty laid back about stuff like WISIWIG and proxies.

I think our mentality could be summed up as 'do what you want with your models and it would be peachy if that occasionally coincided with their actual wargear'.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

That's funny, WYSIWYG is one of the few rules we do bother with. Our armies are uncompetitive and shoddily painted (the few that are painted at all), the size of your army and the version of your codex is no big deal... but a plasma gunner is a plasma gunner!

(That said, a big shoota boy who is 'out of ammo' is definitely legit. )

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/23 11:50:30


Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in us
Wicked Canoptek Wraith





 Ashiraya wrote:
That's funny, WYSIWYG is one of the few rules we do bother with. Our armies are uncompetitive and shoddily painted (the few that are painted at all), the size of your army and the version of your codex is no big deal... but a plasma gunner is a plasma gunner!

(That said, a big shoota boy who is 'out of ammo' is definitely legit. )


What about models that don't exist? Like a Lascannon on Legion of the Damned?

- 10000+ pts
Imperial Knights- 5 Standard Knights / 3 Cerastus Knights
Officio Assassinorum - 4 Assassins
CSM - 500pts? Maybe? Its from the Officio Assassinorum box so I'm pretty sure its not enough to run in a CAD
Vampire Lords- I have no idea I bought it like two days before I left country and they're still in storage so I'll have to see when I get back.] 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

It hasn't come up yet. Our SM player doesn't run LotD.

I imagine he'd make a simple arm or weapon swap for that one. Child's play for him.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/23 12:14:47


Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in us
Wicked Canoptek Wraith





 Ashiraya wrote:
It hasn't come up yet. Our SM player doesn't run LotD.

I imagine he'd make a simple arm or weapon swap for that one. Child's play for him.


Fair enough. Does your rule apply to relics as well?


- 10000+ pts
Imperial Knights- 5 Standard Knights / 3 Cerastus Knights
Officio Assassinorum - 4 Assassins
CSM - 500pts? Maybe? Its from the Officio Assassinorum box so I'm pretty sure its not enough to run in a CAD
Vampire Lords- I have no idea I bought it like two days before I left country and they're still in storage so I'll have to see when I get back.] 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

It depends on the nature of the relic. Something like the Burning Brand? Yes, the model needs a flamer or equivalent, though if equipped on a Sorcerer it'd be feasible that it's simply psychic flames. Something like the Dimensional Key could easily be argued to fit into one of the model's pouches, though.

Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Made me think of this:


 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

I'd play that. Clever. I'd rather play one that is painted in active camouflage colours of course, but that is clever.

Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in ca
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought





Canada

I agree that it does put pressure on an opponent to ask for another 5 points.
It is only a measly 5 points right??
If it is so measly, why can't you just make it fit the standard point size?
That is the real question to be asked.

Then "oh you could spend more too" works out to the good old melta-bomb to throw on some guy that may not get used (and forgotten since it typically was not modeled on the figure as pointed out).
I agree with what was mentioned earlier: that extra couple points tends to make the extra needed upgrade and results usually in a "meh" upgrade for the opponent.

If we cannot agree to keep to the points cost rule, we have no hope in dealing with less clear-cut rules in the game.
You try this madness in X-wing and you would get a sound smack-down.

It is a game, I would suggest if it makes the game more fun to pack in that bit more: just ask your opponent for a next-standard-size point game if you want to play with more and feel you cannot do without.

A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte 
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

Colehkxix wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
The point is, its rude to ask your opponent if its okay to cheat. Would you be okay if your opponent asked if he could move all of his infantry squads 7 inches after he has already done so and expect you to only move yours 6 inches?


I.. it isn't rude to try and negotiate with another player and calling it 'cheating' is rather unreasonable.

The time to negotiate points values is past and it is rude to go back on your agreements. If I can't trust you to keep to your agreements in something as inconsequential as a game, how can I trust you to keep your agreements when it matters?

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in us
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin




Roswell, GA

If your opponent is ok with it in a friendly game, I don't see why it would be a problem. Tournaments would be a no-no, and as a rule of thumb you should try to hit your limit with out going over always.
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

 Vash108 wrote:
If your opponent is ok with it in a friendly game, I don't see why it would be a problem.

Because its obviously not a 'friendly' game or else your opponent would keep to the agreed points limit.

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

CrowSplat wrote:


The point is that it is possible to make a list where you can not remove anything without compromising the integrity of the list, where any change would result in some pretty significant changes in gameplay.


If your list is over on points, then, by definition, it lacks integrity.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/11/24 01:18:16


DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
Made in ca
Confessor Of Sins





 Ashiraya wrote:
I'd play that. Clever. I'd rather play one that is painted in active camouflage colours of course, but that is clever.


What about a 3D-printed one with clear plastic as the material? Maybe with some weaponsfire effects coming from the gun that's the only thing painted? : D


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Vash108 wrote:
If your opponent is ok with it in a friendly game, I don't see why it would be a problem. Tournaments would be a no-no, and as a rule of thumb you should try to hit your limit with out going over always.


A big part of the problem of even asking for it is that saying no to such a small difference (that admittedly can be significant in a lot of situations) makes the person saying no feel like the bad guy. Few people like to feel like the bad guy, and doubly so when playing a friendly game.

So probably, before you even ask, it's best to know that your opponent is okay with it to begin with, and if you know they're not, or if you don't know one way or the other, it's best not to even ask and just stick to the points limit.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/23 17:17:46


 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.


~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in ca
Confessor Of Sins





 jreilly89 wrote:
So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.



Yup, it's weird that such a thing is so polarizing and sparks a huge argument/debate, but there's actually a math problem that, if posed to a forum, invariably causes intense flame wars for some bizarre reason. It's actually considered trolling just to post it, because of the intense rage it always, always causes from nearly everyone involved. Doesn't matter what forum it is, it always causes a flame war. It seems like such an innocuous thing, too, as it's just a bunch of numbers and math symbols.
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 Pouncey wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.



Yup, it's weird that such a thing is so polarizing and sparks a huge argument/debate, but there's actually a math problem that, if posed to a forum, invariably causes intense flame wars for some bizarre reason. It's actually considered trolling just to post it, because of the intense rage it always, always causes from nearly everyone involved. Doesn't matter what forum it is, it always causes a flame war. It seems like such an innocuous thing, too, as it's just a bunch of numbers and math symbols.


Okay, now I have to ask - what's the math problem?

(If you don't want to post it, could you at least pm me it or send me a link?)

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in ca
Confessor Of Sins





 vipoid wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
So after 7 pages, what it seems like is that if you ever want to make people on Dakka lose their gak, don't bring up TLoS, Blasts hitting different levels, any of the other ludicrous rules. No, bring up bringing 1503 points to a 1500 point game.



Yup, it's weird that such a thing is so polarizing and sparks a huge argument/debate, but there's actually a math problem that, if posed to a forum, invariably causes intense flame wars for some bizarre reason. It's actually considered trolling just to post it, because of the intense rage it always, always causes from nearly everyone involved. Doesn't matter what forum it is, it always causes a flame war. It seems like such an innocuous thing, too, as it's just a bunch of numbers and math symbols.


Okay, now I have to ask - what's the math problem?

(If you don't want to post it, could you at least pm me it or send me a link?)


http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

Apparently Know Your Meme is aware of it.
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Hah! I can see how that would cause problems.

Thanks for the link.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




I think it's time someone posted that in the general discussion!

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

The main rulebook does cover this however, under 'Multiple Modifiers' in the Models & Units section of the rulebook. The problem occurs when there's a disagreement over what is a modifier.

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in us
Latest Wrack in the Pits



Spokane, WA

Well there is always the simple rule of asking your partner, and if no agreement can be made just roll off on it high or low. Usually it's not a satisfying answer, but it speeds a game along then it can be doublecheckes in a rulebook afterwards. Like an argument about whether or not a maulerfiend can climb levels in the game given that it's both a vehicle and a beast
   
Made in us
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin




Roswell, GA

 Ghaz wrote:
 Vash108 wrote:
If your opponent is ok with it in a friendly game, I don't see why it would be a problem.

Because its obviously not a 'friendly' game or else your opponent would keep to the agreed points limit.


Then stick to the agreed amount. I have had friends making list as we decide what to play and go over by a point or 2. Personally I would never let anyone go over 3 or 4.

Normally this isn't a problem with me if this is a group of us making a list on the fly. But if someone comes to a game with an agreed upon point limit beforehand and they just went over that isn't cool, because they had PLENTY of time to make it work.
   
Made in ca
Confessor Of Sins





autumnlotus wrote:
Well there is always the simple rule of asking your partner, and if no agreement can be made just roll off on it high or low. Usually it's not a satisfying answer, but it speeds a game along then it can be doublecheckes in a rulebook afterwards. Like an argument about whether or not a maulerfiend can climb levels in the game given that it's both a vehicle and a beast


I think this is the kind of thing that would require the opponent's permission, since the rules are very clear on what having a points limit means and points limits aren't at all unique to WH40k and are pretty much identically-defined across every game system that uses them.
   
Made in us
Abel





Washington State

If you can go five points over, then you can go five points under just as well.

The limit is the limit.

Kara Sloan shoots through Time and Design Space for a Negative Play Experience  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: