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.

In 4th edition, the rulebook explicitly said that you don't have to tell your opponent, nor is he entitled even to ask.

I don't recall the 7th edition rulebook saying either way.

So, suppose I have on my army list that I have 5 rhinos as dedicated transports.

Am I obligated to tell my opponent who is in what transport?

Yes, dont be TFG. This isn't Infinity, everyone must state what is in what so we don't get confused.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Yes, dont be TFG. This isn't Infinity, everyone must state what is in what so we don't get confused.

Does it say so in the rules? If so, where?

Again, 4th edition explicitly said that not only need I not, but the opponent is forbidden from asking.

Traditio wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Yes, dont be TFG. This isn't Infinity, everyone must state what is in what so we don't get confused.

Does it say so in the rules? If so, where?

Again, 4th edition explicitly said that not only need I not, but the opponent is forbidden from asking.

Keywords there was "4th edition." The rules, AFAIK, do not say you don't need to tell them. What was your plan? Squish a bunch of different units into drop pods and have your opponent guess what the hell might be in each one?

Tactical_Spam wrote:Keywords there was "4th edition." The rules, AFAIK, do not say you don't need to tell them.

Yeah. I don't remember mention being made of it either way.

Of course, the converse of that is: "The rules don't say I do have to tell."

What was your plan? Squish a bunch of different units into drop pods and have your opponent guess what the hell might be in each one?

No, that would just be silly/tactically pointless. They disembark as soon as they drop.

I'm thinking about rhinos. Do I have to tell my opponent which one houses Pedro Kantor, which one houses my multimelta squads, etc?

It would make sense if I don't. Realistically, all that his army sees are big metal boxes.

As soon as the opponent asks, "What's in that rhino?" your whole plan is gone...

Check page 80 for the Embarking rules and page 117 for The Force Roster rule, on how you need to note that a unit is being transported and that you have to keep the details of your army on hand for your opponent to reference.

Traditio wrote:
Yeah. I don't remember mention being made of it either way.

Of course, the converse of that is: "The rules don't say I do have to tell."

Then like anything else the rules don't cover, it comes down to how both players agree to play it.

Only in Warhammer Fantasy(now extinct) do you keep the magic items a secret as a surprise.

In 40k, the various deployment and rules nullify any advantage. AFAIK you must tell your opponent what is where unless specified in rules or scenario. Such as Tau Monk'ta's picking a secret unit to kill. One of the scenarios in the new Tau campaign against the Raven Guard specifies that the RG rhinos must be empty except 1 that is carrying the chaplain, mark down which one in secret.

The rules also don't state I can't take a sledgehammer to your army the second you set it up. But common decency in gaming prohibits me from bringing old faithful out whenever I see my opponents army.

If your not going to say whats in each rhino then you will quickly find fewer people to play against. Furthermore unless your using some sort of marker system where you have it written down on paper nearby, IE (Blue dotted rhino holds X and Red dotted rhino holds Y) then you will quickly and rather fairly be accused of cheating, not saying you cheat yourself, I am just saying that by not stating what is in each rhino you are basically capable of saying "Ohh look you killed every rhino except this one and it has the unit that is most beneficial to the current situation where it is, what a coincidence"

When I run multiple transports I usually take the squads most identifiable model and place it in or on the vehicle to designate which is where. For instance, when I run a Mob of Boyz with a a Nob in a Battlewagon I usually place my Nob giving everyone the finger on top of it, also its funny

If you're going to keep transport contents a secret, you better write down what's in what, and have that on hand to prove it to your opponent. Otherwise, there's absolutely nothing to stop you from just driving around some Rhinos and deciding "Hey, I originally had my Multi-meltas in this one, but I need that firepower over here" and just popping them out of a totally different transport. If it's the start of the game and they've never gotten out, how will your opponent know the difference?

So I'll reiterate that no matter how you decide to play, you must have clear proof somewhere of what unit is in what transport, otherwise nothing you say will convince me that you're not just playing a shell game to cheat your units across the board to wherever they're needed.

Traditio wrote:

Tactical_Spam wrote:Keywords there was "4th edition." The rules, AFAIK, do not say you don't need to tell them.

Yeah. I don't remember mention being made of it either way.

Of course, the converse of that is: "The rules don't say I do have to tell."

What was your plan? Squish a bunch of different units into drop pods and have your opponent guess what the hell might be in each one?

No, that would just be silly/tactically pointless. They disembark as soon as they drop.

I'm thinking about rhinos. Do I have to tell my opponent which one houses Pedro Kantor, which one houses my multimelta squads, etc?

It would make sense if I don't. Realistically, all that his army sees are big metal boxes.

True in the fluff of the battle his army wouldn't know what was in what, but on the table top there is a "universal" truth of what box has what squad. I'm not saying you are forced to tell your opponent what squad is in what transport every time without them asking, but if an opponent ask what unit is in what transport where it is in both players interest for fair play to inform your opponent if they ask. Some people think that you should tell your opponent what is in what even if they don't ask to ensure fair play that a person isn't switching units in transports (or drop pods in some cases of making sure the 'right' unit comes in) but my personal view on that is that it is a bit much of volunteering information (even though it is a good and valid point).

AFAIK there is no rule to volunteer information aside from showing your opponent an army list.


In short it is a way to ensure honesty and to prevent any kind of attempt of cheating. (hopefully) no one is going to assume their opponent cheats and it is a way to show good faith in being honest, similar to how hand shakes came about to make sure each person wasn't hiding a weapon up their sleeve and a hand shake would shake any such loose weapon free.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
As soon as the opponent asks, "What's in that rhino?" your whole plan is gone...

Except, if the rules don't say I have to tell him, I can freely answer "What's in that rhino" with "Consult my force roster for the various possibilities."

Obviously, this goes out of the window if I declare that Pedro is firing dorn's arrow or that a tactical marine is firing a multimelta from the top hatch of a rhino.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 GoonBandito wrote:
Check page 80 for the Embarking rules and page 117 for The Force Roster rule, on how you need to note that a unit is being transported and that you have to keep the details of your army on hand for your opponent to reference.

I don't think that really solves the problem.

Suppose my roster says that I have two assault squads on rhinos, one of which has a captain, the other of which has a chaplain.

I put said rhinos on the table top and put my assault squads on the side of the table. Am I obligated to tell my opponent which is which?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xca|iber wrote:
If you're going to keep transport contents a secret, you better write down what's in what, and have that on hand to prove it to your opponent. Otherwise, there's absolutely nothing to stop you from just driving around some Rhinos and deciding "Hey, I originally had my Multi-meltas in this one, but I need that firepower over here" and just popping them out of a totally different transport. If it's the start of the game and they've never gotten out, how will your opponent know the difference?

So I'll reiterate that no matter how you decide to play, you must have clear proof somewhere of what unit is in what transport, otherwise nothing you say will convince me that you're not just playing a shell game to cheat your units across the board to wherever they're needed.

Very fair points all around.

So, here's what I'm getting from this thread:

1. The rules do not unequivocally say that I have to reveal what troops are embarked in what transports.

2. Common practice is to reveal what troops are embarked in what transports when asked?

This leads to you being able to switch what's in what to your advantage. Don't be a tfg

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
This leads to you being able to switch what's in what to your advantage. Don't be a tfg

That was true in 4th edition. Again, the 4th edition rulebook said: "You don't have to say, and your opponent can't ask" At least, in so many words.

Traditio wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
This leads to you being able to switch what's in what to your advantage. Don't be a tfg

That was true in 4th edition. Again, the 4th edition rulebook said: "You don't have to say, and your opponent can't ask" At least, in so many words.

I'll leave the fact I find you wanting to be able to do this hilarious due to the fact you were just calling me a TFG for liking to optimize my units, competitive or not, aside and stick to the thread at hand. It is widely known and done so in 40k as not only a courtesy but an unspoken rule to inform your opponent of the entirety of your army before starting a game. From the weapon they carry to the number of models in a unit. To include takin. A dedicated transport, starting in reserves, infiltrating, etc.

Traditio wrote:
Except, if the rules don't say I have to tell him, I can freely answer "What's in that rhino" with "Consult my force roster for the various possibilities."

No. If the rules don't cover the situation then it is up to both players to come to an agreement as to how it is handled. It is not a unilateral decision on your part to decide how situations not covered by the rules are to be handled.

Ghaz wrote:No. If the rules don't cover the situation then it is up to both players to come to an agreement as to how it is handled. It is not a unilateral decision on your part to decide how situations not covered by the rules are to be handled.

Well, it's not just a matter of "not covering it." The current rules don't cover it, but there's a precedent for it in previous editions.

Oddly enough, I haven't had anyone really willing to contest this. It's come up twice. In each case, I claimed: "The previous edition said that you can't ask and I don't have to tell. The current edition is silent. In point of fact, all that your guys really can see are these big metal boxes. However, these are the dedicated transports for so and so."

And they basically just rolled with it.

That said, if it's customary to reveal what's in what transport, then as St. Thomas says, "custom has the force of law."

That's how I'll play it from now on.

To the best of my knowledge, you aren't required to inform your opponent, but then when he accuses you of cheating by switching which units are in which inside your transports, how will you deal with that?

This is an unspoken rules of all games thing. It's not the law of the land. Sometimes you have to prove you're innocent and by clearly revealing your embarked units not only can you protect yourself from accusations of cheating, but you will have a more interesting and strategic game. Having your opponent know what's what is good sportsmanship, and is better for both parties enjoyment.

If you require a fluff reason... spy networks. Seriously, how hard would it be for a modern army to know what units are inside which transports? Really? So just do it.

 greatbigtree wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, you aren't required to inform your opponent, but then when he accuses you of cheating by switching which units are in which inside your transports, how will you deal with that?

Were such accusations common in 4th edition?

Such accusations are common whenever someone can 'fix' the results of a transport explosion. And yeah, I ran into several issues where I happened to blow up every Rhino except for the one containing the SM Lord'o'Doom with his smashy-smashy bodyguard. Weird. I blew up 4/5 Transports, but missed the right one? For multiple games? Sure, it's possible, but highly improbable.

And the regularity is irrelevant. If we show up to a pickup game, and you won't tell me what's what? I have every reason to believe you'll cheat. I can do that, because this isn't a court of law. This is the two of us having a game, and games need to be fair. More to the point, the game needs to appear to be fair.

Next game, insist that you not reveal which transport contains which minis. See how far you get. Vehemently insist. Do so before the game even starts. Do this with a total stranger.

How do you imagine that plays out? I'm truly curious. Maybe you and your buddies trust each other. Maybe that's cool. But a total stranger? I doubt it.

Now put yourself in the other shoes. Imagine someone insisting that they not tell you which minis are where, and they conveniently always have the right models in the right boxes to deal with what comes. How will you feel?

Traditio wrote:

 greatbigtree wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, you aren't required to inform your opponent, but then when he accuses you of cheating by switching which units are in which inside your transports, how will you deal with that?

Were such accusations common in 4th edition?

No, because most players ignored the 'note on secrecy' and announced what was in their transports on deployment.


Keeping it secret is fine if you're playing with friends that you know aren't going to try anything dodgy, but it simply doesn't work in pickup or tournament games.

You could write which unit is in which on pieces of paper that you roll up and put inside each Rhino - like a fortune cookie.

Do your rhinos have squad markings that match your models?

insaniak wrote:No, because most players ignored the 'note on secrecy' and announced what was in their transports on deployment.


Keeping it secret is fine if you're playing with friends that you know aren't going to try anything dodgy, but it simply doesn't work in pickup or tournament games.

Fair nuff.

I think you're focusing too hard on "If you could" instead of "if you should". Whether you are allowed to hide the contents of your rhinos or not, its not really in the spirit of the game to do so. I'm a laid back player, (I play CSM, I have to be) but if we are playing a game and I ask you what a rhino contains and your response is "It's a secret", The game is over. I'll pack up my models right there and find someone new.to play with. Even if your not doing it to cheat or any other shenanigans, it is implied.

Traditio wrote:
In 4th edition, the rulebook explicitly said that you don't have to tell your opponent, nor is he entitled even to ask.

I don't recall the 7th edition rulebook saying either way.

So, suppose I have on my army list that I have 5 rhinos as dedicated transports.

Am I obligated to tell my opponent who is in what transport?

Are you obliged to? No. But most people do it anyway.

 Mr_Piddlez wrote:
I think you're focusing too hard on "If you could" instead of "if you should". Whether you are allowed to hide the contents of your rhinos or not, its not really in the spirit of the game to do so. I'm a laid back player, (I play CSM, I have to be) but if we are playing a game and I ask you what a rhino contains and your response is "It's a secret", The game is over. I'll pack up my models right there and find someone new.to play with. Even if your not doing it to cheat or any other shenanigans, it is implied.

Except, I wouldn't have said "it's a secret." I'd would have said "4th edition rules say that I don't have to say, and you can't ask, and later editions are silent on the matter."

Had you insisted on the matter, I would have divulged the information.

Your hypothetical response to this strikes me as utterly unsportsmanlike.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:For instance, when I run a Mob of Boyz with a a Nob in a Battlewagon I usually place my Nob giving everyone the finger on top of it, also its funny

I think that this is likely what I'll do from now on, mutatis mutandis.

Traditio wrote:

 Mr_Piddlez wrote:
I think you're focusing too hard on "If you could" instead of "if you should". Whether you are allowed to hide the contents of your rhinos or not, its not really in the spirit of the game to do so. I'm a laid back player, (I play CSM, I have to be) but if we are playing a game and I ask you what a rhino contains and your response is "It's a secret", The game is over. I'll pack up my models right there and find someone new.to play with. Even if your not doing it to cheat or any other shenanigans, it is implied.

Except, I wouldn't have said "it's a secret." I'd would have said "4th edition rules say that I don't have to say, and you can't ask, and later editions are silent on the matter."

Had you insisted on the matter, I would have divulged the information.

Your hypothetical response to this strikes me as utterly unsportsmanlike.

...more unsportsmanlike than refusing to divulge what's in a transport...? He's making a reasonable choice - if a player demonstrates his unwillingness to play in a sportsmanlike fashion and refuses to divulge, it stands that the person is going to...slide...other things in. Refusing to play sends a message to that person that there are real and natural consequences to bad behaviors. Hell, he's probably doing the rest of us a favor.

Traditio wrote:

 Mr_Piddlez wrote:
I think you're focusing too hard on "If you could" instead of "if you should". Whether you are allowed to hide the contents of your rhinos or not, its not really in the spirit of the game to do so. I'm a laid back player, (I play CSM, I have to be) but if we are playing a game and I ask you what a rhino contains and your response is "It's a secret", The game is over. I'll pack up my models right there and find someone new.to play with. Even if your not doing it to cheat or any other shenanigans, it is implied.

Except, I wouldn't have said "it's a secret." I'd would have said "4th edition rules say that I don't have to say, and you can't ask, and later editions are silent on the matter."

Had you insisted on the matter, I would have divulged the information.

Your hypothetical response to this strikes me as utterly unsportsmanlike.

Forgive me, I did not mean to come off unsportsmanlike. That said, if I had asked about what was in your rhinos, especially if they are all different squads, and you had responded "Rules say I don't have to tell you and you shouldn't ask." There is no way that statement doesn't come off as abrasive to me and It's not a good first impression. First impressions are important, for example, you probably see me as unsportsmanlike or too whiney to play with from your first impression of me. What I seem to misunderstanding is, In this scenario, are we playing a 4th edition game or a different edition? If it's 4th edition, then your are completely right and I should be chastised for not knowing that rule. If not though, can you understand how I would be taken aback by the response?

HuskyWarhammer wrote:...more unsportsmanlike than refusing to divulge what's in a transport...?

There's nothing inherently unsportsmanlike about this. 1. Previous editions not only allowed, but commanded it and 2. it's wholly in keeping with the general feel of the game: Your anti-tank guys don't know which tank Pedro Kantor is in. He's in a metal box.

He's making a reasonable choice - if a player demonstrates his unwillingness to play in a sportsmanlike fashion and refuses to divulge, it stands that the person is going to...slide...other things in. Refusing to play sends a message to that person that there are real and natural consequences to bad behaviors. Hell, he's probably doing the rest of us a favor.

1. That's not necessarily a reasonable assumption. Yes, I obviously would be hesitant to divulge where the meltas are because I want to avoid their being targeted, so long as the rules permit me the advantage. From this it doesn't follow that I wish to cheat by mentally swapping who's in what.

2. It's not in and of itself "bad behavior." Again, previous editions commanded it.

The correct, sportsmanlike answer to "4th ed allowed it and later editions don't say otherwise" is not to pack up your stuff and end the game. It's simply to point out that the ordinary way of playing, vis-a-vis custom, is to divulge, i.e., that this is how it's commonly/popularly played in the absence of a determinate rule in the BRB.

If your opponent continues to refuse after being informed of this, THAT'S unsportsmanlike and merits an ending of the game.

Had either of my opponents answered me in this way, I gladly should have divulged the information.

But up and until then? I think that would be a hard case to make on your part.