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.

Apple fox wrote:
The thing is, Its not very friendly, Its reaching into TFG jar. And unless they are a very new player, I would see it as pushing towards a very toxic way of playing the game. Fishing for responses and then changing to other choices.
Mistakes themselves ad to the game in interesting ways, and there is a lot of good reasons not to allow players to do things like this, as well as to the satisifaction of there opponents. unless this player has been playing for more than a month, or the group is very lose with it. I would be stopping this kind of behavior just so it does not lead to more issues.

I can flip through my opponent's codex, army list or data cards at any time during the game. If you disagree, you are not a friendly player and thus not playing friendly games anyways.

Playing "Gotcha" with stratagems a player might not know about or might have forgotten about is not part of the game. The stratagems available to the opponent are public information, so the game is about your opponent deciding which stratagems to trigger when and you trying to goad your opponent into using stratagems on sub-optimal targets, playing around them or just bearing them. It's not about activating your secret trap card.
If you need those Gotchas to make your games easier, maybe you should change your behavior as well.

To me, part of being a friendly to my opponent is saving him or her this trouble and just inform them that I have a stratagem allowing me to shoot units arriving from deep strike as soon as they go and pick up models to deploy them somewhere. Just like I inform them about having a stratagem that doubles perils damage when they decide not to use a re-roll to prevent them or when someone moves unit into Mortarion's aura range because they don't know it triggers in both turns. In addition, it makes the game more challenging and feels more fair to the other player.
Against experienced players just asking "Are you sure?" pretty much does the same job, as they will know there is something they have not considered immediately.

Yes, even top players say the game is about doing less mistakes than your opponent. If you leave a hole in your backfield for my terminators to arrive, if you charge into the heroic intervention range of Ghazghkull Thrakka, or if you reduce multiple vehicles to 2-3 wounds instead of finishing one... that's a bad decision you made and have to suffer through.
Making a decision based on not knowing about certain publicly available information is not a mistake. In competitive environment this is a lack of preparation and thus should be punished by capitalizing on it.
However, why would you punish a person who you want to have a friendly game with for not knowing your codex? Is victory really that important in a friendly game?
In friendly games, you tend to play by intent. Clearly the player A did not intent use a psychic power to murder his own boyz or waste his lootas' shooting and would have decided otherwise if he had known about the stratagems before.

In general player A's decision were questionable even without the stratagems involved, so I don't think it was a very experienced player anyways. Anyone who has played against any eldar ever should know that they can pull -1 to hit out of their fancy hats at any time.
Even if he was steering towards TFG territory (which is impossible for us to know), it's still up to player B whether he is giving take-backs or not.

Some people have more fun with a competitive (in that it is close) game and some people have fun with a competitive (in that it is a battle of wits, no prisoners game). Neither is right or wrong and is the sort of thing that needs to discussed beforehand if you are playing someone for the first time.


I feel like this should be the response for at least 50% of the threads here.

 Jidmah wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
The thing is, Its not very friendly, Its reaching into TFG jar. And unless they are a very new player, I would see it as pushing towards a very toxic way of playing the game. Fishing for responses and then changing to other choices.
Mistakes themselves ad to the game in interesting ways, and there is a lot of good reasons not to allow players to do things like this, as well as to the satisifaction of there opponents. unless this player has been playing for more than a month, or the group is very lose with it. I would be stopping this kind of behavior just so it does not lead to more issues.

I can flip through my opponent's codex, army list or data cards at any time during the game. If you disagree, you are not a friendly player and thus not playing friendly games anyways.

Playing "Gotcha" with stratagems a player might not know about or might have forgotten about is not part of the game. The stratagems available to the opponent are public information, so the game is about your opponent deciding which stratagems to trigger when and you trying to goad your opponent into using stratagems on sub-optimal targets, playing around them or just bearing them. It's not about activating your secret trap card.
If you need those Gotchas to make your games easier, maybe you should change your behavior as well.

To me, part of being a friendly to my opponent is saving him or her this trouble and just inform them that I have a stratagem allowing me to shoot units arriving from deep strike as soon as they go and pick up models to deploy them somewhere. Just like I inform them about having a stratagem that doubles perils damage when they decide not to use a re-roll to prevent them or when someone moves unit into Mortarion's aura range because they don't know it triggers in both turns. In addition, it makes the game more challenging and feels more fair to the other player.
Against experienced players just asking "Are you sure?" pretty much does the same job, as they will know there is something they have not considered immediately.

Yes, even top players say the game is about doing less mistakes than your opponent. If you leave a hole in your backfield for my terminators to arrive, if you charge into the heroic intervention range of Ghazghkull Thrakka, or if you reduce multiple vehicles to 2-3 wounds instead of finishing one... that's a bad decision you made and have to suffer through.
Making a decision based on not knowing about certain publicly available information is not a mistake. In competitive environment this is a lack of preparation and thus should be punished by capitalizing on it.
However, why would you punish a person who you want to have a friendly game with for not knowing your codex? Is victory really that important in a friendly game?
In friendly games, you tend to play by intent. Clearly the player A did not intent use a psychic power to murder his own boyz or waste his lootas' shooting and would have decided otherwise if he had known about the stratagems before.

In general player A's decision were questionable even without the stratagems involved, so I don't think it was a very experienced player anyways. Anyone who has played against any eldar ever should know that they can pull -1 to hit out of their fancy hats at any time.
Even if he was steering towards TFG territory (which is impossible for us to know), it's still up to player B whether he is giving take-backs or not.

Handing them the book and telling them what i plan to do is very different things. And its not playing Gotcha, There is a lot of moving parts in this game. And even Top level players will forget them all the time. We cannot open every game by going though every rule the other play may not know. Which is why i said it was leading towards that point. We do not know 100% details, But assuming the player has play at least a few games. Then making mistakes and learning from them is just a healthy way to go about the game.

As i said, newer players get some leeway to this. But at a point they should probably be learning to start the game by looking at OP rules a bit and trying to gage them. Its not a punishment to reach a point of no return on a action. Casual or not, Fishing for responces is not good for a group.
As you said, Are you sure? is all a player should need passed a point.

I think takebacks should be minimal.

In a friendly game, they can be fine-but in a tournament game, hell no.

I also think that, if your opponent asks you "Do you have any Stratagems or other abilities that would mess me up if I Deepstrike my guys at the 9" mark/if I shoot those Rangers/[ANY OTHER ACTION]?" you should answer clearly and honestly.

In the examples provided, for the Rangers, you should say "I have a Strat that makes them only be hit on 6s." In the Deepstrike case, you should say "I can spend some CP to shoot at them as soon as they're done deploying."

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Yes, if this isn't a tourney game, then theres really no issue, since player B failed to mention what could happen beforehand.
You cant expect casual games to be on point all the time.
I would, as player A, expect my opponent to mention things like forwarned or - to hit strats he can play, when I express my intent to do things in a casual setting.

No. You're not obligated to list every possible combination of strategems and rules your army can do. Hit the big ones, then it's on your opponent to ask...especially since it may be reasonable to assume they know your army in some cases.
A better way would have been:
Player A: "do you have any way of shooting at my deepstrikers/reserves?"
Player B: "yeah I have a strat that enables me to shoot with a single unit at them"
Player A: "ok cool" and then does his move.

It's not on your opponent to stop you from making mistakes in a game.

I'll allow takebacks if I'm playing someone who is new. For anyone past the newb phase, takebacks are a no no as far as I'm concerned.

On the other hand, if there's something that was blatantly obvious for them to do, but they just forgot (say, charge a unit obviously meant to charge), I'd allow them to do it.

It all comes down to just being a good opponent and trying to get a fair and fun game in.

"Oh gak its my charge phase and I just realised I forgot to shoot this one unit!"

Yeah go for it, that's nothing you wouldn't have done anyway


"Oh gak I just realised your stratagem counters my play, can I do something else?"

Nope, that's what my stratagem is there for.

I’d say it depends on the kind of game you’re playing.

In a friendly game, I would remind my opponent about counter stratagems, and if they change their mind that’s ok. Nearly all of my games fall into that friendly category, and I’d hope my opponents would give the same courtesy to me.

Ie. “ I’m shooting my Lootas at your Pathfinders.”
“ You remember I’ve got that hit on 6’s strat, right?”
“Oh yeah... I’m going to shoot your Guardians instead.”

I think winning on a “gotcha” is lame when it comes to 40k. If my opponent realizes the risk and takes it anyway, that’s on them. But if they forget about my shoot at deep strikers strat, I’ll remind them when they start to place models in range. That’s my normal degree of competitive. Like I said, I’m not fond of gotchas.

If we’re playing hard competitive? I would say that like in chess, you take your hand off the last model in a unit, that unit stays. You declare target AND have dice in hand, you’ve committed. But again, being used to the priority structure of MtG, I would often ask about opponent reaction. “My Boyz Jump to here... any reaction before I move on?”

I like and enjoy surprises in Magic, but 40k is so loose it seems cheap to not let people make informed choices.

There's making an informed decision, and then there's making a decision with more information than you had before the mistake. You aren't just getting a reminder that the stratagem is a potential threat, you're getting the information that your opponent is willing to spend their limited resources on that particular use of the stratagem. That is clearly crossing the line from correcting an inconsequential mistake and into getting to change an outcome you don't like now that your opponent has given away their secrets.

Personally I draw a line between informing my opponent they probably just made a bone headed mistake and they ask me if I do X what's your response or if I move this model this way can xyz units see them.

If you don't prompt me for input I'm not gonna raise my voice, unless it's to try and psych who I'm up against out (in which case your probably making a decision that is not going to be kind to me lol).

HoundsofDemos wrote:
or if I move this model this way can xyz units see them.

It's completely against your own interest not to help this one. They are fully allowed to come and view from any part of the table you are standing, or to jiggle around their model placement and get it right. Save yourself both the time and help out here.

@ Peregrine: (Hey, I used your name properly, fancy that!)

In my case, I wouldn't commit to using my strat, just remind them that I have it.

Hell, I might do that to chase them away from their intended action without having to spend the resources... particularly that "Jump" question.

I acknowledge that in the OP, it was a dick move. But in my style of play, it's a situation that wouldn't pop up because I'd take a moment to "are you sure about that?" the other player.

The Ork player is only making a dick move if the OP was hoping to "Gotcha!" the Ork player. Which, in my way of playing, is a bit of a dick move, but well within the player's rights to do so. Not as a personal attack, OP. Everyone plays the game differently and if that's your bag then you rock it. But we tend to play friendly and that's part of our gentlemens' agreement when we agree to play each other.

Each group has their own culture. In my group, when we play 40k, doing a Gotcha is considered a bit of a dick move. Nothing fury inducing, but generally frowned upon. You're spending a "good will" point when you do it. While it's a nebulous concept, we play the game for bragging rights. The prize in all our games is the momentary thrill of saying, "I'm the best, and you guys are inferior to me." and that lasts exactly until the point where we play the next game. It's king of the hill for grownups. So, in our group, "Gotcha-ing" a win is reducing the value of your prize. A good clean fight, you won a good clean fight. If you sucker-punch the other player, it's a cheaper win... prize isn't as satisfying.

Again, just our culture and nobody plays the game "wrong".

The good old "are you sure?", "are you done?","is that everything?", "is that your final choice/decision?" to be clear the other guy has "committed" is what I try to do.

I agree that if a player is part way through an action and their opponent uses some "interruption" type stratagem, the player should not be able to change his mind based on his opponent's action.

I think the ONLY time I would allow or even want my opponent to take back a move or choice is if it is a new player and it is so bad it is apparent they will lose the game based on that.
That is a personal choice however, not anything I would want to enforce but I like close games and do not like beating on new players.

Typically with chess when not using the clock, if you took you hand of the play-piece, you were "committed", I figure if you started moving the unit, declared the target of your shooting, declared charges... the deed is done.

The thing this always comes back to me for me is why one player seems to have all the emphasis put onto them to accommodate their opponent, and that player is the one who hasn't done anything wrong? If I make a mistake why is it my opponent's responsibility to fix it? Instead of asking for a take-back why doesn't that person just own their mistake, take the consequences and move on?

That's not to say there aren't situations where take-backs may be appropriate. Forgetting to shoot with a unit after saying you're moving to the charge phase is fine. New players probably need more help and guidance than more experienced ones, but even then I often find it's better to let them learn form their mistakes (unless this is literally their first or second game). Agreeing an opponent's unit is out of LoS then shooting them because they actually aren't is a TFG move too. The situation in the OP doesn't fall into any of those categories.

This game is a two way street.

"Gotcha gaming" should not be part of the regular environment. Player B didn't do anything wrong, but with such an opponent I would declare - "Are you sure you want to do that? I'll use forewarn if you do."

Everyone is at some stage in their learning curve and it's OK to teach them. If you're in the middle of a cut throat tournament you're not obligated as you can assume your opponent knows what he needs to know, but otherwise I would literally not care if my opponent took back actions in a normal game or minor tournament.

@ Slip:

I don't consider it an "onus" on either player. I don't consider it an "accommodation", outside of what I'd normally do in everyday life.

"You're about to step in front of a moving bus. Are you sure you want to do that?"

"Oh, I didn't see that bus coming. Thanks! I'll not step in front of the bus."

So I don't consider it to be putting myself out to warn an opponent about something like a stratagem. I don't even like stratagems, to be honest, but that's beside the point. For me, it's about out-playing my opponent. The "cleaner" the win, the better. Again, just what I like and not trying to diminish other people's way of playing.

When I'm the bus, and he's another bus, in a bus-fight to the death, I'm not warning him that I'm about to t-bone him if he veers too aggressively into my lane. That's exactly the situation I want.

Fair enough. I guess my ego puts me in the position of Bus and my opponent in the position of pedestrian.

If that's the situation you want, then it would make sense to determine when a person is changing lanes, in your analogy. Having a discussion about how / when a player has commited and you can then "Gotcha" would probably be a good idea to put up front. That way there is no "take backsies" if that's what you like to play. To make it clear, something like, "Once you take your hands off the models, that's where you've moved", or "Once you declare a target, that's your intention and Strats can be used in reaction." would probably alleviate any disagreements, if put up front.

Makes the customs of the culture clear.

Just wanted to say thanks to everyone engaging in this discussion. Some good thoughts here.

I have another thread somewhere else that touches on gotcha gaming, about should you have to tell and opponent your strategy/tactics in the game as they make a tactical mistake. Nice to see so many well thought out responses.

I had a game recently where stupid me, knowing better, deepstruck in within 12 of hellblasters. I meant to come in 13, since my rapid fire on DW intercessors was 15 inches....but I totally forgot, and he wiped out the unit. He waited for me to put the unit down, and I picked up more figures before he announced auspex scan.

The game was a league game, so mildly competitive. I should have known better, and he took advantage of my mistake. Not a gotcha at all.

We don't have all the facts, so I will try to argue player A's side.
I agree with no takebacks and committing to your actions, but both sides have to be somewhat reasonable.
Say that it happened something more like this, and let's be honest, it sometimes happens this way too:

Player A: I can shot at the rangers...
Player B: interrupts: I use Pathfinder on them!
Player A: yeah, not going to shot at them. And probably was not going to anyways...


Player A: I use da jump "places a handful of models down on the table before doing any measurements, just to make ready his troops"..
Player B: FOREWARNED!!


I am exaggerating, but if you don't let your opponent finish a step in the action he is performing, then you can't say anything when he adapts his play.