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.

I mean part of the problem with 8th edition right now is that sometimes I forget stuff.

Does the Forbidden Gem have to meet or beat the enemy's leadership? I've used the relic like five times and I think it's beat rather than meet but I'd have to check.

What's the range on the Warptime power? I think it's 3" and an 8 to cast, but hell if I know for sure without looking.

The Vostroyan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of yourself, while the Valhallan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of others, if I remember correctly. feth, those could be backwards, IDK.

EDIT:
As for etiquette for using LOW, I always warn my opponents before bringing the biggo tanks, if I can. Sometimes I end up playing an unexpected PUG. I still try to warn my opponent but by then it can be too late for either of us to change what models we brought. (This can happen when my previous scheduled opponent cancels, typically).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The Vostroyan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of yourself, while the Valhallan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of others, if I remember correctly. feth, those could be backwards, IDK.

That is at least easy to remember. Just think of Chenkov. He would totally order his men to fire on units locked in combat, and not care about hitting his men. Very Valhallan.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean part of the problem with 8th edition right now is that sometimes I forget stuff.

Does the Forbidden Gem have to meet or beat the enemy's leadership? I've used the relic like five times and I think it's beat rather than meet but I'd have to check.

What's the range on the Warptime power? I think it's 3" and an 8 to cast, but hell if I know for sure without looking.

The Vostroyan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of yourself, while the Valhallan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of others, if I remember correctly. feth, those could be backwards, IDK.

Off topic but - This.

I've played a few small 40k and Kill Team games and I haven't got anywhere near even trying to use ALL the rules and I KNOW there is plenty I forget in game.
Seems a lot more complex than it used to be.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The Vostroyan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of yourself, while the Valhallan unique order lets you shoot enemies within 1" of others, if I remember correctly. feth, those could be backwards, IDK.

That is at least easy to remember. Just think of Chenkov. He would totally order his men to fire on units locked in combat, and not care about hitting his men. Very Valhallan.

Well, yes, but it's also very Tsarist Russia (i.e. Vostroyan) to shoot your own men by accident when hitting the enemy. Just like the 2nd Pacific Squadron and poor old Aurora who got shot up by her own battleships at least once. I think they were jealous of a ship that was actually seaworthy.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well, yes, but it's also very Tsarist Russia (i.e. Vostroyan) to shoot your own men by accident when hitting the enemy. Just like the 2nd Pacific Squadron and poor old Aurora who got shot up by her own battleships at least once. I think they were jealous of a ship that was actually seaworthy.

It was probably the Kamchatka's fault somehow.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well, yes, but it's also very Tsarist Russia (i.e. Vostroyan) to shoot your own men by accident when hitting the enemy. Just like the 2nd Pacific Squadron and poor old Aurora who got shot up by her own battleships at least once. I think they were jealous of a ship that was actually seaworthy.

It was probably the Kamchatka's fault somehow.

never utter that name again here

When 8th first came out I brought Magnus the Red to a 1000 point friendly team tournament. Everyone got all over me saying that this was unfair or that this would take all of the fun away. Magnus ended up doing terribly and this woke everybody up to how 8th edition would be.

I think superheavies can be brought at any point size now. This wasn't the case back in the 7th. If someone brought a Knight in a 1000 point game that would piss a lot of people off.

Something else: I remember back in 7th at a GW store there was this guy who had a beautifully painted Imperial Knight household and would bring a Knight army for 2000 point games. This guy was hated. Everybody thought this guy was being a total power gamer, no one wanted to play against him. Nowadays, if you bring a knight army no one should care all that much. Anything can hurt anything and if you are smart you should have a balance of anti-tank and anti-infantry in your list. The reason I say should is that a lot of people carried this stupid bias over from 7th edition and still think running Imperial Knights is a cheese/powergamer thing. Just talk with them and they should soon realize that this makes no sense considering everything can kill everything and that these models cost 400+ points.

I see two other people are familiar with the voyage of the 2nd Pacific Squadron courtesy of Drachinifel.

 Murrax9 wrote:
When 8th first came out I brought Magnus the Red to a 1000 point friendly team tournament. Everyone got all over me saying that this was unfair or that this would take all of the fun away. Magnus ended up doing terribly and this woke everybody up to how 8th edition would be.

I think superheavies can be brought at any point size now. This wasn't the case back in the 7th. If someone brought a Knight in a 1000 point game that would piss a lot of people off.

Something else: I remember back in 7th at a GW store there was this guy who had a beautifully painted Imperial Knight household and would bring a Knight army for 2000 point games. This guy was hated. Everybody thought this guy was being a total power gamer, no one wanted to play against him. Nowadays, if you bring a knight army no one should care all that much. Anything can hurt anything and if you are smart you should have a balance of anti-tank and anti-infantry in your list. The reason I say should is that a lot of people carried this stupid bias over from 7th edition and still think running Imperial Knights is a cheese/powergamer thing. Just talk with them and they should soon realize that this makes no sense considering everything can kill everything and that these models cost 400+ points.

You should have had enough antitank in your list crica 7th too. That principle hasn't changed.

Super Heavy units were definitely more survivable point-for-point in 7th, though I would say they kill stuff deader faster now.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Funny that you mention that.
In every game I played I went through my army (usually during deployment) and mentioned things that are either not WYSIWYG or I felt are uncommon.
Warlord traits or relics fall into that category for example.

Is that something people don't do?

When i play i tell my opponents if they would take an action that i could react to in a negative way for them (falling back from hawyire skyweavers for example).

Yeah, I take no joy in punishing an opponent with a rule they didn't know about.

If I have a unit or strat that can react to a deep strike, a unit that can prevent fall back, a stratagem that lets me unload a massive alpha strike, or something like that, i'll tell my opponent like the turn beforehand or while they're considering what to do.

In a recent game of mine I found out that in PA they gave Alpha Legion the ability to tell a unit that they can't deep strike more than 12" from enemy models. I was playing as GSC, had a bunch of units in deep strike, and I started with my big alpha strike unit and he used the stratagem. I said I'd use "plan generations in the making" to block it, but he said I needed a unit from the subfaction on the battlefield first. To which I said if I'd known about that stratagem, I'd have put down one of my cheaper units first, just to get them on the battlefield, and the only reason we were in this situation is because it was some new rule from a new book I didn't own. But he wanted his "Gotcha' moment, and that moment basically won the game for him, and turned the game from something casual and friendly into something that felt needlessly rules-lawyery. Like, great, you went out and bought a 40$ book for extra rules for your guys, didn't tell me about them, and used them to screw me over in a way that would have been very easy for me to avoid had you told me about the rule. Still would have cost me a bunch of CP and a once-per-game ability, but I would have been able to keep participating in the game.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Funny that you mention that.
In every game I played I went through my army (usually during deployment) and mentioned things that are either not WYSIWYG or I felt are uncommon.
Warlord traits or relics fall into that category for example.

Is that something people don't do?

Well, as everything I use is WYS there's no reason to cover that. I'm not going to bother trying to decide what might be uncommon etc to someone else. If you've got questions you'll ask. I will point out the "invisible things" - warlord traits, etc.

ccs wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Funny that you mention that.
In every game I played I went through my army (usually during deployment) and mentioned things that are either not WYSIWYG or I felt are uncommon.
Warlord traits or relics fall into that category for example.

Is that something people don't do?

Well, as everything I use is WYS there's no reason to cover that. I'm not going to bother trying to decide what might be uncommon etc to someone else. If you've got questions you'll ask. I will point out the "invisible things" - warlord traits, etc.

I just read off everything in my list, naming anything the unit has that isn't it's base loadout.

i can punish people for not having a proper, well rounded list by spamming generic vehicles more than i can by bringing my Squiggoth, Killtank, or Knight randomly (depending on the army im using).

The main issue these behemoths were unkillable before was only BIG guns could really do anything at all, and on top of that only the REALLY BIG guns had a decent chance at it. Pick off those guns and nothing can hurt the LoW anymore.
Thats gone. Yes those big guns help for sure, but if a Knight is sitting on 1-3 wounds after the last "reliable" gun goes down, its still going to die while previously it would just start dancing around and not give a damn about who it approached.

LoW's dont phase me in 8th, they draw attention more because OMG BIG MODEL than they do on being overpowered. We have a knight player in the area that usually gives his opponents an extra 1/4th of the game points because its all knights. Without even changing my general list i tabled the guy w/o those extra points. Completely opened his mind how weak LoWs are now.

Generally if you are not outfitted to deal with 3-6 vehicles, which you SHOULD BE, LoW will be an issue. If you are outfitted, you probably dont care. I've only had 1 game where i felt i couldnt hurt a LoW and that a joke "Trukkboyz" list for old time's sake...

I used to be of the mindset that you had to clear it before bringing it before. Since 8th happened i stopped thinking that way because theres no real point. Sure, if youre facing a known new guy maybe dont bring the ultra-powerful stuff so he has a chance to learn the game but thats about it as far as limitations go.
(Not to mention i actually dont like bringing LoW's purely for the CP cut, for orks at least. Less CP hurts me more than having big bertha helps)

I'd say a warning beforehand is in order but is just because of how I prefer 40k personally, not because they are necessarily OP. I like TAC vs TAC lists and any kind of skew list goes against that. But again that is just my personal preference, YMMV.

the_scotsman wrote:
In a recent game of mine I found out that in PA they gave Alpha Legion the ability to tell a unit that they can't deep strike more than 12" from enemy models. I was playing as GSC, had a bunch of units in deep strike, and I started with my big alpha strike unit and he used the stratagem. I said I'd use "plan generations in the making" to block it, but he said I needed a unit from the subfaction on the battlefield first. To which I said if I'd known about that stratagem, I'd have put down one of my cheaper units first, just to get them on the battlefield, and the only reason we were in this situation is because it was some new rule from a new book I didn't own. But he wanted his "Gotcha' moment, and that moment basically won the game for him, and turned the game from something casual and friendly into something that felt needlessly rules-lawyery. Like, great, you went out and bought a 40$ book for extra rules for your guys, didn't tell me about them, and used them to screw me over in a way that would have been very easy for me to avoid had you told me about the rule. Still would have cost me a bunch of CP and a once-per-game ability, but I would have been able to keep participating in the game.

You got punished for not knowing your own rule, not because you didn't know his rule. You should have put down the cheap unit first regardless so you'd have your rule active just in case something came up.

It's not on your opponent to play your army for you and forewarn you of ever bad play you're about to make.

 Castozor wrote:
I'd say a warning beforehand is in order but is just because of how I prefer 40k personally, not because they are necessarily OP. I like TAC vs TAC lists and any kind of skew list goes against that. But again that is just my personal preference, YMMV.

Lists that presents a monolithic defensive profile are not exclusive with lists that are take all comers.

A list that can take all comers can confront and defeat any presented list, and is therefore versatile in capability. It presents a diverse offensive profile, but this has limited to no bearing on the list's defensive profile.

Arguably, taking a skewed defensive profile list makes you a better take all comers list, since your diverse offensive profile ensures you can service any enemy threat that may be required and your monolithic defensive profile ensures that it is harder to service all of the threats that you present in exchange.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
In a recent game of mine I found out that in PA they gave Alpha Legion the ability to tell a unit that they can't deep strike more than 12" from enemy models. I was playing as GSC, had a bunch of units in deep strike, and I started with my big alpha strike unit and he used the stratagem. I said I'd use "plan generations in the making" to block it, but he said I needed a unit from the subfaction on the battlefield first. To which I said if I'd known about that stratagem, I'd have put down one of my cheaper units first, just to get them on the battlefield, and the only reason we were in this situation is because it was some new rule from a new book I didn't own. But he wanted his "Gotcha' moment, and that moment basically won the game for him, and turned the game from something casual and friendly into something that felt needlessly rules-lawyery. Like, great, you went out and bought a 40$ book for extra rules for your guys, didn't tell me about them, and used them to screw me over in a way that would have been very easy for me to avoid had you told me about the rule. Still would have cost me a bunch of CP and a once-per-game ability, but I would have been able to keep participating in the game.

You got punished for not knowing your own rule, not because you didn't know his rule. You should have put down the cheap unit first regardless so you'd have your rule active just in case something came up.

It's not on your opponent to play your army for you and forewarn you of ever bad play you're about to make.

I think it's polite form to inform the opponent of your rules if they want to know. My codex and the stratagems in it are open knowledge. If they ask me "do you have a stratagem that ignores modifiers to hit", I'll be like "Yes, 'The Wolf's Eye', right here."

I try to help them when I see they're trying to execute something but aren't quite pulling it off quite right. The idea is there, they just might need a little help to make it work. IE: three pointing, if they've put three models on one of my guys but they're arranged at like 0-90-180 instead of 0-120-240, I might tell them that one of their guys needs to slide further over to one side to actually block my retreat.

On the other hand, I'm not obligated to tell them everything I'm planning, so I don't need to volunteer to them what I'm doing or can do to counter what they're doing if they don't ask me.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I think it's polite form to inform the opponent of your rules if they want to know. My codex and the stratagems in it are open knowledge. If they ask me "do you have a stratagem that ignores modifiers to hit", I'll be like "Yes, 'The Wolf's Eye', right here."

If they ask I'll happily tell them, but if they mess up and start dropping a unit they're stuck with the move they just made. Learn from your mistake and move on.

I try to help them when I see they're trying to execute something but aren't quite pulling it off quite right. The idea is there, they just might need a little help to make it work. IE: three pointing, if they've put three models on one of my guys but they're arranged at like 0-90-180 instead of 0-120-240, I might tell them that one of their guys needs to slide further over to one side to actually block my retreat.

I'd do that for an obvious new player but for anybody else, they can either read up on tactics or play the game and learn as they go.

If it fits, it sits.

If I am dropping an all knights list I will usually tell my opponent, sometimes they just need to tailor their list a little in a casual game so that they actually get a fair chance.

As lists aren’t secret after deployment I am more than willing to answer questions about if my army is capable of x, y, or z. Gotcha moments because my opponent has not memorized all my rules and stratagems in a friendly game aren’t really fun. If they are new to the game I will generally warn them if they are doing something that will let me gain a massive advantage or could be a tactical mistake.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
In a recent game of mine I found out that in PA they gave Alpha Legion the ability to tell a unit that they can't deep strike more than 12" from enemy models. I was playing as GSC, had a bunch of units in deep strike, and I started with my big alpha strike unit and he used the stratagem. I said I'd use "plan generations in the making" to block it, but he said I needed a unit from the subfaction on the battlefield first. To which I said if I'd known about that stratagem, I'd have put down one of my cheaper units first, just to get them on the battlefield, and the only reason we were in this situation is because it was some new rule from a new book I didn't own. But he wanted his "Gotcha' moment, and that moment basically won the game for him, and turned the game from something casual and friendly into something that felt needlessly rules-lawyery. Like, great, you went out and bought a 40$ book for extra rules for your guys, didn't tell me about them, and used them to screw me over in a way that would have been very easy for me to avoid had you told me about the rule. Still would have cost me a bunch of CP and a once-per-game ability, but I would have been able to keep participating in the game.

You got punished for not knowing your own rule, not because you didn't know his rule. You should have put down the cheap unit first regardless so you'd have your rule active just in case something came up.

It's not on your opponent to play your army for you and forewarn you of ever bad play you're about to make.

Well, except for the fact that I know the CSM stratagems, and a week before nothing even could have come up at the end of my movement phase So no, dawg, it was his rule, the reason I knew I could have put a cheap unit down is because I always do it against space marines, admech and eldar. If you are the kind of person who enjoys games ending more one-sidedly and more quickly because you pull the "no take-backsies!" every time your opponent makes a mistake, that's your perogative, but expecting there not to be at the very least a ramp-up of how cut throat the game is going to be from that point on and expecting a lot of people to be super jazzed about playing against you again is probably a bit naive in my opinion.

There's also no rule against you deliberately doing things to confuse your opponent with your models, like having a fully painted up catachan army but deploying them on the table as 3 different non-catachan regiments, or against deploying your leman russes behind a building and tilting their gun barrels up to draw LOS on your shooting phase and then pushing them back down after they shoot.

I do often wonder every time one of these "hey, uh, should you do a polite thing?" threads comes up and it gets 6 pages of outraged replies how many regular posters on dakka are regulars on here because for some reason everybody in their in-person groups had another opponent already lined up when they asked if they wanted to play again.

the_scotsman wrote:
Well, except for the fact that I know the CSM stratagems,

Clearly you didn't or you wouldn't have made that mistake...

and a week before nothing even could have come up at the end of my movement phase So no, dawg, it was his rule, the reason I knew I could have put a cheap unit down is because I always do it against space marines, admech and eldar. If you are the kind of person who enjoys games ending more one-sidedly and more quickly because you pull the "no take-backsies!" every time your opponent makes a mistake, that's your perogative, but expecting there not to be at the very least a ramp-up of how cut throat the game is going to be from that point on and expecting a lot of people to be super jazzed about playing against you again is probably a bit naive in my opinion.

You made a mistake it's not on your opponent to coddle you because you didn't bother keeping up with new information. Now you know for next time or will know to just drop your cheap stuff first to be safe, which you should just make a habit anyway as there is rarely a punishment for dropping a cheap unit in before an expensive one. Would you also ask for an undo if you made a move in chess, hand fully off the piece, and your opponent informed you that it would lead to mate in two via a pair of moves you'd never seen before? Onesided games happen in any system that rewards skill and 40k happens to reward knowing all the rules and bringing a good list as well as playing correctly on the table.

There's also no rule against you deliberately doing things to confuse your opponent with your models, like having a fully painted up catachan army but deploying them on the table as 3 different non-catachan regiments, or against deploying your leman russes behind a building and tilting their gun barrels up to draw LOS on your shooting phase and then pushing them back down after they shoot.

WYSIWYG is dead my friend. Read their list, and ask what each unit is as you play.

The LR thing sounds like a smart tactic and makes sense if you think of it as them using indirect fire.

I do often wonder every time one of these "hey, uh, should you do a polite thing?" threads comes up and it gets 6 pages of outraged replies how many regular posters on dakka are regulars on here because for some reason everybody in their in-person groups had another opponent already lined up when they asked if they wanted to play again.

As long as somebody plays within the rules and isn't an ass, and no not letting you take back a terrible move doesn't make somebody an ass, they should have no issues finding a game. It seems like you want a game where your opponent gives you unlimited mulligans rather than you learning and becoming a stronger player as you play.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
Would you also ask for an undo if you made a move in chess, hand fully off the piece, and your opponent informed you that it would lead to mate in two via a pair of moves you'd never seen before?

If a new move or rule was added to chess then yeah. That's the problem with constantly adding new gotcha rules. GW should have kept it to Relics and WL traits and specialist detachments instead of just adding always available stratagems, if it's a relic/WL trait/specialist detachment your opponent has to announce it and you can ask what those do. Do you really want your opponent to have to read your supplement just before the game starts or would you rather warn them of incoming new rules? I guess you just want to crush your opponent for not doing their hobby homework, kind of lame.

 vict0988 wrote:
If a new move or rule was added to chess then yeah. That's the problem with constantly adding new gotcha rules. GW should have kept it to Relics and WL traits and specialist detachments instead of just adding always available stratagems, if it's a relic/WL trait/specialist detachment your opponent has to announce it and you can ask what those do. Do you really want your opponent to have to read your supplement just before the game starts or would you rather warn them of incoming new rules? I guess you just want to crush your opponent for not doing their hobby homework, kind of lame.

The rules of chess state that once your hand leaves the piece your move has been made, so you'd ask to break the rules because you didn't bother learning them?

The rules are public knowledge, you don't even need to read their rulebook to find them. You could check the tactics section here, watch a YT video, check wahapedia... We know that each new PA supplement will include new stratagems, we know in advance which armies will be covered in each supplement, so read up on the new stuff or lose a few games for not knowing. It's not on anybody else to ensure that you know the rules or that you don't make a mistake.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:
If a new move or rule was added to chess then yeah. That's the problem with constantly adding new gotcha rules. GW should have kept it to Relics and WL traits and specialist detachments instead of just adding always available stratagems, if it's a relic/WL trait/specialist detachment your opponent has to announce it and you can ask what those do. Do you really want your opponent to have to read your supplement just before the game starts or would you rather warn them of incoming new rules? I guess you just want to crush your opponent for not doing their hobby homework, kind of lame.

The rules of chess state that once your hand leaves the piece your move has been made, so you'd ask to break the rules because you didn't bother learning them?

The rules are public knowledge, you don't even need to read their rulebook to find them. You could check the tactics section here, watch a YT video, check wahapedia... We know that each new PA supplement will include new stratagems, we know in advance which armies will be covered in each supplement, so read up on the new stuff or lose a few games for not knowing. It's not on anybody else to ensure that you know the rules or that you don't make a mistake.

They're not public knowledge, they're hidden away in two or three different books that you have to buy. If your opponent hasn't spent their money on codexes/supplements for armies they don't play and as such as failed to do their hobby homework then you can either let them read the whole thing, warn them of the few things that might cause gotcha moments, or actively seek to gotcha your opponents. It is 100% reasonable to expect people to read the rules for chess before the game, and if you tri-point someone because they stringed out a unit without considering that, no take-backsies. There is no WP or mistake made just because you cannot afford to buy 20 books.

Also paywalled content is hardly estimateable as public knowledge.

 vict0988 wrote:
They're not public knowledge, they're hidden away in two or three different books that you have to buy. If your opponent hasn't spent their money on codexes/supplements for armies they don't play and as such as failed to do their hobby homework then you can either let them read the whole thing, warn them of the few things that might cause gotcha moments, or actively seek to gotcha your opponents. It is 100% reasonable to expect people to read the rules for chess before the game, and if you tri-point someone because they stringed out a unit without considering that, no take-backsies. There is no WP or mistake made just because you cannot afford to buy 20 books.

They are public knowledge because you can 100% of the time find a youtube video, post on this very forum, or Goonhammer article explaining the new rules. This is without going to a grey-area site like Wahapedia which lists all the rules of the game for free.

Frankly, there is no excuse to not know the rules a week after they've launched because they will be covered online.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
In a recent game of mine I found out that in PA they gave Alpha Legion the ability to tell a unit that they can't deep strike more than 12" from enemy models. I was playing as GSC, had a bunch of units in deep strike, and I started with my big alpha strike unit and he used the stratagem. I said I'd use "plan generations in the making" to block it, but he said I needed a unit from the subfaction on the battlefield first. To which I said if I'd known about that stratagem, I'd have put down one of my cheaper units first, just to get them on the battlefield, and the only reason we were in this situation is because it was some new rule from a new book I didn't own. But he wanted his "Gotcha' moment, and that moment basically won the game for him, and turned the game from something casual and friendly into something that felt needlessly rules-lawyery. Like, great, you went out and bought a 40$ book for extra rules for your guys, didn't tell me about them, and used them to screw me over in a way that would have been very easy for me to avoid had you told me about the rule. Still would have cost me a bunch of CP and a once-per-game ability, but I would have been able to keep participating in the game.

You got punished for not knowing your own rule, not because you didn't know his rule. You should have put down the cheap unit first regardless so you'd have your rule active just in case something came up.

It's not on your opponent to play your army for you and forewarn you of ever bad play you're about to make.

Well, except for the fact that I know the CSM stratagems, and a week before nothing even could have come up at the end of my movement phase So no, dawg, it was his rule, the reason I knew I could have put a cheap unit down is because I always do it against space marines, admech and eldar. If you are the kind of person who enjoys games ending more one-sidedly and more quickly because you pull the "no take-backsies!" every time your opponent makes a mistake, that's your perogative, but expecting there not to be at the very least a ramp-up of how cut throat the game is going to be from that point on and expecting a lot of people to be super jazzed about playing against you again is probably a bit naive in my opinion.

There's also no rule against you deliberately doing things to confuse your opponent with your models, like having a fully painted up catachan army but deploying them on the table as 3 different non-catachan regiments, or against deploying your leman russes behind a building and tilting their gun barrels up to draw LOS on your shooting phase and then pushing them back down after they shoot.

I do often wonder every time one of these "hey, uh, should you do a polite thing?" threads comes up and it gets 6 pages of outraged replies how many regular posters on dakka are regulars on here because for some reason everybody in their in-person groups had another opponent already lined up when they asked if they wanted to play again.

I just think it's funny - all your crying about Alpha Legion surprising you. Afterall, that's pretty much "in character" for them.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
Frankly, there is no excuse to not know the rules a week after they've launched because they will be covered online.

For anyone who is treating this hobby as a hobby - not something they're 100% laser-focused on at all times, and not something that consumes all their free time like a second job - then it is reasonable not to be aware of new things.

Going to a tournament, especially one with prizes on the line? Sure, you should probably do some research into what's new (though tournaments often have the good sense to say that new material released X days before the event won't be used), but for an allegedly "friendly" game at the LGS? No, that's an unreasonable position to take.

Frankly, in this instance the_scotsman was facing an opponent who was at least partially TFG.

ccs, I wouldn't say he's crying about it - just annoyed that it was sprung on him as a gotcha. For example, would it have killed his opponent to say "I'm going to be using the Faith & Fury material for Alpha Legion - are you familiar with it?" before the game?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:
They're not public knowledge, they're hidden away in two or three different books that you have to buy. If your opponent hasn't spent their money on codexes/supplements for armies they don't play and as such as failed to do their hobby homework then you can either let them read the whole thing, warn them of the few things that might cause gotcha moments, or actively seek to gotcha your opponents. It is 100% reasonable to expect people to read the rules for chess before the game, and if you tri-point someone because they stringed out a unit without considering that, no take-backsies. There is no WP or mistake made just because you cannot afford to buy 20 books.

They are public knowledge because you can 100% of the time find a youtube video, post on this very forum, or Goonhammer article explaining the new rules. This is without going to a grey-area site like Wahapedia which lists all the rules of the game for free.

Frankly, there is no excuse to not know the rules a week after they've launched because they will be covered online.

No excuse to not have done your hobby homework that is released what 12 times a year? What about actual homework? Who said one week? How about games on the day of release? How many games do you try to get in before the one week mark to gotcha as many people as possible before they've done their hobby homework? Dozens of individualized faction Stratagems with new ones being released for at least a couple of factions every few months is too much hobby homework when you add FAQ/Errata and new missions on top. That is too big a requirement to be a casual wargamer. I'd agree that GW is basically asking for piracy with what they're releasing in their books and how they're releasing them, reading a book aloud or showing it page-by-page is the same as sharing a pdf, what YouTubers are doing is as much piracy as what wahapedia is doing. I don't like to mention wahapedia too much, it's the only thing keeping things sane for me and I don't want GW to shut it down.

Yikes, some people demand a LOT of work be done by every single person, no matter the situation, before they stop looking down on other people in the hobby as somehow inferior.

I wouldn't expect my nephew, who started playing before he hit his teenage years (and is only about thirteen right now), to be able to tell me every single freaking rule that he might face for every single freaking army in the game. I still have to remind him of his own army's rules.

Hell, I still have to reference my own codex. It's not like I necessarily get enough games every month that every statline is absolutely memorized.

How about we, you know... just stop being dicks to each other?

Gotcha moments always felt cheap to me. Doesn't matter if it is me or my opponent having it. I don't see any benefit for the mutual enjoyment of the game if such things happen.

Same logic applies if someone forgot to advance with a unit and already cast a spell (and similar situations). Of course they can still advance. As long as I don't feel there is some kind of scheme behind it, why should I say no? In my last game three different Tyranid units charged my lone character model armed with a plasma pistol at the same time. He wanted to move his big Trygon(?) first instead of the Gaunts and I reminded him of the pistol being there, so he should charge with the disposable unit first in case I would hit. Losing the Trygon in that moment would have felt very bitter for him, I am sure.