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.

Dudeface wrote:

So what you're saying is, you can't currently prove that almost nobody (subjective) is using tempest of war?

Other people making the implied claim that Tempest of War is being used widely in the 40k community and the norm have no basis for what they're claiming, so I don't have to prove gak. They're the one making the claim.

Tempest of War isn't in the core rules, it's not part of the core experience of 40k. It's an optional add on. Not relevant to this discussion.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Toofast wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Well if you're completely off guard by someone using a Strat to lower your LD or some garbage like that, I dunno what to tell you.

Again you're cherry picking strats to pretend gotcha moments don't exist. If they don't exist for you, congrats on having the time to sit down and learn 700 stratagems and special rules. For the other 99.9% of the playerbase, they both exist and feel bad when they happen.

Citation needed for the 99% of the playerbase that hadn't memorized Transhuman Physiology and Agents of Vect after they became rules.

Or the real Gotcha special rules like Salamanders rerolling a hit roll! Man that catches me off guard every time!

You play space marines agaisnt my Chaos demons, you decide to cast a buff spell with your librarian and end up periling, you say "sure, i got 4 wounds left, perils can't kill me". I use Daemonic possession and you take 4 mortals from your perils and die.

thats a gotcha.

Will you know in the future? yes, but that doesn't change the fact that its a strat that no one would expect before running into

Not a gotcha since everyone knows about that Strat.

Slipspace wrote:
He also seems to like demanding citations for claims, which is why I thought it was odd that he claimed he could prove it in the first place.

To clarify, I was saying that it's provable.

Slipspace wrote:
The problem with guesswork is everyone's opinions are inevitably skewed by their local meta. Some people will have a wider pool of different local metas to draw on depending on location, but for the most part everyone is pretty isolated in their own little bubble. That's why I'd always be wary of claims that "nobody" or "everybody" plays a certain way. I've never seen Crusade get beyond 1-2 games where I play, for example, but I'm not going to claim that's the most common result of trying Crusade.

Sure, but nobody's meta has Tempest of War as the norm. People are just saying that because they want to argue in bad faith against me.

Hecaton wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

So what you're saying is, you can't currently prove that almost nobody (subjective) is using tempest of war?

Other people making the implied claim that Tempest of War is being used widely in the 40k community and the norm have no basis for what they're claiming, so I don't have to prove gak. They're the one making the claim.

no, other people said that it existed, you claimed that this does not matter because no one uses it and that you can easily proof that claim

and we are waiting

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
In 40k, gotchas have none of these drawbacks. It's one of the reasons I stopped playing. The other being how dreadfully boring it is when it's not my turn. I'm sure there are counter arguments to everything I just said, but I started with 40k, and got tired of it pretty fast.

the only counter argument is that 40k was different in the past, so might change back in the future (as 9th is received not that well) and you should just ignore the current state of the game

similar with IGoUGo, 40k has always been that way so just ignore that it is different now because it made things worse, and wait until it goes back to the default state

 kodos wrote:

no, other people said that it existed, you claimed that this does not matter because no one uses it and that you can easily proof that claim

and we are waiting

Where in the rules for 40k does it say to use the Tempest of War deck? What tournament or other event do you know that has used it? I'm not going to waste my time with your disingenuous assertions.

Was 9th recived bad by the community or was 9th recived bad and the sells went down. Because if the second thing happened, GW may change some stuff, maybe not for the better, but they will change it. If is just the first option of players being unhappy, the reaction may come delayed and probably will not be what the players want, with a good chance of fixs not really fiting the 10th ed rule set.

I mean how many people are happy today that GW fixed eliminators and centurions?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Not a gotcha since everyone knows about that Strat.

I didn't....

Hecaton wrote:
Where in the rules for 40k does it say to use the Tempest of War deck? What tournament or other event do you know that has used it? I'm not going to waste my time with your disingenuous assertions.

were in the rules does it say to always play 2000 points?
is this now your admit to be wrong with the claim that no one uses it?

 vipoid wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Not a gotcha since everyone knows about that Strat.

I didn't....

Whelp guess we should just make it a standard rule for Daemon armies so nobody gets Gotcha'd ever again!

 kodos wrote:
were in the rules does it say to always play 2000 points?
is this now your admit to be wrong with the claim that no one uses it?

It doesn't, but it does allow for it. Many people play 2000 points, other people prefer different amounts. The last game I played last weekend was 1k points. Nowhere in the rules I said did it say anything about Tempest of War. It did say things about playing games at different points values though.

Hecaton wrote:

 kodos wrote:
were in the rules does it say to always play 2000 points?
is this now your admit to be wrong with the claim that no one uses it?

It doesn't, but it does allow for it. Many people play 2000 points, other people prefer different amounts. The last game I played last weekend was 1k points. Nowhere in the rules I said did it say anything about Tempest of War. It did say things about playing games at different points values though.

Oddly nowhere in the rules does it say anything about using a grand tournament mission pack either, did you use one of those?

Dudeface wrote:

Oddly nowhere in the rules does it say anything about using a grand tournament mission pack either, did you use one of those?

No. We used the Matched Play updates though, since we were playing matched play.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


You play space marines agaisnt my Chaos demons, you decide to cast a buff spell with your librarian and end up periling, you say "sure, i got 4 wounds left, perils can't kill me". I use Daemonic possession and you take 4 mortals from your perils and die.

thats a gotcha.

Will you know in the future? yes, but that doesn't change the fact that its a strat that no one would expect before running into

Do you think knowing that strat would have change anything in your example? Who's gonna skip a psychic phase for a psyker just because if the opponets invests CPs and you roll to peril then it dies? I've never sit my wounded psykers just because a peril result might kill them, unless maybe it's sitting alone on an objective and I desperately need the model to be alive at the end of the turn to score.

A gotcha might be something like: player A casts a psychic power than damage an enemy unit then player B uses a stratagem that reverses that psychic power into a player's A unit, killing it. In that case, knowing the strat, player A would have played it differently. Maybe, even that is not guaranteed. But not in your example.

Hecaton wrote:

 kodos wrote:

no, other people said that it existed, you claimed that this does not matter because no one uses it and that you can easily proof that claim

and we are waiting

Where in the rules for 40k does it say to use the Tempest of War deck? What tournament or other event do you know that has used it? I'm not going to waste my time with your disingenuous assertions.

That's not the point that was made in the post you replied to. All that was being stated was that Tempest of War existed. There was nothing about it being a standard way to play, just that it existed.

As for where it says to use the deck - in the Tempest of War deck itself. That's just as much a part of 40k rules as the GT Mission Pack or a Warzone supplement. Looks to me like you're the one making the disingenuous assertions here.

Keep digging that hole though.

The tempest of war deck doesn't change anything about hidden information though, so I wonder why it keeps being discussed?

 Blackie wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


You play space marines agaisnt my Chaos demons, you decide to cast a buff spell with your librarian and end up periling, you say "sure, i got 4 wounds left, perils can't kill me". I use Daemonic possession and you take 4 mortals from your perils and die.

thats a gotcha.

Will you know in the future? yes, but that doesn't change the fact that its a strat that no one would expect before running into

Do you think knowing that strat would have change anything in your example? Who's gonna skip a psychic phase for a psyker just because if the opponets invests CPs and you roll to peril then it dies? I've never sit my wounded psykers just because a peril result might kill them, unless maybe it's sitting alone on an objective and I desperately need the model to be alive at the end of the turn to score.

A gotcha might be something like: player A casts a psychic power than damage an enemy unit then player B uses a stratagem that reverses that psychic power into a player's A unit, killing it. In that case, knowing the strat, player A would have played it differently. Maybe, even that is not guaranteed. But not in your example.

Knowing the strat would make it much more likely the player would use a CP reroll on the Psychic test. That's missing the point, though. The gotcha comes from the fact the information is theoretically available but not always known by both players. The classic example is Auspex Scan, where the difference between losing a unit and not is whether you know of the strat's existence and therefore deploy at 12.1" or whether you don't know and drop at 12" away, only to get hosed. Yes, the opponent can, and likely should, remind the other player about Auspex Scan, but a well-designed game with supposedly open information shouldn't require such frequent reminders.

Slipspace wrote:

Knowing the strat would make it much more likely the player would use a CP reroll on the Psychic test. That's missing the point, though. The gotcha comes from the fact the information is theoretically available but not always known by both players. The classic example is Auspex Scan, where the difference between losing a unit and not is whether you know of the strat's existence and therefore deploy at 12.1" or whether you don't know and drop at 12" away, only to get hosed. Yes, the opponent can, and likely should, remind the other player about Auspex Scan, but a well-designed game with supposedly open information shouldn't require such frequent reminders.

I'm not convinced.

From my perspective there are two types of rules: the most common ones and the rarest ones. If you don't know the most common rules, such as Auspex Scan, that's on you. Last year the football team of Roma made 6 changes during a national cup game, since they assumed that a 6th change was allowed when games come to extra time, but it wasn't and they lost 0-3 regardless of what happened on the field. That's on them for not knowing the basic rules. And that's on 40k players if they don't know the basic mechanics of the opponents' armies. Just like in the past, when stratagems didn't exist.

If you don't know some rare rule and get gotchad, most of the times that gotcha doesn't really change anything, in terms of strategy or decision making. That's my point. I firmly believe that there are very few real gotcha mechanics in 40k.

 Jidmah wrote:
The tempest of war deck doesn't change anything about hidden information though, so I wonder why it keeps being discussed?

because it was brought up as an example to counter the claim that a hidden deck of cards does not exist in 40k

than the goalpost was moved to, it exists but no one uses it

and now we are waiting for him to proof that because he said this is easy

 Blackie wrote:
I'm not convinced.

From my perspective there are two types of rules: the most common ones and the rarest ones. If you don't know the most common rules, such as Auspex Scan, that's on you. Last year the football team of Roma made 6 changes during a national cup game, since they assumed that a 6th change was allowed when games come to extra time, but it wasn't and they lost 0-3 regardless of what happened on the field. That's on them for not knowing the basic rules. And that's on 40k players if they don't know the basic mechanics of the opponents' armies. Just like in the past, when stratagems didn't exist.

If you don't know some rare rule and get gotchad, most of the times that gotcha doesn't really change anything, in terms of strategy or decision making. That's my point. I firmly believe that there are very few real gotcha mechanics in 40k.

Broadly speaking agree. I think the issue is more just people hate realising they've made a mistake that they shouldn't have made. So Auspex Scan is an obvious one - because if being inside 12" made no difference to being outside 12", you've taken the hit for nothing. But taken to the logical extreme, discovering anything about the game becomes a gotcha. "Oh I didn't know your incubi would blend that stuff as quickly as they did, if I had I'd have played differently". Okay... but just use that knowledge for next time.

I think the terror of gotchas gets talked up far more online than is the case at the table. Even amongst casual players who have scarcely glanced at all the things their book may allow them to do.

 kodos wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
The tempest of war deck doesn't change anything about hidden information though, so I wonder why it keeps being discussed?

because it was brought up as an example to counter the claim that a hidden deck of cards does not exist in 40k

than the goalpost was moved to, it exists but no one uses it

and now we are waiting for him to proof that because he said this is easy

It's not hidden though? The cards are just a representation of the d66 table it used to be. At all times during a game of tempest of war you know exactly what your opponent wants to do and what cards are left in his deck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:
I think the terror of gotchas gets talked up far more online than is the case at the table. Even amongst casual players who have scarcely glanced at all the things their book may allow them to do.

I recently had a necron player be quite sour about me gotcha'ing his C'Tan by ramming it (spiked rams, warlord trait) in the movement phase while he felt safe because he though he couldn't lose more than 6 wounds to orks without a psyker.

It's essentially a moment where you make a bad play that you wouldn't have made if you knew about a rule. Especially for casual players, this can ruin their one game per week/month, making those gotcha's much more frustrating. It comes up less often because in casual games you usually make people aware of gotcha's, but they still happen. In the situation above, I was not aware that my opponent didn't know about these rules, especially since I was joking about running over his C'Tan from the beginning of the turn.

I wonder if 'gotcha' is also being used to describe the multitude of scenarios covered by 'I got caught out by something I didn't see coming' or 'I got hard-countered by this thing and there was nothing I could do'.

 Jidmah wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
The tempest of war deck doesn't change anything about hidden information though, so I wonder why it keeps being discussed?

because it was brought up as an example to counter the claim that a hidden deck of cards does not exist in 40k

than the goalpost was moved to, it exists but no one uses it

and now we are waiting for him to proof that because he said this is easy

It's not hidden though? The cards are just a representation of the d66 table it used to be. At all times during a game of tempest of war you know exactly what your opponent wants to do and what cards are left in his deck.

From what was being said earlier, the "hidden" aspect refers to the fact that you don't know which objectives they currently have available to complete (someone said three available, but the cards are facedown until completed?) - as opposed to a GT Matched Play scenario, where you know their primary and secondary objectives from the off.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Not a gotcha since everyone knows about that Strat.

tell that to basically anyone at my LGS (even demon players)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hecaton wrote:


Where in the rules for 40k does it say to use the Tempest of War deck? What tournament or other event do you know that has used it? I'm not going to waste my time with your disingenuous assertions.

dude, take a fething chill pill holy gak.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Not a gotcha since everyone knows about that Strat.

I didn't....

Whelp guess we should just make it a standard rule for Daemon armies so nobody gets Gotcha'd ever again!

Put it on a character's datasheet instead, like AoS does. You want that ability? Bring the HQ with it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackie wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


You play space marines agaisnt my Chaos demons, you decide to cast a buff spell with your librarian and end up periling, you say "sure, i got 4 wounds left, perils can't kill me". I use Daemonic possession and you take 4 mortals from your perils and die.

thats a gotcha.

Will you know in the future? yes, but that doesn't change the fact that its a strat that no one would expect before running into

Do you think knowing that strat would have change anything in your example? Who's gonna skip a psychic phase for a psyker just because if the opponets invests CPs and you roll to peril then it dies? I've never sit my wounded psykers just because a peril result might kill them, unless maybe it's sitting alone on an objective and I desperately need the model to be alive at the end of the turn to score.

A gotcha might be something like: player A casts a psychic power than damage an enemy unit then player B uses a stratagem that reverses that psychic power into a player's A unit, killing it. In that case, knowing the strat, player A would have played it differently. Maybe, even that is not guaranteed. But not in your example.

i've skipped casting non necessary spells to not risk a perils.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:

I think the terror of gotchas gets talked up far more online than is the case at the table. Even amongst casual players who have scarcely glanced at all the things their book may allow them to do.

it definitely is, at my LGS at least every time someone would make a move that would be "gotcha'd" we warn each other (one of the reason why auspex scan is never used as anything but a deterrent)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Deadnight wrote:
I wonder if 'gotcha' is also being used to describe the multitude of scenarios covered by 'I got caught out by something I didn't see coming' or 'I got hard-countered by this thing and there was nothing I could do'.

Not in my mind personally but i could totally see other players mix all of those together

 Dysartes wrote:
From what was being said earlier, the "hidden" aspect refers to the fact that you don't know which objectives they currently have available to complete (someone said three available, but the cards are facedown until completed?) - as opposed to a GT Matched Play scenario, where you know their primary and secondary objectives from the off.

I have the thing in my hands (so much for no one playing it ). The three active objectives are not supposed hidden but face up in front of you, just like they were in most maelstrom missions. There is no reference to revealing them, nor would it make sense for some of the cards (anything requiring an action, for example).

Deadnight wrote:
I wonder if 'gotcha' is also being used to describe the multitude of scenarios covered by 'I got caught out by something I didn't see coming' or 'I got hard-countered by this thing and there was nothing I could do'.

Hence why, if Daemonic Possession was a core rule of Daemon armies, would some of these people be happier?

Deadnight wrote:
I wonder if 'gotcha' is also being used to describe the multitude of scenarios covered by 'I got caught out by something I didn't see coming' or 'I got hard-countered by this thing and there was nothing I could do'.

'I got caught out by something I didn't see coming' is often also 'I didn't know you had a strat that could X if I got inside of Y' (in spite of the perfect information state, it being available and knowing it are not the same)

Slipspace wrote:

That's not the point that was made in the post you replied to. All that was being stated was that Tempest of War existed. There was nothing about it being a standard way to play, just that it existed.

As for where it says to use the deck - in the Tempest of War deck itself. That's just as much a part of 40k rules as the GT Mission Pack or a Warzone supplement. Looks to me like you're the one making the disingenuous assertions here.

Keep digging that hole though.

Tempest of War existing doesn't change games where it's not used (i.e. the vast majority of 40k games) into imperfect information games.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
From what was being said earlier, the "hidden" aspect refers to the fact that you don't know which objectives they currently have available to complete (someone said three available, but the cards are facedown until completed?) - as opposed to a GT Matched Play scenario, where you know their primary and secondary objectives from the off.

I have the thing in my hands (so much for no one playing it ). The three active objectives are not supposed hidden but face up in front of you, just like they were in most maelstrom missions. There is no reference to revealing them, nor would it make sense for some of the cards (anything requiring an action, for example).

That's interesting to know, Jid - I was working purely off what had been said earlier in the thread, as I haven't picked the deck up myself yet.

Hecaton wrote:Tempest of War existing doesn't change games where it's not used (i.e. the vast majority of 40k games) into imperfect information games.

Knights existing doesn't change games where Knights aren't being played. You still don't get to ignore them from the discussion.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
From what was being said earlier, the "hidden" aspect refers to the fact that you don't know which objectives they currently have available to complete (someone said three available, but the cards are facedown until completed?) - as opposed to a GT Matched Play scenario, where you know their primary and secondary objectives from the off.

I have the thing in my hands (so much for no one playing it ). The three active objectives are not supposed hidden but face up in front of you, just like they were in most maelstrom missions. There is no reference to revealing them, nor would it make sense for some of the cards (anything requiring an action, for example).

That's interesting to know, Jid - I was working purely off what had been said earlier in the thread, as I haven't picked the deck up myself yet.

Wow, okay, I misinterpreted the Goonhammer article- they reference drawing secondaries into your hand. Here's the piece I misunderstood:

"At the start of each player’s Command phase, the player whose turn it is draws cards from their Secondary mission card until they have three cards in hand. These are the active objectives for that player. Each time a player achieves a secondary mission, they discard it and score VP (usually 5 per card, though some give other values). At the end of each player’s turn, they can discard any of their active secondary mission cards they want. Once a player runs out of cards, they can’t generate any more secondary missions."

Now that I know it doesn't work the way I thought it did, it seems it is "perfect information."

Please disregard any previous comments- I stand corrected. Thanks for the heads up Jid.