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.

As in title. Like insisting CSM and SM Tacs only have 1W or using different points for models or claiming your (legal) list is illegal and they wont play you etc.


What is the 'fool-proof' way of saying they're wrong

What is the context here? What edition are you playing? If you are using rules from different rulesets, you need to agree what you want from the game, or not play together if you can't.

Well. Since we're in 10th, we're going to use 10th. But some of the store and club newcomers struggle to grasp the concept that you cant cherrypick past rules to gain a advantage

The 1st time you give them the benefit of the doubt & assume they're wrong/misunderstood it/etc.
You then show them the correct rule & explain it to them.

If they try their BS again?
You ask them to quit cheating. If they refuse you quit the game & don't accept future games against them.

ccs wrote:
The 1st time you give them the benefit of the doubt & assume they're wrong/misunderstood it/etc.
You then show them the correct rule & explain it to them.

If they try their BS again?
You ask them to quit cheating. If they refuse you quit the game & don't accept future games against them.

The trend we've noticed is that these are all very new players. Firstcomers i would say. We're not quite sure where they get their ideas from. But we ban them regardless.

"Unless agreed otherwise, we use the most recent rules, errata and points."

You should have your rules present for checking anyways, so you should be able to stomp any argument dead by just showing them. For the core rules, the app has become a very reliant and good way to reference them, for everything else either use the codex/app or your preferred third party rules provider.

If they won't play you, that's all there is to it. Discussion is over, you cannot force people to give up their opinion, no matter how stupid it is. It might be frustrating, but in the end, you dodged a potentially very annoying game.

 Jidmah wrote:
"Unless agreed otherwise, we use the most recent rules, errata and points."

You should have your rules present for checking anyways, so you should be able to stomp any argument dead by just showing them. For the core rules, the app has become a very reliant and good way to reference them, for everything else either use the codex/app or your preferred third party rules provider.

If they won't play you, that's all there is to it. Discussion is over, you cannot force people to give up their opinion, no matter how stupid it is. It might be frustrating, but in the end, you dodged a potentially very annoying game.

We're just confused. Because we show them the relevant entry in the .. relevant rulebook, but they pull out antique/second hand rulebooks as a gotcha🤣🤣. Its like... where the hell did you find those

Be clear that you are playing a game of 10th edition. For new players assume ignorance, not malice.

If they want to pull out old books, ask if they would like to set up a game of old/middlehammer, but that’s not the game you are playing now.

Educate them on editions?

It sounds like they may be trolling, picking up old books and having a laugh at feigning innocence. But that seems a lot of work for a joke, especially if they have armies.

Once is a honest mistake. But if it’s a pattern? Is it the same person repeating or a string of new players? Try to find a common factor if the second. Is this some new fad being spread from a influencer/website/whatever?

Weird that it’s happening frequently.

 Nevelon wrote:
Be clear that you are playing a game of 10th edition. For new players assume ignorance, not malice.

If they want to pull out old books, ask if they would like to set up a game of old/middlehammer, but that’s not the game you are playing now.

Educate them on editions?

It sounds like they may be trolling, picking up old books and having a laugh at feigning innocence. But that seems a lot of work for a joke, especially if they have armies.

Once is a honest mistake. But if it’s a pattern? Is it the same person repeating or a string of new players? Try to find a common factor if the second. Is this some new fad being spread from a influencer/website/whatever?

Weird that it’s happening frequently.

New players. Always. I think they arent jokers because they get that deer in headlights and are always awkward and hesitant. To be sure though, they arent bringing big meta-chasing armies. Ill say fluffy non-optimal 500-1250 point sized ones.

The one commonality of their defense is always a variation of 'i was always told that old material was allowed'

Next time one says “I was always told…” find out who told them.

Someone might be spreading fibs, or at least needs to clarify their message.

 Nevelon wrote:
Next time one says “I was always told…” find out who told them.

Someone might be spreading fibs, or at least needs to clarify their message.

It was the classic "heard online" malarkey

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Next time one says “I was always told…” find out who told them.

Someone might be spreading fibs, or at least needs to clarify their message.

It was the classic "heard online" malarkey

Might be something specific? Not that it would help much, but it might.

I don’t follow vloggers or youtube, tictock or instagram. Whatever the kids are up to these days. But if it’s someone specific that’s telling impressionable newbies stuff that’s flat out wrong, maybe someone could reach out to him.

The whole situation is just odd.

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
The one commonality of their defense is always a variation of 'i was always told that old material was allowed'

I wonder if they've heard someone talking about old models being allowed - as they should be - and somehow confused it with old rules being allowed.

I've rarely played games where people got all the rules right. Show some compassion!

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
As in title. Like insisting CSM and SM Tacs only have 1W or using different points for models or claiming your (legal) list is illegal and they wont play you etc.

What is the 'fool-proof' way of saying they're wrong

"Come on dude, we're just trying to have a fun game, is winning so important that you want to ruin the fun by fighting over this stuff?"

 techsoldaten wrote:
I've rarely played games where people got all the rules right. Show some compassion!

No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:
The one commonality of their defense is always a variation of 'i was always told that old material was allowed'

I wonder if they've heard someone talking about old models being allowed - as they should be - and somehow confused it with old rules being allowed.

We did have some kid try to field Hamath Kraatos and when told no, he whinged and said he read about him in Imperial Armour or some such.

Same with Guard Conscipts

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

ccs wrote:
The 1st time you give them the benefit of the doubt & assume they're wrong/misunderstood it/etc.
You then show them the correct rule & explain it to them.

If they try their BS again?
You ask them to quit cheating. If they refuse you quit the game & don't accept future games against them.

The trend we've noticed is that these are all very new players. Firstcomers i would say. We're not quite sure where they get their ideas from. But we ban them regardless.

Great way to grow the hobby.
Make a mistake as a newbie? Banned!

Just slap down a hard-copy of the actual rules.

If they want old rules, you can correct them the old fashioned way: Dreadsock.

 JNAProductions wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

ccs wrote:
The 1st time you give them the benefit of the doubt & assume they're wrong/misunderstood it/etc.
You then show them the correct rule & explain it to them.

If they try their BS again?
You ask them to quit cheating. If they refuse you quit the game & don't accept future games against them.

The trend we've noticed is that these are all very new players. Firstcomers i would say. We're not quite sure where they get their ideas from. But we ban them regardless.

Great way to grow the hobby.
Make a mistake as a newbie? Banned!

Have to set an example somewhere. Cant have randos coming in refusing to learn and then get argumentative when shown to be wrong


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nevelon wrote:
If they want old rules, you can correct them the old fashioned way: Dreadsock.

Bars of soap will do just fine


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Just slap down a hard-copy of the actual rules.

Yeah.... until they whip out some older edition and start whinging. Like really. What.

Banning a new player because they have the wrong rulebook is needlessly cruel.

I got given the 3rd Ed rulebook as a present once and didn't know any better until a GW staffer said it wasn't the most current ruleset.

There are a bunch of newcomers with easy access to codexes from previous editions?

I'd follow a 4-step program:
1) inform them they are using an outdated set of rules
2) Put down the current rules, point out the publication date
3) warn them that most players will not accept playing with an outdated ruleset
4) Allow them to play, but the old rules ONLY apply to THEIR army - THEY get 1 wound marines, THEY lack Primaris.
YOU get to use the rules in YOUR codex

Codex creep is a thing, they'll soon change their minds

People make mistakes all the time, that's why we game with the rules present. Not memory; not jotted down on a notepad (though a detailed army list is valid to have as well as); the actual printed rules (or digital official app).
If they get it wrong you reference; you check and then you move on after the correction.


If someone is constantly getting rules wrong you might suggest they do some reading or you might simply soft-avoid them by not playing them any more out of choice.
Or you could offer to give them some more tutorial games and help them along.

 Gert wrote:
Banning a new player because they have the wrong rulebook is needlessly cruel.

I got given the 3rd Ed rulebook as a present once and didn't know any better until a GW staffer said it wasn't the most current ruleset.

Heck GW doesn't even publish the edition on their codex/battletomes and with a good few sharing the same or very similar cover art you can very easily mix up which book is for which edition! That's before you get to the fact that not every faction has a current book at the same time.

 Gert wrote:
Banning a new player because they have the wrong rulebook is needlessly cruel.

I got given the 3rd Ed rulebook as a present once and didn't know any better until a GW staffer said it wasn't the most current ruleset.

Like i said, we told them, they said they knew it was old, they didnt accept being told and then got combative


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Charax wrote:
There are a bunch of newcomers with easy access to codexes from previous editions?

I'd follow a 4-step program:
1) inform them they are using an outdated set of rules
2) Put down the current rules, point out the publication date
3) warn them that most players will not accept playing with an outdated ruleset
4) Allow them to play, but the old rules ONLY apply to THEIR army - THEY get 1 wound marines, THEY lack Primaris.
YOU get to use the rules in YOUR codex

Codex creep is a thing, they'll soon change their minds

We've done step 4 before. Whewie that was tense.

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

We've done step 4 before. Whewie that was tense.

What was their argument for "My codex rules apply to your army but your codex rules don't apply to mine"?

Honestly at this point just don't play them, you've tried being reasonable, they're just being jerks

Charax wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

We've done step 4 before. Whewie that was tense.

What was their argument for "My codex rules apply to your army but your codex rules don't apply to mine"?

Honestly at this point just don't play them, you've tried being reasonable, they're just being jerks

So they had the Assault on Black Reach Ork set. They played my mate, who had Iron Hands.

The newguy freaked out near the beginning after celebrating the amount of wounds inflicted during his turn until...... hearing Marines are 2Ws now.

We explained Corporate buffed SM 'recently' which they accepted! But they constantly referred to their rulebook.... which had SM at 1W.

And then the usual old argument ensured with them going 'but i heard online from someone else that some suit said we are allowed to use old materials, why are you gatekeeping' blah blah

I bet these guys would be entertaining in RPGs.

PLAYER: HAH! I'm not impressed by your Ring of Power, as I've created my own ring using the 3.5 Item Creation rules and I'm immune to all your attacks!"

DM: But we're playing 5th Edition...

Full house, jacks over 9s.

I play Monster Reborn to summon your ace of clubs from the graveyard!

If they don't take a straightforward "Sorry guys, you've been misinformed. Back in the old days, codexes often carried across multiple rules editions - but the current 10th edition was a total reset and none of the books from previous editions are compatible" then there's some sort of hidden agenda at play. But short of not wanting to spend forty quid on a new army book, which is honestly quite understandable, I don't get what that agenda would be...

This is such a weird scenario. It's straightforward how you have to deal with it though.

You need to firmly explain that modern editions are not cross compatible with older editions. If they want to play older edition rules they need to clarify that beforehand.

If someone online has told them otherwise they've been misinformed.

The rules are so different between now and 5e (when Assault on Black Reach came out) that I can't imagine how they were managing to play the same game as you at all.

If someone doesn't agree to the above, then you just decline to continue playing them or talking to them if they keep whinging about it.