D6 Sweep

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.

**Lordhat**

I know this isn't a YMDC topic per se, but......

does anybody know where the (apparently) widespread idea, that you can only get a "massacre" result in assault on the first turn", came from? I played this way for quite a long time myself, before I went to Mid-south con last year, and a friendly opponent pointed out that it's not in the rulebook. I thought that it was just me for a while, but then multiple people spouted it to me at my store. The "what is NOT a massacre?" thread reminded me of the phenomenon, and I just had to ask. I THINK it might have been the "Rules previews" in the WD's just before 4th released. They were proved full of misquotes and misinformation after release.

**onlainari**

I've met people who have thought the same way. It might stem from fantasy, where you can only overrun if you win the first round.

I recall a similar period of my gaming where I and my friends all thought when your general died in fantasy, every unit had to take a leadership test or run off the board. After 3 years of playing I learned this is not true, and when telling one of my friends, they said "well lets not play by that stupid rule, they should still run".

End rant.

**Mannahnin**

The Panic test for the General dying was a 5th edition rule.

I've never heard of anyone playing in 40k that you can only get a Massacre on the first round.

It can be easy for these kind of things to get around a gaming group, however, if someone happens to make the mistake and say it in front of everyone. The Massacre rules aren't laid out on the easiest way, so it would be easy for players skimming the rules to not see it but assume it's in there somewhere. In 3rd edition my group used to think that the winner would scrum first at the end of a HtH phase. It wasn't until several of us went to the Baltimore GT in 2001 that a couple of our opponents pointed out to us that we were wrong.

**happypants**

I have played at least 3 tournament players that had the same assumption until pointed out otherwise.

**Tacobake**

Rules preview sounds like a good explaination, we had the same problem I remember.

**beef**

I used to think that to untill I re-read the rulebook, Blame the red shirts as they usually when a new codex/rulebook comes out arbitrate (incorrectly) between disputes.