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 currently do not own my army book, so I requested my usual opponent to just face me with units, and not use a theme, army bonuses. He plays Fleash Eater court. He says this makes his army unplayable? I play Stormcast. Is he being unreasonable?

No, you should buy your army book and let your opponent fully enjoy his army.

Slightly edited the thread title and part of the first post, kindly refrain from this sort of thing in the future, thanks!

 John Prins wrote:
No, you should buy your army book and let your opponent fully enjoy his army.

No you are wrong here. He/she doesn't need to buy an army book at all. Who are you to tell people how they want to play?

As for being unreasonable, it's hard to say. Let's turn this around. Are you being unreasonable? You are not because you want to play the way you want, just with what you have. Your opponent just wanted to play how they like to play. He/she is correct that they would have a harder time playing and therefore less fun for him/her. For you it will be less fun since you don't have access to what he/she has.

What is unreasonable is that two grown adults or even kids can't come to a compromise when playing. One game play their way, next game play your way. Or if the game is lopsided because of you not having access to spells or what not or they not having access to the stuff they want to use, then why not say some units come back.

After all, is both your nerd peen that important of having a win that you can't have fun?

considering part of the game is allegiance abilities and taking a full army of like-keyworded models, I'd say it's not unfair that he get to use everything that is afforded to him. You also have a book and other abilities to use.

Why do you not own the book yet? Do you intend to buy the book at some point and just can't afford it yet? Explain this to your opponent and perhaps a compromise can be had.

Also, the game shouldn't be too bad with no use of any prayers or spells for stormcast or any real artifacts, and same with FEC, but I will say that game will mostly be boring as your are playing with half of what each army is meant to do.

FEC are totally playable without allegiance. As for being unreasonable, I think the above said it better than I would.

FEC are very playable without their abilities from the book, however part of the reason people play their armies is for their abilities and playing AOS without said abilities is kind of hollow.

I 'member when we didn't have allegiance at all; we had to dance or win staring contests just to add theme!

I've beaten many a Settra player by asking them to pick up my dice from the floor.

Davor wrote:

 John Prins wrote:
No, you should buy your army book and let your opponent fully enjoy his army.

No you are wrong here. He/she doesn't need to buy an army book at all. Who are you to tell people how they want to play?

The OP is trying to tell people how they want to play, and his opponent is quite rightly not having it.

You're right in that he doesn't NEED to buy his army book, but he still should. You can play AoS without Allegiance books, but your opponent does NOT need your permission to use an Allegiance book or its abilities. Same goes for Warscroll Battalions. The OP can ask that his opponent not use them, but if he refuses, he's not being unreasonable, he has every right to use his army's rules. So if the OP wants to not buy his army book and play at a disadvantage, that's on HIM.

It might be different if the OP was dead broke and couldn't afford the rules, but he's already stated he spends 2-300 a month in his FLGS in this thread https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/689403.page - he just hasn't gotten them yet. Also, the Flesh Eater Courts player has just got shiny new rules (few months old?) he probably wants to practice with.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I've beaten many a Settra player by asking them to pick up my dice from the floor.

Literally "killed by kindness"

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I've beaten many a Settra player by asking them to pick up my dice from the floor.

exalted

 John Prins wrote:

Davor wrote:

 John Prins wrote:
No, you should buy your army book and let your opponent fully enjoy his army.

No you are wrong here. He/she doesn't need to buy an army book at all. Who are you to tell people how they want to play?

The OP is trying to tell people how they want to play, and his opponent is quite rightly not having it.

You're right in that he doesn't NEED to buy his army book, but he still should. You can play AoS without Allegiance books, but your opponent does NOT need your permission to use an Allegiance book or its abilities. Same goes for Warscroll Battalions. The OP can ask that his opponent not use them, but if he refuses, he's not being unreasonable, he has every right to use his army's rules. So if the OP wants to not buy his army book and play at a disadvantage, that's on HIM.

It might be different if the OP was dead broke and couldn't afford the rules, but he's already stated he spends 2-300 a month in his FLGS in this thread https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/689403.page - he just hasn't gotten them yet. Also, the Flesh Eater Courts player has just got shiny new rules (few months old?) he probably wants to practice with.

I read his post differently. When he said requested, I am thinking he is asking. Yeah it's one thing to say someone else how to play, but he said regular opponent so that means to me they play a few times against each other using normal rules so he is asking this one time not to. Nothing wrong in asking. Demanding, yes. If the Original Poster is demanding and not asking then yeah he is being unreasonable.

Davor wrote:

I read his post differently. When he said requested, I am thinking he is asking. Yeah it's one thing to say someone else how to play, but he said regular opponent so that means to me they play a few times against each other using normal rules so he is asking this one time not to. Nothing wrong in asking. Demanding, yes. If the Original Poster is demanding and not asking then yeah he is being unreasonable.

Dunno if you saw the title and first post before the mods edited them.

You can just play Grand alliance abilities, if he bought his army book its not really fair for him to not use it.

Your allegiance ability let's you keep half your units in reserve. You can choose to set them up at the end of your movement phase more than 9 inches away from the enemy. On the turn you deploy a unit it is minus one to hit.
There you go, problem solved. You can try out some of these rules in battle and then buy the book later if you want to delve into artefacts, battalions etc.
As a compromise, you could ask your opponent to agree to play without battalions.

I recall that the General's Handbook has Grand Alliance wide allegiance abilities that you could use. If you're playing with points you should have access to those.

If you don't want to buy a book to get your army on par then play a game that doesn't have army books.

Neither one of you is right and neither one of you is wrong.

The pre-game phase is a key phase in any wargame where you and your opponent agree on what the game will be when you take part. In this case you've both come to the table with a difference of opinion as to the rules which should be used for the armies in the game.

Either you find a compromise, or one you backs down, or you don't play.


There is logic in both sides of your argument, your opponent is correct in that their army is pulled together and works with the alliance abilities and the like; whilst at the same time as you are unaware of that content for your own army you can justify that since you don't have it they don't have it either.

The thing is the book has equipment, spells, abilities and the like. Taking all the book content out means that an army has no spells (except for those on the warscroll card); no equipment for lords; no army wide abilities nor any battalions. If he's like many modern gamers he's probably got one army in the case with him to play with (though as its FeC he might be able to carry more variety at a practical level); so cutting out all those things from his army might well break a good portion of how it works.

Ergo your opponent can't see how to run their army when you've taken away a core portion of how it functions on the tabletop now.




Personally I'd just go with the flow, since its on you that you don't yet have your own Battletome; or agree with your opponent that as you don't have the content they can forgo it this one time until next week/month/whatever when you'll have your tome too; or you can just agree to let them run their army as normal and you'll have an extra bit of challenge when facing his army.

It should be noted quite a few factions in AoS still don't have an army book so they might well not have access to many abilities and the like and yet they still function at a basic level - and well used some can be reasonably powerful.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I've beaten many a Settra player by asking them to pick up my dice from the floor.

exalted

Agreed. I laughed at this. Well done, man!


On topic, you both have access to something. You don't want to use something, but your opponent does want to use it. Agreed that you should alternate on using/not using (but that'll force you to buy the book). If you want to play your way at times, you should be willing to play his way at times too. I do agree the game is MUCH less fun without the special army rules; otherwise...there's models on the table, but next to zero synergy. Plus...no matched points if you don't have a rulebook?

I played 40k 8th as Index/Power level only when armies were first starting to come out, and only a couple armies had codexes. Now that most of them have actual books, and points have changed considerably (but PL remained the same), I'd insist on points and codexes only. Index/PL armies are completely fine if everyone is playing out of them, but a lot of stuff has been errated/changed and they're a past thing from where the game is now.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I've beaten many a Settra player by asking them to pick up my dice from the floor.

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

 Strg Alt wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I've beaten many a Settra player by asking them to pick up my dice from the floor.

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

I had to grow a more impressive beard or complain about my own army...

 Strg Alt wrote:

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

I think it was GW going: "The community for this game has a reputation for being toxic and isn't generating worthwhile income. Let's hit reset and make it so we can have more crazy and over the top stuff than the current setting allows while we're at it. Let's try to take it back to a casual thing between friends too.."

 DarkBlack wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

I think it was GW going: "The community for this game has a reputation for being toxic and isn't generating worthwhile income. Let's hit reset and make it so we can have more crazy and over the top stuff than the current setting allows while we're at it. Let's try to take it back to a casual thing between friends too.."

Trying to reduce toxicity by giving the finger to your playerbase is a bad plan.

pm713 wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

I think it was GW going: "The community for this game has a reputation for being toxic and isn't generating worthwhile income. Let's hit reset and make it so we can have more crazy and over the top stuff than the current setting allows while we're at it. Let's try to take it back to a casual thing between friends too.."

Trying to reduce toxicity by giving the finger to your playerbase is a bad plan.

I think the people who felt that some lighthearted RP rules were a "middle finger" to them are the people they were trying to scare off in the first place. They were trying to get people to stop taking the game so seriously.

 EnTyme wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

I think it was GW going: "The community for this game has a reputation for being toxic and isn't generating worthwhile income. Let's hit reset and make it so we can have more crazy and over the top stuff than the current setting allows while we're at it. Let's try to take it back to a casual thing between friends too.."

Trying to reduce toxicity by giving the finger to your playerbase is a bad plan.

I think the people who felt that some lighthearted RP rules were a "middle finger" to them are the people they were trying to scare off in the first place. They were trying to get people to stop taking the game so seriously.

Well speaking as someone who hated them I really don't see why you'd be trying to get me out of the game unless you just wanted to bury WHFB as much as possible because it really highlighted a low point for GW in terms of treating customers decently.

Ironically enough, some of the folks closest to the design team, and some of the design team itself, are pushing professional AOS and endorsements (in regards to getting people to stop taking the game so seriously)

Those rules were regarded by my community as lame as all hell, and no one actually did the thing. Besides some of that stuff would be every round, or even every turn, for every game you ran that model in. Anything would get old at that point.

beowulfhunter wrote:
I currently do not own my army book, so I requested my usual opponent to just face me with units, and not use a theme, army bonuses. He plays Fleash Eater court. He says this makes his army unplayable? I play Stormcast. Is he being unreasonable?

It depends on what you are asking.

If you said "Hey friend, I havent played AoS before and I really just want a very basic game to understand the mechanics, turn sequence and get a feel for my armies unit strengths. Can we not use all the additional rules and add on stuff and keep it simple?"

Or were you saying "Hey fellow AoS expert, I am playing stormcast and dont want to deal with all your crazy army rules, can we not use them this game?"


Now either way your friend might say 'hey, im not really looking to play a newbie game atm as I am practicing for a tourney coming up, maybe ask Barry?" People have different motivations for wanting to play or not play certain styles of games. Its up to you to give a reason that might entice someone to play in the way you want. If you are just trying to leech an advantage then be honest about it tell your friend "hey friend, you keep kicking my arse and I feel that im not giving you much of a challenge, how about for the next game I play with an extra 200 point to see if we can even it up?"

Both players are there to enjoy a game and both players want to go into a game in full agreement of the parameters the game is being played under. Communication is king, tell your friend why you want to play a certain way, be honest, he is your friend....isnt he?

 EnTyme wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

I would have to wear a hoodie in order to gain some stupid buff for my night goblins. That was the way GW gave WHFB players the good, old middle finger.

I think it was GW going: "The community for this game has a reputation for being toxic and isn't generating worthwhile income. Let's hit reset and make it so we can have more crazy and over the top stuff than the current setting allows while we're at it. Let's try to take it back to a casual thing between friends too.."

Trying to reduce toxicity by giving the finger to your playerbase is a bad plan.

I think the people who felt that some lighthearted RP rules were a "middle finger" to them are the people they were trying to scare off in the first place. They were trying to get people to stop taking the game so seriously.

The issue wasn't the rules themselves. Loads of people like jovial rules.
Magic the Gathering Unhinged proves this.

The problem was that GW released the jovial joke rules and at the same time removed all the serious rules. It wasn't that you had the option to play the jovial fun rules, they were the only rules that GW was providing. IT was a brand new edition and the launch of a brand new game with a brand new army or two and GW gave you nothing to play with them in even a semi-serious way. You had joke rules or no rules; or rather going back and using previous Warhammer Old World rules - you know the game they'd just dumped after giving it a cash and marketing injection that it had needed for years.

I don't think it was part of some master plan to remove the serious people and make the game more fun, I think it was simply a reflection that GW was taking AoS and its models in a totally different direction and was more interested in just selling cool models end of. The jovial rules were there for some fun with your models; but by the end result was that you'd only really buy stuff to build and paint and display.

The launch rules would have no issue what so ever if they'd been a supporting alternate rules set for "silly times" alongside a normal regular set of rules.

Yeah I dont think there was any evil plan to those rules, just habitual ivory tower syndrom of GW Uk based rules writters.
They fall so flat because they killed fantasy at the same time. If they had add them in the middle of a regular fantasy edition nobody would had a problem.