Munkie

If I owned a cidery, it'd be called Cideways Slogan? "Get Cideways" Works on all the levels.

That's Chief Wiggum, to you!

I'm going to the Bellingham ITC GT that Dark Tower is hosting. I'm bringing the Yncarne because he's a lot of fun, but it's all Drukhari otherwise. I'm hoping to win 3 out of 5 games. I think you'd have a hard time making the argument that I'm WAAC, just because I'm in attendance. On the flip side, just because you're a narrative player does NOT mean you're fun to play against or that you have a good attitude (unfortunately for my point, you are fun to play against and have a good attitude, damn you). In my gaming experience, the problems arise only when people aren't on the same page about what's expected. If narrative is expected, bring narrative armies. It competitive is expected, bring competitive armies. I don't know that I've ever had a bad experience at a tournament. Some people are intense, but I knew to expect that going in. On the other hand, some of my least favorite games of 40k ever were played at the OFCC. The worst WAAC attitudes I've come across have all been at the OFCC. The game format is never the problem. It's players' willingness (or lack thereof) to embrace that format that creates issues.

An outfit change for every game seems excessive...

I disagree with the notion that it would be too complicated. Just use different colored dice or gems for each source. I have hard time believing that would be the bookkeeping that breaks this game's back. I don't think this approach is bad, by any means, I just wonder how well it would apply to other armies. For instance, what would be lost for souping eldar? Battle Focus/Rising Crescendo/Power From Pain? If so, harlequins would be unusably bad, while the other 2 could easily be built to not really care much. The harlequin lore is that they work alongside other Eldar all the time. Punishing that badly for souping would make them trash. So do you add some extra benefit for non-soup on the next round of codices?

The solution is simple. Make it so detachments from different sources can only use the CPs that detachment generates as well as the 3 battleforged CPs. You can still use a minimum battalion if IG with your knights, the only question is what those IG would like to spend their 5 CPs on.

The missions were unique and a lot of fun, definitely. I enjoyed the hell out of them and appreciate @evil_bryan for his work (and putting up with my nitpicking!) Echoing @VonVilkee far above, the only feedback I'd offer is the secondary scoring usually rewarded you for performing well at the primary scoring--particularly mission 5. That said, I loved the "embrace the randomness" theme throughout them, very OFCC! The one thing ITC does offer in this regard is alternative paths to victory. Some armies are good at killing/more than their opponents, some armies are better than others at capturing/more. I'm not advocating cloning their mission structure, but that spirit is great for OFCC missions. Maybe the primary scoring isn't going your way, but at least you're accomplishing this other random task while your soldiers are being slaughtered.

Sherbert is so bad at fantasy that snakes call it "rolling Sherbert eyes."

Thanks for posting these!

The only land raider I ever feared. On topic: the Born in the Saddle rule is kinda odd conceptually. You can shoot after advancing, okay, makes sense. For heavy weapons, they'll still fire at -1 because they moved, makes sense. Rapid fire weapons will fire at their regular BS because there is no provision in that rule or the BRB that their BS would be impacted. That's fine, I guess, if that's what was intended, but what's weird to me is that assault weapons will still be hitting at -1 BS because they already have existing rules for advancing and shooting, and nothing about Born in the Saddle overrides that. So basically, White Scars are good at using more stationary guns on the move, but no better than anyone else at using weapons designed to be fired on the move.

To be fair, Landraiders have been bad in every edition for exactly the above reason. They're just worse now because they lost their immunity to everything str 7 and lower.

They still make that show?!

Did he, though? That's just, like, your opinion, man!

Well...except for those pecs...

True. But Gollum was a toxic enabler, trying to lead Sam's "best friend" down a self-destructive path in order to justify and reinforce his own choices. Too bad he couldn't save one and punt the other into the lava.

Okay, one more follow up question. If I move one unit off, and then another unit onto the objective in the same movement phase do I maintain control or lose it? Thank you!

@evil_bryan We played mission 5: Press Your Luck last night and a few questions came up. 1) Could you clarify what you mean by: Do you lose control, simply by not being on it for any amount of time, or does your opponent need to actually claim it? (Ex: I choose hold an objective, my opponent shoots me off of it in his turn but moves nothing on it. In my next turn, I move something back to the objective and score it). 2) RE: bonus scoring. Is choosing to hold at least 2 objectives enough to score the bonus point, or do you actually have to hold AND score? 3) Also RE: bonus scoring. This is maybe the same answer as question 1, but what entails "preventing" your opponent from scoring? Things like capturing a held objective with Troops are obvious, but there are a lot of esoteric examples. For instance, if I'm using the Yncarne and choose to hold an objective with him, my opponent shoots and destroys something else, and I choose to teleport the Yncarne into that spot. Did my opponent "prevent" me from scoring it, or did I choose to leave it? Also questions regarding game setup in general: 1) Since deployment types are pre-set and missions 1, 3, and 5 all have either no objectives or fixed objectives, do we just roll off at the beginning to see who chooses what deployment zone? 2) Once deployment zones are selected, are we doing alternating deployment beginning with the player who did not choose their zone and whomever is done first gets +1 to go first; or one side deploys everything first and goes first (unless seized on)? 2a) If we're doing alternating with the +1 to go first, are we also doing seize the initiative? Thanks!

Which is exactly what it was trying to do to that puppet! It knows that puppets are creepy and puppet masters are perverts.

Not a metal song, but it's been stuck in my head for days. How could a song about a rapper's therapy cat being anything but endearing? Also, for the cat owners, Kirby is more adorable than your cat. Tell me I'm wrong.

Not an early thought for me.

Not sure what you mean. As a test, I just pooped on your list. Not representative of my feelings on the list in any way, just thought papa nurgle might appreciate it.

@Arizenkin, have you considered Dreaming Shadow for that vanguard detachment? Looks like all Soaring Spite gives that detachment is the ability to board those Starweavers. Dreaming Shadow Death Jesters are really good between their relic and stratagem.

Small outrider detachments of harlequin jetbikes are a good spot! The harlequin stratagems synergize better if you take larger squads, but if you're running minimum squads, ynnari works better. Yvraine can resurrect dead bikes and cast Unbind Souls on enemy units, giving all those nasty zephyr glaives re-rolls to wound too! Also, small battalions of Ynnari wyches are good. They roll buckets of dice, but are only strength 3 (1 squad with str 4 because drugs make you better). Re-roll to wound is huge with them. Also, the psychic power that gives 5++ aura is great for keeping 20 blobs of wyches on the table. The succubus is usually pretty bad because the Archite Glaive is the only weapon in the game that imposes -1 to hit but neither doubles your strength nor inflicts multiple damage. It's bad. With Ynnari, you're often getting +1 to hit, so the -1 is largely ignored. Also, you can spend a CP to give her a warlord trait. Warden of Souls gives her +1 str, +1 A when strength from death is active. As a 50 point HQ, 5 str 6, AP-3 attacks is pretty respectable! And that's before drugs.

The biggest departure from standard match play to ITC is the scoring in missions. The secondaries really push you towards certain list archetypes as they discussed in the latest Splintermind. Things that are normally good at being 40k units like wraith guard are not as good in ITC because they're too easy to get secondary points off of, and have a hard time scoring points themselves. The OFCC won't have that kind of issue at all, because the missions don't have the kind of secondary scoring designed to incentivize/penalize certain lists.

I liked that episode too, and their insights of the difference in quality of units between ITC and non-ITC play were helpful. I'm not sure how that applies to the OFCC. OFCC is definitely not ITC. The scoring is completely different, the missions are completely different, and there are no chess clocks. I'd say the OFCC pretty clearly describes the conversation they were having. Considering what makes a good unit and list for the OFCC is completely different than that process for ITC. For instance, I think my Ynnari Brigade will be a pretty good list at the OFCC. It's very bad at ITC because ITC actively punishes MSU lists.