pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 My contention is that no one plays by the actual rulebook. They choose to ignore certain parts of the rules and that this is largely the same no matter which rules you choose to ignore. No one plays the game that GW produces the exact way it is written. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I understand why players that want to play with a limited number of detachments and hard caps on types unit, would be annoyed with this codex, but the rest of the players, the ones playing the game that GW is selling, should find man-portable D weapons to be nothing new or overly difficult to cope with. Are you confusing the book with something else? Players are free to agree to use or not use elements of the rules as per the BRB. Typically mysterious objectives and night fight are only used if one of the players remembers/wants to use them. We do have unrestricted list creation (point limits and no duplicate unique as per the BRB). Unbound is legal, though uncommon. Joel rolls random missions and deployment. All players play the same mission and deployment as per joel's roll. Terrain is set up by players at the start of the game. As for "exact measurements" we do measure, but we're not rules nazis. It doesn't have to be perfect. It should be an honest attempt at following the rules, but we're not going to be getting a supervisor if the angle isn't perfect. GG sells beer, after all... The chapter master rolls 2+ and passes the wound to someone else. It's the Attack bike that is impaired by the D weapons. Agree that good units will stay good. As for the squad sizes, it really just depends on other elements of the game/army. For example, psychic buffs which target a single unit would have an improved effect on a larger unit. No, melta needs to be within half range to get extra dice on the damage pen roll. They can still pen at full range, provided weapon strength is sufficient. I am talking about Wraith Guard D weapons, which are the ones rumored to be -1 on the table and the ones that are rumored to be spam-able. Wraith guard have 12" D weapons and 9" flamer D weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 In these two statements, you find a dissonance. If you ignore some parts of the rules (say night fighting, mysterious objectives, random allocation) you are still playing the game GW is selling, but if you ignore other parts of the rules (unlimited detachments, no restrictions on units) then you are not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I say that if you are ignoring any rule, you are not playing the game GW is selling and hence this mythical group that should find D weapons, etc nothing new or overly difficult to cope with because they play the game GW is selling does not exist. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Angel Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 From. what I experience is most people play by the rules of the Event or tournament they're practicing for. Ie Ofcc and GG cup. which use a specific FAQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 One thing I find incredible is how often the arguments about 40k rules and the rulebook are nearly identical in type to doctrinal debates I get into in my Christian circles. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 From. what I experience is most people play by the rules of the Event or tournament they're practicing for. Ie Ofcc and GG cup. which use a specific FAQ Agreed. That's pretty much the only thing I do since I mainly play in events like these. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 One thing I find incredible is how often the arguments about 40k rules and the rulebook are nearly identical in type to doctrinal debates I get into in my Christian circles. Not touching this one with a ten foot pole. :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I find that I, by default practically, follow most of the rules in the book as written (outside of when I misinterpret a rule). The only big break I make is not using mysterious objectives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Not touching this one with a ten foot pole. :) Maybe RoC topic, but, seriously, the RAW vs RAI debate is very real in Christian circles. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Maybe RoC topic, but, seriously, the RAW vs RAI debate is very real in Christian circles. No, I get that. It is one of the big criticisms of Christianity, as well. :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I find that I, by default practically, follow most of the rules in the book as written (outside of when I misinterpret a rule). The only big break I make is not using mysterious objectives. I've always held (especially when flyers were a big deal) that MOs were a big part of the GW game as intended and their lack causes issues. I still don't tend to use them, but that's because none of the events I go to use them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Fluger: Do you use all the random allocations? I find that one gets missed a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylvos Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 My contention is that no one plays by the actual rulebook. They choose to ignore certain parts of the rules and that this is largely the same no matter which rules you choose to ignore. No one plays the game that GW produces the exact way it is written. I play RAW bro! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intrizic Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 and who hasn't forgot night fight 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I play RAW bro! Mysterious objectives, terrain datasheets only, unrestricted army lists, random allocation, no pre-setup terrain, no approximations for vanguard strike, no ignoring some mission types, strict maelstom rules, etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 and who hasn't forgot night fight I'm so horrible about this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainA Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I think one of the problems with this whole setup of how GW has made this game is they expect the players to sit down and talk about the game before they play. This is a beer and pretzels game you play with your friends for fun and I believe they have stated as much in the rulebook. The purpose of this game is to have fun with your friends. So when two people sit down over a beer and discuss the type of game they want to play, they expect the players to figure out what kind of game it will be, what kind of units will be used, and if any special rules will be added to enhance the narrative. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Fluger: Do you use all the random allocations? I find that one gets missed a lot. What does that mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I think one of the problems with this whole setup of how GW has made this game is they expect the players to sit down and talk about the game before they play. This is a beer and pretzels game you play with your friends for fun and I believe they have stated as much in the rulebook. The purpose of this game is to have fun with your friends. So when two people sit down over a beer and discuss the type of game they want to play, they expect the players to figure out what kind of game it will be, what kind of units will be used, and if any special rules will be added to enhance the narrative. Absolutely. This is the key problem between the game they make (and what GW designs) and how we play it. You can't go to an event and hash out the rules before every game. When you're playing with people you know and trust, sure that's cool. When you're playing in a competitive event though? Not so much. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 I think one of the problems with this whole setup of how GW has made this game is they expect the players to sit down and talk about the game before they play. This is a beer and pretzels game you play with your friends for fun and I believe they have stated as much in the rulebook. The purpose of this game is to have fun with your friends. So when two people sit down over a beer and discuss the type of game they want to play, they expect the players to figure out what kind of game it will be, what kind of units will be used, and if any special rules will be added to enhance the narrative. Sincerely, I think GW envisions this game closer to D&D with miniatures (tracks with how the game started in Rogue Trader) rather than a game of Chess. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 What does that mean? Random allocation of wounds when buildings are hit, vehicles blow up, etc. so on. So 10 dudes inside, 5 wounds dealt, allocate the wounds to a random model first until he dies. Rinse repeat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Mysterious objectives, terrain datasheets only, unrestricted army lists, random allocation, no pre-setup terrain, no approximations for vanguard strike, no ignoring some mission types, strict maelstom rules, etc? MO: no TD: I do. For anything that is a woods, I call it a twisted copse. I actually made my own terrain datasheets as per the rulebook's suggestion. UAL: I did with my IG/SM/Inq list that I brought to OFCC last year. The real reason I don't is simply habit. If someone came to my house with unbound I wouldn't care though. RA: I'm not sure what this is referring to. Terrain: We almost always place terrain. I use 4th edition standards (1/4 of the table's worth of terrain and then one by one place terrain until we're out) Vanguard Strike: I don't get this? Maelstrom: Oh yeah, I use Adepticon Maelstrom cards instead, so that's different. If we're sticking with Maelstrom I allow a discard of impossible cards. So there's a change too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted April 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Vanguard Strike: I don't get this? Most folks I know use the approximations to form the deployment zones rather than doing the 12" off the centerline thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylvos Posted April 21, 2015 Report Share Posted April 21, 2015 Mysterious objectives, terrain datasheets only, unrestricted army lists, random allocation, no pre-setup terrain, no approximations for vanguard strike, no ignoring some mission types, strict maelstom rules, etc? YES! That's the game! We do Fantasy RAW too cuz we bez pimpin da rulz and shiz. Please if you will imagine me wearing an oversized hoodie with the hood draw up, a massive clock hanging around my neck and some wicked awesome hightop reeboks as I throw my hands in the air like I just don't care as I say all of this. Got the image? Good. Now imagine me naked. HA YOU DID IT! Sinner. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.