Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Kinda cut and paste from the khorne daemonkin topic, but thought actually it probably needs an answer, or may have one somewhere else.

I am still unclear on this one and it has been argued in my gaming circle lots of times before. But can you choose to write down on your army list (or scrap of paper kept in sight of both players where it cant be tampered with) what unit is in what vehicle (AKA the guys with the red bases are in the rhino with the black X on the top, the guys with the orange bases are in the one with the black star of chaos, and the unit of chosen are in the blue star of chaos. Of course with open topped ones you could tell what is inside, but if it is sealed up, can your opponent force out of you what the contents is.

The argument against not declaring your stuff is inside of X is normally that you could change it. Though if you have an official list then that is hard to do unless your opponent is endlessly distracted and has to leave the room continually.
Or the other major one is that my army has high tech scanners or spies that surely would have been able to work out who is inside of what before this point in the battle. Especially if the things inside look nothing alike (Aka Kroot vs Tau).

We seem to have worked out that IF you choose to fire out of a firepoint it is normally clear what is inside shooting out, though even then that has caused issues such as "Well you know 4 boltguns shot out, and 1 of them I rolled with BS5, so that is as much as you know about what is inside" (then of course on the great reveal then it must be the lord and some guys with boltguns or whatever and that needed to be written on the list priory to this event, so you didn't just happen to have them there cos that was the best spot for them to be).

This has also spread to Fortifications and stuff as well and having to work out if people can see inside, and this is normally based on how open the building actually is. Though of course you could have your guys all pressed up against the walls or ducked down under the windows until it is time to reveal themselves.

This could also lead to ghosts though. Where a player could have bought several fortifications or transports but less than 100% of them have anyone inside them. So your opponent may really want to kill that Landraider thinking there is a big squad of death inside it, but actually the big squad of death is in actually in reserve for deepstrike. I know you are allowed to keep your reserves secret, as it actually says that in the book that you can "... conceal your true strength from the foe." But of course you need to have some form of written down option to bring them in I presume, or at least the option to in some way that is legal (though I have heard people planned a unit of daemons to outflank and they ended up deepstriking.)

Whats your opinion, or if there is a rule written down somewhere from on high, where is it located (hopefully not done by page number, just section and "between X and Y rules" or something)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Can you tell me one of the headers on page 117, or what Chapter it is in, as said don't have real page numbers and my epub reader seems to throw 2-3 pages together randomly.
Equally though with the dedicated transports thing, that would only tell you that each of those units purchased a dedicated transport, not which one is which if you have multiple of the same type with same armaments.
Squad 1 has a Rhino
Squad 2 has a Rhino
Squad 3 has a Rhino
You have 1 black, 1 red and 1 green one.
You show your list to your opponent pregame (if that is what you are meant to do). Then post that you can then write down on deployment who is in what. As you don't have to deploy in a dedicated transport just because you bought it. Equally as said above not all transports are dedicated ones (such as land raiders).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 · (Edited)
But what I am suggesting is that I have not found a rule that says either way. So it isn't creating a rule. It was an enquiry as to if there was a rule. This could be especially important if you go to games workshop events in their HQ or tournaments that do not have a clear rule.

The main one we tend to do is have battle tokens that are numbered or have symbols that look different in some way such as colour or pattern on the vehicles if they look the same. So each of the units that are embarked on the Vehicles will have a marker on the army list that corresponds to the number or symbol on the token.
The majority of the time we play with all the tokens face down so you cant see what symbol is what, and on firing or disembarking you flip it over and show the person on your army list that that token = whatever squad. This also means you can have multiple tokens with different symbols what if they don't have a marker next to any of your units on your army list will clearly indicate that nothing was contained inside.
So you could have a + - X V T L O or something as your symbols if you had 7 transport/fortification that are not able to be seen through. But your army list might only have a marker for + - X V. The other markers then indicating that they are empty.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Interesting... So it says you need to share your list... that is fine.
You need to say if a char is joining a unit... again fine.
You need to say what is in reserve... fine.
You need to say if that reserve unit is in what Vehicle... fine.

However it does not say that you have to declare what unit is in what transport or fortification on deployment. THOUGH of course with dedicated transports it means that a person would know what transport they and any character joining them would be in.
So my Non-Dedicated transport thing or Fortifications thing is still not forcing you to reveal.

Quote taken just after the Night Fighting rule in preparing for battle section.
Reserves
Reserves are forces that can be called upon to reinforce a battle at short notice, or to conceal your true strength from the foe.
What does indicate that you can conceal from your foe, though the above quotes you said contradicts that completely by saying that you must hand over your army list and if they are in a vehicle in reserve.

Looks like rules lawyering could be done. But TBH I don't see a huge advantage in hiding what is where in most cases. Though as I put on the Khorne thread it would make it nice if you can buy Rhinos as fast attack (as the person on another forum seems to have leaked the information to say it does) then your opponent might shoot a rhino thinking it was full of bloodletters, when it was full of marines or nothing at all...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
:) I say a lot of stuff on here that I wouldn't use myself as a version of the rules as interpreted by "That Guy". Though the usage of such things tends not to be the case.

As said the games I play are normally between friends or a gaming club, and we tend to be relatively flexible when it comes to some things. So the hidden in a fort or transport thing as said has come up before, and has been allowed under the common sense of "How would your guys know who is in what?" type of question, and as long as clearly marked so you cant cheat your opponent they are fine. With the normal argument again as said before being that they have spies or devices like infrared or heat sensors could tell that something has people inside or is empty.
Though if it looks like an argument will start over it we tend to just declare units as it is easier than someone then accusing you of having cheated after the game when it turned out they focus fired your empty land raider on turn 1 only to discover the guys were hiding in a building all along with an escape hatch.

The "That Guy" I tend to play against is a Deathwing player who takes 2 Inquisitors from Inquisition codex with a 3 Servo Skulls (costing a whopping 68pts out of his army to include both (not each)) and hides them in a building or at the very very corner of the map just so he can deepstrike his whole deathwing army on turn 1 only 1d6 scatter or maybe no scatter at all if they land within 12" of 2 separate skulls (as the rule says if you land within 12" of a skull you roll 1D6 less for scatter, rather than just saying they roll 1D6 scatter, so as written the effect is cumulative).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
And if that's how he wants to play, pick up your own deep strike counters or similar; Drop Pods or similar. Not sure if there are other 1st turn deep strikes available to Chaos (I assume you're chaos?)
I am many things :p

But yeah I have argued the same point with this guy, his argument always being he is landing within 12" of a servo skull so he rolls 1D6 less, then he is also landing in 12" of the second servo skull so is permitted to roll the additional 1D6 less. Otherwise it would say
"A friendly unit arriving by Deep Strike rolls 1D6 for scatter if it aims to arrive within 12" of a Servo-skull."
rather than
"A friendly unit arriving by Deep Strike rolls one D6 less for scatter if it aims to arrive within 12" of a Servo-skull."
What I guess is probably correct... kinda, as nothing as far as I know scatters more than 2D6 for deepstrike, or scatters only 1D6 by any other means.

TBH the person even using this doesn't win to many games and he will only throw a tantrum if he doesn't.
It is also one of the many many questions sent to GW for FAQ and never got published... much like the Daemons who get 3 spells... (God Primus, Malefic Primus and Malefic rolled for). What has been answered in both ways of yes they do and no they don't at 2 separate GW events I have been to by devs.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
I keep thinking that I need to schedule games against people like Matt Ward and other rules writers, just for the purpose of using the common law legal thing of "in the event of an ambiguity you rule against the party that drafted the document as they ability to draft the document and to remove ambiguity." So starting to use all sorts of crazy rules against them while having a banner that lights up behind me saying to fix the FAQs :p
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
I think some of the trouble is that TBH they kinda need to remove the paper copies of the books. Because if it was all digital then it would be possible to make updates to any book several weeks or months after release what would then download it self to patch in to the copies people have.
I think they don't like making FAQs even when glaringly obvious issues appear in competitive play they seem to think that people don't want to have to reference FAQs continually to make sure no one changed how there stuff works.
Equally with some units they discover no one uses because of cost or ability and they attempt to fix that by making a formation that either forces you to take them for some benefit or makes them good. See Tomb Blades being mandatory for Decurion for example of forcing people to take something that hardly anyone used before. Or the Helbrute Dataslates making people take them because they became ok, rather than just a slow poor mans Maulerfiend.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 · (Edited)
Not hard to tell your opponent or check that you have the latest version of whatever on set dates. I would assume that they wouldn't just randomly throw them out, but would likely have a "Patch Day" what was scheduled as the the 1st of every 3rd month or something March/June/Sept/Dec or whatever so it hits before the major campaign seasons.
Equally I am not saying all books continually need a major overhaul. But fixing a few things that they can clearly see haven't worked should be routine maintenance. THOUGH I could see a backlash of "OMG YOU MADE XXXX GOOD THEN YOU NURFED THEM!!!" or "You only made them good so you could sell something that wasn't selling, and now you made them average."
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top