Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,242 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If you were using two Space Marine special characters in a tourney list, say Pedro and Lysander, would there be any injunction in the rules against using different chapter tactics in different battles, or would it depend on the tournament?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,719 Posts
Since the codex doesn't specify the timing of choosing which to use I would say it would be up to the TO.

Personally I would say you must stick with one for the duration of the tourney.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Since the codex doesn't specify the timing of choosing which to use I would say it would be up to the TO.

Personally I would say you must stick with one for the duration of the tourney.
This is not from personal experience, but don't some tournaments allow you to change lists between battles? If that were the case, I would say pick at the beginning of the battle. Otherwise, stick to one. If everyone has the same list, it is a cheese way to try to get the benefit of two lists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Surely you'd just tell your opponent before deployment- nothing in your list changes so I don't see where the problem would occur.
Combat tactics would change. Not a massive change by any means, but a change nonetheless.

Be pointless to really argue it here, what guy should do is ask the tourney organizer and get a ruling there. That's who will make the final judgment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
As already stated, your best bet is to ask the TO. If it were my tourney, my answer would be pick one and stay with it. Same answer GW gave for BT vows back in the day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
i dont think that the vows of the BT are a good refrense as the vows are a upgrade this is more a special rule. and its a option you can swap the combat tactics you dont have too and thats what makes this so difficult too rule. i think different TO's will have different rullings

but personally i think its fare too swap tactics its pretty clever this way you can maximise the effect of your army do you need extra though men or more scoring units.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,719 Posts
The question that needs to be asked is whether it gains the player an unfair advantage to tailor his army for each opponent before each game. Not sure how it can be answered with a "no".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
i dont think that the vows of the BT are a good refrense as the vows are a upgrade this is more a special rule. and its a option you can swap the combat tactics you dont have too and thats what makes this so difficult too rule. i think different TO's will have different rullings

but personally i think its fare too swap tactics its pretty clever this way you can maximise the effect of your army do you need extra though men or more scoring units.
Hmmm........... Let's see, a vow that affects the entire army or a majority of the units by giving it a special ability vs a character that affects the entire army or a majority of it by giving it a special ability...... Hmmmmm, really, looks the same to me. Except that BT used to get it for free which is why it became a tourney question. No points cost, so why can't I change it between games, it's not changing my list.......... Yeah, right, tell me another one.

The usual idea behind a tourney is that you're taking the same army against all opponents. If you can change your special rules in between games, you have an unfair advantage. Which is why GW said no to the BT players and why I would say no to this one.
 

·
Jeep's and Harley's
Joined
·
1,997 Posts
The way I look at it would be like this. If I created a list that was viable to be a SM codex list and a BA list would you let me switch between the two Codex in a Tourney ... the list is the same, just switching codex. The special characters in the SM codex change the chapter tactics, in my mind, to represent the various different chapters that fight differently. Salamanders and Imperial Fists are both SM but they have different chapter tactics.

Personally I would say no to changing tactics between games in a tourney.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
Its not a question of it costing points or not, it matters if it's an army choice. It is not an Army Choice to decide which rule you use when. In the same way you are not compelled to say which IC is in which unit or which unit is riding in which transport you do not need to declare this.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,864 Posts
Yeah but deployment occurs after scenario picking so I would (especially since Pedro can affect missions) stick with one chapter tactics only.

Personally I would not allow such a list since I am a firm believer of STAY IN YA OWN DAMN CHAPTERS!!!

Bother GW for giving out the wannabe liscence in codex SM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
You have no choice but to accept this list, in tournies anyway which is what we're talking about. It's codex legal and that's all that matters.

So you will tell me every special rule all your units have and when they will apply in your Army list then? You'll write down each tactical squad which will choose to fail any leadership check it makes. I mean deciding on the fly in a tactical situation would be unfair and so you must write it on your Army list and stick by it.

Any unit which can outflank or deep strike will be written down on your army list which option it is taking and it MUST do that in every game. That kind of tactical flexibility is totally unfair to not do so.

Aramoro
 

·
Unforgiven
Joined
·
689 Posts
I'm going to agree with Aramoro on this.

Essentially, the player is taking two overly expensive HQ options for the ability to choose a tactical advantage. He is paying for that option, indirectly, with the cost of the model. He is not altering anything on his list in between battles.

Aramoro's example is spot on... a unit that can deep strike has the option to do so- you don't need to make that choice until deployment. An army with two options for Combat Tactics shouldn't have to either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,979 Posts
I see it as using every possible advantage that your army offers for any given situation. It is using a rule to it's full potential. C:SM is all about tactical flexibility, and this is but one example. I say it is acceptable, slightly shady, but acceptable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,864 Posts
I am not saying it is unacceptable, merely cheesy power-gaming that is not supported in the fluff.

Maybe it is just me that sticks to these rules.
 

·
Unforgiven
Joined
·
689 Posts
A. How is tournament play supported by fluff in any way?
B. How is it against fluff that two SM commanders would not defer to the other if one had a better strategy for taking down their opponents?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,979 Posts
I am not saying it is unacceptable, merely cheesy power-gaming that is not supported in the fluff.

Maybe it is just me that sticks to these rules.
Tournament play is all about being a cheese spamming power gamer, plain and simple. No fluff, just kicking ass and taking objectives.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top