PDA

View Full Version : How hung up on rules are you? (Apoc related rant)



kris.sherriff
09-10-2007, 14:55
Hi all,
I have been reading a lot lately about Apocalypse. People asking what people are going to make, people asking if this or that is OK and what ever.
Now at the moment I am not overly excited about apoc. I mean I already have lots of models so I don't need to buy more stuff to play it.
I already have the ability to think outside the box and have played games of 40K and fantasy for that mater, purely for the theme in a scenario that I knew I had no chance of winning so it isn't really anything new to me.

The thing that is bothering me is that some people just don't get it.

I hope this changes once the book has been out for a while and people see what it offers you.
I mean go along to the 40K rules forum. There is a thread about a chaos baneblade taking a havoc launcher that is at like 70 posts (a few of which are mine I admit :rolleyes:). In a game where the rules could be used to take an army of lance strikes or of 3 carnifexes in a thunderhawk with some mantas for that extra fun factor without you opponants consent, are you really going to complain if someone wants to take a havoc launcher?

What I am getting at is that the rules for apoc are that anything is OK with your opponents permission.

I don't see this as a problem or a restriction at all. How many pick up games are you likely to have of apoc?
I don't know about you but carrying 5000 points of stuff around on the off chance of an apoc game just ain't gonna happen.
I would say 99% of Apoc games are going to be arranged in advance so you aren't going to bushwhack anyone by taking your own made up stuff and they will probably have time to make up something of their own to counter it anyway.
Yet people still complain that, you are ignoring the rules or that it wont be official I mean just grow up.

I for instance am in the fortunate position that i can afford to buy GW stuff and have a fair bit already (not as much as some of you crazy fools :p)
The only thing I have ordered is a baneblade which I plan on converting in to a Stormhammer. I know that the only chance I will have to use my Stormhammer is in apoc games and then only with my opponents consent but it does not bother me as I can't imagine any of the people I play having a problem with it and if they do there will be some one who wont mind that I can arrange to play instead.
So the only person who loses out is the person who didn't want to play against the non official data sheet.
The person I am worried about is the one who makes the completely legal list from a codex that is cheesy as hell just to win and then says that I am cheating making a tank that is overpowered (not that it will be I am actually under-powering it if anything just to keep the points down but that is for a different thread).
This person is at best going to get a couple of games of apoc before people just wont play him anymore and will be missing out on what is a huge part of the hobby.
Feel free to add your own rants for either side of the argument (or a 3rd side if you can think of one)
I wont judge you:D

Kris

Xenocidal Maniac
09-10-2007, 14:59
I totally feel you on this. I think the people asking those questions are totally missing the point of Apoc...

Luckily, since you won't be getting in too many pickup games of it, you will probably know your opponents well beforehand, and you will know if they will be fun opponents or not.

I'm not too worried. All the people that I plan on playing it with are not busy coming up with the most broken lists they can or whether or not it's ok to take a Havoc Launcher on a Baneblade (there's a picture of a Chaos Baneblade with a Havoc Launcher in the newest WD, FYI).

I'm looking forward to it! Apoc was a really good move for GW, on a lot of different levels.

Omniassiah
09-10-2007, 15:58
If people are complaining about a havoc launcher on a baneblade they need to get a good thwak by a thunder hammer(frankly, I think a lot of players need a good thwak).

Now I might have a problem with the lance strike armies and carni's in T-hawk but those are just a little out there. As long as its not too far off the wall who cares, I'm doing one of my baneblades up as L.C. Creed's ride with the Fortresses rule.

Killgore
09-10-2007, 16:34
It might take longer for some people to brake out of the tourney mentality that GW's been brainwashing us with for years

I really want to model a heavy bolter as a pintle mount for my FW baneblade, i can just imagin my commander appearing out of his hatch and laying out some dakkadakka

MrP
09-10-2007, 16:43
I have three Bombards, which are about as useful as a chocolate frying pan in a normal game, so I'd say I'm not too hung up on rules. ;)

Hulkster
09-10-2007, 16:55
I often allow things like chaos vehicle upgrades on traitor guard tanks in friendly games.

it is only in tournaments, which i basically never play, that I would get that hung up on them, I prefer having fun.

apocalypse is great because it is going to encourage those anal players to relax otherwise they wont get a game.

off me anyway

Greatoliver
09-10-2007, 17:09
I suppose it's because people usually do get iffy with these kinds of things and that they haven't got used to the Apoc mentality of "If you can stick it on with glue, do it!"

Henry
09-10-2007, 17:12
That's kinda weird though eh? Why have rules if people are just going to do whatever?

bhusus
09-10-2007, 17:38
That's kinda weird though eh? Why have rules if people are just going to do whatever?

Simply put, the rules are guidelines that allow some use of the models (and of course sale of the models) for a purpose other than the hobby element. That's pretty much it; other than that it really doesn't matter what you do with your minis if the people you play with don't have a problem with it. And if you don't like other people anyway, and want to play on your own...well then the rules don't mean a thing at all...

kris.sherriff
09-10-2007, 17:49
That's kinda weird though eh? Why have rules if people are just going to do whatever?

My point is that there are rules in the Apoc book that say that you can do what you want with your opponants permission. There are rules for making your own Data Sheets.
Why ignore the use of these rules?

Kris

Xenocidal Maniac
09-10-2007, 18:01
Henry and Kris = MISSING THE POINT

If you have to ask... you don't get it.

TzeentchForPresident
09-10-2007, 18:07
The problem is not 1 v 1 vs a friend. But most APOC battles will probably be like the previews here with 2-4 players facing 2-4 players. One can only hope that all are good sports in those cases. If not there certainly is a risk that unclear rules might spoil an evening.

Apoc is a bit badly timed in that aspect since there are new codexes coming now meaning more unclear rules since faqs and such are getting outdated.

boogle
09-10-2007, 18:46
Kris, slightly OT but how are you going to convert the Stromhammer, i'm very interested to get some ideas from you

As for the rules, they are guidelines, i'll never play Apoc in a pick up setting, it will always be pre-arranged games with people i've know for a long time and have expansive minds when it comes to gaming

Mr Zephy
09-10-2007, 18:58
It is a game. The point of a game is to have fun. Remember playing cowboys and indians with your friends as kids? "Bang, you're dead." "No, i'm not." "Yes you are, I shot you" And so on. If you have a kid who doesn't like loosing, the game is not fun. A competitive game in this circumstance is impossible. Other, more complicated, games have rules. These determine what is legal, and only legal moves can help you win. This prevents those with sadist, win-at-all-costs or bullying personalities (hopefully) from stopping a game.

Apocalypse is for those people with more imagination, less reliance on rules to prevent games from collapsing, and who just want to have fun.

Ozendorph
09-10-2007, 19:25
Personally I keep to the spirit (or how I perceive the spirit) of the game/fiction as much as possible. I'm not a "Carnifexes in the Thunderhawk" kind of guy, but I am a "Onslaught Assault Dreads (count as Carifexes) in the Thunderhawk" kind of guy.

But is my take any more correct or incorrect than any other players?

I don't understand why everyone is so intent on forcing their interpretation of this expansion on everyone else. Some people want to play with outlandish, wacky stuff. Other people want to keep things fluffy. Still other people are hellbent on keeping to the "official" rules. Who cares? Let them play how they'd like.

kris.sherriff
09-10-2007, 19:35
Henry and Kris = MISSING THE POINT

If you have to ask... you don't get it.

:confused: How can I miss the point of my own thread. LOL.


Kris, slightly OT but how are you going to convert the Stromhammer, i'm very interested to get some ideas from you

Now that would be telling.;)
I am in the middle of sketching out the new bits I need to build and one I pick up my Baneblade this weekend and have the kit in front of me I will have a better idea.
The basic principle is that I have to raise the port side of the bainblade's forward hull slightly so the front turret wont interfere with the tracks and lower the sponsons so that they don't block off the turrets. There's that, and the small matter of designing two new turrets to go on it.

Kris

nooobie 69
09-10-2007, 19:35
yea what we do at my local store is say why this would be happening but i agree about people wondering if they can use something in apoc. it says in the book you can use anything you want just make up fluff explainning why

Cry of the Wind
09-10-2007, 20:18
I'll be strict with the rules in a tournament setting and for the most part in pick up games, but that's because I need to. You can't play the game in that enviroment without being harsher with the ruleset (within reason of course, as much of a fan of RAW as I am, sometimes it really really just doesn't make sense...).

With Apoc I'll never be playing with people I don't know. I don't have to worry about someone trying to exploit the game or me to gain some advantage. That's not the point of Apoc and I'm sure when I get around to playing a game of it there are going to be all sorts of things on the table that I've always want to see but couldn't because of the existing rules. Now that said I personally wouldn't want to see anything too far out there (like Carnifex 's riding in Thunderhawks) simply because I love the background of the 40k universe and it's the one thing that keeps me in the game more than any other factor. For that reason I don't want to see that kind of stuff happening (unless we've all agreed before hand that that is the point of our particular Apoc game, bring all the stupidest combos of allies and oddball things, just for a laugh).

Henry
09-10-2007, 20:39
Xenocidal ManiacIf you have to ask... you don't get it. I know. I'm dumb. That's why I'm asking smart people like you to explain it to me. :D


My point is that there are rules in the Apoc book that say that you can do what you want with your opponants permission. There are rules for making your own Data Sheets.
Why ignore the use of these rules? I grok ya, but don't you need your opponent's permission to use the rules in the Apocalypse book, which gives you permission to obtain your opponent's permission to do what you want... Seems kinda backwards doesn't it? I mean I already know that if I'm going to play a game with someone we need to agree on the rules we're going to be playing by, that's Schoolyard 101.

What if I don't like the way that the rules for creating data-sheets work? Say like I don't want to be limited to the range of data-sheets that can be made using those rules. Then I'd want to ignore those particular rules when composing data-sheets, and it just seems like it would follow that I'd ignore the use of those rules where I wasn't using them.

Damn, now my braaainn hurrrrts! ;)

Xenocidal Maniac
09-10-2007, 21:19
Oh, Henry... I'm not really that mean.

What I'm trying to say is that I really think you will have to figure these things out on your own with your gaming buddies... I mean, I think the Apoc "rules" are really more guidelines to follow, but you should try to compromise with your friends to figure out what would be most fun for all involved.

Don't like one part of the "rules"? Cool - offer to trade it for some part of the "rules" that your buddy doesn't like... or even... think of really cool, imbalanced scenarios!

Like, the attacking force gets 5,000 points worth of forces, while the defender only gets 3,000 - but all set up in 3+ cover save bunkers with Heavy Weapons on them! etc etc.

Apoc really takes me back to the days when I played an obscure miniatures game system called Legions of Steel with a really creative, fun group of guys. The game had a points system, but often we would abandon the idea of trying to create balanced games and just try to come up with cool scenarios that would be fun for everyone, win or lose. Due to the pick up and play nature of 40k, that isn't really feasible most of the time, but it is every once in a while with Apoc. And I love that idea.

I want to have huge raids against fortresses with outnumbered defenders, Tau defense forces fighting off Drop Podding Marines sent to massacre recent human converts to the Greater good, Shady inquisitors allying with Chaotic forces to eliminate Eldar, etc etc. I think it's gonna be a real blast.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
09-10-2007, 21:32
Depends entirely on the nature of my relationship with my opponent.

If it's someone I know, and have enjoyed gaming against in the past, anything goes.

If it's someone I know, and haven't enjoyed my previous games against them, then I tend to be fairly strict, as only rules lawyers tend to ruin enjoyment.

IF it's someone I've never played against, I'm a good deal more lenient until I can get their measure.

[SD] Bob Plisskin
10-10-2007, 02:14
I don't understand why everyone is so intent on forcing their interpretation of this expansion on everyone else. Some people want to play with outlandish, wacky stuff. Other people want to keep things fluffy. Still other people are hellbent on keeping to the "official" rules. Who cares? Let them play how they'd like.

I agree 100% with this statement, all together now:

"You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one"

sebster
10-10-2007, 04:17
I don't understand why everyone is so intent on forcing their interpretation of this expansion on everyone else. Some people want to play with outlandish, wacky stuff. Other people want to keep things fluffy. Still other people are hellbent on keeping to the "official" rules. Who cares? Let them play how they'd like.

The internet is full of one-true-wayism. That is, people find their own way of enjoying something canít stop themselves telling other people they're wrong for thinking differently.

Thing is, thereís a lot of different ways to enjoy any game, thatís pretty clear right now in regular 40k. Some people have fun doing everything (legal) they can to win, from army selection to in-game tactics. Other people just want to turn up with a cool looking army and see what happens. Most of us are somewhere in between, finding a balance between game and spectacle.

Itís the same with Apocalypse. Apocalypse can be about sheer spectacle, massive divisions of tanks, super-heavies and titans, big guns clearing masses of units off the board every turn and just brutal, meat-headed violence. Or Apocalypse can be a strategic game. Itís entirely up to the user.

Due to the nature of the game, itís most likely people in Apocalypse will tend towards a less competitive focus than regular 40k, but that doesnít make more competitive play Ďwrongí. It doesnít mean those kinds of players Ďdonít get ití. If you and your opponentís are looking for the same type of game and youíre all having fun, then you all get it exactly.

elvinltl
10-10-2007, 05:20
Deepstriking Harlequins. :D

shakespear
10-10-2007, 07:27
Its the great GW paradox.

They made a simple beer and pretzles game with vague rules that attracts very competative players. (not the most competative, thats DBM players)