PDA

View Full Version : People telling you what they brought to the field.



mikesmight123
31-05-2015, 20:53
Hey 'seer,





After watching some youtube batreps I realised that in almost every video people introduce their armies and the upgrades they give them.





After reflecting on all the games I have played so far (4 to be exact), no one did this (except for this ork player who brought a primitive proxy heavy list, side note: How would twin-linked spears work?)





Surely you have to do this, what good is it if you charge into a unit and then your opponent goes "oh, these guys are s8 ap 2", once ur in.





So what do you guys think? Should people do this, is it your responsibility to ask? and does anyone here already do this and I should try to push it at my club.





Thanks in advance :)

Eldarsif
31-05-2015, 20:56
Where I play you always go over what you are bringing to the battle. Here it's just common courtesy just so people can't pull a quick one in the middle of the game.

MagicHat
31-05-2015, 21:21
We pretty much always goes over our armies, special rules and upgrades, depending on opponents familiarity of the army. "This is a squad of jump pack Death company, armed with this and this, and they have these special rules" for instance.

Greatest shock I ever received playing was a necron (and Infinity) player suddenly declaring "Surprise reveal! My Lord have a Tesseract labyrinth" which had me stunned for a few seconds in sheer surprise.

stroller
31-05-2015, 21:44
I see both sides of the argument. For a youtube video, it makes sense to tell the viewer what he or she is watching.

Otherwise: sometimes I tell: sometimes I don't. I DO always write up an army list, so that if there's any query during the game: "here they are, and here are the points paid for the upgrades".

With one infrequent but regular opponent we almost always run through the list, including upgrades and special rules. Other times, we agree a points limit, and surprises are part of the fun. So, it depends....

Asura Varuna
31-05-2015, 21:58
I like to go through what's in my army prior to a game starting, usually during deployment to keep things moving along. This is especially helpful if you're using formations, or playing against an opponents who's inexperienced with your faction. I wouldn't bother with really generic stuff like boltguns, but if an army has some wacky special rules or odd mechanics, it's worth going over them so your opponent's not caught off guard. Most people don't have every codex completely memorised, and I don't think they should be put at a disadvantage because of that. It also gives me a chance to point out any proxies, and check they're okay with my opponent, and gives them an opportunity to ask about units in the army. Common questions are about things like Battlesuit movement, the toughness and armour saves of particular units etc and it's nice just to level the information playing field so you can get down to a good game without any sour taste because you didn't realise what a unit could do.

Having a legible copy of the army list to hand over is always helpful as well, but talking through things will help connect the words on the page to the actual models, especially if they're difficult to distinguish at times (oldschool broadsides from crisis), or proxied/scratch built (marker drones etc).

Grombrindal
31-05-2015, 22:14
Whenever I play I ask for their list and/or what each unit is and whats equipped with what, and I do the same with my army.

I keep spares of my list to give people, going so far as to have the local GW have them on file, so if anyone wants a game, I get a call and told what army to bring based on the list they picked.

I have had it break down on me once in awhile, where someone has picked my no higher that str7 orks list, and turn up with 5 knights. generally I've not had abusers, and it suits me fine.


While that may not work for others, I would suggest giving it a try. It solves a lot of problems.

mikesmight123
31-05-2015, 22:19
Ok,thanks for all the quick and informative responses all. Il start asking people what they brought and their wacky rules in deployment. I still don't know why my local group doesn't do it though :s

Spider-pope
31-05-2015, 22:36
Ok,thanks for all the quick and informative responses all. Il start asking people what they brought and their wacky rules in deployment. I still don't know why my local group doesn't do it though :s

As long as they have a written copy of their army list, it's not really compulsory, but i'd say it's good sportsmanship to do so. The thing to look out for are the players who don't tell you what they have in units, don't have a list, and by sheer amazing coincidence always have the right wargear to deal with every specific situation that arises.

Karhedron
31-05-2015, 23:23
At my LGS we normally swap lists while we unpack our respective armies and mention if anything is not WYSIWYG. We also explain any unfamiliar wargear if asked. If my opponent reads my list and doesn't ask what something is/does then I assume he either knows or is happy to find out as he goes along.

Spiney Norman
31-05-2015, 23:26
I'd verbally highlight any proxies or non-WYSIWYG models and happily answer any specific questions about my army that my opponent has, but things that are supposed to be secret (such as fanatics/magic items in wfb and relics etc in 40k) would stay that way.

MajorWesJanson
01-06-2015, 01:15
Habit locally is to trade army lists at the start, and also point out any proxies/counts as models. If a unit surprises you, you did not read the army list very well so it on you, not the opponent.

adreal
01-06-2015, 03:19
I would like to, just once just grab a transport case and hope for the best, not even be 100% sure what army you are playing, could be fun.

Anyway I run through my lists either after I deploy or right before, it helps remind me of what is in my army (they don't change much though) and let's my opponent know what I have

ehlijen
01-06-2015, 03:31
I'll explain everything about my lists in as much detail as desired, but generally tend to assume that if my opponent doesn't ask, they're familiar enough with my faction that they are happy without additional introductions.

in my opinion, that's what wysiwyg is for and why it's a good thing. Put down a model, and your opponent knows what it is and does (or can at least guess close enough). Proxies and conversions of course get special treatment to ensure no confusion.

Unfortunately, this approach can conflict with the type who doesn't know the rules too well, but is shy about asking, and, especially recently, where wysiwyg has stopped accurately and easily representing a model's capabilities :(
As more and more models rely on special rules and abilities on top of their gear, it becomes harder for any one player to know all the factions well enough for wysiwyg to be enough, and I consider that to be a failing of the rules (though 40k is not as bad there as say Malifaux).
So yes, introducing your army is a very good idea and if in doubt should always be done, regardless of my tendency to forget to out of habit :(

AngryAngel
01-06-2015, 03:32
Honestly it becomes quite frustrating dealing with players who think every 40k game is a test in psy ops strategy. I'll go through exacting, annoying, deep detail in asking every imaginable question of what they are bringing what they do, why they do it, etc, etc. The game is about the game play, not about what units, items, rules you can try and sneak past an un wary foe. Now, do I think you need to keep reminding them of it ? No, but be up front about army set up, what units do what have what where they are, yes all that should be out there at the beginning.

If your trying to be a purposefully sneaky git, then I would consider you a special kind of scum indeed. It is a game, to have fun and attempt to win, if I need to play 200 questions for the first 30 mins of a game just to pull your full army list and what it is capable off out of you at the beginning of the game, I will, but that shouldn't be
needed.

I don't think you need to be so sun tzu about army list once the game is about to begin. Maybe I'm in the minority of that.

Losing Command
01-06-2015, 04:00
Over here people usually tell their opponent what their army is, and go into details when someone is unfamiliar with a certain aspect of their army. This also helps those who can get frustrated when a game doesn't go their way at all from trying to sneak in wargear. For example, this one time some guys were in a hurry and didn't tell what exactly they brought to the field, and suddenly for the SW player every single thunderwolf had a stormshield (including the Iron priests, who cannot have them) and the fenrisian wolfs also had 2 wounds and rending.

FraustyTheSnowman
01-06-2015, 04:29
My group is normally fairly casual, so we rarely actually hand over lists...though it's been a long standing thing that if asked for your list before the game you hand it over. We had one guy, who was one an old player coming back after years of not playing, who got pissy about it...someone asked him what was in a rhino and his response was something like "you'll find out when I deploy it" which went over about as well as a fart during sex. Other than that I can't think of any hiccups we've had.

Proxies are universally OK here, to the point it's not out of line to play against a unit that has empty bases or the like...so we normally go over things in varying degrees of detail before the game starts...normally on deployment (there's one guy who's annoying as hell about it, and will tell you what his stuff is while you're trying to finish up your list). A lot of people play the same list, or a at least a lot of the same units, game after game...so often we only go over the new stuff.

insectum7
01-06-2015, 05:37
We're usually completely open about our lists, and unit abilities are either openly given or just available upon request.

Once had a game where someone took Coteaz. I asked my opponent what his abilities were. Somehow when facing against my Drop Pod army, even after I asked, he neglected to tell me about the ability where Coateaz grants Intercept to nearby units or some such. . . I didn't play against that person again for a looong time.

WLBjork
01-06-2015, 07:02
The only issue I have with open lists is that your opponent isn't supposed to know certain things.

For example, they should see a character with a sword and pistol on the model. The fact that the sword is a Relic on the other hand should be found out the hard way.

This is why WYSIWYG is important. Anything not WYSIWYG should indeed be pointed out to your opponent, nothing else needs to be.

AndrewGPaul
01-06-2015, 08:55
My preference is for all models to be WYSIWYG and to not disclose the full army list - keeping some items of wargear, psychic powers, etc, secret. I'm also happy to keep reserves and the passengers of non-Open-topped transports hidden, too. I feel it adds a bit to the fog of war.

I'm quite happy to go by the full disclosure method, too.

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 09:00
My preference is for all models to be WYSIWYG and to not disclose the full army list - keeping some items of wargear, psychic powers, etc, secret. I'm also happy to keep reserves and the passengers of non-Open-topped transports hidden, too. I feel it adds a bit to the fog of war.

I'm quite happy to go by the full disclosure method, too.

IMHO if you're keeping psychic powers secret you are cheating, they should be rolled for in the presence of your opponent, any shenanigans of *points at a dice on the table* "oh look I rolled invisibility" deserves a slap in my opinion.

iamcjb
01-06-2015, 09:04
I think it's just good manners and sportsmanship to give a run down of what you are bringing, and for it to be WYSIWYG. Having a print out of the list is even better.

Karhedron
01-06-2015, 09:34
My preference is for all models to be WYSIWYG and to not disclose the full army list - keeping some items of wargear, psychic powers, etc, secret. I'm also happy to keep reserves and the passengers of non-Open-topped transports hidden, too. I feel it adds a bit to the fog of war.



For example, they should see a character with a sword and pistol on the model. The fact that the sword is a Relic on the other hand should be found out the hard way.

I have to disagree with these ones. There should be no hidden surprises like this, especially with psychic powers which should be rolled for in view of your opponent. As for weapons, there is a big difference between a power weapon and some fancy daemon weapon. Players should be aware of this in advance. If you are relying on springing some relic on your opponent by refusing to list your wargear, that is pretty unsporting.

I only attend 1 organised event so I don't know what the general take is but at that one, you need to show your opponent your army list including all wargear.

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 10:10
I have to disagree with these ones. There should be no hidden surprises like this, especially with psychic powers which should be rolled for in view of your opponent. As for weapons, there is a big difference between a power weapon and some fancy daemon weapon. Players should be aware of this in advance. If you are relying on springing some relic on your opponent by refusing to list your wargear, that is pretty unsporting.

I only attend 1 organised event so I don't know what the general take is but at that one, you need to show your opponent your army list including all wargear.

Psychic powers should obviously not be kept secret, with regards to wargear like relics etc I'm less certain, certainly wfb functions on the assumption that your opponent does not know what magic items your characters have because there are some items and spells that reveal magic items and other hidden things (like fanatics and dark elf assassins) within a certain radius. In all honesty I don't think it makes too much difference whether relics are revealed in 40k or not, though ive played casual games where both parties agree to keep everything secret to give a more realistic battle simulation.

There are difficulties with that kind of game, for example if you go so far as to not nail down which units are in which transports at the start of the game then you need to be able to trust that your opponent isn't going to 'fiddle' his units around when the time comes for them to disembark, in fact I've painted numbers on the underside of my rhinos and Immolators for exactly that purpose so there is no misunderstanding.

Bob Hunk
01-06-2015, 13:06
Another +1 for going through every aspect of your list with opponents before the game. :)


For example, they should see a character with a sword and pistol on the model. The fact that the sword is a Relic on the other hand should be found out the hard way.

Should it? I'm not sure that's the intent... I mean, if your group has agreed to keep Relics 'secret' as standard then fine, but I'd reveal Relics as a matter of course. :) I've had too many frustrating things "sprung" on me during games over the years to ever want to subject an opponent to similar annoyance. :)

AndrewGPaul
01-06-2015, 13:55
IMHO if you're keeping psychic powers secret you are cheating, they should be rolled for in the presence of your opponent, any shenanigans of *points at a dice on the table* "oh look I rolled invisibility" deserves a slap in my opinion.


...if you go so far as to not nail down which units are in which transports at the start of the game then you need to be able to trust that your opponent isn't going to 'fiddle' his units around when the time comes for them to disembark, in fact I've painted numbers on the underside of my rhinos and Immolators for exactly that purpose so there is no misunderstanding.

Thankfully I'm nowhere near Retford, so I don't need to worry about your opinion. ;) Firstly, House rules =/= cheating, and apparently I have a better group than you, because I can trust my friends with secret information in games (well, you have to, if you play Infinity :) ). After all, if I can't trust them like that, why would I be wasting my time playing them?

I understand the concerns, but for me they're irrelevant. More important for me is that fact that I don't find the in-universe explanations for why my troops would know such things less satisfactory than them not knowing.

The bearded one
01-06-2015, 14:05
With fantasy magic items are supposedly secret (though now that I'm flicking through the rulebook, I can't find anything stating it in black&white - open list playing occurs, depending on the environment), but I believe they're all open and known in 40k. If anything, all unit equipment should be visible via 'what you see is what you get'.

Over here I always ask my opponents whether they'd like me to quickly go over my army before a battle. We tend to do it most of the time, in more or less detail depending on how familiar the opponent is with the army. That in itself is a good reason to go over what the units are and do, so you're not surprised to find out that meek looking unit is actually going to tear your terminators apart.

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 14:14
Thankfully I'm nowhere near Retford, so I don't need to worry about your opinion. ;) Firstly, House rules =/= cheating, and apparently I have a better group than you, because I can trust my friends with secret information in games (well, you have to, if you play Infinity :) ). After all, if I can't trust them like that, why would I be wasting my time playing them?

I understand the concerns, but for me they're irrelevant. More important for me is that fact that I don't find the in-universe explanations for why my troops would know such things less satisfactory than them not knowing.

That's absolutely fair enough, I don't think I have any opponent who I would trust enough (or would trust me enough) to roll psychic powers secretly, well ok maybe one or two, but we generally follow the rules on those things, as with all things it depends how far you want to take it, you start getting into in-universe questions like 'would you know from the other side of the battlefield what psychic power was being as as it was being manifested?', and then 'would your forces even realise that an enemy psyker was casting a blessing on his own forces at all if your army didn't include a psyker?' At some point the desire to make a realistic battle simulation has to give way to playability to make the game worth playing.


With fantasy magic items are supposedly secret (though now that I'm flicking through the rulebook, I can't find anything stating it in black&white - open list playing occurs, depending on the environment), but I believe they're all open and known in 40k. If anything, all unit equipment should be visible via 'what you see is what you get'.


WYSIWYG works up to a certain point, but how does one tell the difference between a regular Warscythe and the void reaper or whether the archon is wearing regular kabalite armour or the armour of misery, or whether that is a power sword or the monster slayer of Caliban just by looking at the model ? (ok bad example, no-one would even consider bringing the monster slayer to a game, but the point still stands)

The bearded one
01-06-2015, 14:39
WYSIWYG works up to a certain point, but how does one tell the difference between a regular Warscythe and the void reaper or whether the archon is wearing regular kabalite armour or the armour of misery, or whether that is a power sword or the monster slayer of Caliban just by looking at the model ? (ok bad example, no-one would even consider bringing the monster slayer to a game, but the point still stands)

Oh, I'm aware. I specifically meant units' regular equipment. Even things like power armour and artificer armour should be distinguishable on the model by sights, and generic weaponry definitely should. Relics and the like are more sketchy in this regard - and I'm not certain if there's anything on it in the rulebook or whether it has simply become a case of "that's how most of the playerbase does it". I once read of cases where even the contents of transports were undisclosed. An interesting element, certainly.

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 16:12
Oh, I'm aware. I specifically meant units' regular equipment. Even things like power armour and artificer armour should be distinguishable on the model by sights, and generic weaponry definitely should. Relics and the like are more sketchy in this regard - and I'm not certain if there's anything on it in the rulebook or whether it has simply become a case of "that's how most of the playerbase does it". I once read of cases where even the contents of transports were undisclosed. An interesting element, certainly.

Now there's an interesting question, at what point does a suit of power armour become 'special' enough to be considered artificer armour? To my knowledge GW has never made a concrete distinction between the two.

The bearded one
01-06-2015, 16:14
Now there's an interesting question, at what point does a suit of power armour become 'special' enough to be considered artificer armour? To my knowledge GW has never made a concrete distinction between the two.

There's a skull-quota.

Grombrindal
01-06-2015, 16:18
There's a skull-quota.

I found that the more scrolls it has, the more artificer it is.

Kahadras
01-06-2015, 16:22
With fantasy magic items are supposedly secret (though now that I'm flicking through the rulebook, I can't find anything stating it in black&white - open list playing occurs, depending on the environment), but I believe they're all open and known in 40k. If anything, all unit equipment should be visible via 'what you see is what you get'.

Certainly I think fantasy works better with secret magic items (in fact IIRC there was a magic item which could reveal the presence of magic items in enemy units). In 40K though it should be all up front. You should have a copy of your army list for your opponant to look at and you should go though each of your units, clarrifying what they're carrying and which transport they're in (if mechanised). I've had plenty of games where I get the feeling that my opponant is cheating like mad (wargear swaps, the command squad 'jumping' transports when there's is knocked out, armies blatently over the agreed points total (and no army list available).

The bearded one
01-06-2015, 16:24
(in fact IIRC there was a magic item which could reveal the presence of magic items in enemy units).

Yes! Thanks - it's a sure-fire indication magic items are supposed to stay hidden, if there are (several) items forcing a player to reveal his magic items.

Spider-pope
01-06-2015, 16:32
Certainly I think fantasy works better with secret magic items (in fact IIRC there was a magic item which could reveal the presence of magic items in enemy units). In 40K though it should be all up front. You should have a copy of your army list for your opponant to look at and you should go though each of your units, clarrifying what they're carrying and which transport they're in (if mechanised). I've had plenty of games where I get the feeling that my opponant is cheating like mad (wargear swaps, the command squad 'jumping' transports when there's is knocked out, armies blatently over the agreed points total (and no army list available).

I'd like to see a return of the Magic Item/ Wargear cards from yesteryear. It keeps the items secret without having to faff about with multiple written army lists.

Dominoris
01-06-2015, 17:50
Over the years I have found that most people like to talk about their army. All you need to do is ask.

gwarsh41
01-06-2015, 18:03
I think it's just good manners and sportsmanship to give a run down of what you are bringing, and for it to be WYSIWYG. Having a print out of the list is even better.

I agree, though now I am considering how a "lights out" tournament could be. Where you play the game not seeing each others armies until deployment. You wont know upgrades until they are used.

mightymconeshot
01-06-2015, 18:22
I played that once or at least the final match was blocked. it really suck because I played a heavily meched/armored IG regiment back in 6th. He took a corner, placed the skyshield there parked 2 basilisks on top, 2 leman Russes in front and a death strike missile in the back. Everything else was in vendettas. It just sucked because he basically blasted me apart without me being able to do much, playing assault space wolves so grey hunters, rhinos, a dread, a landraider with lord and body guard. He basically just picked a unit off a turn and last turn landed all of his guys to secure the objectives. It was not fun.

However I would like to see it divided into quadrants and you have to place x percent of units in each quadrant.

theunwantedbeing
01-06-2015, 19:08
Should people do this, is it your responsibility to ask? and does anyone here already do this and I should try to push it at my club.

Isn't the number 1 rule "If you're not sure, ask." ?

AngryAngel
01-06-2015, 19:23
The only issue I have with open lists is that your opponent isn't supposed to know certain things.

For example, they should see a character with a sword and pistol on the model. The fact that the sword is a Relic on the other hand should be found out the hard way.

This is why WYSIWYG is important. Anything not WYSIWYG should indeed be pointed out to your opponent, nothing else needs to be.

Why exactly isn't your opponent supposed to know certain things ? Where does the distinction end ? Why would your opponent know when how many reserves you have or how they are entering play then ? Though you need to disclose all of that. Is there a rule in the book I'm missing that says special wargear like relics is supposed to be kept secret in 40k ?



My preference is for all models to be WYSIWYG and to not disclose the full army list - keeping some items of wargear, psychic powers, etc, secret. I'm also happy to keep reserves and the passengers of non-Open-topped transports hidden, too. I feel it adds a bit to the fog of war.

I'm quite happy to go by the full disclosure method, too.

Is that a rule to keep things secret I missed or simply more of a house understanding ?


IMHO if you're keeping psychic powers secret you are cheating, they should be rolled for in the presence of your opponent, any shenanigans of *points at a dice on the table* "oh look I rolled invisibility" deserves a slap in my opinion.

I agree, unless they are rolling on the space wolf psyhic school, it really doesn't matter what they take it is all pants.

Grombrindal
01-06-2015, 19:26
I agree, unless they are rolling on the space wolf psyhic school, it really doesn't matter what they take it is all pants.

Welcome to the God of Magic's School of pant-suckery

AngryAngel
01-06-2015, 19:29
Welcome to the God of Magic's School of pant-suckery

You know, I will only take that school when I play my space wolves, it is a really painful experience each time, for me, not them.

Commissar Davis
02-06-2015, 01:35
I always have a list on hand as I use Imperial Armour upgrades and just about everything is WYSIWYG. I like to know what is what and like my opponent to have a list. I like surprise and don't normally ask what something does, just as long as I can check it was brought and perhaps have a glance at the rules when it happens to be something powerful.

SirBlackmane
02-06-2015, 07:25
Reading through everyone's views here it does appear that, while there's a certain amount of personal preference in exactly how much to share, most people agree that a basic rundown of units before a match is in order. If for no other reason than to be civil.

My own local group is largely the same, we'll give a brief rundown on the units as we deploy them. Since we play mostly-WYSIWYG it's crucial to note the differences. It also helps that a ot of us use programs like Battlescribe or Army Builder, which are pretty clear and cut down on list shenanigans (and dodgy "accidental" math errors - we've all known someone who winds up coincidentally being almost 100 points over the limit again and again) Also, as far as it goes for transports, more often than not the transported unit is sitting "not really there" on the table edge directly behind the transport for simplicity's sake. With drop pods we play a bit more close to the chest, not declaring what a unit is until it emerges, but we're still pretty clear about it then.

Of course, all the explanations in the world won't prevent you from absent mindedly forgetting a foe has a particular piece of gear right up until they start whacking you with it.

Flipmode
02-06-2015, 08:27
Tau have always been the worst for me. Two relatively similar looking models, very different results.

Still though, I'm generally happy to allow myself to be surprised. I don't expect to know the details of every enemy loadout. However, this is personal choice (and laziness)

duffybear1988
02-06-2015, 08:56
Honestly it becomes quite frustrating dealing with players who think every 40k game is a test in psy ops strategy. I'll go through exacting, annoying, deep detail in asking every imaginable question of what they are bringing what they do, why they do it, etc, etc. The game is about the game play, not about what units, items, rules you can try and sneak past an un wary foe. Now, do I think you need to keep reminding them of it ? No, but be up front about army set up, what units do what have what where they are, yes all that should be out there at the beginning.

If your trying to be a purposefully sneaky git, then I would consider you a special kind of scum indeed. It is a game, to have fun and attempt to win, if I need to play 200 questions for the first 30 mins of a game just to pull your full army list and what it is capable off out of you at the beginning of the game, I will, but that shouldn't be
needed.

I don't think you need to be so sun tzu about army list once the game is about to begin. Maybe I'm in the minority of that.

But what if I don't want people to know that all 15 of my units of night goblins have 3 fanatics each? :D

Karhedron
02-06-2015, 13:03
But what if I don't want people to know that all 15 of my units of night goblins have 3 fanatics each? :D

Then don't play O&G. :p

jeffersonian000
02-06-2015, 21:21
I've gotten stung too many times by people list tailoring against me for pick up games, to the point where I use to bring two armies, display one, and play the other after the Pug gets done writing his list. Even with all that, the list I would play would be pre-printed, and I would go over my units and the options taken, while expecting my opponent to do the same.

Discourages cheating.

SJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Losing Command
02-06-2015, 22:11
Wait what, you not only regularly have opponents that write their armylist after looking at what army you play, but they actively tailor their list as well ?!? That sounds vicious. I've only had that happen once, but that time it backfired spectacularly against the guy doing the tailoting. I was playing my Thousand Sons, and didn't know he was unaware about my whole army having a 4++ and appearently he just assumed it were plain chaos marines : every flamer and meltagun in his army was now a proxy-plasmagun and every vehicle was taken out of his armylist to field more plasma-toting veteran squads. For a few weeks after that he was complaining about how broken Thousand Sons were :p

AngryAngel
02-06-2015, 23:57
But what if I don't want people to know that all 15 of my units of night goblins have 3 fanatics each? :D

I don't know, but even if you tried to tell me they didn't all have that many, I'd assume they would anyways.

Nightfall Shimmer
03-06-2015, 11:23
Every Night Goblin Mob always has 3 Fanatics inside it. Even if they don't.

Edit: On topic though. I always have a written list ready for my opponent to read. It's just, among the people I play they never ask for it, and when I offer it, they shrug and don't care. We usually just roll Warlord Traits and Psykic Powers, go over everything that is Proxied or not WYSIWYG. And then get to the battle.

totgeboren
03-06-2015, 11:36
I just go "Everything is WYSIWYG" and then point out stuff that can't be seen like "My Warboss cap is Da Finkin' Kap" or "The Champion with a power sword has melta bombs".

And that is why I seriously dislike proxy stuff. I have enough of a task at hand to keep track of all the warlord traits, psy powers, mysterious terrain all other random stuff that not following WYSIWYG leads to a direct decrease of my enjoyment of the game.

If I can't drink beer and play properly at the same time, there is too much stuff to keep track of.

murgel2006
03-06-2015, 11:56
At my LGS we normally swap lists while we unpack our respective armies and mention if anything is not WYSIWYG. We also explain any unfamiliar wargear if asked. If my opponent reads my list and doesn't ask what something is/does then I assume he either knows or is happy to find out as he goes along.

The same.
We try to go for WYSIWIG but still show/hand the list out.
That seems to be common courtesy to us.


The only issue I have with open lists is that your opponent isn't supposed to know certain things.

For example, they should see a character with a sword and pistol on the model. The fact that the sword is a Relic on the other hand should be found out the hard way.

This is why WYSIWYG is important. Anything not WYSIWYG should indeed be pointed out to your opponent, nothing else needs to be.

I don't think there should be such surprises except when there is a Gamemaster involved.
we often do such things in campaigns and have fun simulating recon and spys etc. but in a pickup or regular game I would be feeling as if I were swindled.

aprilmanha
03-06-2015, 12:07
No list, I will need to know everything in the army.

Written list I can review, then as long as the main equipment is WYSIWYG then I'm happy for things like a vortex grenade to remain a secret for a Shock reveil as it can make games more exciting and makes some pretty usless equipment more useful since you can spring it on an enemy when it is unexpected.

After all, if I know someone has a tiny piece of easy to avoid powerful wargear, I am obviously avoid it and deny its use.

sicarius68
03-06-2015, 20:35
Where I play we take a look at each others list before we start the game. This way we avoid nasty surprises like: I'm going to charges your GK termies and once he's in locked in CC I tell him they're paladins

Sephillion
03-06-2015, 21:27
I think it’s just normal to say what you brought. Not that I don’t trust other players (the people at the shop seem like nice fellows, even the more competitive ones) but since upgrades are bought with points… “Oh, hey, I (secretly) had bought anti-air missiles so I shoot your flyer”

Though it would be cool to have a unit with options that can remain secret. Say something stealthy, multiple 10 points options, at the beginning of the game, you write your pick on a piece of paper, face down, so your opponent can check when it comes into play.

Ricky
04-06-2015, 08:12
It depends. When playing with close friends then we talk over what is what but don't reveal 'secret' things. But we know each other and have relaxed games. But in a pick up game or whatever I believe in 100% transparency or at least an agreement between us at the beginning of the whole process to decide how much both of us want to reveal... Nobody cheats within my close friends. In fact I'm lucky enough to have never encountered a (malicious) cheater in 20 years.

Wesser
04-06-2015, 11:26
I have to disagree with these ones. There should be no hidden surprises like this, especially with psychic powers which should be rolled for in view of your opponent. As for weapons, there is a big difference between a power weapon and some fancy daemon weapon. Players should be aware of this in advance. If you are relying on springing some relic on your opponent by refusing to list your wargear, that is pretty unsporting.

I only attend 1 organised event so I don't know what the general take is but at that one, you need to show your opponent your army list including all wargear.

Funny

In WFB a big part of the game is consider such tricks including accounting for potential loadouts on units and characters, such as Banner of the World Dragon and Crown of Command in particular.

A Chaos Lord is someone who ought to be somewhat respected in close combat, whether he rocks a Daemon Weapon or Power Sword. It's not really like there's a lot of wacky wargear combos in 40k, so what's the big deal?

If you have 10 Space Marines it's obviously relevant if they carry boltguns or close combat weapons and if they carry meltas or plasma guns.... maybe it's not so necessary to know the champion has a power fist? And is it really visible if the accompanying Sorcerer sports a Sigil of Corruption?

"10 chaos marines with boltguns, Icon X, Mark Y and 2 x meltaguns" is really enough. I think knowing EXACTLY what a unit can do kills a bit of the game..

AngryAngel
04-06-2015, 19:13
It is kind of a sad game if losing the surprise factor of an unknown piece of wargear kills something of it, here I thought the game play was the game. Honestly, if you can see just how your opponent deploys, and know exactly how things will enter play with reserves and even what their reserves are there is very little fog of war in this game. All hiding aspects of your army does is catch a noob by surprise or punish those who won't buy/pirate every codex and campaign book GW gives forth, hardly what I'd consider a bit of the game.

Layla
04-06-2015, 19:51
I dont always volunteer whats what or whats carrying what unless it is not wysiwyg. If it is something that 'doesnt show, I dont tell unless.... I am asked or I am asked to show my written list. Then I will gladly tell or show.

I have had a few opponents not show me their lists because i know they went over but thats not a big deal. What I find really annoying is when I ask pecifically before or during a game whats in a specific transport or whats in a unit and they are vague and try not to tell me. Then, I point out they are required to and a few times, I have had to "repeat" the request a time or two.

Sureshot05
05-06-2015, 10:14
I was go other every unit just before deployment. I describe upgrades and answer any questions that my opponent may have. If I am fielding a unit for the first time, I tend to go into a bit more detail, partly for my benefit and partly for my opponents. First time I fielded a knight, we both went over the rules twice just to be sure that we both had a feel for how it would work.

Karhedron
05-06-2015, 11:01
I have taken to placing a model from the squad being transported in or just behind a transport vehicle to indicate which unit is inside. Helps both me and my opponent to remember. ;)

aprilmanha
05-06-2015, 12:09
I have taken to placing a model from the squad being transported in or just behind a transport vehicle to indicate which unit is inside. Helps both me and my opponent to remember. ;)
I like to do that to :) Otherwise I forget they even came to the fight!

gLOBS
05-06-2015, 18:21
Asking for lists sounds like a horrible way to play. War is supposed to have a fog of war. It seems like to much meta-game mathammering instead of playing 40k. Hell making combat units do and act how you want on a battlefield is nearly a miracle, then having the ability to know where the opfor is located let alone what they are holding in their hands.

Layla
06-06-2015, 00:11
Asking for lists sounds like a horrible way to play. War is supposed to have a fog of war. It seems like to much meta-game mathammering instead of playing 40k. Hell making combat units do and act how you want on a battlefield is nearly a miracle, then having the ability to know where the opfor is located let alone what they are holding in their hands.
I agree. You "shouldnt know a unit even has a heavy weapon much less what it is till ya get hit by it. You shouldnt know which assault marine has the melta bombs or even if they do till they use it. You shouldnt know whats in a transporttill they roll out.
In a real life standpoint or even in a game standpoint.
The problem is, people arent honest. It is a protection for BOTH players from cheating.

Try something fun. .......
Both players make a list. Have a game master. At the start of the game, both players give their list to the game master. Then neither player reveals anything till it is used. Obvious stuff like las cannons and melta guns in unembarked transports of course couldnt be hidden of course. Play game. I have always liked a game master to run games

mikesmight123
06-06-2015, 20:05
What about a literal fog of war, place a black screen across half the table and still have a game master to make sure everything is legit.

WarsmithGarathor94
06-06-2015, 20:22
I generaĺly tend to inform my opponent of certain things ie everything that can have it except my sorceror and cultists has mark of nurgle. also il inform my opponent if ive taken votlw

Aldavaer
06-06-2015, 20:35
What about a literal fog of war, place a black screen across half the table and still have a game master to make sure everything is legit.

I have played a game years back 25mm Napoleonics, each player had two identical armies, screen dividing the room with nan identical table, one player each table and an umpire. Only opposing units one of your units could see was on the your table.

Difficult to set up but great fun, gave a real use to light cavalry screens and scouting.

Khorneflakes01
08-06-2015, 02:28
I think it's common courtesy, especially if there are a couple models that aren't totally WYSIWYG. But then again a player telling me all upgrades beforehand can get a little taxing if I have no idea what some upgrades do.

3eland
08-06-2015, 03:01
Try something fun. .......
Both players make a list. Have a game master. At the start of the game, both players give their list to the game master. Then neither player reveals anything till it is used. Obvious stuff like las cannons and melta guns in unembarked transports of course couldnt be hidden of course. Play game. I have always liked a game master to run games

Played that today in a FFA 4-way. 2k points each army.

Worked fine. Was fun actually. We are a pretty close, friendly group so we can trust each other (that and we had our lists there if any confusion or argument arose).

Usually we share lists but we do have "blindhammer" games. It mixes things up.

ehlijen
08-06-2015, 03:06
Asking for lists sounds like a horrible way to play. War is supposed to have a fog of war. It seems like to much meta-game mathammering instead of playing 40k. Hell making combat units do and act how you want on a battlefield is nearly a miracle, then having the ability to know where the opfor is located let alone what they are holding in their hands.

If you design a game with that idea in mind, that can work quite well. Stratego is an example of a game built around fog of war (though it isn't much of a wargame besides that).

40k is, however, not such a game. For starters, premeasuring now exists and that's about as against the idea of fog of war as you can get, in my opinion. It's also never had secret equipment the way WHFB had magic items (at least not since 3rd ed). The also game gives you total control over your units with an almost absent morale system.

You may want more fog of war, but general consensus is that 40k is not a fog of war game. So asking for lists isn't horrible, it's just not your preference.

Wesser
08-06-2015, 08:51
It is kind of a sad game if losing the surprise factor of an unknown piece of wargear kills something of it, here I thought the game play was the game. Honestly, if you can see just how your opponent deploys, and know exactly how things will enter play with reserves and even what their reserves are there is very little fog of war in this game. All hiding aspects of your army does is catch a noob by surprise or punish those who won't buy/pirate every codex and campaign book GW gives forth, hardly what I'd consider a bit of the game.

Pray tell. Which single piece for wargear for characters is going to lose anyone the game? Not knowing if a certain squad have meltas or heavy bolters, sure... but otherwise? Is it really better that someone can say: "hmm, since that squad of orks don't sport a power klaw it's pretty safe to park my snazzy vehicle right in their face". I prefer "That Chaos Lord of Khorne could probably have that nasty Ap2 Daemon-weapon. Better keep my terminators at a safe distance".

A big problem about 40k is that there's no Fog of War. You can basically calculate what you should do, and games are too often decided by the odds/dice kicking you in the teeth than any actual tactical brilliance

Flame Boy
08-06-2015, 19:48
Personally, I play the game very rarely so I find having my army list at hand at all times is as important to me as my opponent. Once I find a loadout for a unit I like enough to stick with, I may print them on cards to make things easier. I used to play 40k with wargear and strategy cards, so having special rules and wargear loadouts for my units seems like a good idea. As for transports, my Trukks are open topped and look better with a few boys standing in there. My only transport that isn't open-topped was a looted wagon I made to transport my Burna boys before they were able to take trukks. It's got flames painted all over them, so that would serve as a handy reminder. :p

I agree it's polite to give your opponent a brief introduction to your army and to keep a neat copy of your army list at hand for convenience. I don't like fielding unpainted models if I can help it and I don't like having an army list scribbled on a scrap of paper either.

AngryAngel
08-06-2015, 22:05
Pray tell. Which single piece for wargear for characters is going to lose anyone the game? Not knowing if a certain squad have meltas or heavy bolters, sure... but otherwise? Is it really better that someone can say: "hmm, since that squad of orks don't sport a power klaw it's pretty safe to park my snazzy vehicle right in their face". I prefer "That Chaos Lord of Khorne could probably have that nasty Ap2 Daemon-weapon. Better keep my terminators at a safe distance".

A big problem about 40k is that there's no Fog of War. You can basically calculate what you should do, and games are too often decided by the odds/dice kicking you in the teeth than any actual tactical brilliance

To my knowledge 40k has never been a game about tactical brilliance and more about army list and memorization of the different army rules and items. I don't really see how not knowing things adds any tactical brilliance anyways it just adds an uncertain nature, that is also already there from the dice. Is there any one piece of gear that can win or lose the game ? I'm not sure, if such is the case I'd imagine it was already a very close game to begin with however.

Fact is however, unless there is some rule I'm unaware of in 40k to keep it secret, it should all be known and I'd prefer it that way. I've seen it happen more often then I like people trying to keep secrets and mysteriously having just the right piece of gear at the right time. Or people forgetting until it mattered they bought an upgrade they failed to mention then demanding it was there. 40k isn't about Fog of War, and there are other games where you can do such and it shines. Like I've played alot of blind axis and allies and to me, I'll only play the game that way now it raises it to a whole new level and is easy to navigate, 40k however would only function with that if there was a ref who had both lists and could say what was where and had what.

Wesser
09-06-2015, 06:53
To my knowledge 40k has never been a game about tactical brilliance and more about army list and memorization of the different army rules and items. I don't really see how not knowing things adds any tactical brilliance anyways it just adds an uncertain nature, that is also already there from the dice. Is there any one piece of gear that can win or lose the game ? I'm not sure, if such is the case I'd imagine it was already a very close game to begin with however.

Fact is however, unless there is some rule I'm unaware of in 40k to keep it secret, it should all be known and I'd prefer it that way. I've seen it happen more often then I like people trying to keep secrets and mysteriously having just the right piece of gear at the right time. Or people forgetting until it mattered they bought an upgrade they failed to mention then demanding it was there. 40k isn't about Fog of War, and there are other games where you can do such and it shines. Like I've played alot of blind axis and allies and to me, I'll only play the game that way now it raises it to a whole new level and is easy to navigate, 40k however would only function with that if there was a ref who had both lists and could say what was where and had what.

Luck of the dice, Target priority...

Thank god for narrative and models with skulls on or I might think we were discussing Monopoly

WLBjork
09-06-2015, 06:54
That's funny. I have yet to find a rule that requires you to tell your opponent what is in your army.

Proxies is one thing, but actual load out of equipment is another. Consider though: It's rare that it applies to anything other than a character, and as others have said you should be wary of characters because of who they are, not what they are/might be carrying.

Nothing more annoying than telling an opponent that, for example, my Wolf Lord is carrying the Fangsword of the Icewolf then finding the multi-wound models nowhere him...

3eland
09-06-2015, 07:05
That's funny. I have yet to find a rule that requires you to tell your opponent what is in your army.

Proxies is one thing, but actual load out of equipment is another. Consider though: It's rare that it applies to anything other than a character, and as others have said you should be wary of characters because of who they are, not what they are/might be carrying.

Nothing more annoying than telling an opponent that, for example, my Wolf Lord is carrying the Fangsword of the Icewolf then finding the multi-wound models nowhere him...

Well technically......

Under "The Force Roster" in Choosing Your Army, last paragraph

To keep things fair, you must always allow your opponent to read your force roster before a game if they wish to do so.

So... yeah.

EDIT: Page 391 of epub (using full screen mode on computer) and page 117 of rulebook.

Karhedron
09-06-2015, 10:20
Under "The Force Roster" in Choosing Your Army, last paragraph

To keep things fair, you must always allow your opponent to read your force roster before a game if they wish to do so.


Pretty much case closed IMHO, full disclosure required in the rules.

Having said that, I would not object of a "Fog of war" houserule where wargear and even units in transports were kept hidden until deployed/fired. To keep this fair, write down the wargear on a bit of paper at the start and reveal it to your opponent at the necessary time. This could be a fun variation but obviously only by prior agreement.

Spiney Norman
09-06-2015, 12:45
Pretty much case closed IMHO, full disclosure required in the rules.

Having said that, I would not object of a "Fog of war" houserule where wargear and even units in transports were kept hidden until deployed/fired. To keep this fair, write down the wargear on a bit of paper at the start and reveal it to your opponent at the necessary time. This could be a fun variation but obviously only by prior agreement.

We do this quite a often, and IMHO everything in 40k should be done by prior agreement, especially if it deviates from the rules as written in the rule book. Each of my tanks has a number painted on the underside in white paint which corresponds to a unit on my army list roster to ensure there are no shananigans or genuine mistakes.

We even use a hidden deployment method sometimes, where each player draws a map of their deployment zone and their unit placement, and then both players reveal their maps at the same time. It brings an interesting dynamic to the game by forcing both players to deploy their forces proactively rather than reacting to their opponents deployment.