Should I feel bad for challenging?

[Desalbert]

In a game against my longtime and frequent opponent, I was playing as Chaos Daemons against Necrons, and charged a unit of Immortals lead by his Overlord (also Warlord) with my Warlord, a Greater Daemon of Tzeentch, Lord of Change. As his warlord trait, my Greater Daemon got the one where any characters he kills in a challenge will be worth an extra victory point (on a the personal tree)

Now, the battle had not been going my way, and I admit I was flustered when his exile ray randomly lucked out and obliterated my allied Chaos Lord in a unit of berzerkers, but otherwise, we had been pretty cordial (as usual).

Anyway, I of course issued a challenge with my Greater Daemon on his Overlord in hopes to either slay him or the 3 immortals left over. When I do that, my opponent erupts instantly into saying that it's a cheap rule which shouldn't exist, because it turns a game of units into a game of characters. Secondly, he suggested I was being a bit of a jerk because I had quote "no chance of winning the game if I didnt do this" and further that he had "no chance of beating me one-on-one with either the overlord or the immortals, and that forcing him to do so was, not kind of me. I disagreed with all of his suggestsions.

We got into a heated argument in which I raised my voice a few times, because I had felt like it was unfair to say my one chance at glory was cheap, when I've had to fight tooth and claw to stay in this game as Daemons to begin with...

Anyway, all this aside... should I feel bad for issuing a challenge? Should I save it for the tourney field and not against my usual opponent?

[II Orar II]

You played inside the rules. I'm sure his list has so many advantages against yours the guy's playing Necrons and you're playing Daemons so it is barely a fair fight to begin with. In the end of the day you played inside the rules and beat him fairly, if he has a problem with it he should have played differently to prevent it. His problem not yours, if he says that certain rules shouldn't be allowed because it gives you an advantage that's pathetic and under that logic you should say no flyers.

[Mit Gas]

It's a strategy game and issuing a challenge is a tactical move. it's your goal to win. it might be unfair for races who do not have all that strong independent characters but that's his tactical shortcoming, not yours. He could've made sure that you didn't get to challenge him. You could complain now that you don't have his firepower etc. It's kinda unfair at first when all your units (or even allied Chaos lords) get shot down, right? In the end, I'm sure you know full well that you are right.

[Xerkics]

Necron Overlords actually LOVE challenges. That means you can tell your opponent : Stop Hitting your self :-p Pretty much guarantees mss hit the character and its 50/50 chance to work most of time.

[Desalbert]

You played inside the rules. I'm sure his list has so many advantages against yours the guy's playing Necrons and you're playing Daemons so it is barely a fair fight to begin with. In the end of the day you played inside the rules and beat him fairly, if he has a problem with it he should have played differently to prevent it. His problem not yours, if he says that certain rules shouldn't be allowed because it gives you an advantage that's pathetic and under that logic you should say no flyers.

It's a strategy game and issuing a challenge is a tactical move. it's your goal to win. it might be unfair for races who do not have all that strong independent characters but that's his tactical shortcoming, not yours. He could've made sure that you didn't get to challenge him. You could complain now that your don't have his firepower etc. It's kinda unfair at first when all your units (or even allied Chaos lords) get shot down, right?

Agreed. I guess my post is really just one of disappointment. I'm disappointed us long-time gaming pals could get so heated about one thing, and I'm dissapointed that I also did not control my argument defence better (in terms of not being so agnsty). I agree, it's a tactical play that is available to me, and at the same time. He has many tactical plays available to him and I also need to not be so hard done by, by his usage of tactics.

So I guess what I have learned then is this: I should just realize that playing in the rules is in the rules, and I should not scoff and whine (as I did a few times) about exile rays, just as much as he should not scoff and wine about a greater-daemon challenge. It's all tactics.

We both need to realize this fact.

[IcedCrow]

Are you kidding me?

lol

Its part of the game now. He needs to learn how to mitigate this...

[red_drake]

Necron characters with mind shackle scarabs are prolly one of the best in the game at challenges. Not only are they though and pack a punch, they also have roughly 50% chance to nullify the enemy character with mss.

[wanderingblade]

If your opponent has an issue with the rules here - and I can't blame him for having that problem in general - then he should have brought it up before the game and asked for a house rule banning it. Not throwing a paddy halfway through the game when it comes up at a very bad moment for him. The idea that you should feel bad for wanting to take advantage of a tactical situation is preposterous and risible. If he wants it to be a house rule - no challenges - I'd suggest, giving the armies involved here, that you ask for something back.

[Desalbert]

I agree with the sentiments... I should also add that as the game is purge the alien, if the challenge was accepted, I would stand to potentially gain 3 Victory Points (1 for warlord killed, 1 for a unit killed [as IC's are units in their own right, IIRC], and 1 for the extra VP due to my warlord trait role. )

I admit that 3 victory points from one move is a lot-- ludicrous even. But it is the tactic available to me. I also admit that while he can refuse the challenge, that would place his 3 immortals in the unenviable position of going against a greater daemon, without commander support. They would likely concede 1 VP in the ensuing battle (due to purge the alien)

so Yes, the challenge does come off a little lop-sided, but again, like others say, he has mind-shackle scarabs (which he didn't select, as we're both coming to grips with our armies at a 1060 pt game) for the future, as well as the knowledge that you probably should never let a gliding greater daemon in potential charge range of your warlord and his unit (without scarabs) when you also know that I have a challenge victory point warlord trait.

It's simply a bad call on his part to allow that to happen, no matter how lopsided the rule is.

[Thoth62]

Anyway, I of course issued a challenge with my Greater Daemon on his Overlord in hopes to either slay him or the 3 immortals left over. When I do that, my opponent erupts instantly into saying that it's a cheap rule which shouldn't exist, because it turns a game of units into a game of characters. Secondly, he suggested I was being a bit of a jerk because I had quote "no chance of winning the game if I didnt do this" and further that he had "no chance of beating me one-on-one with either the overlord or the immortals, and that forcing him to do so was, not kind of me. I disagreed with all of his suggestsions.

Anyway, all this aside... should I feel bad for issuing a challenge? Should I save it for the tourney field and not against my usual opponent?

Absolutely not. I'm not sure why your opponent should feel the need to get so upset. You're simply performing an action (well within the rules), that would give you a shot at winning the game. I would expect no less, and I'm confused why your friend would think that you had to use sub-par tactics because otherwise you might, god forbid, actually have a chance at winning a game.

I agree with the sentiments... I should also add that as the game is purge the alien, if the challenge was accepted, I would stand to potentially gain 3 Victory Points (1 for warlord killed, 1 for a unit killed [as IC's are units in their own right, IIRC], and 1 for the extra VP due to my warlord trait role. )

I admit that 3 victory points from one move is a lot-- ludicrous even. But it is the tactic available to me. I also admit that while he can refuse the challenge, that would place his 3 immortals in the unenviable position of going against a greater daemon, without commander support. They would likely concede 1 VP in the ensuing battle (due to purge the alien)

so Yes, the challenge does come off a little lop-sided, but again, like others say, he has mind-shackle scarabs (which he didn't select, as we're both coming to grips with our armies at a 1060 pt game) for the future, as well as the knowledge that you probably should never let a gliding greater daemon in potential charge range of your warlord and his unit (without scarabs) when you also know that I have a challenge victory point warlord trait.

It's simply a bad call on his part to allow that to happen, no matter how lopsided the rule is.

I quoted both of these because I think you allude to my point in both of them. Like I said, in this situation, a challenge would benefit you and help you win the game. It just so happened that the nature of your warlord roll, and the mission, it gives you a significant benefit. But I would pose a question to him. How would he feel if you got angry at him for using his doom scythe's death ray? Or the super awesome disembark rule from his night scythe? Are these not the same thing? It's a rule or action that helps him win the game. In this situation, a challenge benefits you. What's to say that in another instance it would benefit him? Would he refuse to challenge you if your positions were switched?

[Desalbert]

Absolutely not. I'm not sure why your opponent should feel the need to get so upset. You're simply performing an action (well within the rules), that would give you a shot at winning the game. I would expect no less, and I'm confused why your friend would think that you had to use sub-par tactics because otherwise you might, god forbid, actually have a chance at winning a game.

This I agree with.

But I would pose a question to him. How would he feel if you got angry at him for using his doom scythe's death ray? Or the super awesome disembark rule from his night scythe? Are these not the same thing? It's a rule or action that helps him win the game. In this situation, a challenge benefits you. What's to say that in another instance it would benefit him? Would he refuse to challenge you if your positions were switched?

I guess here is where the fault is mine. I had been muttering along about how the exile ray is ridiculous (because it one-shotted my chaos lord), and how the scarabs entropic strike is silly because they should be able to do nothing against a vehicle but yet ran my rhino down to about 5 armour per side.

My fault, it would seem, that lead to his blow-up, was that I essentially made him feel like his Codex was overpowered and perhaps unfair in the way that Necrons seem to have so many little beneficial rules and weapons and abilities as opposed to my daemons...so when this situation came up, and the whole of the battle can swing on it-- for once, I guess, it was finally his turn to mutter or disdain me, or make me feel overpowered.

So, I should own some fault in his blow up...

[Lord Squidar]

I think it was rather poor show on your opponents behalf. The main aim of necrons is to shoot and scoot, avoid combat like the plague. If you have not done this, and get assaulted by one of the best assault armies in the game, you have done something wrong, especially since both players know full well the objective of the game and what is to be lost or gained by said move.

That being said, all the logic in the world will not help if the arguement got heated. I hope you can mend things with your opponent and personally, i'd maybe throw him a bone in the next game to give him a swollen head and fix his pride.

Keep up the good work with the daemons!!!

[Rated_lexxx]

Necron characters with mind shackle scarabs are prolly one of the best in the game at challenges. Not only are they though and pack a punch, they also have roughly 50% chance to nullify the enemy character with mss.

Is this how this works? We were wondering how that works. The MSS happen at the beginning of assault, when does the challenge happen?

[Sazabi]

Wow, that's brutal. Really though, if he let a greater daemon with such a warlord trait (something which he was fully aware of) get into melee with his warlord, when he had the game in the bag, then he deserves the loss. In regards to things getting heated, that can happen. How was your attitude while your daemons where getting shot up? If you where wreaking his game while he won, he would feel justified in such a poor attitude. If you where cool, he might just be having a rough week. But such reasons are why I try to keep cheery even when my guys are getting gunned down, it's just a game. I have fun just pushing my toy soldiers around and rolling dice .Any outbursts I have are clearly directed at the troops who let me down, if I ever get edgy. Or planning on throwing the dice in the fire in front of all the others as a lesson (its both cathartic and seems to work).

[Aluinn]

I agree with those who said you should absolutely not feel bad about. For one thing, that's an extremely narrow situation where challenging is so advantageous as to yield you 3 VP; there's no rationality behind getting upset about the rule in general because a very rare situation came up where it could swing a game, and anyway I can't entirely see how it's different from saying "shooting is cheap" because e.g. you shot the Overlord and unit off the board instead.

For another thing, he apparently didn't have mindshackle scarabs, otherwise he would have likely laughed while your GD punched himself in the face, which is his fault, because they're good enough to make room in your list for by dropping other things for, especially on a Warlord. In fact, they're widely acknowledged to be one of the more powerful wargear options in the game. And he chose not to use them.

Finally, I don't see how that situation would have gone all that much differently with no challenge rule. The only situation where it really would is one in which the Immortals with the Warlord Overlord (twice the lord! ) happened to deal the crucial wound to your GD, which is just a little bit unlikely: In other words, it's either him fighting your GD with his Overlord, or him fighting your GD with his Overlord and a few Immortals, or, if he declined, you killing some Immortals then fighting his Overlord; he's probably going to lose either way (without mindshackle scarabs), and either way it was either your good positioning, his poor positioning, or some random event not connected to challenging, or any/all of those, that lost him the unit, including the character, not the challenge rule.

Your opponent was being completely unreasonable and you shouldn't put up with someone throwing a tantrum to gain an advantage; if he is your friend, just call him on it in as nice a way as possible, e.g. by just making the above arguments. Certainly don't sink to his level and get all emotional about it or contribute to the development of a shouting match, but explain why you don't think there's any problem and, if he can't move on, he's just deciding to be a jerk and you should walk away until he decides not to be a jerk. It's a rule he's perfectly aware of (by his own comments), but he didn't ask you at the start of the game if you'd agree to houserule it away, which would be the mature way to deal with it for anyone who truly thought it was so bad. In truth, though, it sounds like he was just being a WAAC gamer of nearly the worst kind, and was only arguing it because a situation came up where it hurt him.

[Desalbert]

Wow, that's brutal. Really though, if he let a greater daemon with such a warlord trait (something which he was fully aware of) get into melee with his warlord, when he had the game in the bag, then he deserves the loss. In regards to things getting heated, that can happen. How was your attitude while your daemons where getting shot up? If you where wreaking his game while he won, he would feel justified in such a poor attitude. If you where cool, he might just be having a rough week. But such reasons are why I try to keep cheery even when my guys are getting gunned down, it's just a game. I have fun just pushing my toy soldiers around and rolling dice .Any outbursts I have are clearly directed at the troops who let me down, if I ever get edgy. Or planning on throwing the dice in the fire in front of all the others as a lesson (its both cathartic and seems to work).

I will admit I made a few too many off-hand (casual, but probably noticeable) comments about getting ripped up in shooting/ close combat difficulties, the craziness of snapfire wrecking my fiends of slaanesh and the exile ray blasting my chaos lord specifically (randomly allocated) out of the game. So, yes, I could have had a better attitude and that is part of this whole problem. What I need to be is more like you, good sir, and here, I have learned my lesson.

Also I should note that we stopped the game and left it on the table in our playing area, 'cause we both got too heated. So the game sits at turn 5 with most of the units decimated and the VP totals still in doubt. The combat between the Lord and the Immortals versus the Lord of Change has yet to go in the books-- so, honestly, in an effort to throw him a bone and mend the fences I'll probably just elect not to challenge this time, but remind him I'm coming for the jugular next time I get the chance with a challenge. In any case, I agree with the above poster as well in that, the combat will likely still go my way (with a few Victory points to salvage) to try and pull for the win regardless of the challenge.

[Hendarion]

he suggested I was being a bit of a jerk because I had quote "no chance of winning the game if I didnt do this" and further that he had "no chance of beating me one-on-one with either the overlord or the immortals

That's the point of fielding and charging with a Greater Daemon. Many units won't have a single chance. If you don't want to lose them, then you should make sure not to get in CC with it. Imo totally bad argument he brought up, because that is what strong monsters always will do - eat simple units.

[Gorbad Ironclaw]

Its right there in the rules, there wasnt anything obscure or surprising about what you did, nor any sort of questionable reading of the rules to reach the challenge or anything like that so I dont think you should feel bad for it.

Now you might be ablebto make an argument for that the rules shouldnt have been there in the first place or that they dont do their stated aim/ just add a weird metagaming element to it. I dont think they work very well in Warhammer at all, its just an accepted metagame element of combat, and Im not sure that adding to 40k will give better results but its there so #shrug# He is just going to have to deal with it.

[hazmiter]

Challenges are fun, I love them, even if I lose the challenge, its fun.
It's very dismal that your opponent was so upset, but you are well within you rights to issue that challenge.
And yeah, unbalanced match up, half your army arrives turn one and the rest in smatterings.

[Lord Squidar]

just one more thing...

If someone who is a close mate throws a hissy fit (hopes thats a word in regular english) there are two ways to handle it. I've tried both. 1. is to have a bigger hissy fit than he is, and get up in his face, which generally leads to a blow out over little plastic dudemens. Not cool. 2. is to just chill, wait for him to calm down, and point out that he is infact being a whiney girl, and its not as cool as it sounds, and suggest to try carry on. This works, but you have to do it calmly with a cheeky grin.