Friendly games, ethics question

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xEBqr5nZ-iY

 

My feelings are for new or newish rules people may reasonably be unaware of, I will warn them.

 

For a rule or ability that’s been around for a while, unless they’re a new player, I do not see any need to warn my opponent.

[Marshal Mittens]

There are a ton of armies. Most have lots of sub factions with special rules. I think its common courtesy to go over your army before the game, including functions and special tricks.

[tychobi]

Gotcha is always bad sportsmanship.  I always err on the side of kindness and tell my opponent about combos and Strats ahead of time that they should watch out for.  9th is an opaque mess designed to not be fully absorbed by any one person. I feel like it the only responsible way. 

 

Not to mention there is no honour or education in winning vs an opponent who made a bad call due to ignorance.  I want to beat my opponents at their best, silly mistakes and lapses are nothing to hang a hat on and mar the shared narrative.  Elevate you opponents and you elevate yourself.  This is the way.  

[Slave to Darkness]

Could be an old player who has not yet encountered 'X' faction. I know plenty of 1st ed vets who have never played against certain armies. Plus, think about if someone did a gotcha move to you, would feel crap wouldnt it?

[Cactus]

A YouTube link is not a question. What are you asking?

[Rik Lightstar]

There is absolutely zero pleasure for me in winning a game by exploiting the fact the other player doesn't know relevant rules. I don't do it, and further I'll actively check that they understand how a rule would work if they seem to be make a decision that could be uninformed.

 

I'd rather lose and have played an enjoyable game than win through my opponent's ignorance of a rule.

 

This does however work on a reciprocal basis. If my opponent withholds information to create "gotcha moments" on more than one occasion then the gloves are off and I don't expect to supply them with any information at all. I'll also most likely do my best to play other people in future.

 

All of this is obviously refers to "open information", in a game system like Star Wars Legion which features a hand of Command Cards that should be kept secret until used then I wouldn't explain the cards until/unless I played them.

 

Rik

[Slave to Darkness]

As your post is called 'friendly games' Id say be open and explain stuff, if its a tourny game then crush them, burn their home and salt the earth. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Could be an old player who has not yet encountered 'X' faction. I know plenty of 1st ed vets who have never played against certain armies. Plus, think about if someone did a gotcha move to you, would feel crap wouldnt it?

would feel no more crap to me, than my opponent getting absolutely great rolls and me getting absolutely trash roles.

It’s just part of the game, and real battle you might not know every trick your enemy had trained for.

[MegaVolt87]

If its a friendly game, it should be an open game. If its tourny prep or high level comp play then yes its up to the other guy to know your army as well as theirs. Its pretty clear cut. 

[Rik Lightstar]

 

Could be an old player who has not yet encountered 'X' faction. I know plenty of 1st ed vets who have never played against certain armies. Plus, think about if someone did a gotcha move to you, would feel crap wouldnt it?

would feel no more crap to me, than my opponent getting absolutely great rolls and me getting absolutely trash roles.

It’s just part of the game, and real battle you might not know every trick your enemy had trained for.

 

 

Two points from what you've just said:

• The difference between statistically unlikely dice outcomes and not telling your opponent something relevant is that dice outcomes are random the other is a choice you are making. When you make a behavioural choice to create a situation that's on you, a better analogy would be using weighted dice.
• In a real battle people don't take turns to shoot each other, nor do generals arrive with forces of approximately even value. I don't see what "real battles" have to do with anything at all when we're playing tabletop games with our man-dollies.

 The entire initial premise of your thread is that it is a "Friendly Game", yet you don't appear to believe that both players enjoying the game is desired result. Unless you've discovered some secret underground 40k circuit where thousands or millions of dollars are changing hands for victory on the tabletop then I'd take a long hard look at what you're actually trying to get out of the experience.

 

Rik

[Valkyrion]

There's friendly games, competitive games and tournament games, or there is to me at any rate. 

 

A friendly game is one of us trying something new; be it a new codex, playstyle (e.g Nidzilla or Horde), new mission etc.

In these games, when my opponent forgets to declare their Synaptic Imperative when he should, I let him pick one when he remembers, or if a stratagem that should be used at the start of the charge phase is instead used when he picks his third unit to charge I'd let it go.

 

In a competitive game, I wouldn't let him go back and pick his Imperative, but I'd let him have the charge stratagem, because it's really just a difference in language, not outcome. 

It's usually apparent which units are going to charge, and as each stratagem has a variation on 'use this when you select a unit to fight' or 'use this at the start of...', 'use this at the end of...' etc, it's very easy to forget which strat should be used when.

 

In a tournament game I'd hand my opponent my list and answer any questions he asked, but I'd not go out of my way to explain anything.

I'd make it clear what Chapter Tactics I was using, and what model is what, but I'd not do a deep dive into the stratagems.

During the game I might ask 'have you anything that can turn off overwatch?' or 'that tasty unit out in the open begging me to shoot it - do you have an I AM INVINCIBLE stratagem you're about to play on them?' but not pre game, and if I get gotcha'd then so be it. I can't know everything. 

 

I think the most important thing to tell your opponent is if something weird is ObSec that they wouldn't normally expect.  I think that's fair. 

[Slave to Darkness]

If they play Primaris, Ultras in particular, dont tell them anything.

 

As for war not being fair, I totally agree with you, but that goes against balancing the game as well though, you have even said yourself that Guard aint hitting the spot for you, I cant remember if that was due to minis being poop or the rules themselves, but if it was due to bad rules and everything else is first turn tabling you with something stupid like Grots outgunning you... See where this is going?

 

Dont get me wrong Im not saying your wrong by any means, I dont know your local gamers, I know plenty of ass hat gamers who fancy themselves as top tier tourny gamers who rolfstomp the new kids with the new hot:cuss armys and if I can pull a fast one on them guys I know I will sleep soundly at night (hell I may even sleep better). 

 

Id say assess what kind of gamer you are up against, if its a WAAC muppet then go all in (hell dreadsock them as well on the way out, Id even pay for pictures) if not then go by my gaming groups philosophy of 'be a dude not a dick'. 

 

 

++EDIT++

 

Hope you get your spark back with the Guard, sucks when you loose interest with a faction. I pray to the gods for both of our sakes the next dex is a banger. 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Slave to Darkness

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

 

Could be an old player who has not yet encountered 'X' faction. I know plenty of 1st ed vets who have never played against certain armies. Plus, think about if someone did a gotcha move to you, would feel crap wouldnt it?

would feel no more crap to me, than my opponent getting absolutely great rolls and me getting absolutely trash roles.

It’s just part of the game, and real battle you might not know every trick your enemy had trained for.

Two points from what you've just said:

• The difference between statistically unlikely dice outcomes and not telling your opponent something relevant is that dice outcomes are random the other is a choice you are making. When you make a behavioural choice to create a situation that's on you, a better analogy would be using weighted dice.
• In a real battle people don't take turns to shoot each other, nor do generals arrive with forces of approximately even value. I don't see what "real battles" have to do with anything at all when we're playing tabletop games with our man-dollies.

The entire initial premise of your thread is that it is a "Friendly Game", yet you don't appear to believe that both players enjoying the game is desired result. Unless you've discovered some secret underground 40k circuit where thousands or millions of dollars are changing hands for victory on the tabletop then I'd take a long hard look at what you're actually trying to get out of the experience.

 

Rik

1. Using weighted dice is cheating. What I said is simply not babying an opponent.

New player, or new rule/ability, sure I’ll warn them or question if it’s a move they really want to make, but not saying anything is not cheating by any measure. If you use weighted dice in a tournament you get kicked out, if you don’t warn an opponent at a tournament you’re simply increasing the odds of you winning. That’s the difference.

2. You’re right but there’s no way to realistically do things simultaneously for both sides and all of your units, it’s an abstraction.

In sports even friendly games, people don’t warn each other about trick plays, in fact in both cases warning the other person pretty much completely defeats the purpose of the play.

 

Should I also warn my opponent they moved their infantry into range and LoS of my anti-hoard weapon? Or their tank into danger from my AT weapons?

It’s not my job to hand hold an opponent and spoon feed them their tactics, and yes if you tell them about X stratagem or Y special ability they’re likely to change tactics (though that could be a strategy in and of itself.)

 

This is part of why I don’t like stratagems, I can’t remember all of my marine strats let alone all my guard abilities, and strats and what not for every other army out there.

My brother used fire and fade or whatever it’s called in my first game back in the hobby, it sucked that he could pop in and out of cover to shoot me, but that’s how the game goes.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

If they play Primaris, Ultras in particular, dont tell them anything.

 

As for war not being fair, I totally agree with you, but that goes against balancing the game as well though, you have even said yourself that Guard aint hitting the spot for you, I cant remember if that was due to minis being poop or the rules themselves, but if it was due to bad rules and everything else is first turn tabling you with something stupid like Grots outgunning you... See where this is going?

 

Dont get me wrong Im not saying your wrong by any means, I dont know your local gamers, I know plenty of ass hat gamers who fancy themselves as top tier tourny gamers who rolfstomp the new kids with the new hot:cuss armys and if I can pull a fast one on them guys I know I will sleep soundly at night (hell I may even sleep better).

 

Id say assess what kind of gamer you are up against, if its a WAAC muppet then go all in (hell dreadsock them as well on the way out, Id even pay for pictures) if not then go by my gaming groups philosophy of 'be a dude not a dick'.

 

 

++EDIT++

 

Hope you get your spark back with the Guard, sucks when you loose interest with a faction. I pray to the gods for both of our sakes the next dex is a banger.

mostly the aesthetics is what is killing it for me in regards to guard.

I’m actually playing them today against some WS. Fully expecting to get rolled, but don’t care, my orlock veteran squad is super cool and I can’t wait to use them again. (I am considering using the orlock buggies as scout sentinels when I have some disposable income) And I’m super stoked for Kasrkin models to be returning.

 

About the only rule that actively turns me off about guard is the taurox prime use limitations, and scions being a separate subfaction completely(came back to the hobby with my guard and bought the scion start collecting box thinking they worked the same as storm troopers/Kasrkin. Was disappointed I wasted the money and didn’t like the scion sculpts, but I should have looked into things more. My bad, just like if I expect to be aware of every trick a player can pull, then it’s on me, to make myself aware of that, and it’s not on my opponent to baby me.)

 

War is not fair, and balanced rules are the goal for a war game, but there will inevitably be variables that make things unfair. Guard vs custodes can be viewed unfair for many. Losing 1 custodian is a big loss compared to losing 1 guardsmen. That could be viewed as unfair, but a single custodian HQ being able to wreck a whole squad of guard in melee reliably without taking a wound could be viewed as unfair.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

When it comes to players who are fairly experienced and established in the game/edition I view such warnings as showing your hand in poker, or telling your opponent what play you’re running in football.

 

I don’t see a clear way to define what stratagems or abilities warrant a ‘warning’ to an opponent. Does a niche but powerful stratagem you’ve only used once in a dozen games warrant a warning? What about common stratagems you use nearly every game but are less powerful individually? Do they warrant a warning?

Edited May 25, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Rogue]

I think trick plays are different. Take the NFL, for example - whilst a team might produce something unusual, like the Philly Special, they're still operating within rules that are the same for both sides. Their opponents could run the exact same play if they wanted to.

 

A better analogy for stratagems (and unit special rules in general) would be a team having a player with physical capabilities beyond the normal. Switching examples, someone like New Zealand's Jonah Lomu, in rugby union. His sheer size and speed made him almost unplayable for a time, but it wasn't as if other teams could just field their own Jonah to balance out the game.

 

When he first appeared on the scene, teams had no answer at all. Once they'd seen him in action for a while, they began to create counters, but he still gave NZ a big advantage.

 

On the initial topic, my own preference is the challenge of beating my opponent, even though he knows what my army can do. If my 'trick play' only works because I didn't tell him about it, all I've discovered is that my codex has some powerful combinations. But that tells me nothing about me as a player.

 

Now, there might be times when I tell my opponent everything that a unit can do, but don't provide details of exactly how I intend to use said unit. That's the difference, for me. The rules should be open and transparent; what I plan to do with those rules can be a surprise, even in a friendly game.

[Azekai]

Should I also warn my opponent they moved their infantry into range and LoS of my anti-hoard weapon? Or their tank into danger from my AT weapons?

It’s not my job to hand hold an opponent and spoon feed them their tactics, and yes if you tell them about X stratagem or Y special ability they’re likely to change tactics (though that could be a strategy in and of itself.)

 

You seem like a blast to play against.

 

Fueling the issue is an indirect problem not stated by the OP: there is fairly massive mental load imposed by playing current ed. 40k. There is a lot to track, and a mind-boggling number of interactions between factions rules, unit rules, and stratagems. It is better to work through those interactions together, rather than try to use specialized meta-game knowledge against your opponent.

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Azekai

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

Should I also warn my opponent they moved their infantry into range and LoS of my anti-hoard weapon? Or their tank into danger from my AT weapons?It’s not my job to hand hold an opponent and spoon feed them their tactics, and yes if you tell them about X stratagem or Y special ability they’re likely to change tactics (though that could be a strategy in and of itself.)

 

You seem like a blast to play against.

 

Fueling the problem is an indirect problem not stated by the OP: there is fairly massive mental load imposed by playing current ed. 40k. There is a lot to track, and a mind-boggling number of interactions between factions rules, unit rules, and stratagems. It is better to work through those interactions together, rather than try to use specialized meta-game knowledge against your opponent.

never had a complaint, and have regular opponents

I just treat adults like adults.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I think trick plays are different. Take the NFL, for example - whilst a team might produce something unusual, like the Philly Special, they're still operating within rules that are the same for both sides. Their opponents could run the exact same play if they wanted to.

 

A better analogy for stratagems (and unit special rules in general) would be a team having a player with physical capabilities beyond the normal. Switching examples, someone like New Zealand's Jonah Lomu, in rugby union. His sheer size and speed made him almost unplayable for a time, but it wasn't as if other teams could just field their own Jonah to balance out the game.

 

When he first appeared on the scene, teams had no answer at all. Once they'd seen him in action for a while, they began to create counters, but he still gave NZ a big advantage.

 

On the initial topic, my own preference is the challenge of beating my opponent, even though he knows what my army can do. If my 'trick play' only works because I didn't tell him about it, all I've discovered is that my codex has some powerful combinations. But that tells me nothing about me as a player.

 

Now, there might be times when I tell my opponent everything that a unit can do, but don't provide details of exactly how I intend to use said unit. That's the difference, for me. The rules should be open and transparent; what I plan to do with those rules can be a surprise, even in a friendly game.

would you feel like you outplayed your opponent if they warned you about an ability or stratagem when they saw you make a move that would really hurt you?

If your opponent is spoon feeding you moves not to make are you out playing them?

So on the flip side shouldn’t you give them the opportunity to actually outplay you?

 

And these strats are part of how you outplay an opponent.

[Rogue]

Should I tell my opponent that he's moved his infantry within 24" of my autogun neophytes. Maybe, maybe not - if I've already ensured he knows my basic guns are 24", then he's free to play as he wants.

 

Should I tell him that I can extend the range to 30" via a stratagem, so his carefully measured 26" gap is meaningless? Probably, yes, because he's playing without complete information. And 40k is a war game, not a memory test.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Should I tell my opponent that he's moved his infantry within 24" of my autogun neophytes. Maybe, maybe not - if I've already ensured he knows my basic guns are 24", then he's free to play as he wants.

 

Should I tell him that I can extend the range to 30" via a stratagem, so his carefully measured 26" gap is meaningless? Probably, yes, because he's playing without complete information. And 40k is a war game, not a memory test.

its not a memory test but if the opponent doesn’t ask, that’s on them.

I fully support being honest if an opponent asks a question about a unit, or rules.

But if they don’t care enough to ask, I don’t care enough to volunteer the information.

[gideon stargreave]

In the groups I play in (or would if I hadn't emigrated) we would remind our opponents about stuff all the time.

Aren't you going to cast that neat spell again? You forgot to declare charges. Etc.

Strength, honor and beer!

[Antarius]

I'm not trying to be snarky at all here, but why are you asking this question to begin with, OP? I'm asking because you mostly seem to want to tell others that you already have the correct answer and you're not going to change your mind about it?

Again, I'm by no means trying to be unfriendly, it just seems like you're not getting the response you're looking for and it might have to do with the framing of the issue. Of course, it might also just be down to disagreements. For the record, I do think I disagree with your stance, but I'm not sure how relevant that really is, because I'm not quite sure what you want from the thread.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

In the groups I play in (or would if I hadn't emigrated) we would remind our opponents about stuff all the time.

Aren't you going to cast that neat spell again? You forgot to declare charges. Etc.

Strength, honor and beer!

I see that as a bit different than, revealing information that could cause an opponent to make significant changes to how they play.

 

A simple ‘oh you didn’t shoot with that unit. Was that intentional?’

Is making sure an opponent isn’t making silly mistakes and is playing up to their maximum ability.

 

Questioning a move because they don’t realize it puts them in danger is hand holding imho, and in that case no one is outplaying anyone or no one is showing better general-ship.

[BluejayJunior]

 

In the groups I play in (or would if I hadn't emigrated) we would remind our opponents about stuff all the time.

Aren't you going to cast that neat spell again? You forgot to declare charges. Etc.

Strength, honor and beer!

I see that as a bit different than, revealing information that could cause an opponent to make significant changes to how they play.

 

A simple ‘oh you didn’t shoot with that unit. Was that intentional?’

Is making sure an opponent isn’t making silly mistakes and is playing up to their maximum ability.

 

Questioning a move because they don’t realize it puts them in danger is hand holding imho, and in that case no one is outplaying anyone or no one is showing better general-ship.

 

One could argue that forgetting about Auspex Scan is a silly mistake and reminding them you have it is just letting them play to their maximum ability. 

There is a lot of nuance in this whole debate. It's hard to make hard and fast "rules" for when you should and shouldn't do it. It depends on the type of game, the actual situation in play, how often you are your opponent have played each other, how often you've played against the faction. 

I lean much more towards reminding my opponents about my tricks so they make an informed decision. I play mostly friendly games and don't want anyone to feel cheated out of a win because they forgot something. In those games, I'd rather have a fun game than win. In a tournament, I'd probably still be nice about it, but wouldn't hold it against anyone if they didn't remind people of their tricks.