Gotchahammer and Social Contract

[Kramer]

On 9/5/2020 at 2:49 PM, Overread said:

I think once you're at AoS reminders that's the kind of thing that if someone wants they should bring themselves. It's far more detail and information and its designed to remind not inform. So its built around having some familiarity at least with the army in general. 

Oh I know. But I’m fascinated by the idea of a cheat sheet hand out for you opponent including some core mechanics. And just curious where that line is? 

 

[Overread]

32 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Oh I know. But I’m fascinated by the idea of a cheat sheet hand out for you opponent including some core mechanics. And just curious where that line is? 

 

The line depends on the game really. For a pickup game or tournament most people would not expect to get handed the battletome in short format. They'd want basic unit upgrades, what units you've taken and might ask about stats during the game if there are any they are unsure of etc... Remember your army list likely also lists your allegiance ability options and such as well. 

Basically they are looking to play rather than pause and spend 10mins reading over how your army works. 

 

Cheat-Sheets also tend to be more reminders and as such can be confusing to someone who hasn't read the battletome already, where a touch more detail might be present. Otherwise if the sheet is identical then they can just read the battletome. 

 

 

I would also note that sometimes people can be weary of very overly detailed "reference sheets that aren't part of the core material (book or app) because they wonder if you're using it to cheat. OF course this is rare, but can happen if someone has tried it on before. Even if the cheat was an accidental error or a stat that got updated that hasn't been added to the sheet etc.. 

[Nos]

It's not reasonable to expect someone to know the rules of an army they dont collect which they can only know through 

A) Playing against said armies for literally *tens of hours*

Or

B) Buying a book for 25 quid

It's by far one of the most stupid aspects of GW's approach to rules/balance 

[Kadeton]

On 9/5/2020 at 8:49 PM, Overread said:

I think once you're at AoS reminders that's the kind of thing that if someone wants they should bring themselves.

I'm a bit baffled by this. Are you saying that the player who wants AoS Reminders-style info on your army should print out their own reminder sheets for every other army at the tournament, on the off-chance they get matched up against them? "Bringing it yourself" doesn't seem at all practical.

Just printing off two copies of your own AoS Reminders sheet and handing one to your opponent seems way more reasonable.

[Sleboda]

8 hours ago, Nos said:

It's not reasonable to expect someone to know the rules of an army they dont collect which they can only know through 

A) Playing against said armies for literally *tens of hours*

Or

B) Buying a book for 25 quid

It's by far one of the most stupid aspects of GW's approach to rules/balance 

I think tournament settings are the exception here. By definition, a tournament is a competition aimed at determining the "best" participants. When your tournament is for a game, which means there are rules to know in order to play at all, let alone at the highest level, it is entirely reasonable to expect the competitors to have knowledge of those rules. Having more knowledge makes you a stronger competitor.

Do some people attend tournaments with the erroneous idea that they are not competitors? Sure, but that's on them not understanding the nature of the activity, not something to hold against those who are there with full knowledge of what the event is.

 

To put it another way, you wouldn't expect a football team that has not studied the game tape of the other teams in the league to do as well as a team that put in the work to study the tape of the other competitors. We generally laud those people who study and learn. Players in a Warhammer tournament who put in the work should be commended, while those who turn up expecting to use their lack of knowledge as an excuse to get a pass might reasonably be less well regarded.

 

Standard Note: this is not a post about sportsmanship or being a ****** at the table or winning by tricks and cheats. This is just a refutation of the idea that it's unreasonable to expect others at a tournament to have put in the effort to learn about the competition.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Sleboda

[The World Tree]

7 hours ago, Kadeton said:

I'm a bit baffled by this. Are you saying that the player who wants AoS Reminders-style info on your army should print out their own reminder sheets for every other army at the tournament, on the off-chance they get matched up against them? "Bringing it yourself" doesn't seem at all practical.

Just printing off two copies of your own AoS Reminders sheet and handing one to your opponent seems way more reasonable.

I don't think it should be the expectation that you do this (also, bad for the environment!). 

Most people don't tend to want to know every detail, more like top level highlights and then ask for relevant info when it is relevant (eg. what is your maximum threat range)

[Overread]

9 hours ago, Kadeton said:

I'm a bit baffled by this. Are you saying that the player who wants AoS Reminders-style info on your army should print out their own reminder sheets for every other army at the tournament, on the off-chance they get matched up against them? "Bringing it yourself" doesn't seem at all practical.

Just printing off two copies of your own AoS Reminders sheet and handing one to your opponent seems way more reasonable.

Games basically expect you to bring your battletome/codex for your army for reference and an army list. The army list should detail any upgrades units and the army in general has and, of course, what units it has. 

Beyond that any more detailed information is optional. The thing is things like "reminder sheets" and such can be great, but if a person isn't used to reading them for a specific army or isn't that familiar with an army to start with, a reminder sheet can be too much information at once in an unfamiliar format. So they might well find it easier to read the Battletome itself if they want more detailed information. 

Thing is at a tournament players don't expect to pause for a battletome reading; you're expected to be familiar with other armies and the game in general. So if you wanted a detailed breakdown of every army you'd be expected to bring it yourself in a format you're familiar with. 

[Kadeton]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

Games basically expect you to bring your battletome/codex for your army for reference and an army list. The army list should detail any upgrades units and the army in general has and, of course, what units it has. 

Beyond that any more detailed information is optional. The thing is things like "reminder sheets" and such can be great, but if a person isn't used to reading them for a specific army or isn't that familiar with an army to start with, a reminder sheet can be too much information at once in an unfamiliar format. So they might well find it easier to read the Battletome itself if they want more detailed information. 

Thing is at a tournament players don't expect to pause for a battletome reading; you're expected to be familiar with other armies and the game in general. So if you wanted a detailed breakdown of every army you'd be expected to bring it yourself in a format you're familiar with. 

Just checking that I'm understanding what you're saying. The options you're offering your opponent are either:

• No information whatsoever except the names of units and upgrades; or
• Your entire Battletome, which you won't allow them the time to read.

Is that right?

[Overread]

In any event all information in the Battletome is considered "open knowledge". If your opponent wants to know it there are no barriers to stop them. My point isn't that you are denying them information, just that you are not expected to bring a detailed summary document of your army to the game. Your "army document" is your Battletome. 

At the same time in a competitive event you don't expect your opponent to need to read your tome cover to cover. It's there for checking stats,  checking abilities, confirming the wording on a spell etc... Warscroll cards serve the very same function, though as GW doesn't make them constantly available they can be a bit iffy on if you can get them to use. Which is why events don't mandate them. You can be sure if GW sorts out its card stock supply issues and Warscroll cards became freely sold then many events might start to mandate them to speed up referencing. 

[Kadeton]

But we're not talking about what's mandated in tournament rules, as far as I'm aware. We're talking about what information it's reasonable and sensible to give your opponent within the spirit of good sportsmanship. What you have to give your opponent is written down in black and white, but what you seem to be saying is that there is no reason to give your opponent any information that you're not specifically forced to.

I guess I'm just coming at the question from completely the opposite direction: There's no reason not to give your opponent any information you have available. If they choose not to use it, or they don't understand it, fine - at least you made an attempt.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Kadeton

[TheCovenLord]

I always disclose the rules that my army possess. Depending on the type of match (more competitive or less competitive) I will either disclose HOW I make use of the rules or not. In a more competitive environment I will be less forthcoming with exactly HOW I will use the rules I disclose. I am not speaking of gotcha moments but more of overall strategy. If my units can teleport I will tell you. They teleport with X restrictions in X phase. What you make of that and how I might use that is on you to figure out. This is particularly relevant in a competitive setting (weekend tournies).

 

If it is less competitive. I will be more chatty and often warn opponents if I see a major blunder or offer a gentle reminder if they seem to have forgotten key rules of my force so they can potentially avoid bad feeling moments. 

 

 

Its a spectrum for me. But I always disclose the exact wording of the rules and at the very least I ask if the opponent wants to know what my armies rules are. If they decline that's also on them and I respect the decision. 

 

Edited September 10, 2020 by TheCovenLord