I know, I didn't think it was possible- but they are!
GW decided to FAQ my lovely dudes into 5th coherency and all is right with my world (for the most part).
Now I have to revisit my list for Monday... cause Tank Hunting Cyclone Missile Termies need to be on it.
Or maybe some other fabulous version of death... I have options!
Showing posts with label rules. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rules. Show all posts
Friday, January 14, 2011
Monday, October 18, 2010
[40K] A Newer Player's Q's: Options
I have a couple sample lists finally. A buddy from the game store helped me get started- I was pretty much missing the point when trying to build my lists and was coming way -way- WAY under. I simply didn't understand or know how to operate all the dang options and wargear BT present.
Once I got that out of the way, there came the question of- what STYLE list did I want to run?
I personally see several options- a pure "fluff" list with chaplains, holy sigils, blessings, and so on; a foot list; a fast list; and a small but mighty combination list. I'm sure there are others, or better twists on those- but that's what I see.
For my sample list, I really wanted to go with the fluff- that's why I like the Black Templar so much. They're so incredibly evocative and offer so many options for naming, details and thoughtful touches. I chose a chaplain for my HQ and worked the rest of the list from there.
Before I share my lists- onto the questions. How do you handle picking options or wargear for your armies? Do you try to make things fit with your theme, or effectiveness, or some combination thereof? Do you have a lot of choices, or are you stuck with things that you don't like? Am I crazy, or is 100 points of wargear way to friggin much?!?!?!?!?!
------------------------------------------------------
OH, I am so glad I tried to post this!
I just went through typing out the whole list I came up with (with my friend's help)- I was pretty excited about the ideas and options I had in front of me- when I realized...
I forgot The Emperor's Champion.
Crap.
I'll be back later today with a legal list, I swear!
Once I got that out of the way, there came the question of- what STYLE list did I want to run?
I personally see several options- a pure "fluff" list with chaplains, holy sigils, blessings, and so on; a foot list; a fast list; and a small but mighty combination list. I'm sure there are others, or better twists on those- but that's what I see.
For my sample list, I really wanted to go with the fluff- that's why I like the Black Templar so much. They're so incredibly evocative and offer so many options for naming, details and thoughtful touches. I chose a chaplain for my HQ and worked the rest of the list from there.
Before I share my lists- onto the questions. How do you handle picking options or wargear for your armies? Do you try to make things fit with your theme, or effectiveness, or some combination thereof? Do you have a lot of choices, or are you stuck with things that you don't like? Am I crazy, or is 100 points of wargear way to friggin much?!?!?!?!?!
------------------------------------------------------
OH, I am so glad I tried to post this!
I just went through typing out the whole list I came up with (with my friend's help)- I was pretty excited about the ideas and options I had in front of me- when I realized...
I forgot The Emperor's Champion.
Crap.
I'll be back later today with a legal list, I swear!
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Game Breakers
One of the guys that hangs out at my FLGS is pretty well known for finding ways to legally "break" any game he is playing.
A recent case in point involved the following: During a planned, published adventure, buying an ox from the supply table, killing/sacrificing it, and then re-animating it so as to have a Zombie Ox for use in combat. (And rendered the fighter of the party useless in the works.)
His alignment and diety situations were such that this was all totally legal and in no way affected his moral standing nor his ability to gain XP for the adventure.
He liked the idea so much that he did it again in another adventure in the same system (because you don't keep equipment from session to session in the organized play league).
He also formerly ran a droid in one of the Star Wars games where he bought skill chips for any possible scenario, and left all the other PCs twiddling their thumbs.
Sometimes this type of behavior is funny- and the group loves it. Other times it is truly annoying and makes playing NO FUN. Most of the time, it's the response of the GM that bothers me.
The mentality of "well, it's legal so I must allow it" really aggravates me. I like games where GMs and players work together to make things fun, and I don't mind an occasional "here's why I think this might be appropriate" kind of good natured arguement. But when it comes to rules, whether something is allowed, or making the game a sham of what it should be, I'm firmly in the "I'm the GM and I say NO" camp.
Some folks are not good at saying no to other people. Others are so intent on "let's have a good time" that refusing something that is legal (but potentially game breaking) is out of their mindset.
I played with a guy recently who was unintentionally coming close to breaking the game we were in. He kept trying to use OOC knowledge in character and kept justifying it off through very shaky reasoning. The GM in question called him on it several times in very subtle (but effective) ways. The player continued in some of this behavior by asking questions that he really should not have been asking to another player in the game. The other player was doing a pretty good job of avoiding the questions, but my character found the whole thing creepy and told off the offending character.
I knew this player would be a little problematic. He's young and just learning the social aspects of gaming, and still hasn't outgrown the "look what I can do" mentality. He really has not had a lot of opportunity to roleplay (most of his experience has been in miniatures) and so many of the lines between personal knowledge and character knowledge have yet to be drawn. Despite all this, he's a good and willing kid, and I don't mind helping him learn - other people helped me learn when I was in his position.
The difference between these examples, I think, is intent. The first guy INTENDS to to find ways to break the system- and in many cases, takes pleasure in it. The second guy doesn't know better.
There's also a difference in response- the first guy has gotten away with quite a bit because of GMs who don't want to say no, or feel they can't. The second guy has a GM who is not afraid to tell him "stop doing that; it's annoying".
I actively look for GMs that will say no, and avoid the known game breakers as often as possible.
A recent case in point involved the following: During a planned, published adventure, buying an ox from the supply table, killing/sacrificing it, and then re-animating it so as to have a Zombie Ox for use in combat. (And rendered the fighter of the party useless in the works.)
His alignment and diety situations were such that this was all totally legal and in no way affected his moral standing nor his ability to gain XP for the adventure.
He liked the idea so much that he did it again in another adventure in the same system (because you don't keep equipment from session to session in the organized play league).
He also formerly ran a droid in one of the Star Wars games where he bought skill chips for any possible scenario, and left all the other PCs twiddling their thumbs.
Sometimes this type of behavior is funny- and the group loves it. Other times it is truly annoying and makes playing NO FUN. Most of the time, it's the response of the GM that bothers me.
The mentality of "well, it's legal so I must allow it" really aggravates me. I like games where GMs and players work together to make things fun, and I don't mind an occasional "here's why I think this might be appropriate" kind of good natured arguement. But when it comes to rules, whether something is allowed, or making the game a sham of what it should be, I'm firmly in the "I'm the GM and I say NO" camp.
Some folks are not good at saying no to other people. Others are so intent on "let's have a good time" that refusing something that is legal (but potentially game breaking) is out of their mindset.
I played with a guy recently who was unintentionally coming close to breaking the game we were in. He kept trying to use OOC knowledge in character and kept justifying it off through very shaky reasoning. The GM in question called him on it several times in very subtle (but effective) ways. The player continued in some of this behavior by asking questions that he really should not have been asking to another player in the game. The other player was doing a pretty good job of avoiding the questions, but my character found the whole thing creepy and told off the offending character.
I knew this player would be a little problematic. He's young and just learning the social aspects of gaming, and still hasn't outgrown the "look what I can do" mentality. He really has not had a lot of opportunity to roleplay (most of his experience has been in miniatures) and so many of the lines between personal knowledge and character knowledge have yet to be drawn. Despite all this, he's a good and willing kid, and I don't mind helping him learn - other people helped me learn when I was in his position.
The difference between these examples, I think, is intent. The first guy INTENDS to to find ways to break the system- and in many cases, takes pleasure in it. The second guy doesn't know better.
There's also a difference in response- the first guy has gotten away with quite a bit because of GMs who don't want to say no, or feel they can't. The second guy has a GM who is not afraid to tell him "stop doing that; it's annoying".
I actively look for GMs that will say no, and avoid the known game breakers as often as possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)