How to Deal with That Guy who Ignores Errata

[Slasher956]

well the 1st thing is this from the rule book FAQ

 

 

Official Update Version 1.5

 

So it says its official...if you ignore that then I can ignore the parts of the rulebook I dont like....

 

the 2nd thing is.... the Craftworld Bonesinger... I've brought the model when she 1st came out (3rd Ed?) but the 8th Edition rules have never been put in to a printed book... so I cant play the model???? really

 

3rdly... introduce the player to Infinity by Corvus Belli.... all the rules are free... as are Malifaux & Bushido - By saying you have to pay for the rules  erratas & FAQs for them to be legal that is elitist* and a dig at people who have less money for hobby purchases than themselves! 

 

4th - Chapter Approved... Are they saying that half of CA should be all the erratas reprinted so you end up paying £20+ a year for 80% repeat of last year and 9/10ths of it you dont use?... see point 3 about money

 

 

*by elitist I mean trying to make the game harder /more costly for people to get in to the game & stay current.....

Edited August 16, 2019 by Slasher956

[Marshal Rohr]

Its not elitist to say you need to buy the rules...

[Ishagu]

Yeah that's definitely not unreasonable, even in a pick up game.

 

People overwhelmingly want regular rule balancing and adjustments.

[Finkmilkana]

I mean, ultimately anyone can play with any rules they like, as long as both them and the opponent agree, even insane stuff like “all marine models have 10 wounds”. If this guys is upfront with the fact that he does not want to use the FAQ, then that’s his decision and it has to be respected. Just because the rules are ‚official‘ doesn’t make them inherently the right way to play. It doesn’t even sound like he does it for gaining an advantage, but more out of principle and to avoid the hassle of keeping up with FAQ.

 

That said, no one who wants to use the most current (usually better) version of the rule set has any reason to humor him and play against him.

 

Trying to “teach him a lesson” by utilizing something that, while RAW, was already clearly not intended in the old set of the rules (I.e., that no one sane would actually have used/allowed, even before the clarification) does not seem like a good idea.

It just makes the person doing so seem petty (‘you want to use a different ruleset, so now I try to break the game’), even if that was not the intent. Playing some overpowered, but sane combo that was actually common before the Errata (like 600 points castellans) on the other hand seems like a more sensible approach to convince him that errata are good and make the game more balanced.

[Slasher956]

Its not elitist to say you need to buy the rules...

 

Ok I put rules when I should have said FAQ & Erratas, 

 

 

 

Yeah that's definitely not unreasonable, even in a pick up game.

 

People overwhelmingly want regular rule balancing and adjustments.

 

So you're happy paying for those rule balances & adjustments on top of your codex?  Good for you, personally I like the fact that the errats & FAQs are free it mean I can spend my hobby money (what little I have after the mortgage etc etc :p) on other things .... like the new sisters codex when its released :p

[Marshal Rohr]

 

Its not elitist to say you need to buy the rules...

 

Ok I put rules when I should have said FAQ & Erratas, 

 

 

 

Yeah that's definitely not unreasonable, even in a pick up game.

 

People overwhelmingly want regular rule balancing and adjustments.

 

So you're happy paying for those rule balances & adjustments on top of your codex?  Good for you, personally I like the fact that the errats & FAQs are free it mean I can spend my hobby money (what little I have after the mortgage etc etc ) on other things .... like the new sisters codex when its released

 

 

Fair enough

[Rik Lightstar]

3rdly... introduce the player to Infinity by Corvus Belli.... all the rules are free... as are Malifaux & Bushido - By saying you have to pay for the rules erratas & FAQs for them to be legal that is elitist* and a dig at people who have less money for hobby purchases than themselves!

 

4th - Chapter Approved... Are they saying that half of CA should be all the erratas reprinted so you end up paying £20+ a year for 80% repeat of last year and 9/10ths of it you dont use?... see point 3 about money

 

*by elitist I mean trying to make the game harder /more costly for people to get in to the game & stay current.....

The FAQs and Errata are ALL available for free via GWs website in a high enough resolution that printing them 2 sides to a sheet is still readable. Your only cost is paper and ink IF you want to print them rather than have them on a tablet of some description.

 

Rik

[Slasher956]

 

The FAQs and Errata are ALL available for free via GWs website in a high enough resolution that printing them 2 sides to a sheet is still readable. Your only cost is paper and ink IF you want to print them rather than have them on a tablet of some description.

 

Rik

 

 

Rik... did you read the OP?  where the complaint was 'if you dont pay for it then its not a legal update to the game'  (paraphrased)?

 

I didnt point that post at any answer or person... so my points are in relation to the OP.....

[Torbenos]

I personally have only played without erratas/handbooks/etc so far in 8th edition. It's mostly for the same reason as above have mentioned that I prefer to only need the corebook, my codex and my opponents codex to play rather than have to keep up with various erratas, new rulings and so forth. It's basically for the same reason as people sometimes complain when you might need 3-4 books to play a single army and so forth.

 

In the particular response the OP mentioned though it sounds a bit shady if it's only done sometimes for some form of benefit.

[Rogue]

I can't be the only one who just writes the errata straight into the relevant book, right? No cost, no printing, no carrying around extra stuff - just a pencil note at the right point. Easy.

[MARK0SIAN]

I personally have only played without erratas/handbooks/etc so far in 8th edition. It's mostly for the same reason as above have mentioned that I prefer to only need the corebook, my codex and my opponents codex to play rather than have to keep up with various erratas, new rulings and so forth. It's basically for the same reason as people sometimes complain when you might need 3-4 books to play a single army and so forth.

 

In the particular response the OP mentioned though it sounds a bit shady if it's only done sometimes for some form of benefit.

I can certainly sympathise with wanting to carry around less books etc, 8th has gotten silly for that. But out of curiosity how do you deal with situations where you say you want to do something and your opponent says the FAQ/errata changed that or disallowed it?

[Torbenos]

 

I personally have only played without erratas/handbooks/etc so far in 8th edition. It's mostly for the same reason as above have mentioned that I prefer to only need the corebook, my codex and my opponents codex to play rather than have to keep up with various erratas, new rulings and so forth. It's basically for the same reason as people sometimes complain when you might need 3-4 books to play a single army and so forth.

 

In the particular response the OP mentioned though it sounds a bit shady if it's only done sometimes for some form of benefit.

I can certainly sympathise with wanting to carry around less books etc, 8th has gotten silly for that. But out of curiosity how do you deal with situations where you say you want to do something and your opponent says the FAQ/errata changed that or disallowed it?

 

 

I personally just tend to abide and change over if the opponent wants something different there. It should be said I am in a small town so I only play with four or so different guys so we don't tend to get too stuck into that type of thing. Funnily enough the biggest problem I have run into when it comes to changes is when I gave the points wrong for the ETL since I have not bought any handbooks.

[Kinstryfe]

I think it's important to understand why we have official errata and FAQs, which is so that there's one set of rules for the game to make things like pickup games and tournaments easier. With that in mind, insisting on ignoring them is no different than trying to enforce a house rule. I've gone to new shops where they've walked me through a list of things they changed about the game to the point where the game was substantially different. Good for them as a community for deciding on a bunch of things, but it did ensure that that was my only game played at that store. I do disagree with the point someone made that if he wants to play without errata you have to respect his decision. You have to acknowledge his decision, but there's no requirement to respect it or even treat it as valid. If I had an opponent who wanted to ignore errata, that's fine, but we're going back to the 8th edition index lists without any adjustments. No codexes, since those are just big lists of errata and changes when you think about it, and I don't believe that paying for versus not paying is a legitimate way to measure things. My Kill Team group operates with only about half of us buying each supplement, so I have no idea what that logic would lead to us doing there.

[Plaguecaster]

To be perfectly honest they sound like a complete jerk who cheats for advantage I’d just refuse to play him otherwise just play unbound if they don’t want to stick to the rules . If you play matched play you have to abide by any faq errant regardless of whether you like them or not

[MegaVolt87]

It's not much of an excuse that guy has in the age of smart phones. It takes like two minutes to look up errata, download the file. Do it for him, if he complains still, tell him he is gaming for advantage and not play him OP. People like that are generally not worth your time to have a game with and it's always an unpleasant experience as a result.

[Volt]

You really shouldn't bother with anybody who outright refuses to play with official rules; it's no different from people who refuse to play against FW units... even though they are issued by the same parent company and are as GW as tactical squads. Especially when you consider how important the FAQ's are for fixing some utterly broken builds, I'd be suspicious of anybody refusing to use a FAQ as being a WAACer. Plus you can just use battlescribe as a cheat sheet, as they update their rules with the FAQs.

[Fhanados]

I'm very much of the opinion that it depends on his attitude, and the kind of environment you play in.

 

For me, I play using the Chaos index, the Death Guard and Chaos Space Marines (version 1) datacards, and a photocopy of a few pages in the Death Guard and Chaos Space Marines (again, version 1) codexes for Warlord Traits, Legion traits and Relics. I try to keep up to date through FAQs and Chapter Approved, but I don't own the CA books and I lose track of FAQs pretty often. For me and my friends, this is fine.

 

When I play in a store or a tournament though it's a different matter. I brush up on my FAQs and borrow a codex from a friend. I won't use models I don't have a rules source for, and will adhere to FAQs as much as possible. My games tend to be slower, but they are more "correct".

 

 I wouldn't tell an opponent "I don't use FAQs because they're not official....". Despite that statement being wrong, it just reeks of bad attitude, almost trying to guilt your opponent into using older, potentially weaker, rules. Playing a pickup game or something I'd arranged at the LGS outside my normal circle I'd assume my opponent is using the most recent FAQ, and would endeavour to do the same. If they don't use it because they don't know about it, that's fine too, just don't be an argumentative ass about it.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Brother Tyler

[Lexington]

A lot of this would be easily solved if GW would just commit towards digitalization of their rules and gameplay. CB does this really well for Infinity, with both a web-based app and a wiki that serves as the official ruleset, and it’s much easier to handle. GW’s, like, a bajillion times their size, but we’re somehow stuck with “officialized” fan-based apps (which don’t have things like, oh, I dunno, points values) and endless FAQ docs.

[Marshal Rohr]

A lot of this would be easily solved if GW would just commit towards digitalization of their rules and gameplay. CB does this really well for Infinity, with both a web-based app and a wiki that serves as the official ruleset, and it’s much easier to handle. GW’s, like, a bajillion times their size, but we’re somehow stuck with “officialized” fan-based apps (which don’t have things like, oh, I dunno, points values) and endless FAQ docs.

 

They recently hired a few coders for what I can only assume is in-house app development. The job announcements differentiated between the coders they hire for the site and these guys, who will focus on apps. 

[Panzer]

It's kinda sad that they bought that sorry excuse for an app for 40k from some random guy with promis to build upon it and there's still no progress.

[mughi3]

We have 2 rules at our FLGS when it comes to GW errata/FAQs-

 

1. To use it you must provide a copy either physical or digital for everybody to read. telling us about it does not count (same for unit rules such as FW)

 

2.is it a dumb rule change? as an example in 7th when they decided only one trooper in a squad could throw a grenade when you had to spend points on them for every member of the squad- we agreed as a group, if all you're troopers have them and you paid for them then you can all throw them if you have the range.

[Vermintide]

 To use it you must provide a copy either physical or digital for everybody to read. telling us about it does not count (same for unit rules such as FW)

 

 

This sounds like a nice compromise.

 

I mean how many books do you need if you want to play fully up to date and using the latest toys? You want the BRB, Vigilus, CA (both of them), codexes, and then a print out of all the FAQs and erratas, not to mention things like WD supplements... And not everybody has a tablet to put their completely legally acquired copies of those books on.

 

At something like a gaming club you'd expect there to be a "group copy" there for anyone to reference. If it's a big one like Bolter Discipline everyone knows about, fair enough. But besides that, I can totally forgive someone for missing something like that change to the fly keyword a while back.

 

The more books and sources there are, the harder it is to keep track, and since it's all in paper and not indexed at all, you could even completely miss it when you tried to look it up.

 

Just my two pence.

[Captain Idaho]

I use the old fashioned, "I'm not going to waste my time playing with you" technique.

 

Sure everyone is entitled to play how they want, but that includes you as well.

 

I'm too old to wasting my gaming time not enjoying myself.

[Dragonlover]

I use the old fashioned, "I'm not going to waste my time playing with you" technique.

 

Sure everyone is entitled to play how they want, but that includes you as well.

 

I'm too old to wasting my gaming time not enjoying myself.

 

This. The rules are the rules, for better or worse, and that includes errata/FAQ to said rules. I've got no problem with the occasional minor agreed tweak, or someone potentially doing something to their detriment (for example, I'm pretty sure I've played against BCC with us both using different points values) but in the latter case I'd always offer to give them the opportunity to bring things up to speed if they wanted it.

 

Just don't play the guy. Much, much easier in the long run.

 

Dragonlover

[MARK0SIAN]

We have 2 rules at our FLGS when it comes to GW errata/FAQs-

 

1. To use it you must provide a copy either physical or digital for everybody to read. telling us about it does not count (same for unit rules such as FW)

 

2.is it a dumb rule change? as an example in 7th when they decided only one trooper in a squad could throw a grenade when you had to spend points on them for every member of the squad- we agreed as a group, if all you're troopers have them and you paid for them then you can all throw them if you have the range.

I certainly agree about ridiculous rules that they’ve either added in on purpose or by mistake due to poor wording etc. There’s been a lot of those in all the editions I’ve played.

 

For your first point though, I’m not so sure. It sounds like you’re putting the onus/burden to do extra work on the guy who wants to play by the rules. If you turned up to any sporting event, even a friendly match the default would surely be to play with the most current, up to date rules? If you’re not wanting to play by the most current rules (which is a perfectly fine position) then my personal view is that you’re the one expecting others to deviate to accommodate you and therefore any burden in terms of extra work/bringing extra stuff/agreeing stuff beforehand should be on you.

 

It’s nothing personal against your group and it clearly works for you, it just seems to have the emphasis the wrong way round; that the person who wants to go by the FAQs is the one who is making an unusual request and has to be accommodated by the others :)