Hey everybody!  I’m back.  I wish that I had some awesome story about running off to Mexico with a one-legged hooker after a drug deal went south on my only to find myself running from the Policia, but my month-long hiatus has much more mundane roots.  Grad school started up and pseudo-work has kept me busy.  Not to mention Lauby and I started a blog network and I’ve still had to keep up appearances over on Dick Move– it’s not that I don’t love writing for BoK, there’s just only so much time in a day.  Add in an apple picking jaunt to Michigan and my 13th anniversary with my good lady, Dr. Girlfriend, and I’ve had far too much on my plate.  On second thought, let’s just go with the drug dealing story, that probably reads better than apple picking.

But anyways, I’m back and looking for a fight.  Chaosgerbil was nice enough to send me a hot tip on a little row he got into over on BoLS about Slingshotting.  Avoiding all temptation to make any references to Talledega Nights below is what happens when you try to argue with a cartoonish figure who tries too hard to come off as smart or clever or smarmy or whatever the fuck he was trying to accomplish.

As always, none of the names have been changed to protect the innocent, but their avatars have been for my own amusement.  My snowmobiled commentary track is in red text, and you better know that I’ve got a fuck of a lot to get off my chest.

Porky_Poster- Very smart ~if you think that stranding a character out in the open and making him into a juicy target is smart, then well have at it… but isn’t this stretching the rules rather too far? What’s the game-world mechanism that explains the extra movement? ~a gravity well?  sorry reading some  Heinlein right now, so I have astrogation on the brain. All rules involve a necessary distortion, but to push that distortion to the limit – even if it shows a certain kind of intelligence – is still a failure of character, of belief in one’s own ability to succeed according to the rules as generally accepted. ~I’ll admit you lost me here.  Are you actually stating that playing within the rules, but at the very edge of the envelope shows poor character?  You’re fucking crazy. The first time it is used on an unsuspecting opponent the need to win has overcome respect for that opponent, and I would argue it will always be in opposition to the idea that the rules simulate a reality based on recognisable principles. ~hey look at me, I’m porky and I’m failing at trying to be all philosophical.  I feel ways about stuff and junk too, you know I would be embarrassed to use a trick like this, and the first time at least it is a trick, not a tactic.

paintraina- I would be embarrassed to get upset about this. ~there you go.  Office linebacker that prick into the ground This is how one grows as a player. Sure you might lose that one game. Man up. Deal with it. Make a note of the tactic, and be on the watch for it next time, or even better: incorporate it into your battle plan.

If you want a game world mechanism, it would be the same mechanism as if the librarian had been joined to the marine squad at the start of the turn and was positioned just a little closer to the DE. ~no, he gets the game mechanic, he’s looking for a real world analog.  We all know that 40k is just like real life after all.  I get up every morning and put on my power armor one leg at a time just like the rest of you

Who is getting upset here? ~you were you big pussy.  all complaining about how if someone used this trick to dupe you, you’d get all uppity on your moral high horse and shit.  Go join a tea party or something and leave the rest of us free thinking individuals alone.

I repeat that this is not a tactic so cannot be incorporated into a battle plan, at least in the traditional sense of the term. If it really is a battle, why are we focusing on the rules themselves rather than seeing beyond them to the encounter taking place, with soldiers and vehicles engaging in a rich setting?  ~who knew, you can’t make tactics based on the rules.  and to think of all these years I’ve wasted…

It seems you would like to play a game of ‘rule on rule’, along the lines of “I see your manipulation of wound allocation and raise you my ‘slingshot engaged’.”  ~I see your slingshot and raise you a ‘double-knuckle shuffle’ There are models on the table converted and painted with care and imagination and terrain built to simulate a landscape, and the rules relate to recognisable concepts like ‘running’, ‘shooting’ or ‘armour penetration’. ‘Rule on rule’ bleeds the colour from this.

If the librarian was with the squad at the start of the turn, the opponent would be able to make a judgement based on the clear lie of the land according to rule use as generally accepted.  ~oh that’s right, nobody is caught off guard ever in real life. That’s fair, and respectful. ‘Teleportation’ has a set of rules all to itself – creating your own teleport move by operating outside of the expectations of the vast majority of players – to judge even by the reactions here among the creme de la creme of the game (…?) – is a little off.

The rules are not the battle; using the rules in unusual ways – rather than using troops or war machines in unusual ways – is not a tactic.  ~stating a broad claim that you don’t/can’t support is not a persuasive argument

You say ‘man up’, I say ‘in a game played for fun men do not need to be so sneaky’. Women either for that matter.  ~man, if a woman tried to pull these kinds of rules lawyering shenanigans on me I’d be all like ‘ hey what the fuck are you doing out of the kitchen.  Where did you get those shoes?’

thecactusman17- I don’t know why people are calling an abiity like this “sneaky”. It sounds like a fun way to represent your character joining a squad and leading a new charge. ~oh shit, somebody with an imagination.  I thought that years of video games, pornography, and media violence had eradicated that from our population Frankly, I’m more surprised that you could have a character like that exposed near the front without already being shot to death or locked into combat.  ~I am liking you and your ginormous cactus dong more and more every second If your opponent is going to leave a powerful independent character alone, it makes sense that they should regret it when he leads a whole boatload of your forces into the fight.  ~yes, so the way this tactic should actually be pulled off is using somebody with a jump back or some other -gasp- sneaky mode of locomotion to move in from behind the unit he is about to join.  That way no exposing yourself needlessly, unless you want to expose yourself…then I say go for it.  Just make sure that there aren’t any minors present, I think that’s frowned upon.  Miners are ok, though

–edit– Though pressing this through with 3-5 models is not only tactically unsound, it’s also terribly cheesy.  ~edit–quit while you’re ahead

questauthority- You are clearly (in the edit) using an incorrect definition of cheesy. Cheesy means “rules-lawyerly-nonsense-that-makes-me-mad-when-used-against-ME”. Tactically unsound decisions, when made by ones opponent, can therefore never be cheesy.  ~what’s the opposite of cheesy?  Milky?  Meaty?  Udderly retarded?  Ok, I’ll stop.  stop throwing sharp objects at me
thecactusman17- I see your point. Perhaps the proper word is “abusive.”
questauthority- I honestly can’t see this as being any more sneaky or cheesy a stratagem than the old 4th ed strategic casualty removal was. ~why go back to 4th when 5th gives us so many awesome wound allocation tricks.  Live in the now my main man In fact, to me it seems to be less of one – as others pointed out, this can easily represent a character running over to the unit, yelling “follow me, men!”, and leading – from the front – the charge.  ~’but colonel Shaw, that slope is steep, and there’s confederates on the other side.’  ‘what part of onward 54th didn’t you understand?’
Porky_Poster- We’ll just have to lie back and imagine that if anyone tries it against us.  ~leave me out of this.  I want no part of anything that has to do with you.  You’re quickly becoming my new Zingbaby

It’s not a stratagem either. But you seem to be saying it is cheesy, and I agree.

garradh- If anyone tried it against me, I would have to give them kudos for knowing the rules and finding a way to use them to his advantage. As Leonardo Leonardo would say, “Well played . . .”  ~so what you’re saying is that you respect, rather than fear and ostracize, intelligence?  Novel concept, that.
Chumbalaya- If you know the rules, you should know what is possible. Rather than calling your opponent names for outsmarting you, try learning from it and improving yourself.  ~you could even channel that frustration into an epic quest to defeat evil and get you out of the shire

Or you could just stay a tool.

Porky_Poster- Who is name calling? ~well Frodo did just call you a tool 🙂  Not too sure if that wouldn’t fall more under the greater truths category rather than name calling, though This post has a whiff of hypocrisy (see ‘Or you could just stay a tool’) and barely concealed, unfocused frustration. This is likely frustration that there are people who feel ‘slingshot engaging’ is playing like a snake in the grass, rather than playing the army as a snake in the grass.  ~you lost me with your own sad attempts at sounding profound again.  Please give up
Chaosgerbil- Or it could be frustration in response to a condescending windbag on the internet.

So if I play by the movement rules but try to win with them, it makes me a snake in the grass. Got it. ~and don’t forget it’s not even a tactic either…. 🙂

Porky_Poster- There goes that name calling again. What is it with so many people here that they can’t engage civilly?  ~it has a lot to do with you being a pompous windbag, tool, and all-around complete fuck “Like a snake in the grass” is simile. I think you understand very well the point being made, but prefer to ignore it.  ~no, I don’t think many of us get what point, if any you’re trying to make.  All evidence I’ve seen of you trying to come up with anything to say has been buried under ham-fisted attempts at trying to be some kind of literary genius.
Chaosgerbil- The majority of your posts on this topic have seemed insulting, with a faint hint of troll. ~with a bouquet of douche that clings malignantly to the pallet If you question people’s integrity over something so trivial then you will likely experience some negative feedback.

What point am I ignoring? I have a different interpretation of whether or not this is fair or abusive. I’m not going around saying that everyone who disagrees on this point is some sort of subhuman slithering betwixt stones and shubbery.  ~ni!

Porky_Poster- Negative feedback is fine and has to be expected, especially on a subject so central to the hobby.

The point is laid out in the first post and then expanded, and plenty seem to have understood it. No one is subhuman or being called subhuman. However, this is a fair concern for a gerbil and I recognise that; the mention of serpents was insensitive..!  ~oh aren’t we ever so smug and clever

At any rate, we disagree for now. I expect we’ll discuss similar issues in the future and I look forward to it.

Chaosgerbil- Yeah it was amusing trading jabs with you  ~you say amusing, I say painful.