What are common tournament restrictions with the current 40k edition?

[Erik Setzer]

I love the wierdness this edition lets you use, its open to abuse, but then, the old system was too.

I'm all for the "weirdness" but I have to admit, I'm pretty firm on the Allies Matrix rules when I play against someone, whether Unbound or Battle-Forged. If you want to mix Blood Angels Death Company with Tau battlesuits, or Dark Eldar (with lances) with Imperial Guard mechanized units (tanks and Chimeras), then yeah, I'm going to hold to the rules about deployment and rolling if they get too close. You want to mix and match, that's cool, but use the restriction that's meant to somewhat balance it. I'm not a hypocrite, either, I do it when I mix Imperials with Orks (I have Blood Axes, and they used to even have IG in their army list).

[Path Walker]

Well yes, that all depends though, I know recently I played against 2 kids using Nids, Imperial Knights and Chaos Daemons, they deployed all together, but I let it slide, you know, because they were 10 years old.

[Erik Setzer]

Well yes, that all depends though, I know recently I played against 2 kids using Nids, Imperial Knights and Chaos Daemons, they deployed all together, but I let it slide, you know, because they were 10 years old.

Well, with really young kids, sure, you let it slide, and gradually over time as they play more and also show more maturity, you let them know about those things (so they don't run into issues with it over time because they've "always played it this way," which I hear as an excuse for a lot of incorrectly played stuff, i.e. people deploying 6" out of a vehicle without taking difficult terrain tests).

People 18 and up? Yeah, let's play with the rules to keep it fair. Unless we're agreeing to do some kind of special fun game. Then we can muck around with the rules.

I love tournaments, but that's the kind of stuff that reminds me why I love one-off games (or campaigns) with friendly people.

[Camden Poole]

I believe it says in the rule book that parent codices can't ally with themselves or their supplements. The store I play at allows only one detachment and just started allowing formations, but my TO is taking his time with 7th ed.

[Mr Mystery]

It's all horses for courses.

Me, I'm not terribly keen on non-rulebook restrictions on my list, so I don't play games with them (main reason I tend to go for odd armies, and seem to fall foul of such restrictions more often than not).

Which means in turn, I have to accept that by embracing anything goes, anything goes. The above example of the kids? Bring it on. As an experienced gamer, I see it as my responsibility/privilege to help keep newcomers enthused and enjoying the game. If that means slightly odd match ups, or playing several hundred points down? So be it. If it means knocking some of the spikier edges off my armies so my opponent doesn't get disheartened, or fall foul of believing it was the list rather than skill with said list that defeated them, so be it.

The good thing about Tournaments? There is no standard, and to my mind nor should there be, not for a hobby wargame. Yes it makes sense from a TO point of view to stick to a common points limit, but that's as far as I would consider standardisation to make sense. With greater variety, comes greater challenge, and a wider pool of potential players.

Some might like 'Ard Boyz type play, where it's apparently all about bringing your best. Others might prefer a weekend of narrative gaming with more restricted lists which progress in size. And there's everything in between, and more extreme settings.

It's a hobby after all, and that aspect should be embraced. For every 'no scratchbuild' rule intended to prevent modelling for advantage, there will be gamers who feel they can't take part in your event because their army comprises some really nice scratch built stuff. For every 'comp', there's someone out there who will still game that system as all you do is shift what would be considered beardy.

Best thing? The community is pretty much self-policing. Nobody enjoys regular games against a powergamer, and powergaming is fair looked down upon as a general rule (though the exact definition of powergaming is gloriously mutable!)

[Denzark]

What about supplements that specifically state they can Allie with their faction's main codex? Kind if seems a but too arbitrary to me.

SJ

Yeah, just to stop bringing in multiple units. I think this originated before 7th tbh.

So, in other words, no two Detachments from the same Faction. For Ally rules affect not just those of Allied Detachments, but the relationship between any two detachments, even Formations.

So, technically, this means that Space Marines cannot take Stormwing. Very interesting...

I can't remember about dataslates. It wasn't about factions per se. It was about were a publication relies on a main codex and only has 1 or 2 entries of its own. To stop you using them together to get 4 of one unit whereas with one codex you would only get 3. Like I said, something from 6th.

They also restricted some of the bigger stronghold assault nastiness.

[JMichael]

A local GW store did have a single elimination 2,000pt Battle-Forged, no Lords of War tournament (Knights were allowed as they are not LoW). That was the only restriction. We played Maelstrom missions and each round was the same mission for everyone.
I played Eldar and won the event, surprisingly no Knights showed up in the tournament.

[Denzark]

I played Eldar and won the event, surprisingly no Knights showed up in the tournament - I didn't think anyone knew in advance about my 6 Wave Serpents.

Here, fixed that for you.

[JMichael]

Here, fixed that for you.

Heh!

[40kGamer]

Here, fixed that for you.

lol! You really only need 3 WS + some MSU bikes to ruin the day for the majority of other builds. 6 is just overkill.