 a little more. Okay, there we go. Looks like we're pretty good now. All right, what are we going to do? We're going to restart the show. Okay. And I'm just going to trim this part out. When I when I for the upload, that'll be the solutions. Here we go, right? We're going to pretend like this just began. Thanks everybody for sticking with us. Okay. There we go. Sorry, everyone. Hello, everybody. If it's Wednesday, it's Warhammer and that must mean it's time for another episode of Warhammer Weekly. Joining me as always is my one and only co-host, Tyler. We're on the road and as such we had some technical issues but here we are. Tyler, what's going on? It's good to see you, man. How you doing? There you go. Been a minute. It has been a minute, buddy. All right, so we're going to talk about some news and there's not much news. Yeah, just this rumor engine. So, Tyler, this baton as I said earlier with my joke that I certainly didn't make before, I think it looks like the guy from Police Academy, his baton. Beyond that, I have nothing. I don't know what it is. Works for me, man. I have no clue what this thing is and I've looked around and it doesn't seem to be anyone on the internet who has much of a clue either. So, why don't we move on with our lives? I agree. I agree. Thank you, Garrett. Garrett said like and subscribe for audio trickery. Yes, indeed. Don't worry, folks. I'll just trim that part out at the beginning so we don't lose everybody. People who click into the show and they're like, is the whole show like this? Is it muted? What's going on? I'll figure it out. I also like James Valdez who said it's a punch arrow. Absolutely. Our classic boxing glove arrow. Yes, absolutely. There you go. Also a great, great guess. All right. You know, and somehow, somehow, Tyler, there is like no other news. Yeah. I did see the app, the Citadel Color app got updated. There's a little article about that. So, if anybody missed that, yeah, checking out. Yep. I did not realize it deleted the old inventories but apparently the new app is better. I didn't use the old paint color, paint rack app or paint color, whatever it was called app. So, I'm, I didn't know about the update to the change but somebody just said their inventory was deleted. Well, that's no fun. There you go. They did give a couple previews of the two Heart of Gur horror bands but frankly there was mostly stuff we knew. Yes, I agree. They did mention like Castor was like a thousand times but it's still a bunch of human dudes. So, I don't know what to tell you. It wasn't like, there you go. It wasn't anything really exciting. So, we've had rumors for a while that Castor will be in our future. So, maybe that'll finally hit in 2023. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Okay. I guess we'll see. Yeah. Thanks, Josh. I appreciate it. Just one of his comments. So, yeah, man. So, yeah, that's the news. All right. Let's talk about some, yeah, some pick of the week. Tyler, what do you got for picks of the week there, brother? Only two, which is practically one. So, the first pick, Mike from Gunhammer has started up a YouTube channel. It's called Fantasy with an M Wargaming. Put out a couple of little videos, one on Starting Out with General Sandbook 2022. Just some of his high-level thoughts. Also invited the community to help him figure out what his army is going to be for this next six months. And it was just a great video. Mike's a really cool guy. He does awesome work at Gunhammer. Oh, yeah. I really recommend folks checking that out. Vince, did you see that he just started that up? I didn't, but that sounds awesome. I'll have to go check that out. Obviously, I can find the link, Tyler, for that right down in the description below. There you go. And then Saga of Dice. They had a new battle report out, Sylvaneth, new Sylvaneth, new Skaven. Rob and company always do great work over there. So, I started watching a little bit of that over lunch today. It was a good time. So, yeah, just definitely recommend their battle reports as well. Nice. It's all I got. Awesome. You know, Tyler, the real fun thing is, will I remember to fix the audio and put it back on the proper settings before I start the show next week? 50-50. Place your bets now, everyone. Guests is in the comments as to whether Vince remembers back at home to fix the audio on the normal machine so it actually inputs the settings or whether we start next week muted too. My pick of the week is a new video from Cult Paint. Has them painting up some of the Gossamid archers. Very beautiful models. I really love the color scheme that those came out to. So, go check that out. It's a really, really cool tutorial. And I just love the colors it came out to in the scheme. So, I think people should, you know, if you're going to be painting up some new archers, I imagine I think some Sylvaneth players are going to use them. I'll say I got a game in over the weekend, Tyler, against Sylvaneth. We'll just use this to transition right into hobby time. So, here we go. This is now hobby time. Okay. And I got a game in over the weekend against Sylvaneth. Did a little tournament practice for NashCon. And I was running my listing in Sylvaneth. I'll tell you those Gossamid archers, they ended up becoming like a problem I didn't want to deal with because I didn't have like a sacrificial sort of unit to charge into them that I knew was gonna, you know, could potentially get blowed up. Now, it was funny what I like, I ended up killing sort of everything else around them. And then I had two, I had like a single Stormdrake Guard and a single Fulminator on one wound left within charge range of them. So, then remembering how their rules are actually worded, I charged in the single Fulminator on one wound left, who then died on the charge on the unleash. And there was now no enemies within three inches. You talked about it. Absolutely, man. Yeah. And guess what? He then could not retreat away. And then the Stormdrake Guard came in and killed them all. Nice. You know, we actually, we didn't talk about that specific scenario. We talked about the general idea, right, of pulling models outside, but not just deliberately suiciding a unit into them. Right, because he had no other choice, right? If he didn't unleash, why not? Then he would just get smacked by the Fulminator, right? So like it was, it was a, there was no good answer for him. So it was just an interesting thing that if you have, it's an interesting counterplay to the to the Gospel and Archers, if you have sort of a quote unquote, like a unit you don't mind throwing away, right? Then you can, then there's no, they just kill it. And there's no one left within three. They can't actually retreat away. And then you can bring in the actual heavy hitter who's going to clean them up. So I will, that was good learning for me. Good, good learning moment. Seeing them in action. Yeah, Jordan was running them in the battle report this week. And it made me have a better appreciation of them. You know, they're not necessarily a high priority target in a Sylvaneth army for your opponent, you know, for playing against Sylvaneth. So yeah, he was using them to quite good effect. I may have underrated them on initial first look. Yeah, I, it was a, it was a, it was a fun learning game all around because I was also going for sort of a magic Dom Storm cast. And I was, I wheeled a purple sun around my opponent's army the entire game. So that was because again, it's tournament play and it's time to be a bad person. I can't not take it in my tournament list. I'm sorry, it's just too good. Giving my opponent neg for it all their say, but having effectively rend for, I guess on my whole army is, you know, turns out pretty good when you do a lot of damage. So it was weird. It was weird. My opponent, I don't think ever really made armor saves that entire game. He had one unit one time save on sixes. So that was pretty, that had to be fun for him at any rate. Also hobby time. I'm working on a bunch of stuff for some upcoming videos. I'm excited about that. I did finish up just so everybody knows I did finish up the big night, big chaos, renegade night. So that video will be coming like next month or something. There's a big video. It's a super long edit. So we'll see about that, but probably next month. And yeah, so all around a lot, a lot of good hobby time for me. What about you, Tyler? What about you? Did you get a good games in or? I didn't. Yeah. Had a awesome tea over the weekend, Midwest Bash by some friends in St. Louis. We had 32 players and Stormcast had a 32. So that was fun for everybody. And yeah, no, had a had an awesome time. Thunder buddies had a fantastic weekend. Alison prime at Bastion. Yeah, can't can't complain. Congrats, everybody. Shout out to my last opponent, John. He ended up taking best overall. He had a brilliant Stormcast. Let's man was Krondis. See Lord relic tour with the usual build out, Miroshield, etc. He had adjudicators, Thunderbolt crossbows, forts and pastures, two desolators, two Stormstrike chariots, and a purple sun leaning into Krondis atavastic tempos, minus one save, purple sun, minus one save. Something about that seems very familiar. Dropping in pestores so that they could be on up to minus three rents against a key target with all of their attacks. And of course, Thunderbolt volley with adjudicators, Thunderbolt crossbows is really good too. So yeah, just a lot of shooting output. I love this list and he played it really well. So a lot of fun. Awesome. No painting yet still, right? No painting yet. I know I'm running out of time. I mean, my deadline is May 2023, so I was gonna say I'm running out of time, but obviously I've got all the time in the world. So that is the famous last words of every painter ever. You're already, Tyler, you're already in the in the painting mindset of I've got a funnier time. No rush at all. That tournament's like months away. Why would I be worried? Exactly. You get narrator. He was not. He didn't he did not have a lot of time. Yeah, exactly. Great. All right, cool. Well, yeah, I'm looking forward to, obviously, Nashcon next month, I'm looking forward to and having a lot of really fun games. And you know, Tyler, what we want to talk about tonight, see how I'm sneakily transitioning into our main topic. And while I do that, you could hit like out there, people watching this, you know, hit like for all the audio issues we had at the beginning wasn't that fun. You know, hit like for, for, for a guy with a baton for rat cast, whatever you want. Just hit that button. Subscribe if you haven't already. Buttons are fun. But anyways, we've been having some fun games and Tyler, one of the things that I think it's good to do with your, with your fun games is have some proper communication and play by intention, which brings us, Tyler, to tonight's topic, playing by intent. Yeah. Okay. So this has been a show. It's been talking about doing this for a long time. A long time. Yeah. So this is drawing heavily from an article on playing by intent from Goon Hammer written by James Kelly. The link to that is down in the description. And so go and go and check the article out because it certainly has a lot more detail, I guess I want to say on, on kind of like, he's going to really go into a lot of detail in that article. And we're going to be basing a lot of what we say here on our own thoughts on, you know, sort of the things that James tease up. But this is something that you and I, I think, both care a lot about because it's pretty important to me that people have good games, that people play good games. I think this is one of those things that scares people is like being at a tournament and being up against like a whack player who's just not going to say anything and is just going to show up and like steamroll you into the dirt, right? Which if you come from like competitive magic, it's, it's actually like, not that rare to encounter magic games where you just don't really talk to your opponent and they just kind of like, you know, they just kind of show up, you play the game and move on. But that would be really, really weird to me in, in Warhammer, right? And obviously, there's, there's all kinds of folks, you know, that play Warhammer, you know, we sure. So yeah, there are obvious reasons, then that makes sense. But yeah, I know what you're saying. Yeah, 100%. And like, look, no part of this is going to be in any way saying this is how you should be. There's a lot of different personality types out there. There are plenty of folks who are neurodivergent in various ways and so don't have the same confidence to sort of speak or, or, you know, speak up or out or, or whatever on their behalf. And in fact, I think this is very powerful for everyone because if you are someone who doesn't have any of those challenges and you're the person who initiates this conversation, you can make it a lot easier for your opponent who might not be as comfortable to also then reciprocate, right? And have a better conversation. So, so I just think this leads to better games and that's, let's jump into what we mean here, right? Because I think this is exactly the, the sort of the first rule, the very beginning of this, right? Where do we start? And it's turn zero, right? So, so game zero has come into popularity quite a lot in our session zero in role playing games, you know, getting together, talking about the kind of game you want, what kind of game is this going to be? What kind of characters are you going to play? Are there any things that you just, you know, like this is going to be a game about intrigue and investigation and not going to have a lot of combat. So, you know, make those types of characters, right? And that sort of thing, right? Setting down what everybody's comfortable with, what everybody wants to accomplish, what is everybody here for? And I think this turn zero concept in Warhammer is very similar. It's having the important conversation about like, hey, look, we're both human. We might make mistakes. We're gonna, I'm gonna state my intentions clearly throughout the game. I'm gonna, you know, I want you to tell me if you think my intention is possible is physically possible. We'll talk about that later on, right? Like, I'm gonna search for your agreement that we agree on the shared state of reality here. And that's going to be my intent, right? Because, you know, I'm going to play by that intent, and I will state those intents. And once we agree, then that will become the reality. And I hope you do the same. Right? So there becomes a shared mutual understanding of reality because this is the thing I was talking about. This is the thing I've run into in so many games. We're playing a game with tiny fraction of an ounce plastic figures sitting on uneven terrain often on a board. How many times have you like whipped a measuring stick out and bumped a thing or something? Yeah, it's just what happens. Like, it's not a this isn't precision gaming, right? Like, we have to accept there's some level, our brains aren't perfect, our understanding of the rules aren't perfect, and our use of the models on the table isn't perfect, right? So let's all agree with that. Let's all, like, know that that's the case and talk it through verbally to create a shared reality, right? Okay, hit me with your thoughts on this part. Yeah, I've been doing this for a while. Now, typically do it when playing somebody I've never played before. And a good example was game five top table over the weekend. We played him before we got to know each other at the start. And just my usual line of then happy to play. However, personally love to play by intent is what that means to me. But if you want to play a really tight game, where if we forget something, we make a mistake, you know, we take the hit and we move on. I'm happy to do whatever you want to do. And I've done that for a while now over the years, never had a negative both from that, you know, it's always helped in every game just to create a sense of shared understanding, as you said, and often a more kind of generous spirit, you know, between the two players there between my opponent and myself, why we're playing the game in the first place, the kind of game we're looking to have together. I've heard from a lot of players over the years that do this. I remember and saw on Twitter, like a year ago, Bill Suza, Sonata Tweet saying that he does this in every one of his games, which I thought was really cool. I didn't I didn't know that he did that because he's obviously really good and really competitive. A lot of very high end players that I've seen play like this, right? They want to create that shared understanding, open communication, open dialogue right away, especially because they know they're probably more comfortable than the person they're playing is. Right? So they're trying to create a comfortable space for the opponent. And you know, there was a question in here of how do you recommend fitting this in if it's during time tournament rounds? And my answer is I think the same way, Bill, and in the same way I have this conversation is when you are setting up, when you're getting your figs out, when you're handing them your your list, you know, to review when you're doing the pregame stuff because I generally walk up to the table, you got 10, 15 minutes of stuff that's going to happen before you drop dice on round one, right? Just have this conversation while that's going on because it doesn't need to be the solo thing, right? And my general impression is if you have this, you come out there, you say, hey, look, I'm going to play my intention, I'm going to be open and communicate with you about what I'm doing. I'm going to say what my intention is, you know, hopefully you, like I'm going to invite you to measure it to share it to agree. And then if so, then we'll move on as per that. And I, you know, I, I hope you do the same. I want to have a fun game. If you miss something, no problem, you know, I have no problem with us going back a phase, like this is a good part, we'll get to this later, but this is a good part where you can set down kind of what the expectations are around that if you're okay with that, you know, then that's how we'll play or something, you know, you can, you can kind of set down those things and invite agreement, right? I think a lot of times there's, there's gray area with some of these things, but I think a lot of the times, at least in my personal experience with it, most folks generally know what within reason means in terms of can you go back and do something, right? It, you know, it's especially way to define that is has the chain of decisions that have happened and she forgot what we're considering going back and addressing, you know, has that really changed with that have an impact on that kind of lost my, my train of thought there, but kind of know what I'm getting at with this, the, yeah, kind of the chain of events when you intended to do something. Right. So, yeah. And it's just little, like as we're going to talk about, it's not just like, this is the first part of it, you set up the fact that you're going to be having these conversations throughout the game by having a short conversation initially. And it'll actually speed up the game because you won't get into later arguments and discussions about, wait, was this thing this way, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, definitely. Yeah. And so that leads to like, what do we even mean here, right? Like, it's about establishing that shared understanding. I think the article laid this out really, really well. And I agree with James's point, which was it's three components, right? One is mutual understanding. Two is reciprocation. You both understand what you're going for in this game. Reciprocation, both of you are going to do this and be clear with each other and be open and talking and communicate, right? And three, you're going to agree at all times on what is possible because you can't play by intent and defy the possible, right? Like, and this is a thing that when we'll get to this later in the problems, because I've got a couple of fun problem stories where this goes wrong, you can play by intent badly, right? You can just say, oh, my intention is this. And it's like, okay, but that's not physical reality, right? This last one is where the challenge is going to come in. So you have to, you have to agree on what is possible, not state what is possible. There's a difference, right? The point of this isn't just for you to like dictate to your opponent reality by saying, this is how I'm setting up, this is what I plan to do, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, right? No, it's to say, hey, this is what I think, do you agree with that, right? That's a really important part. And that last one's where the trickiness comes. And it's where I've tripped up. I mean, I'll be honest, it's where I've certainly tripped up on both sides of this. So, a couple of comments. Nigel, check out aosevents.org for all events around the world, mostly events around the world. And then we, Jack made a comment about always trying to tell my opponent that I would re-roll my die if it's not completely flat. I said to kid, yeah, absolutely, I think is part of this. That's a great piece of the conversation to have, or kind of wrap into this, right, Vince? You know, are we going to play dice have to be flat? Are we doing, I mean, generally, I personally love just playing it. If it's not flat, re-roll it. I think that address is about everything. Yep. I've got a buddy who sticks to that like glue, and he has for the entire time I've played with him for 20 plus years. If the dice is in any way cocked on any piece of anything, it doesn't matter if it's like slightly off, he will pick it up and re-roll it every single time. Doesn't matter if it was successful for him, doesn't matter if it's the one and he needed a six, and he got a six, he will re-roll it without hesitation, without question, every time. So he's completely above board, right? At the same time, I'm okay if you want to use the can you balance the dice on top of it thing, like that's another perfectly fine test, you know, whatever. But yeah, having an open conversation about that, right? That's why I like rolling in dice trays, by the way. That's why I bring my little fold up dice tray so I can just roll in there and not have to worry about that. Hey, whatever, whatever. I like to chuck dice at my opponent's side of the table, so it promotes interaction. You just wing them straight out. Yeah. It gets us closer as human beings. Yep. Yeah, I'm with Steve. He says I re-roll any dice that jump out of my dice tray every time. Exactly. Like if it's not in the dice tray, it doesn't count. That's just a fun, that's a, that's again, that's the thing you can state, like I'm going to roll in this dice tray, if it ain't in the dice tray, it doesn't count. I don't care what it is, how beneficial or negative to me it is. This is where the dice go that mattered, right? And like, if you stick to that, you're fine. Just, yeah, just like setting up that kind of etiquette, right? And that's fine. I think those kinds of things go a huge long way toward just like, oh, okay, cool. You've established kind of the easy, the easy communication with someone. And I think that just did, it's about having those open discussions, open conversations, like during the game. So I think here's a good example of that, right? Okay. You know, during the game, you say, okay, I'm going to move to here. My, your, your move is eight inches. All right. I am going to move 18 inches away from you. So barring anything else, if you make a normal move forward, you'll have a 10 inch charge with that unit. Right. Do you agree with that? And you set down the tape measure, you both look at the 18, if your opponent goes, yep, looks like 18. Cool. Right. Then we're, we're already a turn and a half ahead on knowing what the situation is going to be, right? You know that unit is at 18 inches away. They know if they move fully forward that they're going to have a 10 inch charge. There's no question. We've resolved so many potential issues right out of the gate, right? I do that like all the time. I'll say, okay, my intention is to move this many inches away from you. Does that look right? And I hold the tape measure there and just invite them to look at it. It just makes things so much easier, right? Especially if you're trying to play like a KG type of army, like if you're someone who's trying to run around a lot, those kinds of things, trying to like fade around, just so useful, right? Definitely. Or my intent is to make sure you can't land behind to be here, that there's no nine inch space and you kind of set up your nine inch sticks, right? Behind it, behind your space. You see, there's nowhere for you. Every stick is like touching the edge of the board or within this much space of it. So not even a 25 mil base could fit. And you're like, what do you think? You agree? And if they, but that's the key, they have to come over and be like, or look over and be like, yep, I agree. And once that agreement happens, you've created a shared reality. That is now truth. That's what it is. Yeah. Another big part of the game, of course, man over the years is the whole, it's like setting up a screen, right? And then you've got your, maybe hammer unit behind that screen. And your intention is to place it within three inches. So that anything that comes into your screen will be within three inches or the case might be you want to be outside of three inches. But yeah, it just promotes faster place. So you're not trying to exactly get everything precisely right and taking five minutes. Right. Yeah. I do that, but nobody else should do that. So yeah. And so like, and then Carter said, then the opponent moves and forgets to tell you that their unit can run in charge and they ought to run six for the easy charge. Well, first of all, I know which one of my opponents units could run in charge. But that's a, that's like a blessing I have of having enough time to read and understand basically all the army books. But by the way, there's no reason you can't ask your opponent when you're doing that. Like, Hey, I want to move so that he has a tenant charge. I know they have a movie. Can they run in charge? Do you have any way in the army to give them run in charge? No, or yes, you don't have to ask them, are you going to make that unit run in charge? That's not fair. Right. Sure. Cause like they might do it. They might not, but especially if it's like some kind of command ability, they can only use one of right. But if you say, do you have any ability in the army to give run in charge? Yes. Once a game, I have steadfast march. I can make a unit run in charge. Okay, cool. Now I know that that's something I need to be aware of. And then I, you know, okay, maybe I, maybe I, I give you that strength, that chance. Maybe I don't, right? Well, it'll see. But, but now I'm making a decision within full context. So I don't think it's bad in any way to ask your opponent, like, do you have X capability in your army? Sure. That's very standard. Yeah. Right. Like again, saying, are you going to make this unit do this thing? No, of course they're not going to answer that. They're under no, there, there's no burden for them to answer that question. That's, that's just ridiculous. Right. No, that's tactics. And this is a bit fuzzy of a line, right? But I think it has a bit, but when you're asking like, in general, can you do this thing? Yeah, sure. That's fair. Yeah. Like with this, I don't know if you have it later on in the discussion, but I pointed out to you today, there's one item in the player's code that's unique relative to every other item, right? Yeah, I do have this on the next one. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. I love Tomas's wording here, which is I often ask, I'm doing this for this reason. Should I know anything in your rules about this? Right. That's a great way to ask this. Because again, when you're asking about their rules, not, and this is the bright line in my mind, okay? The bright line is, are you asking for what is legitimately completely open, knowable information? Right. And everything in their rulebook and on their army list and in their army is for the most part, barring a few very, you know, weird, hide it under a cup type of situations, you know, like with the host of the ever chosen, right? Is open knowledge. There's no reason they can't know it, right? So when you're asking about a rules clarification, is this how your army works? Is this what you have in your list? Is this how this unit works? That's all open information and should be completely fair game, and you should feel fine asking about that clarification. If you're asking about something that only exists in their head, right? Which unit are they going to move? Which unit are they going to apply their specialty to or above to? No, that's not fair game, because that's not open knowledge, right? So I think that's probably the bright line I would draw in asking your opponent questions. Makes sense. Yeah. And I think it's important to stay here. The goal isn't to allow everything, right? We're not just saying like, eh, willy-nilly anything goes, like, of course that's not it, right? It's not a magic wand, right? I'm just like, hey, go wild, whatever you want to do. Yeah, and there's a spectrum as we'll get into as we continue the discussion. Yeah, there's not an objective standard with these things. Different players may have different levels of comfort of how much they're willing to agree to in terms of take backs or correcting, you know, correcting obvious misplays. We'll talk a lot later about obvious misplay, you know, quote-unquote obvious misplays and potential fine line between obvious misplays and what James called tactical errors. Absolutely. That line, that sort of thing. So yeah, there is a lot of this is subjective, but obviously the goal is to try to promote just a better expression of, yeah, everybody having a good time and the social contract, the heart of this game. So let's talk about, you know, Andrew just raised one, and this really talks about misplays versus tactical errors. I think this is a really good point, right? So Andrew says, my poor teammate got gotchied by Fire Slayer's player with their new book. He got all the way through the charge phase and then the Fire Slayer player called their fight first and deleted the unit that charged, right? Okay, so the question here is, and this is one of those things that I don't know if this is really part of it, but I'll say that this is a way I like to play. And we discussed this in on the last slide, right? Of like, how much should you be telling your opponent about your potential rules, gotchas? Okay, this does fall into that side for me. So let's, let's, Andrew, we're going to come back to that in a very real way on a couple slides. But what do you see Tyler as the difference between an obvious misplay versus a tactical error? Okay, what, what is that? Yeah. How would you try to draw a line between those? And then the secondary question here is, how much do you let people take back? Right? That's the obvious next question that comes from this. Right. I think it is generally challenging and a case by case basis. So I mean, I could give you some examples of what I would consider obvious misplays. I mean, there's actually reached out on Twitter for folks to send me some examples that came to their mind. And so, I mean, I'll read a few off here real quickly. So Daniel Knitz for getting a command ability in the hero phase, such as Catacrosses for other abilities that are obvious that they are going to do every turn. Sam Valdez on Twitter pointed out that there are some things that must be done in the game, like you must choose a battle tactic. Right. Sometimes folks forget about battle tactics. So they get through the start of their hero phase and cast a spell and they're like, oh, I didn't choose a battle tactic. And it's like, no, no, fine. Go back. Of course. It's a must to do it. Right. Like I said, two plus tough, not properly explaining mini games, examples, hand of dust, the Spharynx, the little dice game that you play with the Spharynx, Jim Viola, the sequencing is out of whack, but doesn't make a difference. Like forgetting to shoot with unit after we moved into rolling for charges. Dave Nashkon Dave said, forgetting a monstrous rampage. I've seen that happen all the time, man. Oh, my God. He said, yeah. We are all so guilty of that. Monstrous rampages are just the easiest thing in the universe to forget because of their timing, right? Because you're so caught up in like, did you land the charges and did you re-roll the charge? You know, which charge did you re-roll and who's in and who's out and what's going to be your order of fighting? Right. That like remembering to do the monstrous rampages is like such an easy thing to forget. A million times I've let my opponents go back and just be like, oh crap, I should have stopped. And I'm like, yeah, yeah, fine. Go ahead. Do it. Who cares? And so to me, the line here that I draw, this is my own personal line. You tell me what you think about this, but again, I think every, but you can draw whatever line that you think is comfortable. You just want to communicate it at the beginning of the game, right? Like be open about it and don't like, don't suddenly not let somebody take something back on turn three. If you didn't state at the beginning, hey, we're doing no takesies, backsies here. This is hardcore. You forget something. It's on you. That's the kind of game I like to play. Are you okay with that? Right? Like if you elicit agreement to that at the beginning, fine, play no takesies, backsies. Yes. Right. Like if you want to go hard mode, go hard mode. If that, if you're both in for that, that's a great game. You're both agreed. You've created a shared agreement. No problems, right? But I know players who prefer that way, which is absolutely legitimate. Yeah. And the, you know, for me, the sort of general rule I use with this is I'll basically let anybody go back a phase. Okay. So like we get into the movement phase and they're like, oh, I forgot to do this hero phase thing. I'm like, yes, sure, good. That's fine. But if we're like, if we're two phases on, I'm like, that's, you know, a lot of game state has changed since then, right? Like you've already, you can't do another spell when you've already shot things off or whatever, right? Like things aren't where they used to be. Everybody's moved a lot, you know, the casualties have been done, you know, that's, that's too far. So, so what I generally say is like, you know, sure, if you, if you may, if you forget something, no problem, we can go back within the same phase, of course, or up to like, you know, within a phase, I don't care. That's fine. Right. Because you're going to forget like over the course, this game, both of us will do it. We'll forget a monstrous rampage. We'll forget, you know, to do a heroic action. We'll forget to pick a battle tactic. There's a lot of mental load on you when you're playing War Amherst. So like, and as long as you establish that intent at the beginning of the game, right, like you say, hey, that's, I'll just say, hey, like, if you, if you forget something, don't worry about it, we're playing a fun game, you can go back. Like I don't care as long as it's, you know, within the phase or the phase after no problem, go back, right? I like that rule of thumb. I could see the exception possibly being this idea of if it hasn't impacted the game state in a meaningful way. So let's, I'll give you an example that probably comes up a fair amount is when you have a unit in reserve and you just, you're in turn, you're in your turn three in the movement phase, you're just not thinking about, oh crap, I've actually got to bring this unit onto the table at this point where it's going to be dead, right? And but you get to say the end of your turn and you're going into your opponent's turn and you realize it or they realize it, you know, what do you do? I mean, I don't know, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that everybody would allow a player to put that unit on the board. My personal bias is I would pretty much always allow them to put it on the board because the game hasn't really been affected, at least at that point. I mean, yeah, if we're into like the bottom of my opponent's turn and they've moved and they've shot and they've, you know, all that stuff, like, yeah, no, that's not reasonable to make that request. Anyway, so I could see some, but I like the general rule of thumb of a phase or two. Yeah. So it's, yeah, I think the phase is just, it's just such an easy line. It's a simple rule of thumb. It's where most people remember their things. And when you kind of state that, it, you know, it's sort of easy to catch and then to allow the things and not feel bad about it. And also it generally curtailes too much of the game state having changed when you're going back to make those changes, right? So that's kind of my simple rule of thumb. And for me, obvious misplays are exactly that. It's exactly what you mentioned. It's an obvious thing you've done every round. Like you did this three rounds, it's a command ability you would do every round. There's no reason you wouldn't do it every round. It's clearly your strat to do this every round. And then you went like a phase pass and you forgot to say you were doing in the hero phase, right? And I'd be like, yeah, okay, sure. Of course you did it. Like, yeah, cool. Next, you know, just like wouldn't even be a thing because and again, if you just set that up at the beginning, in fact, if I had one of those things, I might just say, Hey, every hero phase, I'm going to do this thing. I'll still state it. But it is my intention to do this thing every round. So if I ever forget, you know, you can feel free, please help me remember, I need to do this thing every hero phase. I have this stupid tracking rule that should just be on, but it requires me to say I get it. I hate when they write rules that you have to like say you're doing a thing, even though there's no cost to it, no reason you just have to kind of like turn it on. And there's no limit to it. You can do it every round forever. You just have to say you're doing it, you know. And it's like, yeah, okay, sure. All right. And, and so to me, like, having those kinds of conversations just helps smooth things out, right? Let's quickly mention a couple more. Joe on Twitter. I love, I really love this one. I always point out when my opponent piles in a strong another unit into combat, just to make sure they intend to like winning or swinging on gotcha moments and it makes your opponents better for the future. I thought like, again, I mean, maybe that's not for everybody's taste, but I really like that one. Oh, no, I love that one. I do that. Like, yes, absolutely. Okay, let's, I want to file that away for communication, because that is 100% in one of those. We'll talk about like how good communication can make your games go smoother. You don't like and not winning on the gotchas, right? Like you want to win. This is something Thomas said, as you and I both talked about, like, I want to win based on the tactics that I have, not because my opponent made an sort of obvious misplay, right? Now, if they choose to do something and I outthought them, great, that's a good win, right? I'm not going to tell them how to play their game. But, and there is a there is that's a little tougher line. So like, let's talk about where things go wrong here. Okay. Okay, where things go wrong, stating an intent that isn't physically possible. Okay. So this is something that has come up in games I have both seen and played, or someone stated something that just wasn't physically possible. Like, it's my intent that you can't drop behind me. And I'm like, Well, you that's way more than nine inches, I can absolutely drop behind you, right? You left me a lot of space there, right? So like, or it's my intent that this whole unit's going to drop and then shoot that unit. And it's like, well, that unit's on the other side of a building, you can't actually see them, right? Like they have, they are completely physically blocked from line of sight, right? So like, it doesn't matter what your intent was, it ain't physically possible, right? And that's why I say it's not just stating you have to gain agreement, right? This is one of those things that you really get yourself in a trouble with. When people try to dictate and stop, like it, like just state their intent and then leave and then just that's it, right? As though that's the final word. It's like, no, no, no, no, no. Your opponent has to buy into this for this to do anything. Yeah, independent verification. Right. Yeah. Right. And the, yeah, so like not gaining that agreement on shared reality, right? That's the second thing. So not just even stating what's not physically possible, but you just move too quick or you just state things that you didn't gain agreement. You just stated it. The opponent didn't actually agree to it. And then you moved on. The moving too quickly, I think, is a big one we all get guilty of. I know I've been in this place before, especially especially as they get, you know, if you're like round three and you've got it, what, 45 minutes left and you're starting to stress and yeah. Yep. Yeah, exactly. I mean, we're all there. We're all looking at the clock. We all see there's less than 30 minutes left. We all know there's two rounds left, right? Like that is the moment of where mistakes happen. That's why I don't really love rushing games at the end. I mean, you play as quickly and responsibly as you could, right? But I don't love rushing games because it just invites, it just invites mistakes, right? And Donnie Rongo, I agree. Call it playing by agreed intent. Yes. Right? That's really what you're going for. It's like this shared agreement. That's almost maybe the better way to see it, right? Like you have to have a shared reality. Otherwise, you're going to have arguments because where all these arguments manifest from is when each of you has a different perception of what reality is on the table. That's right. And as I stated earlier, this is an imprecise game, like just physical things on a lumpy table that we just like swing around and you're just like like it happens all the time. Speaking of that, I particularly have found terrain over the years at point of comic attention, right? I talked to you earlier about your opponent or whatever is looking to do a charge. They may be landing on a terrain feature. You really probably need to have, to make sure you're both on the same page about your understanding of the core rules and generally how you're playing, landing on terrain features, trying to complete a charge. Because sometimes it's different. I mean, you know, I'm a big, like with Vault Wars, we deliberately ruled it to where any part of a terrain piece that's more than three inches, you cannot land on it. You can't go on it just to avoid those kinds of situations. Yeah, well, this is just it. This is actually where I don't think it's on the player. So I completely agree with your point that terrain is this common point of contention, right? And but this isn't, in my mind, this isn't up to the players to hash out. I mean, maybe if the TO didn't do their job, but I honestly think, and I'm not trying to be mean to TOs, but I honestly think this is one of those things that the TO is largely responsible for and should have explained in their, in their pack. Yes, right. Because look, this is a deficiency in the core rules. That's on GW for writing bad terrain rules. We've talked about it on the show many times. Okay. And there are good terrain packs out there. There are good terrain rules out there. Okay. And so like, unfortunately, we've got three different layers where things can get decided, right? Games Workshop, the people who wrote the rules, the TO who's running the individual game, or the players who are playing it. Now, if you're playing a game at home, and it's like casual, because these aren't all tournament games, then yeah, like if you're playing a game at your friendly local game store or something, it's not a tournament, or it's in your basement, then have the conversation about terrain, right? Because there's nobody else to go. There's nobody to appeal to here, right? It's just the two of you. So yeah, have that hash that out in your, in your turn zero, right? But if it's a tournament, it's an actual tournament game, and there is a judge in TO, you know, somebody in charge of this operation, they should be laying down like this is impact, exactly what you just said you did for Vault Wars, you did the right thing for your tournament, right? And that's how it should be for, I would love to see that in basically all tournament packs, which by the way, most of the tournaments I go to do have this in the rules pack, and that makes me happy. That's part of the reason I go to these tournaments, because they're well run by good TOs, right? We did not have one instance of a terrain issue, a question, it was amazing. So yeah, it did its job. Yeah, that's it. Because the terrain is such a complicated little nest of nonsense, that if it's not hashed out by the TO, then yeah, you need to say like, look, how are we doing with landing on terrain? And if you both come to an agreement before the game cool, play that way. Then yes, again, casual game, friendly local games for a game, basement game, yeah, you got to do that, right? There's just there's just nothing else you can do. I think that's my friend, Brett, Brett, I can always rely on you, man, 2D terrain, the way to go. No pass, false, incorrect, forever incorrect. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. He's an X war machine player. Oh yeah, there you go. You'll have to forgive him. Um, no, I like playing on a, on a, on a, on a, on something that looks like a world, not on a piece of paper. But hey, there you go. Yeah. Yeah. All right. You know, I mean, the last one I think is just different perceptions of rules and trying to hash it out instead of simply calling for a judge. This is just a small thing, but don't argue with people like, and you don't have to be a jerk about it, right? Like, you know, like if somebody starts talking, you don't have to be like, uh, judge, judge, you can just be like, you don't have to go like immediately to that as though you're trying to like overrule them. All right. You can just be like, Hey, I don't know how about we get a judge, right? Let's, let's, or, or I don't know, let's just get a judge, right? And then you just call for a judge. Easy. All right. Don't, don't fight with your opponent about stuff. Just have somebody come over, right? And, and have the neutral third party come over and arbitrate it. And don't argue with the judge. Obviously, whatever their call is, is their call. That's what we all, being a judge is not an easy thing. Listen to your judges. If they make a call, and even if it's wrong, sometimes the judges make wrong calls, but they made the call. That's the rules. There it is. If, if the tournament has like a TO, you can appeal your way up sometimes or whatever, but there you go. Um, yeah. So I think this is where things go wrong. What else do you think is, is challenges? Is there anything we didn't cover here, Tyler, where things go wrong with this? Again, I'm not sure the order for some of these things, but while I'm thinking about it, um, we talked before the show about my personal bias is when it comes to core mechanics, I want to operate as transparently as possible, such as a leash hell and redeploys, especially redeploy. And I don't know if now's the time to talk about redeploy as an example or it's coming up on the next slide. There you go. Okay, let's just jump there then. Because I think this is one where we're going to have a lot of conversation. By the way, folks, I didn't state this at the beginning, but this will be a much shorter show this week. I apologize, everyone. This one's going to be a very short show because I have to get up at like three in the morning to get on an airplane and fly for a long time. So I am sorry, everybody, but it's already late here. So anyways, um, but we're, this is, this was the perfect chance for Tyler and I to just have a conversation about this, uh, communication, right? This is where the rubber meets the road. Let's talk about the examples, Tyler. Let's get into it, right? So, uh, number one, reminding your opponent of rules, misses that you catch, especially when they are in your favor. What I mean by that is like, they made a miss that miss is in your favor. Okay. And you remind them anyways. All right. About again, you know, it's not telling them how to run their army. It's not saying, Hey, didn't you could have used your steadfast march there? That's not your job, right? Okay. It's they didn't monstrous rampage. Okay. We're about to pass the end of the charge phase and they didn't use their monstrous rampage saying, Hey, did you want to use your monstrous rampage? You have a monster fighting these guys. Did you want to do that? That is a rules miss that is in your favor, right? They didn't do a thing to your army. They could have done, right? Perfectly valid in the rules. They could have done it. Okay. Hey, you didn't pick a heroic action. Did you, were you going to, were you going to do one? Right? Okay. Or like you had here, especially when they are in your favor. I think you mean when they are not in your favor or when they're in the miss is in your favor, right? That's oh, I see. Yeah, whatever. I got you. I got you. Do it regardless of who it is rewarding, right? Yes. You know, if they forget that they've got a word save or something, right? Like, Hey, doesn't that unit have a six up word, right? Something like that. Like people make that kind of mistake all the time, right? That stuff. I think this is just like being a good opponent when you know they have a rule, especially if they explained it to you and then forgot it, right? And then just didn't do it when they otherwise could have all of those kinds of things, right? And you're gonna be like, did you, did you want to do this? And that goes straight into the next one, which is invite them to take actions they're allowed to take, right? So like when I move, I'll move the unit. If I know I'm ending within nine, because I'm generally aware of redeploy as a thing. You know, I'll say I'll move the unit. Any redeploys? Okay, cool. Move the next unit. Good. Next unit. Good. Next unit. Okay, cool. You're gonna redeploy. All right. All right. I'll wait. Go ahead. Do it. You know, it just like a quick, like half a second check like that is so easy. And it just like, it makes the game better. This is true for redeploy, for unleash hell, for monstrous actions, like we mentioned, right? Monstrous rampages, like for so many little things like that. And this is where the, the pile in thing you mentioned to me, this is where this is. This is where this comes in, right? I always, when people come in and charge to me or they're about to pile in, I'm like, I always state, hey, you're about, you're gonna bring this unit into combat if you move it. Did you want to do that? Okay. If you did, cool. If you didn't, don't go there, right? Like, it's because it's so easy to mess that up. And I will like, telling the opponent who they're piling into. And like, that is say, not the unit they're directly trying to fight, right? Of course, they're one of that, but that they're bringing other units into combat is just such a simple thing. And, and at the same time, it like, it just helps them avoid a stupid gotcha when you're later like, okay, now I'm going to pile into the unit. And they're like, wait, what? And you're like, yes, as you can see, you were exactly at 2.9 inches away. So got them. Right, right. Yes, I agree. By the way, Gareth says that it's a tactical move to bait them into incorrect redeploys. I'm not going to say there's no psychological warfare to inviting them to the redeploy when I when I want them to redeploy early. You might be right, you might be somewhat right there. There's a there's a there's a secondary level of psychological warfare that may or may not be going on. But it's still nicer to do it. It's friendly psychological warfare. Okay. Well, that does get into I mean, part of this is the gotcha conversation later, and while we're talking about redeploy and piling in, though, again, this isn't right or wrong. Over the years, though, I've had a much this kind of gets into the ethical errors, right? And here, let me give an example. So the last week, Sellison Prime charged into some stormcast unit and stayed outside of three inches of two storm drake guards so that I'm not getting monstrous rampaged. And then so my entire intent was to kill those storm drake or try to kill the storm drake guard with prime time. But I lost my mind and activated Bastion first. The lad my opponent, of course, to pile around prime to swing around him, screwing up his ability to get into the storm drake guard. Yeah. And my intent, and it was clear to my opponent, we talked about it was a casual friendly game, was to kill the storm drake guard, activate first blah, blah, blah. I lost my mind. So, you know, I mean, I think the answer of that is that's on me at a tournament in a casual game, whatever. But I do find that an interesting example where I think there would be many players who would give someone that take back at a top table at a tournament, but you can in no way expect that to be given to you when you make that mistake, at least in my mind. I'm curious what you think about that example. No, I agree. I don't think I would have given it back to you. Sure. No, that's fair. Because, like, if you say, hey, my intent is to do this thing, and then you go and directly do the opposite, like, yeah, that's, that's on you, right? Like, I don't, I don't know what to tell you. And that's my point of like, we've got to live in a shared reality. Like, if you say my intent is to pile in here, and then I'm going to swing around, and I go, and then we measure it, and I go, yes, I think you can do that, right? Like, by all of the rules, constructs of this game, I agree with the shared reality that you could come in with prime, his three inch piling will take him to within range of the Stormdrake card, you could fight them. Like, that's what you're gaining agreement on, right? That reality is correct. But if you then lose your mind, right? And you're like, okay, let me activate this other unit first. Like, hey, man, sorry, I don't know what to tell you. You're, you told me what your tactic was. I agreed, you could do it, and then you did something else, like, else, right? That's when we get into the, the, yeah, more of the takebacks and what's reasonable, and only what's reasonable, what's, yeah, it is the, you know, the gray area of it. I mean, like, I know that it's not reasonable to ask for a takeback in that, but it certainly feels terrible in the moment to have lost your mind. Yeah, I mean, I think assistant ref is correct when he says like, and this is something I have done, which is like, say, wait, weren't you going to do this thing first? Like when you start to go with Bastion, that's a very reasonable thing to do, right? But, but again, I don't, I, you know, there's got to be some limit to this. You can't really tell your opponent how to play that. Like, you're not there to play your opponent's army, right? And so to me, that falls into like the, the like a nice thing to do, but not a, not a required thing to do. Like the redeploys and the pylons and the unleash hell, those are the unintentional things. It's easy to forget, right? But like, they're activating units in combat. That's not forgetting anything, right? Definitely. Let me, let me just throw out one more, because I know we'll probably get into this. So one more example, this is kind of a temperature check with redeploy, right? So I was at a tournament and again, I'm not just, these are personal experiences. So they're not meant to be anything beyond that. My opponent got within redeploy range, could have put 10 protectors, I could have put a sufficient number of objective, a number of protectors on an objective by rolling a two up is what I needed to steal that objective from him. Didn't see it. And I pointed it out, because it would have had a big impact on the game. To me, that's probably an example along the lines of what we just discussed with Celeston Prime. But is it, is in your mind, is there any difference because it's like, it's redeploy, it's kind of a core mechanic, or is that just a tactical error of my opponent? And I'm under, nobody's under any obligation to point that out. Yeah, it's a good, it's a good question, right? So like, the opponent is moving by moving at nine inches, they're going to let your dudes come forward with a redeploy, right? And then you're going to be able to take the objective away from them on the move, right? Really screw up their turn, potentially. Yeah. Maybe their entire game. Yeah. Yeah. And so like, I, you know, again, I think that probably fault like, you're not, there's no rules thing, they're forgetting necessarily there, right? Because what they hopefully by you asking them to redeploy throughout the game, you've triggered in them to reciprocate, right? And got them thinking about it, like another advantage to having the like regular rules cadence asking, like we talked about above, right? Is that it gets it in their head and they start like learning and using it correctly, right? And then realize, oh wait, now they're thinking about redeploy when they move their units, they're like, oh, he could redeploy toward me, right? But at the same time, no, I don't think I'd say, you know, yeah, you know, hey, if you move there, I can redeploy onto the objective. Like I don't think I would tell my opponent that I think I would just do it, right? And, and go from there. I think there's certain cases where sort of they're tripping into something in your rules so obvious that you've told them you can do that it's that it's good to remind them. So I have like the Manfred example is the next one here, right? Like they take they sort of have a unit, let's imagine they have a hammer unit that could charge Manfred or something else, anything else in your Soul Blight army, okay? And, and so they roll their charge and their charge is good enough to charge either unit, right? Okay. And then they like, they go, okay, I'm gonna, I'm gonna go into Manfred. And you're like, that might be a fair time for you to go, don't forget, Manfred can teleport away at the start of combat. Is that your intention? Right? Like, because they might not have Soul Blight locked in their head, they might not know Manfred can do that, right? And so like that kind of thing that feels when it's sort of like an automatic there's no cost to me, you're really probably tripping into something stupid. You know, that to me is the kind of thing I'll generally talk about, you know, or like, here's another one, you know, if you charge that I can unleash from this unit. Yeah, I'll tell people that all the time, right? Like if I have shooters behind, like at the line, but but still like that unit can shoot, right? And, you know, I'll say, hey, you're, you're, you know, I can unleash with this unit if you if you charge there. Right? Like, and then if they if they say, yep, okay, cool, great, let's keep going, right? But if they're like, Oh, actually, you're right, I could have charged over here. Great. Well, then charge over there. Right? Like those kinds of like super obvious things to me. I'm okay with it. Right on. Yeah, yeah. Like I think that's the type of stuff you should say, and just have open dialogue about it just makes for a better game, right? Like, and I think that's a clear example of your first line on the slide, which is uh, player's code has this item explicitly, you know, we talked before the show about how this is the one clear item in the player's code that gets into playing by intent very, very clearly. The exact phrase remind your opponent about rules they may have forgotten to use or that they have used incorrectly, especially in doing so is your opponent's advantage than your own. And I've just found that it does seem like we haven't had enough shit, like enough conversation or almost like realization man in the community collectively, that that's the thing. I tend to find that sometimes I fail to do that. And only as a player base, we fail to do that consistently, right? Like, it's not, it's not remotely subconscious. It's not, it's not autonomic, the community that we're doing this, right? And though we should be, and then like, where's the line on clear examples of what this is and what it's not? We just, we just gave it, I think a pretty good example with Manfred versus redeploy to still an objective when your opponent didn't realize that I think that's a pretty clear delineation of the line. Yeah. And, you know, so Aaron asked an interesting question. There's, I think the question here that I've, that's difficult the other way around is, do I need to tell my opponent that they can redeploy when I know that even a one inch redeploy would mess up my turn? And my answer is yeah. That's why I said like, every time I move, if I move, and I know I'm going to end up within nine inches of somebody, I'm like, do you want to redeploy? Like, I know they can do that. And you have to play assuming that the other person is aware of the rules, right? Like, if that's going to mess up your turn and ruin the game for you, then you have to choose a different tactic, right? Or something like that or figure out a different way to get around it, because you should generally be trying to always structure your own turns as though your opponents are going to take full advantage of the rules, right? Like you shouldn't be trying to win hoping your opponent forgets something like, oh, geez, I hope they forget they have a word save. That's effectively what you're banking on, right? Right. And so like that's why I say, and I just, I get into the habit of it, I move any redeploy, cool, move any redeploy, cool. That's like, I'm not, I'm not saying do you want to redeploy that unit? I'm not telling them what would be tactically smart to do. Hey, did you know if you redeploy toward me, you can steal the objective from me? I'm not going to say that, right? But I'm going to invite them into the, again, into the open knowledge that they should have that they might have forgotten because they're thinking about 50 things in the game at that moment, right? And to me, that's the bright line. The bright line is between what is an open rule that they have full and present access to versus tactics that they may or may not think of. Okay. Because like you had to redeploying forward and taking the objective, that's a, that's a layer on top of the redeploy, right? Most people when they redeploy, they just replay away. That's the standard move, right? So like, you know, if I would have moved near your, your, your protectors, I would have said any redeploys. And then if you thought, hey, if it, if the thought occurred to you, I can go forward and steal the objective. Great. That's on me for not realizing you could have done that, right? But if you go, no, okay, cool. Moving on, right? We've, we've, we've got its intent. We've, we've shared this little communicative moment and we're good, right? And so like, and I think that there, that the point is you don't ever want to be giving, you can't play their game tactically, right? And that's why I just invite them into the rules. Did you have a response to this? It's the same, honestly, this is the same thing I used to do in magic, because oftentimes you'll play in magic against like, you know, decks that have counterspells and other interactions or things that could be done with cards and, you know, activated abilities. So I'll play this card, any response? Okay, it results, right? And like, you just wait, like any response, it's just, it's just getting into that habit of like inviting the response. If they have within their capability, within the open, known rules, a thing that they have access to do, then it's nothing but good manners to invite them into that moment, right? And not breeze through it quickly, like move, move, because the opposite side is you're moving, you're moving, you're moving, they're like, wait, wait, I wanted to redeploy. And it's like, Oh, well, no, it's too late. I already moved to other units. It's like, no, you were rushing. Right? That's how you get a bad game. Do you want to get a bad game, Lana? Because this is how you get a bad game. Definitely. Awesome comments tonight on this topic. Yeah, autumn lotus. There's a line between politely reminding people and babysitting them so they don't fail. What is enjoyable? The other is irritating. Absolutely. And Nicholas Walters, Jack from Rewrilling Ones, you know, been making some comments about particularly competitive tournament setting, right? The importance of learning and understanding context and where you are. And Jack made the comment about the effects he had earlier on of this guy syndrome, where he was losing games by being too nice. And I mean, that's that's certainly a thing. And that does get into, right, the subjectivity of this is that there's going to be variants. And in that regard, there cannot be expectations with some of these things that it's not a good idea for us to have the view of trying to promote that level of quote unquote niceness. That's that's not that's not reasonable for for a number of reasons. But yeah, to try to have some clear delineation, though, on what is very healthy to promote for for better games and better community. Yeah. And like, you know, I saw some of the things, you know, Nicholas mentioned was like, you know, like, well, if they make a mistake, they make a mistake. It's this that it's it's whatever, you know, welcome to this level of play. Again, that's fine. If that's the game you're playing, as long as you state that at the beginning, right? That's what we talked about. Like, if you rock up and you're like, hey, look, we're going to play by intent, I'm going to openly communicate, but we're not doing takes these backsies, right? If you make a mistake, you made a mistake. Right. If I make a mistake, I made a mistake. That's how we're that's how I would like to play. You good with that. Right. And again, that you good with that is a really important phrase there. Right. Like that kind of stuff is important. Right. And if you both agree to it, cool. Play the hardest edge game. No takesies backsies. You don't pick a battle tactic. You don't get a battle tactic, I guess. Right. Like that's too bad for you. Too bad. So sad. Should have been a better player. Right. Get good, son. If that's what you both agreed to play because you're trying to do that, cool. Right. Fine. A plus. No problems at all. Right. But like, and even if you're not going to invite them into the redeploy, even just like, which, which I think those kinds of things are just general sort of good manners, but like just not being too quick with your play in a game that has responses, I think is the other part of that that's good. Right. Like if you're like, you know, you're just doing a bunch of stuff and you're not even looking at your opponent or asking them or anything or look, you know, check it in with them and you're just going about your turn, rolling dice, doing things. That's just, that's just set up to be a bad time. Right. Because there, this is now a game where there are responses, reactions, things that, that can sort of interrupt your flow as it were. Right. Like, and so like the, the, the world where you, you just don't pay any attention to your opponent and play like they're not present at the table. That's just not a good game. That's what I would say. Right. I think that's obvious. Um, the other thing I would, so the, my final point on the slide here, and we, there's some more discussions I want to have on this, because there's a couple more examples we got earlier on the show. When they state that something is their intent, I'm setting this up so there's no way you can deploy nine inches away. Don't say nothing. Right. Like you, if it like, wait for your opponent to agree, or if they don't say anything, just be like, are you okay with that? Prompt to them. You know what I mean? And it's same for you. Like this is a mistake I made. Okay. I had a game was my game five at a tournament and my opponent said, you know, okay, I'm just like kind of open to state measures. Like I'm, I'm blocking out the back of the board and I was like, all right. Yeah. Okay. And I didn't go over there and look or whatever. And then it came to my turn and I went over there and measured on my turn and it was clear that there was enough space over there. Right. And of course it led to an argument. Now, because we didn't actually go agree on the physical reality. By the way, this is on me, not my opponent. Right. Like I, I should have been the one who went over there and looked at that originally and said, I don't know, man. That looks like I could fit a unit back there. Right. Like I don't, my bases aren't that big. You're not all the way at the edge of the board. Right. And like it was, it was on me for not going there and saying that. And now in the end, I ended up, it led to an argument and I said, you know what, let's just, it's fine. I picked up my toys. I put them into a place that we think there was absolutely no, that he wasn't trying to hedge out, that there was no previous discussion on and, and, you know, life went on. Okay. Fine. And, but, you know, that was on me for not, the, the, it was on me for not assenting, not going over there, not checking, not verifying, not being an active participant. Right. And what was going on. Like my opponent was trying to play by my intent. And I wasn't, I wasn't participating in the way I should have. Like that was my failure. All right. And so I think that like you have to, you have to get in there and it's a, it's a block and tackle game. All right. Like you can't be just some passenger, passenger on a train. Right. You don't get to say where the conductor goes. You know, you got to get up there in there. You got to get up there and start taking a little control. Right. Okay. So there was the question, let's return to a couple of the interesting earlier questions. Right. Yeah. So Gareth had said, you know, we did, he does this a lot and he went, he had a basically a near dead Marathi, like in other words, she could die this turn. She hadn't taken her three wounds and she had less than three wounds remaining. Right. Charge scar brand. Okay. And scar brand has a shooting attack and could unleash the dozen mortal wounds. Right. And he said, Gareth said, Hey, if you charge me, if you're going to complete that charge, I can unleash on you and it's straight mortal wounds. Right. Like, which is by the way, that's exactly what we're talking about. Right. That's exactly the, the Manfred example. The like, it's so obvious you're forgetting one of my rules things. That's being a good player. Right. Players like whatever charges gets hit by the mortal wounds and dies. And the player goes, Oh, I thought the mortal wounds were only on a six. Okay. And it's like, I don't fault Gareth at all in that situation. Right. He was very clear about it. And the other player didn't get involved in the block and tackle of it and say, well, what are the, what are the chances of you doing those mortal wounds? Right. Like, you know, just assumed. Right. Or, and if you thought you knew the answer, unless you're 100% positive, clarify, is that only on a six? Is that, Oh, no, no, it's on a two up. Oh, okay. Never mind. I'm not going to charge. Right. Like, you know, like, Hey, you know, if you charge my sprites, I'm going to unleash on you and then float away. That's, that's a fair thing to say. Remember, my, my little sprite archers can do this. Right. So like, to me, that's on the other player. Gareth played exactly right. He communicated. He gave the person the option. They still did it. Boom. That's, they, you know, that's what happened. The opposite of that was the example from earlier. And I apologize. I don't remember the name of the person who, who said it, but it was the example of the, the fire slayer unit getting charged and then them activating the thing. Like, that just feels bad. Like that fire slayer player could have said, Hey, remember, I have a rule because again, it's open knowledge. Right. This isn't like their tactics. I'm not saying I'm going to use it. It's saying, Hey, remember, I have a rule that if you charge me, I can make one unit strike first when you charge me. Right. That's perfectly fair thing to say. You might even just shout it out at the beginning of the enemy charge phase. Right. That's how I would play that rule. I'd just be like, Hey, don't forget I've got this rule I can do. Okay. Go ahead with your sentences. Right. Cause it's going to guide their, their decisions. And again, it's open rules. There's nothing secret about that. Right. It's not their tactics. They don't know which one of your units you're going to do it with. Right. And that's where the win for lose the good player versus bad player comes in. It's how you use your rules, how you properly use your limited resources, the trades you set up, all of that kind of stuff. Right. And so like, that's the kind of stuff that I that to me is just like good etiquette to say. Right. Yeah, Kevin Engel said I could have let my opponent leave his dirt through in combat where he would have been teed up to get wrecked but reminded them they could have used strike and fade. Sure. I did. I've done the same thing playing New Sylvaneth. Like I had my opponent about to retreat. And I was like, why would you retreat? Like it's your turn. Just strike and fade if you want. Like if you want, you could just pick, I didn't say I was like, you could just pick them first and strike and fade. Now that might be going even a little farther than what you're talking about. Right. But like, and again, this was just getting them used to their rules. It was a new book. Right. And they hadn't really gotten into it yet. Definitely. Kathy, your lovely wife, your better half is in the chat. I see that. I think you must watch The Bear and get your husband to watch it as well. It's the best show of the year. It's amazing. The Bear. The Bear. Is this a boring drama? Nope. It's comedy. It's amazing. You can thank me later. All right. Okay. All right. Yeah, like Marcus has it dead on. As a Fire Slayer player, I tell them that every round of charging just to make sure they know. Yeah, exactly. Just stated at the beginning of their charge phase. In fact, it's better. I think, like, see, to me, I've seen some people talk and worried about like sort of losing the game because they're being open about the open state rules that exist. To me, that's not at all the case. This is power, right? Because I'm going to play as though you have knowledge of your own rules and knowledge of the core rules, right? Like I'm going to do that. And so like when I state those things, suddenly your opponent's off their game. Like again, it's this, you can, like there is a psychological warfare to being nice to people, right? Like you, you can win perfectly, like they can act perfectly aware of the rules and still make the wrong choices. Right? That is in fact what happens most of the time. Most of the time when people lose, it's because they were perfectly aware of the rules but made the wrong choices. Right? And so like there's nothing that unusual about that. What other examples, Tyler, did you, did you want to, to touch on here in like the communication story? Well, let's see. Guess what the comments we got from Peter Pratt, when my opponent finishes a move with the unit that is hovering about nine inches away from one of mine, I always ask, okay, so yeah, the intent to be close enough trigger redeploy. And think they end within one inch of deadly or sinister trains. We've covered that one. Paul Castro had a comment that was aligned with you. You gave the rule of thumb of one phase, you know, maybe if it's something happened one phase earlier and you forgot about it, yeah, we can go back and address that. Yeah, Paul Castro and I are birds of a feather on this one. The one phase rule is like the easy rule. It's the easy line, 90% of things you forget you remember like at the start of the next phase or like partial just just into the next phase. Right. That's what happens most games. And let's not kid ourselves. Like he who is without threat sin throw the first stone here. You know what I mean? Like, my God, we've all forgotten this stuff. We've all forgotten a monstrous rampage or something, right? Yeah. Yeah, definitely. Yeah, I guess this is personally helpful. Hopefully it's helpful to a lot of others. You know, Vince, we've talked about this over the years and I do have that bias toward preferring to play games regardless of context. If it's top table at a tournament or just casual Tuesday nightclub game, are we generally are aligned around allowing takebacks and mitigating gotchas within reason? Sure. Because we're all as we said, we're all human and experienced players are capable of losing their mind as I have at times. And yeah, maybe I should. Oh, yeah, I mean, ultimately, happy to play Warhammer where you suck it up better cup and you take the hit and you move on. That's fine. At the same time, I do I have at least like my bias on it is that happens often enough with bad everyone that I've played against. I mean, top amazing players or casual newer players that I just have developed that strong bias over the years that that's a that's my preferred way to play the game. But I don't. Yeah, so I do find it interesting to try to delineate, you know, like what are something that's not that right, man? Like we're getting into some examples of what's not that, but that's still healthier the game. So that's been very helpful in having this discussion with some of these examples. And a lot of it gets back to at that players code item that we discussed earlier. You know, I do think that's a huge area of potential improvement for the community is more actively expressing that item in the players code. And we tend to. Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I mean, I think that in my mind, the story here is really simple, but we like to make it complicated. And like, look, I'm not going to say there's not a there's not some gray area. Of course, there is, right? Most of life has some gray area to it, but we shouldn't let the exceptions drive the behavior and just say like, Oh, you know, I won't do this at all because one in 100 times, it's a it's a problem. That's obviously silly, right? You cross the street, even though one in a million times you cross the street, you're gonna hit by a car or something, right? Like whatever, we do all sorts of things that are that one in an X number of times have a bad outcome. And to me, it's like you start with the turn zero, you set that you set the tone for the open communication then, right? And then you remind them of open rules there from there. And you you stayed at the beginning. This is how I think we should handle takebacks. This is how I think we should handle, you know, stating what we're going to do. I want you, you know, I let you know, I want you to do the same and, you know, talk to me and, you know, I'll look for your agreement. If I say something, you know, hey, tell me you agree or you don't. And if not, then we'll get to the right place where we do agree. Because again, it's about getting to that shared reality, right? And you can set the takeback meter right wherever is comfortable. But if it's if it's something you just leave until round three, when it really matters, you're not going to be able to make the right the right decision in the heat of the moment. Yeah, definitely. Yeah. One of my favorite people that I've played over the years, it's fresh in mind because just had a game was Steve Potosik. Steve, forgive me if I'm butchering your name and you're listening to this. You should be used to it right now. I'm sure everybody's been butchering your name for for four decades. However, however, so the so Steve and I played, we played two games now. And with games, we had this played by agreed intent to use the the updated frame framing. And in the first game against him, I had done something silly. He let me fix it. And then in our game this weekend, he had done something silly. And, you know, like it was just, it was an obvious misplay would have hurt him. But it was he just didn't catch it in the moment. And, you know, like five minutes later, we fixed it. So I understand that's not reasonable to expect that to be the baseline in the community. Sure, just do fine. It kind of gets into the question of how do you want like we talked about this in the beginning is one of the things that Tom says now. Yeah, which I really resonate with how do you want to win the game? I don't like the idea of winning games when it's at the expense of my opponents like doing something obviously dumb. Right. Yeah, it feels bad one out of however many instances when I like some of my friends locally give me crap every other week for forgetting violent fury in a game. You know, it's like apparently I forgot violent fury on on some pigs in a game. And, you know, it's like things like that, that that stick with me at least that are annoying, but it's an obvious misplay. So I don't know if I have a point to any of this. It's just that. No, I mean, that's just it. Like if you if they've put violent fury on some pigs and then they go and attack and forget the plus one damage, then like to me it's on and you're remember that like you're aware of it, right? Like if you if you don't remember either, well, oopsie doopsie like that, which can sometimes happen, by the way. So of course, we're talking about it be acting in good faith here, right? But like, you know, my opponents put a buff on themselves. This, this happens all the time. My opponents put a buff on a unit, they come in the attack, they forget the buff. If I remember that it's present, I'll be like, Hey, don't you have that buff? Right? Shouldn't you be re-rolling ones or aren't you hitting on twos or don't you do this? Like, yeah, like if it's on there and it should be happening and they forgot and you remembered, why would you not tell them? Right? Why are you relying on you on them cheating themselves? Right? With a thing that is absolutely there. And like, yes, you can take the hard edge of like, well, it's on them to remember their own rules and own your buffs and like, yeah, that's all true. Right? But isn't it just a better world if we're like, Hey, didn't you put violent fury on those guys? Aren't they too damaged? They're like, Oh yeah, great. Okay, thanks. Right? Isn't that just a better world we live in? Because, because you yourself could very easily get in the same position somewhere. Right? Yeah, totally. And I guess that I mean, that's the basic point. It gets how do you want to win the game? I just I don't like, personally, in a better position to win games when my opponent has just done an obvious misplay. It happens all the time. Just does. And yeah, I mean, it could be one of many things. Though, but, but I get I get that that's not I don't think that's a reasonable baseline to expect from the community. Well, I mean, again, I yeah, I think it's probably a bit generous. But at the same time, if it's what you want to do in your local crew, and you all agree that if that's the agreed intent around, fine, right, you can all do that, right? It all comes from having that conversation at the beginning, right? Everything flows from that. I think it is good to stake out a reasonable position there, right? Like, just because it will help you gain agreement, like you, it's not it's not, you know, a negotiation where you're trying to start with an unreasonable position, right? But but like, having that conversation is from where everything else will flow. Yeah, yeah. And so like, um, yeah, Aaron says I had my opponent roll attacks with 30 wardens, as if they were sentinels only rolling one attack each. And I took barely any damage. I was like, you did two attacks each, right? Yeah. Great example, perfect example, right? And then they'd be like, Oh, normally did one, let me just they can roll the other half, right? Like, it's not that's not that's such an easy fix. Right. And so there you go. Like, those kinds of things, especially when you catch them in the moment, it's just being a good player in my mind. Yeah, definitely. Yeah. Okay, cool. So that's, that's, that's it. That's playing by intent and gaining that agreement. That's what it comes down to. Tyler, anything else we wanted to say before we call it a night? Oh, I don't know if I felt like maybe I missed it. I don't know if we necessarily covered the notion of gotchas well enough. Okay, let's talk about gotchas a little. Yeah. I think we got into it a little bit, but not really. Yeah, I mean, I think that all of these things are about avoiding gotchas. Yeah, like, because gotcha has this negative connotation, but all rules, all tactical errors, by the way, I don't like you're under no compulsion, my general rule is under no compulsion most of the time to like, tell your opponent they're making a tactical error, unless it's so obviously stupid that they're like, sort of, again, running into face first into a rule that they didn't weren't aware of, right? But it's an open piece of information. Like, hey, if you charge these gossip and archers, you know, I get to shoot you and then leave, right? That's an open rule they should be aware of, right? That you're just restating or like the fire slayer charge thing, right? Not, oh, hey, you know, if I move there, then next turn, I'm going to be able to move this unit and charge them and wipe them out like, no, no, no, no, right? Like, that's not, that's getting into like, that's knowledge, again, that's in my head. That's not open knowledge out in the world, right? And to me, like, if you share the rules, I don't know what there are that are gotchas anymore that have that negative connotation for the most part. I think you eliminate like 95, 98% of them, right? And if like, because then it just comes down to like tactical errors that they like, yeah, I gotcha. If I, if I lured you in with a chaff unit that you came in charge, and then I countercharged you with the hammer and lifted your unit, like I gotcha, right? If I, if I picked the proving ground so that you would put your Galatian veterans on it, so that then next turn I could flip the battle tactic to wipe out a unit of Galatian veterans and get that battle tactic, I gotcha, right? But again, that's not, that's just good play, right? That's just using your tools wisely, right? Like, I don't think you're under any compulsion. Like, again, the bright line to me here is, is it an open rule that they should have full awareness of? So it's a game rule, it's something in the opponent's book, you know, I mean, like it's, it is a rule out there in the world, it's open information, right? It's on Wahapetio or whatever, right? Versus it's something that's in my head only, because it's how I'm going to play the game, right? If I, if I trick you through my clever play, that is to say like, I make you move somewhere that was unfavorable to you, or, or whatever, and then I wipe out one of your units, or, you know, if I move a bait unit here, so then you move your castle that direction, and that opens you up for my ambush unit to command and attack your, your little heroes at the back of the line. Like, yeah, that's all just good, that's all just good Warhammer, right? That's just playing a game of Warhammer, like technically I gotcha, right? But it's not a gotcha in the way we mean it. Right. So what about, we've had someone in the chat watching your opponent forget to bring in the reserve, so they all die, is it gotcha? What's your view on that? I mean, I think if you remember, that goes back to something you said earlier, right, which was like, you know, you forgot to bring in your stuff in the reserves. If you're, if you are aware of it, this, this goes back to the same thing I thought of, right? The same thing I mentioned earlier, like if you're aware of it at that moment, one of their buffs that they forget, like if you forget too, it's not on you to remember, it's not your responsibility to remember, okay? But if you do remember, if you're like, hey, didn't you, don't you have to bring in your reserve unit this round? Right? If you remembered, yeah, you should tell them, right? Like if we're about to end the movement phase and they didn't do it, it'd be like asking, don't you have reserves is a perfectly nice and reasonable and good thing to do. Yeah, to me, man, that, I find that a perfect, like if I were to give a top line example of that player's code line item, it would be a great one, I think. Yeah, it's a consequential one that might you'll like, you shouldn't necessarily need to do that. No, it's not on you to remember their rules. It's not, like I can't set down that you, you are not playing both sides of the table. It is not on you to remind them, okay? And like, so if you forget to, which by the way, again, I can't state this plainly enough, it is not on you to remember their things, okay? And but if you happen to be aware of it, yeah, like why not be a nice person? I don't understand, right? It's a must to do this thing. Clearly, they didn't intend to just throw their unit in the bin, right? Like, so why not say it? I don't, I don't get what you're getting out of that, right? Right? Like, that makes no sense. Yeah, man, I don't, sorry, I'm not being anything by this. So don't, don't take it the wrong way. It is obviously, it's, it's a situation that I've heard other players and I did experience and no ill will buddy whatsoever. It's, it's all good. I do find it helpful to talk about this though, because I think it is an interesting example of many interesting examples. Yeah. Yeah, just in terms of, yeah, anyway, I love Tomas said, be the player you want to be playing against. Yeah, 100%. Right? Like, that's, yeah. And, you know, like that's, that's how we should be playing, right? So again, and just real quick, scuba, like, I don't have a problem if people want to play super hard core, right? That's fine. You can play super hard core, like no takesies, backsies, no nothing, you know, whatever, and you're just playing very straight Warhammer. If that's what you set up at the beginning of the game, right? Like, again, if you had the conversation that that's what we're doing and your opponent agreed, then it's on like Donkey Kong, let's do this, right? The point of this is to have a shared experience, right? And to be in a place where you're avoiding the arguments and the things like that, right? To me, this is, and I don't, Marcus said, we're primarily talking about casual games, though, right? Why are events even discussion? No, no, I disagree. I think we're talking about all games. I think this is all games from your every basement game you play to your, your friendly local game store to a tournament, like there's no time not to be having this conversation, not to be playing like this, not to be communicating effectively. Like I do this same thing in my tournament game, I do this same thing at home. Okay? Like I legitimately don't see a difference here. That's what I would say. By that, what I mean is having an open good communication to start the game is something appropriate for all of this. Now, you might set different expectations during turn zero at a tournament game than you would at a local game. Hey, fine, cool. That makes sense, right? Okay. You know, because assistant ref, I think the problem is if you don't have the conversation, there is no baseline, there is no shared middle ground, there's no heuristic, there's no bias, there's no benchmark that you can set by, right? You're just at the mercy of your opponent at that moment or there at your mercy of like, oh, I forgot this thing. Can I, can I do that thing? And then you're like, okay, well, now I'm in this moment where am I going to be a nice guy? Should I be a jerk? Right? Like, and suddenly you're like, it's uncomfortable for you. It's not good for them. It's just not great all around, right? And so I just don't, I don't understand why you wouldn't want to be openly, openly communicative if you could, right? And that's, that's the point is, yeah, the, what everyone I called the first rule turn zero, I have certainly found that to be by far the most impactful way, yeah, to cut through all of this. And yeah, yeah, and it's helped in every, every time that I've remembered to do it with my opponent. Yeah, basically every top player I've ever seen, like people who I look at and go, they are absolutely better Warhammer players than me, like hands down, right? So this is, you know, people like Relian and Bill Susan and people like that, they all do this. It's just second nature to them, right? Because they are just playing by the clear rules, stating the open knowledge openly and clearly, right? And then, and, you know, and, and, and stating upfront what they're, what, what it should be allowed and what isn't, they're bringing you along, they're openly talking the whole time. And they're beating the pants off of you, right? Because they don't need to rely on you forgetting your rules to win, right? Yeah, totally, right? They're going to beat you because they play a tight good solid game of Warhammer where they make the right decisions, right? And if the best players in the world can win acting like that and being like that, then I want to be like them. Right? Yeah, totally. I mean, that's what it boils down to. Who do you want to be like? Well, I want to be like the players most and this is true so almost universally. It's, it's crazy. You know, like Anthony Trent Nellies, another guy like this, just unbelievably solid, easy communication, very, very frank, very friendly, you know, openly having discussion over the whole time. This is this, this is this. And like, again, just one of the absolute best players I've ever played against, right? He beat me in round five, he beat Tom in round five. He's the Warhammer Weekly destroyer. Oh, I'm looking forward to NashCon then. Excellent. So, yeah, like, again, I see them and, you know, I'm in for that. So there you go. Good stuff, man. Yeah, hopefully, I mean, I got a lot out of this, hopefully, like I said, a lot of others did as well. Yeah. Some of the, so what would be some of your main takeaway, other than the turn zero idea that we discussed, what are some of your kind of mainline takeaways from this? Talk open and often communicate when you, the other big one is if you state something by intent, make sure it is agreed to. That is the other important one, right? Like, playing by intent alone isn't enough. Like, it has to be agreed intent, right? Where you are saying, my intention is to block off the back of this board so you can't deploy behind me, right? And like, they have to agree, like, look, they have to look at that and go, yes, I agree. Because if not, you just did nothing. So the active communication back and forth is important to me, right? That's, I think that's the other big one, right? So, yeah, like step one, be a decent human, seems like a reasonable thing, yeah. Right. I think for me, yeah, a big part of this for me, man, is the, is that player's, and I keep coming back to that player's code item, but yeah, I would just love to see going to tournaments in the coming years, this feeling that that's becoming more ingrained, sort of autonomic in the way that the vast majority of us play the game would love to get to that point. And we were certainly much closer to that than otherwise, but reminding your opponent about rules they may have forgotten to use or they have used incorrectly, especially in doing so is to your opponent's advantage, other than your own. I feel like there's so much that is said in that sentence. To me, it's kind of the core of the player's code. Yeah. A lot of the other items are just obvious. Player dice where your component can see them. We talked about dice, had a kid in general, be respectful, et cetera, et cetera. That stuff's obvious. Be a decent human is all of that stuff. Yeah. Sure. But yeah. Yeah. And again, the line, the bright line I draw, this is, this would be my summary point, right? The bright line I draw is the difference between open rules and just open game rules you're stating, I've moved, did you want to redeploy, right? Like just giving them the time to make that choice, right? As opposed to immediately going to move your next unit, right? Great. Fantastic. You know, that's just good communication, right? There's a difference between sharing, like you don't have to give them, you're not giving them tactical advice. Don't be their, their mom, right? That's not, nobody enjoys that, right? That's not, that's not fun. Okay. And that's not what we're saying. It's like, it's just, you're stating the open rules, you're stating what you're doing, you're talking through your intentions and you're, you're open, like when they are open, known rules, things that are out there, right? Is, is to me the, that's the way to play. That's, that's, that would be the take-homes. Have the conversation at the beginning, invite in the agreement, right? And state what you're doing, like just talk if you can. And again, just to be clear, I'm aware that there are people who are, you know, neurodivergent folks in the community and stuff like that. And it's not always easy for everyone. If you're not that person, by you doing it, you can invite your opponent into that and make it easier for them to participate. So it's even being more welcoming to other people in the, in the community, right? Right. So, you know, that's, to me, that, that's, that's great. Okay. Awesome. Cool. Tegan, maybe I'll show up. Could you talk about dice, repulling failures versus pulling successes? I mean, generally pull failures. Yes. There you go. It's that easy. You generally leave the, the successes on there. There are a very few exceptions. Like if you're hitting on only sixes, then you can just be like, one, two, three, four, you point them out. Yeah, four, you pick the four out and then roll those somewhere else. Cause it's like, get 30 dice and you only hit on sixes, something like that. You know, there, there are exceptions for the most part, you, you pull failures. Yeah. Yeah. No, scuba, I understand. That's exactly what we talked about. And that's why we said at the beginning, you state that at the beginning, like, I don't care, we can go back a phase or, or like, or you don't make, that's my personal rule and what I set up with my intent. But if you're intent, if you don't like that, you could say, look, if you remember in the phase, fine, or, or no takes these backsies, all good. As long as you're having that conversation at the beginning, great. Yeah, fine. Nobody, nobody owes going back a whole turn. I think that's probably ridiculous. Right? It's, you know, if they forgot something that far in the past, it's it. My general rule is one phase. That's what works for me. And that's what I state during my turn zero and invite the opponent to play the same game with me. Right. That's it. That's what it is. All right. Good. We'll hit like, everybody. Do that. Subscribe. By the way, a slight note here. I chase just mentioned it. So I think it's worth a shout out. If you want to help remembering your own rules, our AOS reminders, or just making yourself a cheat sheet is a great way to remind yourself of your own rules for start, during, and end of phase stuff throughout the game. I've certainly made myself cheat sheets for some of my armies. It's a great thing to do. That way you just go down a checklist. So it's just something that can help yourself. Still not going to remember everything, but it can just help you be a better player. So do that. But hit like, subscribe. Hey, if you want to support the channel, don't forget there's a, there's a Patreon down below that's focused on like the hobbies and review and feedback. You can join a great discord community full of enthusiastic hobbyists. There's merch down there. So don't forget that you can make your vote for Team Tom versus Team Tyler. And you can see which, which, which team you're on. So don't forget about that. As well, there's like an affiliate link down there for element games and all that kind of stuff that you can do to support the show. But as always, what you, what you've done already is amazing, which is watching the show. And I thank you so much for that. So I know this was a shorter show this week. I've got to go to bed to get up in just a few hours, to get on an airplane. It's nearly got you up to two hours. Hey, yeah, almost did it. Yeah, almost. But thank you very much, everybody. We really appreciate you watching. This was some absolutely fantastic discussion in the comments tonight. I really appreciate it. Tyler, thank you so much. That's a lot of fun, man. Yep. All right. Thank you, everybody. Have a great one. As always, we'll see you next Wednesday.