Rules: Nobody is Perfect

[Miami]

I'm tired of hearing people bag hardcore on Warhammer 40K for having "such a terrible set of rules." I'm no uber-fanboy saying GW is perfect and the rules are just fine, I'm just sick of hearing SO MUCH ove-the-top complaining. Of course there are problems. There are problems in every code and set of rules that exist in the world, and it's because people interpret things differently. Even billion dollar industries that have more rules than GW could even imagine have problems. They hire scores of people to watch, judge, and enforce these rules, and mistakes are made and debates rage over calls. If you don't believe me, google "Ed Hochuli Chargers Broncos."

But I came across a video today to back this up. A short film on NFL.com that shows the head officiator of the NFL going through a series of calls either to reinforce why they were made or to show that mistakes were made.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/09000d5d8144f5c1/Official-Review-Week-10-bonus-coverage

So please, before you get upset because you lost a game because of "GW's crappy swiss cheese rules," think for a moment how incredibly hard it is to come up with a foolproof set of rules and be thankful that we have a pretty fun and interesting game with great models that are ridiculously overpriced. An army's still cheaper than season tickets to the Patriots.

PS - Sorry to the non-American Warhammer players that don't care about American Football.

PSS - If you watch Mike Pereira, he is using a 360 controller to play/rewind the video. Wouldn't that be an awesome video game?

[BuFFo]

It seems you, as well as many modern 40k players, fail to realize is that 40k is not a strict rules based game.

Never was, and probably never will be.

It is a hobby that GW 'creates' to sell models.

The rules are secondary to the hobby.

People who bag GW for their crappy rules really have no idea what they are talking about.

GW's rules are just fine because it is up to both players to actually create their own rules, story, fun, so that the game is as enjoyable as possible.

40k is a hobby, not a "strict WAAC competitive" game in the slightest.

[Just_Me]

It seems you, as well as many modern 40k players, fail to realize is that 40k is not a strict rules based game.

Never was, and probably never will be.

It is a hobby that GW 'creates' to sell models.

The rules are secondary to the hobby.

People who bag GW for their crappy rules really have no idea what they are talking about.

GW's rules are just fine because it is up to both players to actually create their own rules, story, fun, so that the game is as enjoyable as possible.

40k is a hobby, not a "strict WAAC competitive" game in the slightest.

Amen!

The rules are designed to service the hobby, not the hobby to service the rules.

[Pi666]

And remember GW is British, so they would like Football (the one played with feet) and that's the game with more issues with interpretation of the rules...

[Vince]

The real issue is not their rules per say but there refusal to clarify badly worded rules. If GW would just publish a FAQ every 6 months (Hell they could even charge for it) that was just rules clarifications most of the issues with the rules could be clearly resolved. GW has badly written rules that can be salvaged with very little work but since they have terrible customer service they dont do this.

[BuFFo]

The real issue is not their rules per say but there refusal to clarify badly worded rules.

I know you probably think I am attacking you with my response here, but far from it.

You are the exact kind of person I am talking about. You simply do not know what 40k is about.

You, along side countless people online, make it seem like GW 'refuses' or 'doesn't care' to clarify their rules.

They. Don't. Need. To.

You either do not understand what 40k is about, and/or you are forgetting there is only one rule that rules them all; The Most Important Rule. Heck, it even has the words 'Most Important' in the title.


If GW would just publish a FAQ every 6 months (Hell they could even charge for it) that was just rules clarifications most of the issues with the rules could be clearly resolved.

This is proof that you don't understand the basic underlying of what makes 40k a HOBBY and not a WAAC game.

FAQs are NOT, in any way, shape, or form, official. Only Erratas are supposed to be taken seriously.

It seems no one online ever reads the Shrine of Knowledge page just BEFORE the Erratas and FAQS, where GW explains, in great length and detail the clear difference between an Errata and a FAQ.

FAQs are just suggestions. Thats it. FAQs are exactly what GW wants you to do yourself, come up with your own 'house rules'. FAQs are just GW's own house rules.

When it comes down to it, you don't need GW to tell you that you can Ram with your Deff Rolla. The 'game' is sold for people 12+, and as far as I can recall, 12+ year olds can come up with a solution themselves. The kids in my store do it just fine.

At my store, my friend will allow a local eldar player to tank shock / ram with star engines. I don't. The Eldar players knows that with different people ha can do different things.


GW has badly written rules that can be salvaged with very little work but since they have terrible customer service they dont do this.

GW doesn't write bad rules. Players simply forget the type of game it is, and for some reason, cannot come up with their own solutions.

I really don't think many people understand the true reason for this 'hobby', and the actual genius behind such an open ended system.

If anything, GW is guilty of being stuck in the 80's, and treating their hobbyists as if we still play in the 80's.

GW probably doesn't realize how 'gun ho' and 'cut throat' modern gamers are.

I mean, if you don't have a 300+ page rule book like Magic the gathering, you aren't having fun right?

[Fizyx]

If anything, GW is guilty of being stuck in the 80's, and treating their hobbyists as if we still play in the 80's.

This is the most important thing I think GW needs to figure out. Actually, I think they HAVE figured it out, and are now in the process of modernizing the hobby. They are taking their time, though.

I am not saying GW is obligated to provide FAQs for ambiguous rules, or even to provide updates for codices, but the fact is their hobby has turned into our game. I do consider myself more of a hobbyist than a gamer, but I do recognize the shift in priorities of the average consumer of GW products and GW is going to need to recognize the shift even more than they have already.

This is a generation of people who get what they want, when they want it and without question. I am not saying this is how it should be, but that is where we are at. The ubiquity of the internet and the ease of information exchange has made any corporation who fails to capitalize the 21st century powers of communication on the trailing edge, and it will only get worse. I mean, for pete's sake I just refinanced a car loan because the original financial institution didn't provide the ability to pay my bill online. If I am going to go through the trouble to do that, why shouldn't I scream at the top of my lungs for GW to improve communication for future releases and provide better rules support.

Should GW have to provide better rules support? No. Should they actually provide better rules support? Absolutely if they intend on staying relevant.

Throughout this endless debate over countless forums and multiple threads on every one of them (except here, much fewer here) I have always defended GW. Hell, I am still defending GW and I really wish people would just shut up and either come to a gentlemanly conclusion, roll a D6, flip a coin, arm wrestle, hell something besides add to the seething mass of ignorance that is 10 kinds of more destructive than Skynet could have ever hoped for. The fact is, however, that you should never, ever start a sentence with the word "however." In addition, we are never going to be able to go back to the way things were before the 21st century age of too much communication, and we--as a hobby--will have to accept this and GW--as a supporter of the hobby--will be forced to. GW will need better rules support. Not because of any obligation to the hobby, but as an obligation to the future of our world.

I really hope you can draw my conclusion out of that steaming pile of smashed dicks I call an argument. I'll try better when I don't have a class to teach in 10 minutes.

Also, I think this is my first post on this forum. Hi!

[Bean]

There have been two points made in this thread to which I object.

First, the OP asserted that rules are very hard to write perfectly, and so we should cut GW some slack. Both are true: as a system of rules becomes more complicated, it because difficult to write perfectly. That's why most legal systems don't bother but, instead, appoint judges and juries and give them the discretion to apply the rules as they deem appropriate. GW, by attempting to write the rules for a fairly complicated game (compared to, say, Go, Chess, or Othello, which actually do have perfectly functional rules), has undertaken a difficult task, and if they fail to perform that task perfectly, they should be cut some slack.

However, there's a difference between cutting them some slack and saying, "oh, it's a difficult job so they don't even need to try to do it well." The former is fine. The latter is not. In the case of Games Workshop, their efforts are pathetic. They fail to address even the most obvious of errors in anything approaching a timely fashion. It appears, really, that they just don't care, and that's not really acceptable. I'd be willing to cut them some slack if they were willing to try a little harder. As it is, they don't really deserve much beyond criticism for their handling of their rules.

Nobody's perfect, but that doesn't excuse GW for not trying to be better.


Second, Buffo has asserted that they don't need good or functional rules, that such rules are only necessary in a game where players are trying to "win at all costs," and that if the rest of us would just understand that the game is supposed to be fun, rather than competitive--that the rules are a vehicle for the hobby, rather than vice versa--we'd all be fine with the shabby state of the current rules.

This assertion is absurd. I know perfectly well that the game is supposed to be played for fun and that it is a vehicle for the hobby, and that doesn't make any difference at all.

The game is less fun when the rules fail to work. When I throw Arjac's thunderhammer at your Wraithlord and we have no way of knowing whether the Wraithlord's initiative should be reduced to 1, that makes the game less fun. Sure, we could roll a die to decide, but that hurts the experience and reduces the amount of enjoyment the game produces.

The game is about fun, but functional rules make the game more fun, while dysfunctional rules make it less fun. After all, if rules didn't make the game more fun, we wouldn't use them. We'd just push our guys around the table going 'bang, bang, freem!' and taking them off and having a good time. We don't. Instead, we play a game. With rules. Because that is more enjoyable than playing with the models without rules.

When GW fails to fix their broken rules, they're essentially saying, "we don't care how much fun you have. All we care about is that the product is just functional enough to convince you to buy our models anyway--beyond that, you all can go screw yourselves."

It's not about winning at all costs, as you seem to suggest. The rules aren't necessary only if you're playing competitively. The rules are also necessary for a fun and rewarding experience, and GW should put more effort into making sure that they function--because encountering dysfunctional rules while playing makes the game less fun. GW does need to fix their rules because broken rules make the game worse--no matter what you're playing for.

Frankly, the assertion that everyone who thinks the rules should be better simply doesn't appreciate the nature of the game is insulting. I do appreciate the nature of the game. Doing so, I still think the rules should be better written. Your argument is absurd and your accusation unjustified.

[Lerra]

It is a hobby that GW 'creates' to sell models. . . . GW's rules are just fine because it is up to both players to actually create their own rules, story, fun, so that the game is as enjoyable as possible.

40k is a hobby, not a "strict WAAC competitive" game in the slightest.

BuFFo is right here, but also consider that a lot of gamers have taken this freedom given to them by GW and decided that they want to play a chess-like wargame with it. A game that's complicated enough that clear rules are needed to avoid anger and other varieties of not-fun. 40k is a hobby, but it is also a painter's game, a modeller's game, a competitive game, etc. It is what you make of it.

Tbh, I am okay with the current state of the game. I just wish established FAQs like the Adepticon FAQ were more universally followed, and that Adepticon updated slightly more often. Gamers will probably always be more responsive to rules questions than GW will, and will probably make better rules than GW anyway! I know the desire is strong to have "official" rules from GW, but we can just as easily decide that Adepticon is official rules, too.

[DoctorEvil]

I'm tired of hearing people bag hardcore on Warhammer 40K for having "such a terrible set of rules."


Actually i hear this all the time too, but I think it's a bit of a mis-statement.

40K has a great set of rules. They're easy to learn and fun to play. It's what they aren't that causes people to complain.

40K rules are not designed for tournaments/competitive play. It's that the designers don't think of those things, they are just designing around a fun gaming experience. Hence the rules maybe be terribly "tight", FAQs are infrequently updated, etc.....

Yet, since playing in 40K tournaments is a popular pasttime, the ruleset gets knocked for being "terrible'. They're not terrible, otherwise no one would enter a tournament to play the game. But the need for tournament organizers to issue FAQs of their own and intrepret murky rules interactions leads to the "terrible" label.

[Duke]

Im going to have to disagree with you on some of your post Buffo... I think that when Warhammer was created it was to make a concise game that was rules based... I doubt the conversation was "Hey lets sell models... wait we need rules for the models." If that was the case then our minis would be little more that small GI Joes with all the 'events,' happening in our imagination.

No, Warhammer is a rules based game that makes a ton of money selling models. I have no doubt that GW has grown away from that mindset, but it doesn't change the nature of the system.

I think that GW simply thinks more actively when creating rules, they want rules that will help sell models. (apoc anyone?)

Possbily I am just a blind optimist who wants to think that GW hasn't sold their soul to capitalism.

That said I agree with the rest of your first post:
-The Rules are secondary to the hobby (assuming we are excluding the first rule "have fun,")
- A lot of times players can't come up with a reasonable solution which is stupid (I don't know how many times people won't agree to roll off to solve a simple disagreement!)

best regards,

Duke

[Rapture]

The game is less fun when the rules fail to work. When I throw Arjac's thunderhammer at your Wraithlord and we have no way of knowing whether the Wraithlord's initiative should be reduced to 1, that makes the game less fun. Sure, we could roll a die to decide, but that hurts the experience and reduces the amount of enjoyment the game produces.

I feel the same way.

[Old_Paladin]

I find that the attitude that GW shouldn't have much responsiblity BS for two reasons.
1) If 'the most important rule' really is just that, then they shouldn't release a FAQ at all. If it is up to us to come to an agreement and make house rules; then it is simply up to us. To step in and say "now that we thought about it, this is what we think the best house rule is." Then they need to stay on top of it.

2) The claim that this is just a fun hobby, not a competitive game. That would be true if GW themselves didn't hold compatitions. If it was just BOLS-con and 40K Radio doing the WWW, then fine. But when the parent company says, pay us $120, use our rules and mini's and if you win you get a 3000 point army, your own article in white dwarf and a night with Dan Abnet; then they better have rules that can be followed and understood by all the people shelling out the money.

[Duke]

I think you point out a problem that most players feel.
1. On one hand GW says it is for fun... Rule #1
2. On the other hand they highly encourage competitive gaming ('Ard boyz)

The sit very much in a grey area. the problem with that is youll always dissapoint someone. I personally think that they should take a mroe active approach at resolving rules quandries.

Duke

[Denzark]

It seems you, as well as many modern 40k players, fail to realize is that 40k is not a strict rules based game.

The rules might not be strict but the game is rules based - hence you have something called a rule book

Never was, and probably never will be.

No really, it's called a rule book.

It is a hobby that GW 'creates' to sell models.

The rules are secondary to the hobby.

Why do they waste time (=money) and resources updating the rules ever, and not just produce new codexes/models? Is it because over time the rules become dated and need changing,hence ar ecrucial to the hobby?

People who bag GW for their crappy rules really have no idea what they are talking about.

This is a harsh comment - it is quite reasonable for someone of sound mind to expect something called a rule book to make sense in all circumstances. Squash is just a game and the rules of squash make 100% sense

GW's rules are just fine because it is up to both players to actually create their own rules, story, fun, so that the game is as enjoyable as possible.

For some people they would get a more enjoyable game if 100% of the rules in that item ironically called a rule book made sense.

40k is a hobby, not a "strict WAAC competitive" game in the slightest.

this final comment has no relevancy as to whether or not people can expect rules that work. I prefer a closlely fought game down to the last turn - win or not the spectacle is it. But it doesn't mean I am wrong to not want a rule to make sense to both players.

[Duke]

... I prefer a closlely fought game down to the last turn - win or not the spectacle is it. But it doesn't mean I am wrong to not want a rule to make sense to both players.

I think we all prefer these games, where your pissed turn 3 and elated turn 5. Clear cut rules make it easier to enjoy the game. Vauge rules make it very difficult to simply have fun, and only serve to make it more competitive because now we are not only competing on the table top, but also in our ability to argue a rules point.

Duke

[Denzark]

Vauge rules make it very difficult to simply have fun, and only serve to make it more competitive because now we are not only competing on the table top, but also in our ability to argue a rules point.

Duke

I'd never thought of this - not only are we trying to get our troops to vanquish using our cunning plans only to fail by the whims of the dice gods but we now and again have to try and argue like OJ simpson's lawyer to resolve a pigging rules query.

I think you are spot on here Duke.

[MajorSoB]

And remember GW is British, so they would like Football (the one played with feet) and that's the game with more issues with interpretation of the rules...

This above all other points to me is the key.

GW is a British company and suffer from the arrogance that have cost Britian their worldwide empire. GW honestly believes that they have created a "perfect" system of rules with each version and codex released. The real reason that FAQ are seldom released is that they do not feel they are necessary. The rules are quite clear and fair to the people who have designed them, therefore they should be equally clear and concise to everyone else. There is never a need to patch a perfect product. Also remember that these rules are only changed to sell product and if product cannot be sold by a rules change then it will be a LONG F-ing time before GW gives that set of rules any attention. ( Can I hear a HELL YA from all you DE playaz!) Complaining about GW rules is like complaining about the weather, no one ever hears what you are saying and when it changes it happens without any control from you. Play the game and have fun, stop worrying about GW's "perfect"set of rules because I guarantee no one at GW worries about them!

[Denzark]

This above all other points to me is the key.

GW is a British company and suffer from the arrogance that have cost Britian their worldwide empire.

Really old chap I thought I remember being taught in history it was the cost of fighting German tyranny for a decade last century. You know, that century where you played for 6 years, coming somewhat late to the party both times...

[Melissia]

Oh shutup, both of you. Nation-bashing will only resort in moderator action, and nation-bashing posts are worthless trash.

[BuFFo]

Im going to have to disagree with you on some of your post Buffo... I think that when Warhammer was created it was to make a concise game that was rules based...

Sorry bro....

You didn't play Rogue Trader, when 40k required a Dungeon Master to play the game.

Yes. You heard that right. The game required two players to fight each other, and a Rules Judge, a dungeon master, to run the scenario and resolve all rules issues.

40k has always been a game designed for the players to use their own imagination to complete a game. And obviously, by the responses I am reading, people simply do not 'get' what 40k is about, and probably never will.

I probably come off as egotistical, or ignorant, whatever.... Convincing people that their family cars are made for weekend fun and not to be used on an Indy 500 race track is pointless if all you care about is taking your family car, and complain to the manufacturer why your engine doesn't have 500 horse power.


I find that the attitude that GW shouldn't have much responsiblity BS for two reasons.
1) If 'the most important rule' really is just that, then they shouldn't release a FAQ at all.

Are you not reading what I write, kind sir?

FAQs are NOT required to play the game at all. The inability for creativity and self policing does not a rules broken system make.


If it is up to us to come to an agreement and make house rules; then it is simply up to us.

Yes, this is exactly what GW wants players to do. Do you not read half the fun battle reports GW has in White Dwarf, where the design team just creates Ork vehicles and tank-trains and scenarios with 'house rules'? Half of the battle reports are full of things that both players just make up to make the game they are playing FUN and INTERESTING.


To step in and say "now that we thought about it, this is what we think the best house rule is."

Sorry, GW never has suggested that their house rules are better than anyone else. First, you are just not understanding the Shrine of Knowledge where GW tells you that their faqs are not better than your own creative house rules.

second, who do you think makes the faqs? You do know for the past few years, all gw faqs are created by fans, mainly an internet yahoo group of just regular gamers. Yes, the 'official' faqs that everyone swoons over are just opinions by people like you and me, non gw employees who are not paid to do so. Read the faqs from 2007ish I believe. You'll see the name of the group at the bottom of the faq. GW has stopped using their name on the faqs and now just randomly credits people around the world on their current faqs.

So to reiterate, yes, these official faqs are anything but in every way possible. They are written by gamers and in the shrine of knowledge you are told flat out a faq is not an errata. What more do you need to understand 40k is NOT a strict rules based game in any sense?


Clear cut rules make it easier to enjoy the game.

Depends on the kind of person you are. You clearly would rather play Warmachine, with its clearer rules, than 40k, where player improvisation is required.


Vauge rules make it very difficult to simply have fun, and only serve to make it more competitive because now we are not only competing on the table top, but also in our ability to argue a rules point.

For over two decades, I have been having fun just fine with 'vague' rules, and so has the majority of my opponents. It is the 'rules lawyer' type players who can't just sit down, shut up, and enjoy the game, because they are playing the wrong type of game.

When you come across a rules issue you cannot resolve, roll a dice, and be done with it. So simple, so effective.


Oh shutup, both of you. Nation-bashing will only resort in moderator action, and nation-bashing posts are worthless trash.

Yeah, totally :)

Oh no I made a multi quote post! Time for people to rip me a new one!

[Kahoolin]

Oh no I made a multi quote post! Time for people to rip me a new one!I don't know mate, that seemed very clear and convincing. And unusually polite by your standards ;)

The only time anyone can honestly find rolling a dice to resolve a rules issue unacceptable is if they are seeking some kind of rules advantage, and GW games simply do not favour that play style. They are not designed to support it. I'm not judging, I'm just saying. Different games are designed with different aims, and the designers shouldn't have to change their aim unless the market dictates.