Deadnight wrote:WayneTheGame wrote:Slightly related to this topic, I found a great quote from Jay Larsen (a well-known Warmachine player, also the Season 1 World Champion) in an article talking about David Sirlin's book and the application of the theories therein to Warmachine.
I thought this quote in particular is pretty apt for Warhammer, although the context is in regards to "self-limiting players" (he chooses not to use the word "scrub" as in Sirlin's book) who feel that the game (Warmachine in this case) isn't properly balanced:
Many self restricted players believe that it is the duty of the players to create social contracts that discourage certain play styles or models for the fun or health of the game. They are wrong, these players are assuming the responsibility of a game designer rather than that of a player. If the game designer is not able to create a well balanced and fun game, then the player should find a better game instead of trying to apply band-aids to a broken product.
I Don't necessarily disagree with jay, but I dont think what he says is right either. I think this handwaving away of responsibility is a very selfish and lazy attitude to take, and one that ultimately can be as self defeating and self destructive as any kind of
Waac attitude. I think it's wrong to out of hand dismiss player responsibility and player input.
Ultimately, there are three paths to take. Accept it for what it is, and plod along. Walk away. Reshape the game so that it works for you. Ge wrongly dismisses the last option. Social contracts are not ideal, but they're not bad either. There's nothing wrong with 'we don't use flyers of super heavies.' Etc. now obviously, this goes with the caveat that this only really works amongst close friends and groups of like minded individuals. It's not something that works well for tourneys or pugs, but I also don't see either of these types as defining of all table top gaming can be.
Thryre not 'wrong' for assuming the responsibility of the game. They're simply making it theirs. They're empowering themselves to tweak the game into something that works for them. And fair play. Why the distinction between player and designer? Why can't I be both? Why can't we treat the rules as a giant sandbox? Some people actively enjoy all that tinkering and tweaking, and playing around with different mechanics. We do it all the time in our flames of war games. Why should I, or anyone else be pigeonholed into playing someone else's game?
40k is a mess, but actively trying to make it work amongst your own group is not necessarily a bad thing.
Thry should find a better game? Well, fine. It's an option, and a very valid option. I did. And I don't regret it, But I'm also not adverse to having a deadnighthammer
40k as a side project. I think if I had the right group with the right mindset, I could still be playing
40k and having a blast.
our only true responsibility as gamers is to try to enjoy the games we play. Whether it's a new game, or a band-aid to an existing game, or a home brew, who cares? If you're having fun, essentially you're doing it right.