Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I'm working on some club specific AB files and I get to the orks.  Well, in the ork FAQ it states that the mek's force field is measured from him not the vehicle.  In the new 40k FAQ it states that transported models aren't even on the table.

Aaaaaaaarrgh!  Why GW, Why!?

Here's my proposed solution to GW:

Instead of having one guy or even a group of a few people responsible for all of the codexes and main rules creation/FAQing.  Assign a specific person to each codex and a specific person to the main rules.  All changes and clarifications to the main rules should be displayed to the entire team before acceptance.  Changes to a particular codex would really only need to involve the person in charge of that codex and the main rules person.  These people don't even have to be the ones that write the rules.  They just need to be responsible for consistency and keeping the writers from overlooking the little things.  In a perfect world these people would also be responsible for the writing and developing the races, art, whatever, but realistically that probably won't happen.

GW could even outsource these responsibilities to those willing to take the responsibility with the proper non-disclosure and legal arrangements.  I'm sure on Dakka alone we could find enough people to fill all of these roles.  I'm putting this here in the hopes that it can metamorphasize into reality through enough people demanding the same or similar ideas over the internet.

Oh, and I realize that the new ork codex is probably on it's way and the very nature of the ancient codex creates rampant rules problems, but my example is just one that I found today.  We all know that even the most current codexes come across with a feeling of inconsistency.

While I completely agree with everything you've said (although we've all talked about similar things before), the FAQ does say "unless specified otherwise".

Ork KFFs and Daemonic Possession are just two rules (I'm sure there are more) that clearly specify that they work while "in" a vehicle. So in the case of a KFF (and only a KFF) you place the Mek model on the vehicle and measure distance from there.


But as to your main point: Nothing will ever happen in terms of GW outsourcing their FAQ responsiblities to others. Just getting some updated FAQs is pretty much a major step right now.

Posted By Glaive Company CO on 10/20/2006 10:57 AM

Here's my proposed solution to GW:

You brought up an interesting situation.  I was quick to dismiss it and call you wrong based on the assumption that reference to them not being "on the table", would not prevent this necesarilly,( though would beg for additional clarification). 

However, before I got that far, I looked at the ruling and found out you are completely write according to the line "as they are not physically on the table, they can do nothing...(exception noted)"  It is not in the first portion of that sence, but rather the blaringly obvious "can do nothing part (and noting the exception of shooting from firing ports).

Regarding you proposed solution, I would suggest the notion that that is already happenning.  While obviously capable of making mistakes, I think it highly likely that this game company would employ, either as employee or fanatic) a quality assurance process that would attempt to minimize product flaws. 

This is not to say that  that flaws won't occur.  they are most likely to happen.  What I am saying is that I think the Dev team make a real effort to prevent them. 

Now what ever beauracracy the company has in place may work directly against that intention, but I imagine no good game designer thinks to himself "I want to make a crappy game".

The current FAQ and Errata seems so far to be a "living" errata, one that can change as a result of feedback.  We have already seen 2-3 changes corrections since the last set of FAQs were released (the tyrnid FAQ changed 3 times over the Synapse/Instant Death situation.

You caught this situation because you had your mihnd focussed on a specific instance and found the ruling didn't well take it into consideration (assuming it's supposed to).  That's cool! but don't think it easy to find.

finally, I have recently went on a rampage here saying that Dakka Produced a pretty great list of errata and was sad to see it not used by the GW staff.  they didn't use it because they didn't see it.   They didn't see it because they don't really frequent Dakka Dakka.  they don't really Frequent Dakka Dakka because people are quick to spoutt spit and wind.  I can't blame them really.  I wouldn't go to a party consiting of only my exgirlfriends.

Addtionally, Public arenas like a semi-monitered community forums don't make a great place for efficient discussion, as creidible debate tends to get steamrolled by trolling, and loud people who think their idea is infallible and MUST BE HEARD ABOVE ALL ELSE.  I would love it were it not the case, but how often do threads not spread to the inevitable namecalling/ opponent bashing variety. 

I would love it, were your idea to happen, as I think there are manyt smart Dakkites here.  But they will not be seen past the louder, less reputable Dakkites who pushed GW away in the first place.  

now Kotrin, You may again call me fanboy, as that is the only possibility for someone who writes a post not spewing venom at the makers of the game I play and talk about so passionately.

wns,

Tim

 

 

That was a really long post.

I recommend in future you keep it to about two lines, the last of which should be something witty, funny, or plain biting, lest the fair people of dakka get bored.

Chuck

Posted By chuckyhol on 10/20/2006 5:41 PM
That was a really long post.

I recommend in future you keep it to about two lines, the last of which should be something witty, funny, or plain biting, lest the fair people of dakka get bored.

Chuck

Unfortunately, Tim is right on.  And what's more, I've had the good fortune to game with him on a few occassions.

I'd add a caveat to his comments, places like Dakka and AWC are a double edged sword.  It's good to have the commentary, and the criticism, but at some point, it gets to be too much like ganging up on the guy who is down on the ropes, be it GW, a newbie playing a list that is not considered to be optimized for whatever race he plays, someone who comes with the millionth question about area terrain, or the proper way to orgainze and execute a tournament.