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.

dosiere wrote:
In fairness, everyone knows GW write their rules like they write fluff. They don’t do technical writing well, or at all. Look at the mess the simple keyword system can be. Their rules are messy, wordy, and sometimes ill-conceived from the start. They love adding layer upon layer to the rules to make them complicated. It’s unfortunate from time to time but if you’re going to play a GW game it’s just how it is.

The case for assault weapons, while funny, is such a clear case of Nonsensical RAW interpretation trumping an obvious RAI one though it’s not even worth mentioning IMO. Yeah, you can lawyer it up, but was ANYONE IRL actually arguing with an opponent that assault weapons didn’t work and could never fire? No, I don’t think so.

No, of course not. Ive never met anyone who would argue that the raw is what should be played. Same with pyrovores blowing up the whole table in 6th and 7th ed. But again, just because the rai is clear in THOSE cases it doesnt do anything to help out all the significantly more numerous instances where the rai is less clear. Its just indicative of, and a good obvious example to point at when discussing, how unclear and poorly written the rules tend to be.

Being someone who gets relied upon by his club to introduce a lot of new players to the game, I definitely notice the cost of GW's shoddy writing.

If you've been around the block for a few years and some, it's not so bad. You can piece together the gaps and are used to enough rules lawyering that working through the bulk of it is not going to break down most games. But you get some new players who are trying to learn the systems, especially younger ones or those with reading/learning issues (something that tends to be fairly common in wargaming circles, in my experience), and things will grind. And that comes with a real cost. Those new players have less satisfying games for it, and people don't like playing against the new blood because of the constant stumbling.

It's not healthy for the game or the community, and GW should be held to a higher standard.

 Fafnir wrote:
Being someone who gets relied upon by his club to introduce a lot of new players to the game, I definitely notice the cost of GW's shoddy writing.

If you've been around the block for a few years and some, it's not so bad. You can piece together the gaps and are used to enough rules lawyering that working through the bulk of it is not going to break down most games. But you get some new players who are trying to learn the systems, especially younger ones or those with reading/learning issues (something that tends to be fairly common in wargaming circles, in my experience), and things will grind. And that comes with a real cost. Those new players have less satisfying games for it, and people don't like playing against the new blood because of the constant stumbling.

It's not healthy for the game or the community, and GW should be held to a higher standard.

I've literally never had this problem introducing someone to the game.

I have.

I'm dealing with several players right now who end up alienated from the group without some real prodding from the store managers and myself. Making sure they get games in when they're getting hung up on rules and confused about certain effects that should be laid out more clearly can end up just as frustrating for their opponents as it is for themselves.

And then you introduce poorly designed update/expansion content like Chapter Approved to players who already have these problems, and it's painful to watch.
It wouldn't be so bad if it was wholly self-contained like the General's Handbook, but just try watching a kid who already has difficulties with the numbers having to deal with sourcing his values for one army from three different books is painful for everyone involved.

 Fafnir wrote:
I'm dealing with several players right now who end up alienated from the group without some real prodding from the store managers and myself. Making sure they get games in when they're getting hung up on rules and confused about certain effects that should be laid out more clearly can end up just as frustrating for their opponents as it is for themselves.

And then you introduce poorly designed update/expansion content like Chapter Approved to players who already have these problems, and it's painful to watch.
It wouldn't be so bad if it was wholly self-contained like the General's Handbook, but just try watching a kid who already has difficulties with the numbers having to deal with sourcing his values for one army from three different books is painful for everyone involved.

Why don't you just play power level then since CA didn't change that? Why force a more complicated system when a simpler one is in place? Is your group so heartless that it won't budge on using points to help ease people into the game?

Because changing to an entirely separate system is not going to help players who are already struggling with the uptake. Especially when it means alienating those players into a further separate group, and essentially excluding them from any events the club would end up running.

I agree with the above. Multiple rules that can change just creates group self segregation where people cant play together. If there was just one set of rules to use learning the game would be much simpler.

Ive learned how to play matched play no matter the issues i have with it but now i cant play open and narritive because they are too different and no one else plays by those rules.

In 7th you could play any game type you wished and the rules were always the same.

The problem started to bleed in at its worst (never to be corrected) when GW began to use a separation of 'narrative' (or whatever the hell they meant by that) and gameplay as an excuse to make shoddy rules.

Truth of the matter is that if you create systems that encourage fair, creative play, games will forge their own narratives organically. And they're all the more exciting because they're not forced onto or by the players.

On the rules subject, one thing I never got is why people give GW a pass. Any other company is expected to put out a quality product, but with GW it's always handwaved away and ignored. I even saw one person argue on a facebook group that GW should not be expected to have their books proofread because "they are not a publishing company".

Warhammer is one of, if not the most expensive, miniature games on the market. GW is also one of, if not the largest, company in that market. So why is the "market leader" allowed to put out poorly-written, poorly-proofread, typo-laden products and charge a premium for them, while other much smaller company manage to write both good rules and make sure they are edited properly? Even if we excuse the rules with Warhammer being intended as a low-key and laid back game, nothing excuses the number of typos and just shoddy editing that GW gets away with.

Obviously, people must not really care about well-written rules, because they are okay with GW not providing that.

Wayniac wrote:
On the rules subject, one thing I never got is why people give GW a pass. Any other company is expected to put out a quality product, but with GW it's always handwaved away and ignored. I even saw one person argue on a facebook group that GW should not be expected to have their books proofread because "they are not a publishing company".

Warhammer is one of, if not the most expensive, miniature games on the market. GW is also one of, if not the largest, company in that market. So why is the "market leader" allowed to put out poorly-written, poorly-proofread, typo-laden products and charge a premium for them, while other much smaller company manage to write both good rules and make sure they are edited properly? Even if we excuse the rules with Warhammer being intended as a low-key and laid back game, nothing excuses the number of typos and just shoddy editing that GW gets away with.

Obviously, people must not really care about well-written rules, because they are okay with GW not providing that.

Why do people keep paying €60 for Call Of Duty or Assassin's Creed? Why do people keep paying €15 to see Marvel or Transformers movies?

 Sim-Life wrote:
Why do people keep paying €15 Marvel movies?

Because those are actually good. Not masterpieces, but they have pretty solid heroes, okay villains, good action, good comedy... They're good movies.

The feth, in what country do movies cost 15€?

Here is 6/7€, 3€ the day of the spectator! (Normally wednesday or thursday)

And for me warhammer40k (At least right now, I stoped playing in 7th) is the equivalent in tabletop wargaming of Marvel Movies. They are cinematic, cool to see on the table, good enough. They work, you have a fun time with your friends. But is nothing revolutionary.

40k is not cinematic. Properly 'cinematic' engagements are all about building up tension. You take your time inching towards the edge, feeling each other out and establishing the stakes before coming together in a decisive climax.

But that's not 40k, not in its current state. It's all explosions, all the time.

To be properly cinematic, 40k needs to be designed around a good nuetral game. The time in between each grand charge or barrage where you position yourself and try to read your opponent's intent, and counter appropriately while they try to do the same (and then in return, try to counter that counter). That's where the real meat of the game should happen. The explosions are only a good payoff if tension is built behind them.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Why do people keep paying €15 Marvel movies?

Because those are actually good. Not masterpieces, but they have pretty solid heroes, okay villains, good action, good comedy... They're good movies.

Your opinion. I prefer 7th edition of 40k to superheroes movies

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Why do people keep paying €15 Marvel movies?

Because those are actually good. Not masterpieces, but they have pretty solid heroes, okay villains, good action, good comedy... They're good movies.

When did I say they were bad? I said they were lazy amd mass produced.

 Galas wrote:
The feth, in what country do movies cost 15€?

Here is 6/7€, 3€ the day of the spectator! (Normally wednesday or thursday)

And for me warhammer40k (At least right now, I stoped playing in 7th) is the equivalent in tabletop wargaming of Marvel Movies. They are cinematic, cool to see on the table, good enough. They work, you have a fun time with your friends. But is nothing revolutionary.

In Norway, a 3d movie after 1800 is €17 (2d €13.71)

 Fafnir wrote:
40k is not cinematic. Properly 'cinematic' engagements are all about building up tension. You take your time inching towards the edge, feeling each other out and establishing the stakes before coming together in a decisive climax.

But that's not 40k, not in its current state. It's all explosions, all the time.

So a Michael Bay movie

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Why do people keep paying €15 Marvel movies?

Because those are actually good. Not masterpieces, but they have pretty solid heroes, okay villains, good action, good comedy... They're good movies.

Yep great fun movies - well ploted, good characters and great action. Now if you were talking about what they recently excreated onto the screen and called a Star Wars movie - then you might have a point.

 Galas wrote:
The feth, in what country do movies cost 15€?

Here is 6/7€, 3€ the day of the spectator! (Normally wednesday or thursday)

And for me warhammer40k (At least right now, I stoped playing in 7th) is the equivalent in tabletop wargaming of Marvel Movies. They are cinematic, cool to see on the table, good enough. They work, you have a fun time with your friends. But is nothing revolutionary.

The movie itself is 9-10 euros here, and if you then add drinks and popcorn youre almost up to 20 euros.

 Fafnir wrote:
40k is not cinematic. Properly 'cinematic' engagements are all about building up tension. You take your time inching towards the edge, feeling each other out and establishing the stakes before coming together in a decisive climax.

But that's not 40k, not in its current state. It's all explosions, all the time.

To be properly cinematic, 40k needs to be designed around a good nuetral game. The time in between each grand charge or barrage where you position yourself and try to read your opponent's intent, and counter appropriately while they try to do the same (and then in return, try to counter that counter). That's where the real meat of the game should happen. The explosions are only a good payoff if tension is built behind them.

Yeah, well...you know that's just like, uh...your opinion man...

To me it is one's opponent(s) that can make the game cinematic (or not). An opponent who enjoys "forging the narrative" can make the cinematic play as opposed to the guy who only play's to win. I played a game in which I fielded Mortarion and my friend fielded Magnus. He moved Magnus into the middle, calling out Mortarion on the way, so I charged into combat and gave him the narrative battle he craved as opposed to positioning all of my units to shoot down Magnus. In the end, Magnus was left with one wound when he slew Mortarion, but ol' Morty exploded, sending pus everywhere, which in turn brought down Magnus. I found it quite cinematic then, and I still do now.

nekooni wrote:

 Galas wrote:
The feth, in what country do movies cost 15€?

Here is 6/7€, 3€ the day of the spectator! (Normally wednesday or thursday)

And for me warhammer40k (At least right now, I stoped playing in 7th) is the equivalent in tabletop wargaming of Marvel Movies. They are cinematic, cool to see on the table, good enough. They work, you have a fun time with your friends. But is nothing revolutionary.

The movie itself is 9-10 euros here, and if you then add drinks and popcorn youre almost up to 20 euros.

Here is about 5-6 euros if you pre-pay for 10 shows to watch within 6 months, which is usually a long enough term, less than one movie per month if you share the card with someone else, like a girlfriend or just a friend. It's also 5-6 every wednesday with no restrictions.

Some people buy snacks and drinks even for 40k games.