Too much drama in the hobby?

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.

**Ruckdog**

sebster wrote:
Sidstyler wrote:In the 3-4 years I have invested in the hobby, I still to this day do not understand what the hell a "rules lawyer" is supposed to be. Are there really people out there who think that insisting that people play by the rules is a bad thing?

Really? It isn't that complicated - if you approach the rules in a consistant manner, considering each rules dispute with the same approach and a focus on what the most sensible outcome might be, and not just what's best for your army then you're likely cool, whether you argue for RAW, RAI or some hybrid thereof. But if you scour the rules for any and all misunderstandings and try to use each for your own benefit, then you're likely a rules lawyer.

For instance, there was a guy who dropped onto a range of sites to complain about how he was mistreated in a game because a strategem only stopped being useful on a 4. It was clear to everyone else there this was meant to be a 4+ but this guy argued otherwise, and wouldn't stop.

I thing that definition makes a lot of sense. In practice though, I could easily see someone who lost accusing their opponent of being a Rules Lawyer just becasue they were corrected on a rules mistake. As a result of this worry, I always get nervous when I notice something my opponent is doing wrong and point it out.