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.

How in the name of all that is holy is this still being debated.

Its a voluntary FAQ for tourney goers put out by a group of people. You either like it and use it or don't and don't. End of discussion.

No one should post after this period --> .

Shummy is trying to stop the madness by bringing religion into the picture. Anyone else see the situational irony?

Sorry shummy, couldn't resist a cheap chuckle.

I think the big reason that it's still being debated, at least on one front, is that we were saying the same thing from 2 different perspectives.

What's your take on it Shummy? Care to join in? </drysarcasm>

Buzzsaw: I'm not discarding anything. I was trying to illustrate what you boiled down to 2 words, "unavoidable unfairness", and more importantly that the issue behind that is neither player nor venue, but GW.

What's your take on it Shummy? Care to join in? </drysarcasm>

My opinion in this situation is one of irrational hatred. On the one hand, people are wrong for being somehow insulted by the release of a fanmade FAQ. Cry somewhere else, it's not even official. It's a fan thing. Get over it. On the other hand they are wrong to vociferously taint this discussion with what amounts to "YOU CANT TAKE MY RULES AWAY FROM ME FIFTH EDITION IS BROKEN NO I WANT TO DO IT FROM THE RULEBOOK THAT DOESNT WORK NO IT DOESNT MATTER THAT THIS IS ALL SELF CONFLICTING WHO ARE YOU TO TELL ME WHAT TO DO?"

Essentially this discussion boils down to one thing. Irrelevance and the ease of off topic trolling. The oddities in the fifth edition ruleset have nothing to do with the presence and introduction of a fan made FAQ, though they may be the impetus for its creation. Yet this discussion is based on the bad premise of an insufficient ruleset mandating the presence of a FAQ. That is irrelevant because the presence of a fan made FAQ only serves to clarify based on the volition of those partaking and has in essence truly little to do with the overarching rulesets viability in a competitive format.

In summation, 40k doesn't always have watertight rules. We get it. We know. We are aware. This is a FAQ for tournaments and casual play to enable faster and more even rulings in unofficial events. As it is unnoficial and player made it is unenforceable in any real regard outside of a small portion of the tournament scene which is entirely voluntary in participation.

Get over it. No one cares what you think of the rulings because it's free and voluntary.

I'm shock to admit that I agree with Shummy. This FAQ affects who chooses to use it, and nobody else. I think that a lot of the sturm and drang is just generic Nerd Rage of the "nobody can tell me what to do" variety. Funny at first, obnoxious after a short period of time. Most of the rest is simply anger of rulings not going the posters way, and the rest is some delightful combination of simply not understanding the concept and pure trolling.

As I said when this issue boiled over last year, this FAQ is nothing more than a pre-set list of rulings from the Adepticon judges. For all the talking of rules changes, nerfs, boosts, and overreaching this FAQ simply tells you ahead of time what a judge would have been able to tell you when it came up in April. We all know that judges can make good or bad calls, alter rules, etc. in the heat of a game because, well, they're the judge! When people talk about "house rules" or "local judges," they mean those grey areas that come up that every store or club plays a little different. With players coming from all over the country, why wouldn't you have a standardized FAQ?

And yes, many of the situations are incredibly unlikely, minor, or ridiculous. After a while, I'm guessing simply coming up with as many rules holes as possible became half the fun....

Shummy, your position was fairly clear. I would have thought my tag at the end of the question would have made it pretty obvious that the request was fascetious.

And you are just wrong. No other way to put it. INAT FAQ has been a matter of discussion and debate as to whether or not it should be used in venues besides Adepticon. Dakka is a place ofr them to discuss it. Period. If they go to the right forum on the site, they can discuss pretty pink thong panties if they want, so long as it stays within forum guidelines. You state that no one cares what 'you' think about the FAQ. If you were refering to me personally, you are prob. right. If you were refering to any groups of people, the people in this thread; you are wrong. This thread, even if it is stupid and infantile, is part of a public discourse. I was trying to make that apparent when I continued to post after your 'period in the sand', so to speak. Evidently I was too subtle. Oh sure, you can let your irrational hatred flow and fill a thread with venom, but you are not stopping the discussion.

INAT FAQ has been a matter of discussion and debate as to whether or not it should be used in venues besides Adepticon.

Indeed, which is a matter of course in those events, to those attending, and to those organizing. Unless you attend every tournament on the planet then I really couldn't possibly be bothered to care what it is you think of ruling 45A on page 14 of the ork codex. Its powerfully irrelevant and only serves to show disapproval of the work of others. You have already made note of the fact that you don't think any sort of rulings FAQ should be needed because of your own personal experiences with your longstanding FLGS, why exactly does it matter to you that other people care to do something other than listen to an anecdotal story by the store owner?

It's a matter of personal choice to those organizing events or playing under the FAQ. You are not everyone. Ergo get over it people will and will not use this as they see fit. Nerdrage aside, it's matter of personal preference and not all discussions are worth having.

A 4 page debate over voluntary faq's??!!!
Wht's next, multiple pages on the insult of being called sir?

Relapse wrote: A 4 page debate over voluntary faq's??!!!
Wht's next, multiple pages on the insult of being called sir?

You are such a SIR!

As far as the rest, until I started to get involved with touney folks, 5th made sense to me. Now I feel like I have to argue about whether or not my shoes are properly tied.

Relapse wrote: A 4 page debate over voluntary faq's??!!!
Wht's next, multiple pages on the insult of being called sir?

Really, its all just leading up to when quetzacoatl returns and delivers the faithful to heaven. Until 2012 just expect things to get stupider.

Someone writing on the internet about how much he hates some people and want to smash their heads in and stuff, is pretty much the epitome of nerdrage. Usually backed up with not beeing able to actually do anything like that to anyone, ever even in life or death situations. But at least its good for a smile, esp when the person belives he is beeing mature and the intelligent one posting.

This is a forum, on forums you debate things. Whats the problem with that? Sometimes its small irrelevant things like plastic toys but its usually something that matters to the pepole that visit the forum.

Personally I like the idea of a FAQ that doesnt change the rules drastically in some cases but rather clarifies and follow some sort of context, not just the personal opinions of some people who think they are a ruling council. And since this place is the home of those said pepole you can expect the same crowd and their friends/fans come out defending it with teeth and claws. The only reason to care is that its beeing used by some people as a real "FAQ" (even if re-write of the rules is more correct) and spreads some of the disease to other tournaments, if it only had been the houserules for a specific tournament I doubt anyone but the attenders would have cared.

Shum: Read. Read first, then type. You are putting out that I said things that I did not say. Which is your right, I guess, it's an internet forum. And if the topic galls you that much, I would suggest not participating.

NERDS! We are all such a bunch of NERDS!

4 pages of debate over something that is not debateable!

Shane - this was a masterpiece of Nerd Baiting....Classic!

Build it and they will come!

Aldonis wrote:NERDS! We are all such a bunch of NERDS!

4 pages of debate over something that is not debateable!

Shane - this was a masterpiece of Nerd Baiting....Classic!

Build it and they will come!

No no no, we're Geeks!!

Can you really call it a voluntary FAQ if it's being used at actual GW tournaments? I have no problem with the idea but I think there should be fewer glaring problems with the document.

In one breath it forces DA to adhere rigidly to their codex bike rules, separating them from other 5e bikes, while forcing Land Speeders to adhere to 5e vehicle rules, separating them from their codex special ability.

Stuff like that doesn't make any sense to me. If I can pick things like that out in a 25 minute overview, what's the point of a FAQ? I can achieve the same level of rigorousness just asking the tournament organizer.

The document provides clarity, consistency, and fairness. Just as with last year, not everyone agrees with every ruling. In fact, probably no one person agrees with every ruling. It still makes the game flow more smoothly, and the tournament experience better.

Last year's Adepticon, using the previous iteration of the INAT FAQ, was one of the smoothest experiences I ever had in terms of rules discussions with opponents. I played against 11 people I had never met before, and had no friction in rules discussions, as every issue (there were less than a half-dozen, for seven games) was quickly resolved by a brief FAQ consultation.

Mannahnin wrote:The document provides clarity, consistency, and fairness.

I agree with the clarity and consistency, but in the case referenced above, how is that possibly fair to a DA player? "Your bikes can't turbo boost in the scout phase. Suck one. And your Land Speeders don't count as scoring. Suck two."

The point of a FAQ is to provide the most clear and difficult to dispute answer to a set of rules issues. They aren't really designed to be fair, though its better for a DA player to have this knowledge in advance then to have a tournament judge it that way at a critical moment.

If I created a FAQ document that simply said 'in all rules disputes the opinion of the taller player is dominant (in the case of identical heights use the player whose middle initial comes first, alphabetically)' that would be clear, concise, and settle all disputes before they even happened. Doesn't change that it's arbitrary and foolish.

Overall, I think the INAT FAQ does a decent job, but the places where it falls short really seem to fall short.

Relapse wrote: A 4 page debate over voluntary faq's??!!!
Wht's next, multiple pages on the insult of being called sir?

your request is granted. i <3 that thread.