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.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Who cares? You're expecting too much in my opinion. Warhammer and 40K are not competitive games, but some people play them competitively. Competitive players need to decide on some of the unclear rules beforehand or there will be problems, but they sure as hell aren't GW's problems. They are simply 'games' and you may play them as you see fit.

The MOST IMPORTANT RULE - as defined by the 40K rulebook - is that the rules aren't that important. The suggested solution to issues in-game is a roll-off. I suggest that if you have serious real-life issues with a deliberately casual ruleset you ought to seek immediate counselling.

I'm a competitive gamer and I can deal with it, so why can't you?

'Subtle' personal attacks aside, the bolded section above is the real problem with 40K (and some 40K players). Who the feth writes a rulebook for a game, and then says "oh but the rules don't really matter, just do whatever you want"? That just reeks of terrible design.
Case in point: (as if anyone needs to be reminded how poorly 40K rules are generally written )
I've recently started playing some 40k again, and every single game I've played or watched there have been several rules disputes, many of which dragged on until one or the other person got tired of arguing and just let the other person have their way. It's been rather annoying actually, and overall it takes away from the enjoyment of the game by quite a bit. Compare to my last 4 months of playing Warmachine, where what few rules disputes there have been were quickly and efficiently resolved by consulting the rulebook; this resulted in less time wasted and more fun had by all involved. The Warmachine rulebook is well written and it shows; the 40K rulebook and codexes are poorly worded, and it's glaringly obvious.

DakkaDakka wrote:

Warmachine encourages hard lists and competitive play. Different people have fun in different ways. Warhammer is a fun, casual hobby with a wide and varied background that caters to much more than the tiny percentage of WAAC players who can't complete a game without a raging argument because they care so very much about something as simple as an unclear rule. I'm not trying to be an apologist but these are two very different systems. It's pretty clear that Warmachine is better suited to you.

My games of Warhamer (40K at least) very rarely involve rules confusion and I've never been involved in a heated argument about it... It doesn't happen in 'every single game' unless both players have a less-than-clear understanding of the rules.

WHFB players are generally a different lot so I don't often play it competitively... but that's a nasty stereotype so I won't say any more on that!

The text you have highlighted defeats your point when you revert to my previous statement. GW don't write 'hard rules'. It's not that the rules are unimportant. It's that enjoying the hobby and a good game with a fellow player is of far greater significance.

Che-Vito wrote:

MasterDRD wrote:

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Who cares? You're expecting too much in my opinion. Warhammer and 40K are not competitive games, but some people play them competitively. Competitive players need to decide on some of the unclear rules beforehand or there will be problems, but they sure as hell aren't GW's problems. They are simply 'games' and you may play them as you see fit.

The MOST IMPORTANT RULE - as defined by the 40K rulebook - is that the rules aren't that important. The suggested solution to issues in-game is a roll-off. I suggest that if you have serious real-life issues with a deliberately casual ruleset you ought to seek immediate counselling.

I'm a competitive gamer and I can deal with it, so why can't you?

'Subtle' personal attacks aside, the bolded section above is the real problem with 40K (and some 40K players). Who the feth writes a rulebook for a game, and then says "oh but the rules don't really matter, just do whatever you want"? That just reeks of terrible design.
Case in point: (as if anyone needs to be reminded how poorly 40K rules are generally written )
I've recently started playing some 40k again, and every single game I've played or watched there have been several rules disputes, many of which dragged on until one or the other person got tired of arguing and just let the other person have their way. It's been rather annoying actually, and overall it takes away from the enjoyment of the game by quite a bit. Compare to my last 4 months of playing Warmachine, where what few rules disputes there have been were quickly and efficiently resolved by consulting the rulebook; this resulted in less time wasted and more fun had by all involved. The Warmachine rulebook is well written and it shows; the 40K rulebook and codexes are poorly worded, and it's glaringly obvious.

sooooo....why are you bothering with 40k then?

Because not all my friends play the superior game yet.