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.

 Manchu wrote:
Seems more than a bit ironic to lecture me about authorial intent while proposing a conspiracy theory regarding the same ...

You state your claim is fact when it is objectively wrong. I said that the statement made by someone else (that supposedly works at Games Workshop) is interesting if it is true. I then stated they might be crazy (out of touch with reality enough) to do it.

 Nightwolf829 wrote:
You state your claim is fact when it is objectively wrong.

You have failed to demonstrate as much, on either score.

To avoid the whole discussion spiralling off into this cul-de-sac of beard, I would like to remind people that the Beard Rule does not actually require you to grow or even wear a beard. You simply must "have", i.e. possess a larger, more impressive Beard than your opponent. Therefore you could just carry a comedy false beard in your game bag.

However this interpretation of the rule itself presents a different kind of discrimination, as gay men who wish to conceal their sexual inclination, often go about accompanied by attractive women for a sort of camouflage. These women are known colloquially as "Beards".

I think you will agree that an attractive woman taking an interest at any wargame event is a most impressive thing in itself and also she is almost certain to be larger than any beard you might grow or buy.

 Nightwolf829 wrote:

People disagree with facts all the time.

dis·crim·i·na·tion
dəˌskriməˈnāSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: discrimination; plural noun: discriminations
1.
the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

Manchu. The Beard and Mustache rule by definition are discriminatory. I think you are looking at implied context as opposed to what is actually written. Author intent is virtually impossible to ascertain as reading between the lines is wholly unreliable.

My original section of the post relevant to our conversation. How is the beard rule, as written and without authorial intent, not discriminatory? Where in the rules does it say that my opponent must agree not to abide by those rules when asked?

 Nightwolf829 wrote:
How is the beard rule, as written and without authorial intent, not discriminatory? Where in the rules does it say that my opponent must agree not to abide by those rules when asked?

None of those questions are material to the statement at hand:

 Manchu wrote:
This rule is not a barrier to any reasonable person regardless of their gender.

You are having a merry time arguing with someone, but it doesn't appear to be me.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think you will agree that an attractive woman taking an interest at any wargame event is a most impressive thing in itself and also she is almost certain to be larger than any beard you might grow or buy.

I think you're getting into the realms of fantasy there, KK. (Which I suppose is appropriate for AoS.) But we are trying to have an important grown-up discussion about how a rule that is said to be silly is also at the same time a deadly serious matter of sexism, or anti-cleanshavenism, or something or other anyhow.

 Nightwolf829 wrote:
Where in the rules does it say that my opponent must agree not to abide by those rules when asked?

Not to mention suddenly you're spoiling the fun if you don't want to play with those rules when you show up. What if the rest want the beard rule you either play to a disadvantage or sit it out.
This would never have been an issue had they just not done this, not like these are super important and needed rules.

 Manchu wrote:

 Nightwolf829 wrote:
How is the beard rule, as written and without authorial intent, not discriminatory? Where in the rules does it say that my opponent must agree not to abide by those rules when asked?

None of those questions are material to the statement at hand:

 Manchu wrote:
This rule is not a barrier to any reasonable person regardless of their gender.

You are having a merry time arguing with someone, but it doesn't appear to be me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think you will agree that an attractive woman taking an interest at any wargame event is a most impressive thing in itself and also she is almost certain to be larger than any beard you might grow or buy.

I think you're getting into the realms of fantasy there, KK.

Well I know when I'm beat. I'll just leave this here as food for thought and be on my merry way for tonight. Cheers!

beard
ˈbird/
noun
1.
a growth of hair on the chin and lower cheeks of a man's face.
"he had a black beard"
synonyms: facial hair, whiskers, stubble, five o'clock shadow, bristles; More
2.
USinformal
a person who carries out a transaction, typically a bet, for someone else in order to conceal the other's identity.

 Nightwolf829 wrote:
a person who carries out a transaction, typically a bet, for someone else in order to conceal the other's identity

Well there you have it old bean, simply bet on the game through the fattest friend you have and you've cinched nabbing that bonus regardless of your baby-smooth cheeks plus you have managed to do it with all the overly literal panache a stickler could hope for.

Up next, "The Endless Dance" discriminates against paraplegics and middle-aged dads.

Discuss...

 Manchu wrote:
Yes, I expect criticism (especially serious accusations like racism or sexism) to be based on careful consideration of all the relevant information. I understand that this bar is too high for you and others posting ITT; and it is so much more self-righteously fun to fling around words like discriminatory and "red piller."

And now that's just unnecessarily insulting. I expect more from a mod.

Of course, I, a person who has played WHFB for 20 years, can see that the stupid rule is just a stupid insignificant rule. That was never my argument.

I said it was an unnecessary barrier for a potential player. In fact what I said exactly was "At BEST it's just another and completely unnecessary barrier to women getting involved with wargaming."

To which you replied that it wouldn't be a barrier for any REASONABLE person. To which my retort was that it's perfectly logical to think it would be yet another (albeit small) barrier to even a reasonable person.

Now you attack me by saying *I* am too lowly to base my criticism on careful consideration... as if that's not what I've been doing for all my posts in this thread.

Maybe I shouldn't be so harsh, maybe you weren't intending to insult, you simply are incapable of comprehending "careful consideration" that is not your own, that's ok, maybe the bar is too high for you?

These rules actually add a huge lot of fun when playing with kids.
I think people who get into an argument about it are completely missing the point. It is just a game with plastic dolls for God's sake...

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Up next, "The Endless Dance" discriminates against paraplegics and middle-aged dads.

Discuss...

Any wargame using dice and small miniatures. Discriminates against people with poor eyesight.

Aside from the fact that you're arguing about a 4$ disadvantage in a game that costs hundreds of dollars... and even that is a stretch, because grooming an actual beard causes expenses as well, so you might be cheaper off with the fake one... I think you're massively overvaluing mechanical advantages.

Looking at all the rules, Age of Sigmar clearly isn't meant to be a competition to win. There is no attempt to balance the game whatsoever! There isn't even a point system for armies!!! You can literally put as much stuff on the table as you want, as long as it fits in your deployment zone. If you care about winning, screws beard re-rolls, bring 15000 8th edition points of models, fill your half of the table and see how you're oppoent deals with that. In other words, if you care about winning, you can break the game in an instant.

Caring about things like re-rolls still comes from a competitive mindset. But this isn't a competitive game anymore. It's a cooperative game. Like tabletop rpgs. It's a fun way of rolling dice and pushing beatifully painted miniatures around, nothing more. Who cares, who wins! And if it doesn't matter who's winning, who cares if someone gets a re-roll or not.


For the record: I think, it's a terrible idea to design a tabletop game like that and GW is greatly overestimating the number of people, who want to play that way. But under the designers premise, there's nothing wrong with the beard rules.
If they absolutely had to go in that direction, what they should have done IMO is introducing some kind of dungeon master to the game and really make it an RPG.

After getting really excited for the next edition of fantasy, and helping to convince others to get involved in it at the local store, these rules have actually ruined the game for me. Why should I act the prat in order to gain 2" on my charge, when my opponent can take a similar model and have a minimum 6" charge, for no penalty? The game is designed for two friends to play together, and not playing with friends, and having no desire to act like a prat means I'm not going to play it again. The rules seem extra ridiculous, if you are unfamiliar with the more behind them, which most new players will be

I don't want to put words in Manchu's mouth, but my understanding of his view is that it's bizarre to literally read those rules and follow/enforce them. Basically, to him, it's "blah, blah, blah, re-roll all failed to hit rolls." At most, the requirement to talk to your model or have a beard is a formality that no decent person would require. It's window dressing.

Further, while I do think the writing in these rules shows some unconscious bias, or at the least regrettable lack of editing, let's keep a little perspective on the issue here. This is one model of one army, and far more male players are affected than female. It's a very, very minor issue, and one so easily dealt with by players.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
The flip side to that, is that while I doubt the author of the beard rule expected slavish devotion to such rule, the gaming community is full of people that will. Now, such people aren't the best to game with, but not everyone has the same access to a quality gaming group.

Like it or not, the rules can be used to discriminate, albeit in a minor way.

 Nightwolf829 wrote:

He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.

Might just be BS, but I thought this is interesting. I could honestly see GW trying to push people away from the old factions by making them be embarrassing to play (so that they buy the new ones). They might just be crazy enough to do it.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2015/07/gw-answers-age-of-sigmar-questions.html

It's extremely note worthy that the new models do not possess any "beard rules".

We could argue them back and forth all day, but if they truly were reasonable, why not put them in the new box of models they're hoping to sell tens of thousands of, rather than the boxes they're phasing out?

You can brush it aside but that rule and others like it are (possibly intentionally) terrible rules and an unnecessary barrier to play. Which is exactly why there's nothing at all like them in the new model boxes. They're like a "fluffy" goodbye joke, not a real rule, and make it even clearer GW is not supporting that entire line. That's not a problem if acknowledged to me - but there's a reason those rules aren't in the new box set. Exactly because they're silly, frivolous, and not something that will make people want to buy their models.

RiTides is right. That's also why, like I said before, I'm giving AoS the benefit of the doubt long enough to see what their ACTUAL Dwarf rules are going to be when the faction that includes them is released (cause there's like four factions now apparently).

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Up next, "The Endless Dance" discriminates against paraplegics and middle-aged dads.

Discuss...

Any wargame using dice and small miniatures. Discriminates against people with poor eyesight.

No, it is huge advantage because you have a great excuse for all sorts of "tactical" mistakes of seeing and not seeing.

Besides, the new AOS miniatures are Ecksbocks Hueg. Try playing with 15mm, 6mm or even 2mm models!

 Iron_Captain wrote:
These rules actually add a huge lot of fun when playing with kids.
I think people who get into an argument about it are completely missing the point. It is just a game with plastic dolls for God's sake...

Totally agree, I can't believe people are still debating this whole 'beard rules' thing... It's a fun little game of plastic toys, not a front for beard-harboring anti-women illuminati.

If a little ol' thing such as Age of Sigmar silly rules gets your goat, then I hesitate to think how stressful daily life would be. Like, how do you choose what to be offended by first?

My beard is thick, manly and thoroughly impressive, its about time it got some god damn recognition... I love the new rules.
If you don't love the new rules then you are unmanly and unworthy and undeserving of your rerolls... simple as.

Side not: if i see anyone with a fake beard or moustache I'm going to rip it off their face and burn it, you need to earn your rerolls mofos.

Yes, I am unmanly. Got a problem with it?

My fake beard is gold encrusted with lapis lazuli.

No problem at all but you do if you want to play empire or dwarves.
If you do I suggest you don't play against dudes with beards, if you're opponent is clean shaven you should get the reroll by proxy.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
My fake beard is gold encrusted with lapis lazuli.

Pretty sure a lot of GW regular beards are also encrusted. No gold, though.

BAN wrote:
No problem at all but you do if you want to play empire or dwarves.
If you do I suggest you don't play against dudes with beards, if you're opponent is clean shaven you should get the reroll by proxy.

I so hope you're joking. Can't be sure these days.

My beard is soft and luxurious beset with bronze and silver rings and bathed in fine scented oils.

 clamclaw wrote:
It's a fun little game of plastic toys, not a front for beard-harboring anti-women illuminati.

Yeah and jet fuel can melt steel beams *rolls eyes*

well seems all the funny rules are a fond farewell to the models that are being discontinued. there will be a balancing system and there will be a tournament pack. there going to be replacing the factions with easier to protect ip versions for instance orks are becoming Ooruks. so will be intersting to see what they look like and what will become of everyone else.

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/gw-answers-age-of-sigmar-questions.html?m=1

BAN wrote:
No problem at all but you do if you want to play empire or dwarves.
If you do I suggest you don't play against dudes with beards, if you're opponent is clean shaven you should get the reroll by proxy.

I fething hate these rules.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I understand that this bar is too high for you and others posting ITT

And now that's just unnecessarily insulting.

There is nothing to be insulted about, as this accurately reflects what you yourself posted:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
You're assuming someone has actually read all the rules and spent time evaluating them to understand that the context that the author may or may not have meant was "silly rule which most people will ignore". It's unreasonable to assume that a reasonable person should have to go through all of that to realise "oh, this stupid barrier isn't a stupid barrier, it's actually a stupid insignificant rule".

Between this and the beard thing, I conclude that you are inventing insults.

 Polonius wrote:
but my understanding of his view is that it's bizarre to literally read those rules and follow/enforce them

This is fairly accurate. It is bizarre to insist a rule (a) actually requires you to make your opponent uncomfortable and (b) absolutely must be followed under all circumstances. There could be a very weird shade of Milgram experiment to all this. But honestly I think it is just a lot of hot air for the sake of arguing on the internet.

 Polonius wrote:
Like it or not, the rules can be used to discriminate, albeit in a minor way.

Sort of like how you could theoretically kill someone with thumbtacks, I guess. I mean, it could be done but you would have to be quite a sadistic donkey-cave to do it. Frankly, isn't it much more worrisome (if you are the type to worry about such things) that the whole concept of super expensive miniature games inherently discriminates against poor people? I mean, I was once that kid who could not afford to join in the fun. Those scars are what drove me to become a heartless super villain mod! Bwahahaha!

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Besides, the new AOS miniatures are Ecksbocks Hueg.

Yes, Stormcast guys are the miniatures equivalent of large print. Turns out, AoS is for oldsters rather than juves.

 Manchu wrote:
It is bizarre to insist a rule (a) actually requires you to make your opponent uncomfortable and (b) absolutely must be followed under all circumstances.

It's bizarre that the rule itself requires that, and that GW thoughtlessly put such a dumbass rule in in the first place.

Given the bizarre fact of its existence, it's hardly any more bizarre that people want to abide by it when playing the game it is a rule for.