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.

I found this interview with Gav Thorpe, I thought you would be interested.

My favorite bit is: "...I sometimes miss clever tricks and tactics that others might see. I always found the input of play testers invaluable in this area, spotting potential loopholes or wicked combos for me. In management jargon, I’m not a completer-finisher!"

You don't say. I always find the honesty of those no longer on the payroll (regardless of whose payroll they're no longer on) refreshing.

Indeed, cut loose from the vocal shackles. Maybe we'll see his biography on the shelves this Christmas?

Gav Thorpe: My Story

So, he finds the input of playtesters invaluable (then and now?) but GW doesn't?

Whatever.

Maybe it was the input of sites like Dakka Dakka that lead to him leaving discreetly during the night? Input is input.

Preemptive strike in the name of H.B.M.C.

*Glares at the Chaos Codex.*

Great interview. Thanks for posting the link.
I've always liked Gav's attitude toward the game and the hobby.

Eldramesha wrote:Preemptive strike in the name of H.B.M.C.

*Glares at the Chaos Codex.*

What a saga that was...

Thanks for the link.

Interesting read. Suprised he's still so eager for the hobby after the flogging people have been giving him the last decade or so (some deserved, most not).

I won't go into great detail about what I think of Gav except to say that he seems to be the poster child for the biggest disconnect at GW - He's a guy trying to design good rules for a company that sees rules as a way to drive sales of miniatures and nothing more.

BYE

I at least agree with his attitude towards gamers asking for "official" rules- that imagination is a greater asset than min-maxing ability, and good narrative is more important than someone's win-loss record. Kudos to him for espousing creative and inventive gameplay.

However I do lament that he might get to write Eldar books for Black Library (a whole trilogy, no less). His writing is far from superb. I miss William King's Eldar work, and fear that gave will not only write poorly, but will spawn "Fluff that Should Not Be" on a par with the first Inquisitor novel.

Savnock wrote:I at least agree with his attitude towards gamers asking for "official" rules- that imagination is a greater asset than min-maxing ability, and good narrative is more important than someone's win-loss record. Kudos to him for espousing creative and inventive gameplay.

But the problem is he assumes that the two are mutually exclusive. It's quite possible to have 'official' rules whilst still catering to the people who like 'imagination'. Having a tight ruleset won't affect the 'imagination' players at all. Having a loose ruleset because the 'imagination' players don't care either way does have an effect on the opposite.

If he can't see that - which I suspect he hasn't given your comment above - then I'm glad he's no longer writing rules at GW.

BYE

I didn't reply to this on Warseer, since the site doesn't like comments that don't declare the man a living god.

I've always liked Gav's attitude and his intentions have always seemed good, but the man wrote awful rules. I'm glad he's writing fiction and fluff now, which always seemed to be his strength.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Savnock wrote:I at least agree with his attitude towards gamers asking for "official" rules- that imagination is a greater asset than min-maxing ability, and good narrative is more important than someone's win-loss record. Kudos to him for espousing creative and inventive gameplay.

But the problem is he assumes that the two are mutually exclusive. It's quite possible to have 'official' rules whilst still catering to the people who like 'imagination'. Having a tight ruleset won't affect the 'imagination' players at all. Having a loose ruleset because the 'imagination' players don't care either way does have an effect on the opposite.

Good point(s) indeed.

I liked this quote..

"The question of 'legality' only applies in particular circumstances - tournaments. Even in pick-up games at a store or club I would encourage players to be imaginative and inclusive rather than not. I once wrote a 'Last Rant' for Fanatic Magazine about trying out new things. The short version: Why not try out new (or old!) things? All you have to lose is a game of soldiers. The potential for a new gaming experience, a new gaming buddy far outweighs a win/ loss record."

In pick up games, I think way too many toy soldier players get way too excited about the win loss column and forget that the game is more a social engagement and not so much a "I need to win this game to keep my 95% win percentage going..... so there is no way I will play against an army that could beat me.. " I think more people would have more fun if they had this approach..

two_heads_talking wrote:I liked this quote..

"The question of 'legality' only applies in particular circumstances - tournaments. Even in pick-up games at a store or club I would encourage players to be imaginative and inclusive rather than not. I once wrote a 'Last Rant' for Fanatic Magazine about trying out new things. The short version: Why not try out new (or old!) things? All you have to lose is a game of soldiers. The potential for a new gaming experience, a new gaming buddy far outweighs a win/ loss record."

In the end, though, we are playing a game. I can play a relaxing game of 40k with a friend just as easily as playing a quick game of one-on-one on the basketball court or a game of table tennis. These games have very clearly defined rules that define the sorts of actions that will take place.

If I show up to the blacktop and tell my opponent that I just bought a pair of brass-knuckles that I'm really looking forward to trying out and ask him if he doesn't mind me using them, I'm going to get some strange looks. Why? Because there are no rules in basketball concerning the use of brass-knuckles.

When a kid shows up to the LGS with his homebrew Leman Russ Lobotomizer , I could certainly choose to be imaginative and inclusive. I however don't want to waste three hours of my life being charged by a man waving brass-knuckles.

Frankly, I'm glad the guy's no longer employed. If your job is to write rules, I think the least you could do is take it seriously. The guy's job was to write rules but every time he talks its about how rules aren't important. By his own speech, he's redundant.

redstripe wrote:

two_heads_talking wrote:I liked this quote..

"The question of 'legality' only applies in particular circumstances - tournaments. Even in pick-up games at a store or club I would encourage players to be imaginative and inclusive rather than not. I once wrote a 'Last Rant' for Fanatic Magazine about trying out new things. The short version: Why not try out new (or old!) things? All you have to lose is a game of soldiers. The potential for a new gaming experience, a new gaming buddy far outweighs a win/ loss record."

In the end, though, we are playing a game. I can play a relaxing game of 40k with a friend just as easily as playing a quick game of one-on-one on the basketball court or a game of table tennis. These games have very clearly defined rules that define the sorts of actions that will take place.

If I show up to the blacktop and tell my opponent that I just bought a pair of brass-knuckles that I'm really looking forward to trying out and ask him if he doesn't mind me using them, I'm going to get some strange looks. Why? Because there are no rules in basketball concerning the use of brass-knuckles.

I think your example is a non sequitur. A more apt comparison would be showing up to play ball and suggesting you play;

Last basket takes ball
Play by 1s, threes count as 1s
No hard posting
21
etc.


Those are variations of the game, in the same manner different models/scenarios are. I think he's somewhat right about rules only being important in tournaments. The other exception would be finding new players that are mature enough for your group..then it's nice to have a common language to meet each other. After that...the slang you decide to use is entirely up to your imagination (and your friends).

AgeOfEgos wrote:
I think your example is a non sequitur. A more apt comparison would be showing up to play ball and suggesting you play;

Last basket takes ball
Play by 1s, threes count as 1s
No hard posting
21
etc.


Those are variations of the game, in the same manner different models/scenarios are. I think he's somewhat right about rules only being important in tournaments. The other exception would be finding new players that are mature enough for your group..then it's nice to have a common language to meet each other. After that...the slang you decide to use is entirely up to your imagination (and your friends).

These are rules that people are familiar with and generally agree are fair and reasonable. Games have been played with these rules in the past. There is a precedent for these rules.

theHandofGork wrote:I didn't reply to this on Warseer, since the site doesn't like comments that don't declare the man a living god.

I've always liked Gav's attitude and his intentions have always seemed good, but the man wrote awful rules. I'm glad he's writing fiction and fluff now, which always seemed to be his strength.

So, do you think anybody at Games Workshop actually writes decent rules, because the last really tight rules I've seen from them was the first generation of Epic.

redstripe wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:
I think your example is a non sequitur. A more apt comparison would be showing up to play ball and suggesting you play;

Last basket takes ball
Play by 1s, threes count as 1s
No hard posting
21
etc.


Those are variations of the game, in the same manner different models/scenarios are. I think he's somewhat right about rules only being important in tournaments. The other exception would be finding new players that are mature enough for your group..then it's nice to have a common language to meet each other. After that...the slang you decide to use is entirely up to your imagination (and your friends).

These are rules that people are familiar with and generally agree are fair and reasonable. Games have been played with these rules in the past. There is a precedent for these rules.

I'm willing to bet there was a time 21 had no precedent though . Taking 21 as an example, often you need to nail down how they play 21 as well...as there are variations in that variation (bounce back to 0, check to top of key, etc). His point (and the one I agree with), is that trying out new rules/variations is fun and should be encouraged. We use rules as a common language for most scenarios, as we lack the free time to make entire gaming systems on our own. However, we don't mind taking the common language they have given us and including our own slang.

warpcrafter wrote:

theHandofGork wrote:I didn't reply to this on Warseer, since the site doesn't like comments that don't declare the man a living god.

I've always liked Gav's attitude and his intentions have always seemed good, but the man wrote awful rules. I'm glad he's writing fiction and fluff now, which always seemed to be his strength.

So, do you think anybody at Games Workshop actually writes decent rules, because the last really tight rules I've seen from them was the first generation of Epic.

Point taken, I suppose, but Gav seemed to be the worst of the lot, to me at least. I appreciate all the fluff and background work he did, but his codexes and army books were even stinkier than normal.

It's easy to find complaint with many of Gav Thorpe's 40k works I don't play WFB so that stuff could be ace and Inquisitor was definately a rough diamond. However in recent months I've begun to see this...

"The one rule that I was least comfortable with at the time was the Blood Angels extra movement. Originally a failed roll forced the unit to move forward during the movement phase, but not as a bonus. Jervis convinced me to turn it into the semi-bonus it is now, pointing out that players are more likely to remember rules that are of some benefit to them, and to forget those that hinder them (thereby forcing the opponent to remind them each turn). It isn't that they're deliberately cheating, it's just the way people's heads work! Anyway, I think it would have been better to stick with the rule the way I had it originally, so it's not so much change a rule as not change a rule!"

...from this interview in a whole new light.

Granted good 'ol Gav is a gamer. But what I really want to hear is an apology for the end of the Storm of Chaos campaign. Eventhough he doesn't work for Gdub anymore, he still deserves a rochamboing for that travesty.

Gav left?

When did that happen?

Gav Thorpe!

A nice interview. Easy to like him now he is a writer, and at a safe distance from damaging an army rule book. I thought Inquisitor was a really themed idea, and had the best illustrated rule book of them all.

Too bad a role playing game is something that can be done much better on a computer (WOW) than with miniatures. Think about it! In a role playing game, one of the keys is always getting new gear and better gear, a new and better gun, whatever. How the hell that is supposed to work with metal miniature, that obviously dont change gear was always THE MOST STUPEDOUSLY STUPID design idea GW ever came up with.

How they didn't notice this until about six months after publishing the great disaster shows that someone was asleep at the wheel.

I don't blame Gav Thorpe for that one, I think it was Tom Kirby's call, actually, but both of them should have had a clearer idea.

They are doing the role playing game, and the real massive multiplayer online stuff now at last.

Can you imagine how BLOODY FANTASTIC Inquisitor would be in that format!!!???? Can't wait!

The fact that he is so suprised about Flames of War and that he is now writing about six novels at the same time suggests Gav is a little too busy to do everything perfectly!

We will miss him though. It was always interesting when he brought out an army book, to check to find the unbalanced and overpowered bits.....

Like the entire Blood Angels Codex! Like original Harlequins! And so on! He's definitely got a place reserved up in hobbyists heaven somewhere our Gav!

OTG.

Im pretty sure you mean hobbyists hell, but I guess thats only if you like the game.

Orc Town Grot wrote:Gav Thorpe!

A nice interview. Easy to like him now he is a writer, and at a safe distance from damaging an army rule book. I thought Inquisitor was a really themed idea, and had the best illustrated rule book of them all.

Too bad a role playing game is something that can be done much better on a computer (WOW) than with miniatures. Think about it! In a role playing game, one of the keys is always getting new gear and better gear, a new and better gun, whatever. How the hell that is supposed to work with metal miniature, that obviously dont change gear was always THE MOST STUPEDOUSLY STUPID design idea GW ever came up with.

How they didn't notice this until about six months after publishing the great disaster shows that someone was asleep at the wheel.

I don't blame Gav Thorpe for that one, I think it was Tom Kirby's call, actually, but both of them should have had a clearer idea.

They are doing the role playing game, and the real massive multiplayer online stuff now at last.

Can you imagine how BLOODY FANTASTIC Inquisitor would be in that format!!!???? Can't wait!

Have you ever played Necromunda or Mordheim? Because they're all about having you find better gear and change it out, making you model new gear on often painted models.

It was also something I never saw happen in the Inquisitor campaigns I played in, since you could basically get what ever gear you wanted to start with and model the figures before hand. Most people I know that grabbed different gear just added it to their Inq characters, so that they were carrying more, not swapping stuff around.