Re: [NetEpic ML] Eldar Book

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 20:58:55 -0400

Hi!

Agreed, I dont want you redoing anyting major at this point either... ;-)

Look since the only real objection here is Orks allying with Eldar, then
just drop that one and keep all else as is. I mean its kinda silly to do
a sweeping change just for ONE thing most seem to not like.

Just drop the orks from the eldar's ally list. Its the easy thing to do.

Anyone disagree with this?

Peter


Jarreas Underwood wrote:

>>>why not we can use a "mercenaries cards" ?
>>>
>>>
>>That would be another simple, yet effect way around this issue. :-)
>>
>>
>
>Unfortunately it has the problem of trying to draw a line between mercenaries and allies. If I take a Space Marine army, is an Imperial Guard force an ally or a mercenary? And if Marines can take Guard as allies, why should an Eldar player have to pay more for the exact same units?
>
>If we say that Imperial can ally with Imperial but Orks can't ally with anyone, then Imperial players have a significant advantage over Orks. Fluffy or not, that isn't fair.
>
>It also means we have to go over every single army book and argue about which units are merc and which aren't. I'm not willing to do that.
>
>It is true that the conclusion of this arguement is that there should be *no* ally rules and players can create armies with whatever units they want. The only limitation would be personal responsibility. This is bogus, as IMHO gamers just aren't like that and need rules. I don't want to complicate things and am inclined to lean towards going with the major fluff storylines (Ork vs Dwarf, Marines & Elves vs Chaos) and leave it at that.
>-Yar
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Apr 08 2005 - 00:58:55 UTC