[Epic] Naming common game occurances

From: Tyler Provick <bprovick_at_...>
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 20:15:51 -0400

>-----> Ah, another member of the choir - let me preach a bit more:
>Your second sentence is what seperates reasonable people from
>cheesemongers - " There's no rule that I can't take 50 stands of
>terminators" or LR's or whatever.
>May not be a rule, but at some point the background _must_ come
>into play, and if you don't know a whole lot about the background,
>why then let me educate you...
> This argument is similar to the "I don't have that WD so I don't
>use that rule." Sorry, if there's been an official rules change (which
>WD is)
>and you aren't aware of it, that's your problem.

But if you don't bring that WD for proof, then it becomes your problem. I
agree with letting new rules in. Even for store rules, have it in writting
so there is no. "Did you get this month's WD?" "Uhh, no." "Well, it has a
rule change that specifically states that Imperial Armies can't have
Whirlwinds and Land Raiders anymore." "Uhh, what?" "Yeah, and it says you
should give the models to your ork player, free of charge, to make the game
more balanced." "Uhh, I don't know about this, but if it's in WD, then I
guess it must be kosher."

But then again, it is my opinion that no one, should ever, for any reason,
be forced to play rules that s/he doesn't want to play. This is of course,
what us in the business call the "Taking a hissy" clause. You don't like the
rule, you don't play. And if you do it in front of people, they will talk
about it behind their back.

If you really don't like the rule, say at the beginning of the game "I don't
like this rule" Then play as best you can. Do everything non-cheesily
possible to win. And smile the whole way through, at least the parts that
don't have anything to do with the rule in question. Then, at the end of the
game, you just say "I don't like that rule because it makes it impossible
for my army to win, and my army is legal, so then the rule is wrong." Of
course, if you win, you might have to play that rule for the rest of your
days. This is called, "Hiding bad sportsmanship in good sportsmanship."

While on the topic of naming things, there is also. "Being nice onto
defeat." Which is the strange complex that derives from being guilty about
forcing someone to play. I personnaly find that I am more agressive on the
table when someone has asked me to play, then if I have asked someone to
play. This happens to people who find it hard to find players, and have thus
convinced their friends to give it a go. What happens is that you sometimes
don't take advantage of rules. This happens most often with templates, and
is how the disorder gets its second name. "Oh I guess he's not covered
enough to count." and its third name "I'll give you hard cover on that one"

Oh well, that was fun, but enough from Dr. Tyler Sleslinger (Or however you
spell it)

Tyler
Received on Thu Sep 04 1997 - 00:15:51 UTC