> IMHO, GW would benefit greatly from structuring their rules like a classic
> wargame (i.e. D2.3.10) for design purposes. At least this would help them
> avoid vaguely described interactions when describing all their "rules
> exceptions." It would also speed up and make their Q&A more regular, not to
> mention less frequent and less necessary. After they have organized all
> their rules, THEN they can go back and add fluff.
>
> [snip]
> Temp
It would also make my job a hell of a lot easier. (Assuming, of course,
that I start getting answers from them again after the release of
EPIC 40K)
The sheer beauty of Temp's statement brings a tear to my eye. Those of
you whose sole experience with wargames is from GW products (surely not
many of you?) simply can't imagine the ease of play which comes with
a well organized rules system.
I hate to keep bringing up Star Fleet Battles every time we discuss
rules organization, but it really is the best organized rule book I've
ever seen. The SFB rulebook really is between 10 to 20 times bigger
by volume than the combined EPIC rulebook. You'd think that this would
make the EPIC rules sleeker and easier to use, but in truth the exact
opposite is true. The Amarillo Design Bureau's numbering system,
cross reference notes, and (gasp!) index make finding even the most
obscure "unit interaction" rules the work of mere seconds. These
things also build player confidence in the competence of the company.
I've always said the the worlds best wargame would be one wherein
ADB designs the rules, and GW sculpts the miniatures.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Allen (The EPIC Q&A guy)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the EPIC Q&A Pages at:
http://work1.utsi.edu:8000/~amccarle/EPIC.html
If you have EPIC questions, send them to: allen_at_...
They will be passed on to Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.
Send all other correspondance to: allen_at_...
---------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thu Feb 06 1997 - 21:15:18 UTC