So, rant time....
This time it is about what bothers me with the prevalancy of the Adepticon FAQ- CRAP.
Ok I'm aware that IF I go to Adepticon, I'll be using the Adepticon FAQ. I'm fine with that. It's their event and they are more than welcome and encouraged by me to use it and abide by it. It works for them.
If I am going to be running an event and have a player quote to me that a rule has been "FAQ'd" and I ask when, and they quote to me the Adepticon FAQ, I'll simply rule against them. Period.
I have NO OBLIGATION to use that thing in ANY event that I run. EVER.
But Why you may ask...
Well, I Just downloaded the 3.3 FAQ.
We'll start from the begining.
Page 1: Table of COntents.... Ok that works.
"Rulings that clarify an issue that has no conclusive RAW answer are noted as [clarifications].
Rulings that change the RAW because we feel playing that way is absurd, unfun, or goes against the style the vast majority of people play are noted as [rules change].
Situations where we feel the issue is clearly based on a typographical error are noted as [typo]."
So, if you can't figure out what the English (which the creators of the game speak fluently) version of the rules mean, you make a change.
If you don't like the rules you change them,
and because you can't use your brain in any gramatical fasion, you change the rules...
NOT COOL GUYS!
I'm paying an exorbinate ammount of money to play a game that is moderately well designed. and you change the rules. FUN.
So, lets look at some examples:
RB.22A.01 – Q: When models from two or more units are intermixed together, can these units simultaneously provide cover saves for each other from a single enemy firing unit?
A: Two or more intermixed units cannot simultaneously provide cover saves for each other against a single enemy firing unit. When such a situation occurs, the intermixed unit with a model closest to the firing unit does not count as being in cover from the unit(s) they are intermixed with [rules change].
First, this is not a rules change. Second, Duh, you measure from the firing unit to the closest model of the target unit. if there is another intervening model between them they get cover. if not, not. How is that hard? you don't measure to the farthest model. all you have to measure is if they are in range.
intervening models make it so that if you shoot through 1 squad to another. not to the back guy. It's part of the definition of INTERVENING.
"RB.48A.02 – Q: Can an Independent Character end its move within 2” of a unit it cannot join (like a vehicle)?
A: Yes they can, as otherwise it would be impossible for an IC to disembark from a vehicle that has already moved [rules change]."
seriously, that really needed to have someboy both A) ask the question and B) you thought it was serious enough to require an answer?
"RB.61H.02 – Q: If a vehicle has a weapon that can only be fired a certain number of times, and that weapon has been fully expended (such as firing a Hunter-Killer Missile, for example), does it still count as a „weapon‟ that can be destroyed by a „Weapon Destroyed‟ damage result?
A: No, weapons on a vehicle that cannot possibly fire for the rest of the game no longer count as weapons in regards to „Weapon Destroyed‟ damage results [rules change]."
So because you want to kill vehicles faster, you take away the point of a lot of people taking Single Use weapons. Thanks.
"RB.67C.01 – Q: If a lone Independent Character is embarked on a vehicle that is within 2” of a friendly unit, is the IC considered joined to that unit?
A: No, while an IC is embarked on a vehicle he cannot be joined to a unit that is outside of the vehicle [rules change]."
So, the part of the rules where it states that a unit can not be partially embarked on a vehicle does not cover this? Seriously?
RB.67F.01 – Q: When a transport vehicle suffers a „Destroyed – explodes!‟ result its passengers must be placed “where the vehicle used to be”. What exactly does this mean?
A: Passengers must be placed wholly inside the area of the table that the vehicle‟s hull previously occupied [clarification].
Any models that cannot fit entirely within this area or are within 1” of an enemy model are removed from play as a casualty. In addition, the models count as having disembarked from a vehicle (and so cannot assault the same turn if the vehicle wasn‟t open-topped, for example) [rules change].
And here you go on to both change a rule and kill a lot of orks. Orks have enough problems. Thanks again. FAILURE
The list goes on and on, but you get the Idea.
First I have to give the guys who wrote this thing credit for trying to answer EVERY stupid question people who don't know the rules ask.
And secondly I have to sarcastically thank them for putting it out there where everyone thinks it is a Cannon document that is in effect in every tournament.
No Thank you.
- Rant Off.
Game Design: Learning from my mistakes
1 day ago