Local Tournaments are getting weird

[Melissia]

Which doesn't really change anything I said. The majority of people I've run across use FAQs as official, and indeed quite a few things need to be FAQed anyway (I seriously do not want to get into another argument about the Doom of Malan'tai and units in transports...)

Nabterayl: I would suggest that they put it in a section called "Suggested House Rules" or something like that, rather than the Errata/FAQ section.

[Senekal]

Out of curiosity, Mel ... would it be possible in your view for GW to publish their own unofficial house rules on their website, or otherwise communicate their own unofficial house rules to the public? If it is, how would they go about that in a way that made it clear to you that they were doing that and not publishing official rules?

Thankfully GW clarifies that nicely right on their own website. See above.

[Senekal]

Which doesn't really change anything I said.

Of course it does. It is okay to admit being wrong occasionally. Hell I am more than I'd like.

The majority of people I've run across use FAQs as official, and indeed quite a few things need to be FAQed anyway (I seriously do not want to get into another argument about the Doom of Malan'tai and units in transports...)

So if the majority of people start playing that every time a model gets removed from the table you smash it with a hammer you'll be good with that?

Nabterayl: I would suggest that they put it in a section called "Suggested House Rules" or something like that, rather than the Errata/FAQ section.

Umm - you realize that's what they did right?

Errata - hard rules changes.

FAQ - 'GW's House Rules'

Geez - they came right out and bloody said it! How much more clarity do you want?

[Melissia]

FAQ - 'GW's House Rules'

No, FAQs are "frequently asked questions", IE, clarifications on the rules that need it. That is why they are called FAQs, that's the entire purpose behind a FAQ, that's how it's used in all tournaments that have their private FAQs (even if I disagree with anywhere from just a few to many of their decisions in many cases, they at least try and make a consistent, clarified game). If they were "GW's house rules" they'd be called "GW's house rules", not FAQs.

[Senekal]

No, FAQs are "frequently asked questions", IE, clarifications on the rules that need it. That is why they are called FAQs, that's the entire purpose behind a FAQ, that's how it's used in all tournaments that have their private FAQs (even if I disagree with anywhere from just a few to many of their decisions in many cases, they at least try and make a consistent, clarified game). If they were "GW's house rules" they'd be called "GW's house rules", not FAQs.

So how YOU choose to define a term, despite flying in the face of what the people who wrote the thing SAID in plain English is more valid? Let me try quoting this for you once again.

The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'.

If that's not clear enough for you - well there's not much more I can really say as we're no longer communicating in the same language. Your mind is clearly made up, far be it for me to confuse you with facts or anything.

I believe I'm done here. Happy gaming.

[Melissia]

So how YOU choose to define a term

No, "frequently asked questions" is what FAQ stands for. Do you know what an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym]acronym[/url] is?

[Cossack]

Why are you arguing with Melissia? Try the 'Ignore User' option in the User CP! Done!

[blackjack]

"Now that's an interesting statement. So, umm, what items in the IA books are so 'wildly unbalanced?' Have you ever actually PLAYED games against those models? Run an event that allowed them? Which ones terrify you so that you would make such a claim"


I suppose I am speaking out of ignorance here, fair enough. I have heard of drop pods that allow you to assault the turn you come in for instance and that terrifies me.

I would certainly go to an Adeptacon if it were held here in Edmonton. (we only get 2 20+ person tournaments a year here).

How's the 40k turn out in Winnipeg?

[Nabterayl]

No, FAQs are "frequently asked questions", IE, clarifications on the rules that need it.

You know I respect you Mel, but I have to say, it seems odd to me to give more weight to the term than to its definition. I agree with you that the term FAQ suggests authority, but when it's subsequently defined as not authoritative, that seems like the definition should control. It's like if I were to draft a contract that said:

The term "authoritative answer", when used herein, shall mean a non-authoritative suggestion.

It would be ... odd to argue that in such a document the term authoritative answer referred to authoritative answers, because everybody knows that's what the words "authoritative answer" mean. That is what those words mean, but it doesn't change the fact that for purposes of my contract, authoritative answers would be non-authoritative suggestions.

It would be an odd word choice (and yes I can draft better than that), but it would also be totally clear.

[Melissia]

Which means that GW is sending mixed signals (nothing new there), but I'm tuned into one signal in particular as opposed to the other :P