Search This Blog

Saturday, 3 May 2008

Wargamers are a strange breed...

I've just come from the WAB forum where there has been an, erm...'interesting debate' about a rule called 'ferocious charge'. Now, for the non-WABbers among you, let me explain... It's a rule that's meant to show how nasty a bunch of medieval knights was when they charged headlong into their enemy...note the word charged in that sentence...

Anyway, sadly, the actual 'rule as written' states that any unit with the 'ferocious charge' rule will, when it wins a round of combat, immediately cause its enemy to break and run without any of the usual 'do they run or stand' leadership tests... Note that it doesn't say that the unit actually has to be charging to do this when it wins the round of combat...and therein lies the rub!!!

Now, I've played a few games against folk with these 'ferocious charging' knights and every time, the player has used the rule when his knights have charged...makes sense...the charge is hideous...they hit hard, win big, my troops run like b*ggery!!! If I ever do hold the charge, never, never (and I repeat) NEVER has my opponent then claimed the rule in subsequent rounds of combat when his knights aren't charging!! Quite right too....jolly fair and sporting and everyone's happy...even though I'm usually being slaughtered at the time...

Now, some folk on the WAB forum were actually trying to justify how the knights could still claim to be charging ferociously (and thus winning and autobreaking/slaughtering their enemy) even when they weren't charging (!!!!???) just so the 'rule as written' makes sense. WHAT?????!!!!

Bloody hell!! Anyone with an iota of common sense can see what a load of utter tosh that idea is..How can a unit be ferociously charging when it isn't charging???!!!!!!!! Why didn't the errata guys at Warhammer Historical spot this utter buffoonery and actually write the errata properly?

It is difficult, though...Imagine that you are facing one of thse guys at a tournament and they pull that one on you? You can't argue it cos the 'rule as written' means that they are right... What happened to common sense? What happened to 'sporting??? Let's just hope that no-one actually ever does that... I'm sure that those guys who were arguing for it actually wouldn't...not really...

I mean, just how badly do some chaps need to win a game of toy soldiers???!!!!!

Anyway.....no painting updates cos I've been up to my proverbials in it at work, not to mention gardening and stuff at home! A few Welshies and Romano Brits awaiting completion from ages ago, but nowt new really started beyond the basing and undercoating. Unlikely to get much done over the next month either the way it's looking, so sorry about that! Will update as soon as I can...

Work/life balance...what's that?????

5 comments:

WABit said...

Only one word for them Andy....

Cheats.....

Darrell.

GuitarheroAndy said...

Well quite! Personally, there are many other words I'd like to use and none of 'em are as polite as 'cheats'...

I sometimes think that one of 'em in particular just does it to wind folk up...he's virtually admitted it in the past...

And you wonder why I don't go to the tourneys???!!!!!

Dave said...

Well.......originally back in the mists of time it was stated WAB was not designed for the rules lawyers of competition play. Probably for this very reason. It's designed for like minded souls to play a "fun" game.

Rules should be seen as the framework for an enjoyable pastime not some holy scripture obeyed to the letter.

IMHO of course

GuitarheroAndy said...

Suits me absolutely fine...I don't have any intention of ever playing in a tournament anyway.

As for the FC rule, I think that you'll be hard pushed to find many folk who actually agree with RAW on that one. You can 'justify' your view of FC all you like. I still think it's plain wrong. Luckily, we'll never face each other over the wargames table to 'argue' over it in person...

I'm glad that you found my post here. I deliberately left it off the WAB forum to avoid any unpleasantness on there. far better to keep it a bit more private, which this 'ere blog is, cos hardly any folk visit!

I trust that you've also sent the same message to Wabit, who also used the word 'cheat' out loud... :-)
To be fair, you, I'm sure, do not cheat. However, I have met (and gamed against) others who do.
Probably wrong of us to 'tar you with that same brush!' So yeah, ok...sorry about that...

I do not apologise for the 'rant' as I still stand by the view that the RAW is wrong. Blogs are designed to be both personal and written in a 'chatty' style and that's how I would have 'said' it if talking to someone about it.

Anyway, you probably won't come back to visit again, so I dunno why I'm even replying....

Guy said...

So you don't have a future in tournament gaming Andy, well thank God for that! :-)

I asked RobB about this one. He said you need to charge. Its a classic case of reading the sentence in isolation form the rest of the rule. It is clear by the text that a charge is involved.

Cheers,

Guy