Is GW qualified to make rules?

[busbina]

I was doing some linkedin stalking of GW rules developers along with contrasting them to game designers at WotC. 

 

Here is Phil Kelly's CV:
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/phil-kelly/61/281/b51

 

Phil has a BA in sculpture. It looks like he worked his way up at GW from being an artist\writer. While everyone who holds the same position

at WoTC has a degree in math\physics\computer science. Don't get me wrong Phil is a great writer, but if I was running a

game company I wouldn't hire him to write rules.

[pretre]

On the other hand, how many people do you know that have degrees in XYZ but have no practical experience?

 

Phil Kelly has been writing rules for the most popular miniatures game in the world for what... 30 years? We may not like some of the decisions he makes but you can't argue with the results.

 

Also, just because WOTC writers have better resumes doesn't mean that their decisions aren't just as controversial/picked apart as Phil Kelly's. D&D: Remember the launch of 3 and the uproar there. The need to launch 3.5 to fix 3. The launch of 4 and [big bad swear word] storm that caused. And D&D has plenty of FAQs to handle current situations.

 

Now if you're talking MTG, that's a whole different beast.

[JamesBeadle]

What Eben said. I am studying to be a pastor, and among what I have learned about holding the office is that, like a politician, pastors live in a fishbowl where everyone examines thier every word and action. Now multiply that by a couple of million fans, put your words on paper, blend them into an excating and percise game system, and just see how many people barf their anger and frustration all over you becasue you made a rules decision that runs counter to their expectation. I think the guy does rather well all things considered.

[AscentStudios]

I think, as with many fields, you'll find the vast majority of game designers do not hold "related" degrees\. Take myself for instance. Spycraft 2.0, which I designed, was widely lauded for having a very balanced, tightly integrated set of RPG rules spread across half a million words - and I have a degree in Russian, Writing, and Sociology. FWIW I also worked for years in web analytics and content management with those same degrees, and no one ever questioned my capacity based on my educational background. What matters is if you can understand and analyze a system of rules interactions, and innovate on the established base - e.g. "the work."

[pretre]

Personally, I find a lot of degrees to be overrated for the majority of jobs. You just don't need them. Of course, people still expect them for some silly reason so I'm getting one in my spare time. Ugh.

[fluger]

I now want to look into Spycraft 2.0.  

[fluger]

This is quickly turning into a Warpspace discussion, but I agree with Eben in regards to the value of degrees in today's America.  My history degree is an albatross that I wish I had never gone for.  I wish I had gone right into the work force at 18 instead of going to school.  

Of course, a lot of the value I got out of college made me a better person and more rounded all around, but the ROI was terrible.  I just wish it hadn't been essentially required as the next step in life post HS.  

[Bosco]

There are far worse writers (rules and fluff butchers) at GW to be worried about than Mr. Kelly.  

 

A certain fluff butcher, let's say his name is Matt Ward, who has been credited with a significant volume of the 'codex creep' we've seen in the last two editions is a far greater concern than how a sculptor happened to work his way up the chain to game designer.  Whoever brought him into the fold and then promoted him to write anything more than a table of contents needs to be thoroughly examined.

 

Like Pretre said though, degrees don't necessarily correlate to competence or capability.   

[busbina]

I'm not saying a degree is needed, but I don't see Phil doing statistical analysis of each unit.  Comparing pro and cons, mapping out how each unit interacts with every single other unit. While their fluff is great, and Phil is a great writer, the existence of 2++ reroll death stars makes me question if they spent anytime balancing the rules.

 

Edit:

D&D does have problems. But I am more referring to MtG, there release process is quite meticulous and very analytic.

 

Side note: While I do have a Math degree, I work with people everyday who do the same thing who dont have more than an HS diploma. Experience and personal skill is the same thing.

[pretre]

There are far worse writers (rules and fluff butchers) at GW to be worried about than Mr. Kelly.  

 

A certain fluff butcher, let's say his name is Matt Ward, who has been credited with a significant volume of the 'codex creep' we've seen in the last two editions is a far greater concern than how a sculptor happened to work his way up the chain to game designer.  Whoever brought him into the fold and then promoted him to write anything more than a table of contents needs to be thoroughly examined.

 

Ugh. Thread is Draigo'd already? Yuck. Matt Ward gets far more crap than he actually deserves for codex creep and fluff butchery. A more even assessment shows him as not really any worse than anyone else in the design studio. They all have their little foibles, but overall provide a pretty decent product.

 

In addition, and I love this about the new codexes, the books aren't really just written by Kelly or Ward. Each book is written by the design team together with one person taking the lead. In the new books, they emphasize this by removing individual writing credit and putting 'Design Team' as the author. So things you blame on Kelly or Ward may not even be things they actually did.

[Chappy]

Yay! Matt Ward bashing! Wooooo!

Haven't seen this in a while.

[pretre]

I'm not saying a degree is needed, but I don't see Phil doing statistical analysis of each unit.  Comparing pro and cons, mapping out how each unit interacts with every single other unit. While their fluff is great, and Phil is a great writer, the existence of 2++ reroll death stars makes me question if they spent anytime balancing the rules.

 

Edit:

D&D does have problems. But I am more referring to MtG, there release process is quite meticulous and very analytical. 

Sure, but MTG also fixes a lot of problems with the rolling release cycle and not having to balance against previous editions.

 

I have said this before and I will say it again.The problem with 40k is not balance itself. The problem with 40k is that the people who own and write 40k (i.e. the design team) play an entirely different game than the people who buy their product. They love beer and pretzels, fast and loose wargaming. They have never and, quite possibly, will never produce a tight rules system. It isn't because they can't do it or they are incompetent or bad at their jobs, it is because they don't see any reason to. The way things have played for the last 30 or so years have been fine for them, so why change it? They think: "All of my games work out fine using the Most Important Rule and just discussing things, why can't all of our players just do that?"

 

Add into that the need for a new edition every 4 years and new army books every 4-8 years for each army (both from a profit standpoint and from a consumer demand standpoint) and you have a nasty stew of cobbled together rules that work perfectly fine if you are just looking to drink beer and play a game but fall apart when two people who don't have the same understanding sit across the table from each other.

[busbina]

Matt Ward does not have a CV on linkedin btw,

[busbina]

Sure, but MTG also fixes a lot of problems with the rolling release cycle and not having to balance against previous editions.

 

I have said this before and I will say it again.The problem with 40k is not balance itself. The problem with 40k is that the people who own and write 40k (i.e. the design team) play an entirely different game than the people who buy their product. They love beer and pretzels, fast and loose wargaming. They have never and, quite possibly, will never produce a tight rules system. It isn't because they can't do it or they are incompetent or bad at their jobs, it is because they don't see any reason to. The way things have played for the last 30 or so years have been fine for them, so why change it? They think: "All of my games work out fine using the Most Important Rule and just discussing things, why can't all of our players just do that?"

 

Add into that the need for a new edition every 4 years and new army books every 4-8 years for each army (both from a profit standpoint and from a consumer demand standpoint) and you have a nasty stew of cobbled together rules that work perfectly fine if you are just looking to drink beer and play a game but fall apart when two people who don't have the same understanding sit across the table from each other.

I also think this might be a lost in translation issue. I am not sure if gaming in general is as competitive in the UK. I know here we are going through a gaming renascence here, I am not sure if the same is true across the pond.  

[fluger]

Gaming in the UK can be ultracompetitive. 

 

Some of the old 7th Edition Fantasy Official GW GT tournaments over there brought out the meanest types of lists wielded by really good generals.  

[pretre]

Yeah, they have competitive gaming, just not in the Design Studio.

[busbina]

Gaming in the UK can be ultracompetitive. 

 

Some of the old 7th Edition Fantasy Official GW GT tournaments over there brought out the meanest types of lists wielded by really good generals.  

Not as in "are people competitive", but is gaming there as widely accepted as it is here. Is it still a fringe activity? Or do they have the popularity where gaming (not just war) but any type is seen as a good use of your time? Where being good at playing a game is seen as something that is "legitimate". I know MtG has achieved this, when I started playing as a kid (1994) it was fringe activity, but now almost every kid I meet, from all walks of life, have a deck in their backpack. Being widely used requires the rules to become tighter, or people will get frustrated at it. MtG had to do this, it seems like like a growing pain almost.

[JamesBeadle]

I cannot speak for miniature games, but boardgames are certainly far more popular in Europe than in the US. It is common for friends who would not be understood as wargamers, to get together for a social gathering and break out boardgames. People in the US go to movies, folks in Europe game. I would think that would translate into all kinds of games, but I don't know for certian.

[tombking]

I think, as with many fields, you'll find the vast majority of game designers do not hold "related" degrees\. Take myself for instance. Spycraft 2.0, which I designed, was widely lauded for having a very balanced, tightly integrated set of RPG rules spread across half a million words - and I have a degree in Russian, Writing, and Sociology. FWIW I also worked for years in web analytics and content management with those same degrees, and no one ever questioned my capacity based on my educational background. What matters is if you can understand and analyze a system of rules interactions, and innovate on the established base - e.g. "the work."

One of the best guys we had on our admin team years ago was a lingustics major, but the base education and principles for pattern recognition of it worked well with his main job of performance monitoring. I find a lot of the basic logic I had to learn for the higher level math courses extremely useful for the problem solving I have to do for server support.

 

On the whole most BAs are a ticket to here you have the background to survive the specific job training we are going to throw at you and just because you got a degree in X does not mean that 15 years later you will be doing anything related to it.

[busbina]

One of the best guys we had on our admin team years ago was a lingustics major, but the base education and principles for pattern recognition of it worked well with his main job of performance monitoring. I find a lot of the basic logic I had to learn for the higher level math courses extremely useful for the problem solving I have to do for server support.

 

On the whole most BAs are a ticket to here you have the background to survive the specific job training we are going to throw at you and just because you got a degree in X does not mean that 15 years later you will be doing anything related to it.

The basis of computer programming is linguistics. Its a great field to understand, teaches both logical thinking and cultural understanding. Great for game design too, how languages are processed, and their grammar rules are a lot like steps and decision in a game. 

[HeroZero]

The "problem" with warhammer isn't the rules, miniatures, writers designers or even the literal millions of pages of universe written in disparate places.

 

The problem with warhammer is:

THE PLAYERS

 

This hobby is by its very nature an individualistic expression of personal creativity, desires, and ethos in a format that encourages a communal dialogue, setting and function of the hobby.

 

We all have opinions and personal meaning behind our hobby. Any attempt to create an equally balanced and fair game metric went out the window the moment the first two people picked up dice.

 

Education, experience and personal Hygiene aside the designers have created a product that is engaging, largely diverse in personal investment and can be used in numerous ways.

 

Anything that doesn't fit with your personal taste is absolutely 100% just that: your personal opinion. Expression of your opinions are encouraged but remain your own.

[pretre]

As much as I agree with some of that, I disagree with other parts. It is certainly possible, if GW wanted to, to make the game a lot tighter rules-wise and eliminate a lot of problems. Would it be perfectly balanced? No. But it would be closer. You can't boil that down to just opinion.

[fluger]

As much as I agree with some of that, I disagree with other parts.

What a surprise! 

 

[busbina]

While I love GW IP and the game (which is why I spend tons of cash on it). I do think we as players should ask for higher standards when it comes to rule sets. Or else some day, maybe someone will come up with a better rule set than the GW rules (Kill Team has already had this happen).

[Chaos Lord Chris]

I just can't fathom why they wouldn't want to write tight rules. A good ruleset benefits everyone, even the fluffy bunnies and beer & pretzel guys. Its not like 40k isn't fairly rules-dense already so complexity clearly isn't the issue, its just that the rules seem almost tailor made to drive artificial wedges into the player base based on even small variances in how competitive players are.

 

I wouldn't call my armies particularly competitive. They're good sure, but if I went up against any of the big tourney-stomper lists I'd get butchered 9 times out of 10, and yet my lists stomp even slightly more casual players to the point that I've got to dumb down my list building to keep things enjoyable. I'm not some tactical genius, and I'd wager that neither are the people playing the lists that just naturally curbstomp mine, but these massive gulfs in army effectiveness are just built in to the system and that can't be healthy for the game as a whole.