ITC, WarMachine, and Narrative Gaming

[pretre]

Using the ITC missions is not a requirement for being an ITC event. Ask Bob Kelly- he didn't use any of the ITC missions for Harvester of Souls. Moreover, ITC does not mandate a point total or list format, either- if you want to run an ITC event where one player brings a 716pt unbound army and the other player brings a 9000pt apocalypse army using the 4th edition rules, you're allowed to do that. That's completely legal.

 

The ONLY mandate of an ITC event is that it has brackets based on a pure win/loss/draw format. That's it. The ITC FAQ, missions, and format just happen to be Frontline Gaming's particular preferred format; whether an ITC event uses any or all of them is entirely up to the TO.

Nicely said.

[fluger]

Ok how about this: It would be like bolting on a ranking system to civil war re-enactments, or a LARP. That somehow that there is a top ranked Confederate unit, and so we have to tweak some things to give the Confederate players a challenge (if this were an early war campaign) would be anathema to the very concept of the endeavor. Yes, the outcome of the campaign is unknown. But war is not balanced. And sometimes the two players are not going to be on equal footing. But goal of a narrative game is to play out scenarios that are fun, unique, and memorable; without the burden of having to know who is going to take home the gold. 

 

I have no issue with this type of gaming.  I play paper and dice RPGs for the similar feel.  I don't personally enjoy doing it with 40k, even though I readily admit that GW views their games more like you do than I do.  

[Torg]

this entire issue… the need for ITC…the discussion of which or which to not ITC.. etc.  makes it all that much clearer to me that maybe the player base or maybe just that me/i is somehow now beyond the reasoning which I started playing the game.  Having only really played 40k the last couple years for OFCC prep or play… maybe I am just holding on to 40k for no real payoff.  Having moved 100% of the last 6-9 months gaming budget to non GW games - I find it harder and harder to get interested in giving 40k a second look. I am much more engrossed in what else is out there at this point.

 

I blame GW for the "all over the place rules" over the last couple versions - the "need" for something like ITC only highlights that problem.  I hate the idea that some 3rd party like ITC even is a factor in my playing the game at all.  It's highly annoying to have to care what ITC rulings are.  But to play at an event I do - and that simply step of having to have my army choice "validated" by a 3rd party to participate really gets under my skin.  In the end though I know it's not ITC… and really I am not sure its GW lack of "tourney quality rules"… I really think the player base for the game has shifted from what the "meta" was when I started playing this game - to what it is now.  And really thats on me - for trying to stick with something that doesn't exist in how I think about it.  

 

Hate ITC - but really for my own reasons.  40k will continue to dwindle on my hobby space - and thats probably better in the long run.

 

-d 

[Lord Hanaur]

But you yourself said adding complexity is a bad thing- if you admit that your missions add complexity (and I think it's hard to argue they don't), where does that leave you?

 

I don't think they are that complex and they dont REDEFINE the way an army plays.  So its apples and oranges.  The FAQ redefines codex entries and Main rule book entries and is far more impactful.  And not always in bad ways by the way.  Viewed as a whole its a discouraging document though.

[InfestedKerrigan]

My Problems with ITC, in approximate order of importance:

 

1) There is a need for it.

2) It alters the basic rules of the game.

3) Bias, perceived or otherwise, with rules interpretations

 

 

Selling Points for ITC, in approximate order of importance:

 

1) Drives a Uniformity in rules interpretations

1) Addresses questionable rules

2) Regularly Updated FAQ

 

 

 

 

Back when I played Magic, I had a problem with the different "Type" settings.  I felt, and still do, that I paid my f-king money on these pieces of cardboard or plastic to play this game with.  Don't tell me how I can use them.  It's bull that I have to buy the current most flashy blah blah blah to play the game.  I've already spent 100s to 1000s on the game, [big bad swear word] you for telling me I can't use it anymore, especially when it's just to drive your bottom line.  I don't play unbound, and I'm also trying to adhere to ITCs guidelines, as I do enjoy the game, and I do enjoy the company of fellow hobbyists.  I don't HAVE to buy new toys to keep playing.  GW would like me to keep buying, but thankfully they haven't followed WotCs format, yet. 

[InfestedKerrigan]

And there you go, my biggest gripe with ITC is because of GW, not Frontline Gaming.

[AbusePuppy]

this entire issue… the need for ITC…the discussion of which or which to not ITC.. etc.  makes it all that much clearer to me that maybe the player base or maybe just that me/i is somehow now beyond the reasoning which I started playing the game.  Having only really played 40k the last couple years for OFCC prep or play… maybe I am just holding on to 40k for no real payoff.

 

The things is, tournaments and tournament play aren't incompatible with casual play. I'm a hardcore tournament 40K player if there ever was one, but I'm also playing in a weekly narrative escalation league. You don't have to limit the ways you have fun- anything you enjoy can be a part of the game at different times, if you so choose. Now, if 40K is losing its appeal to you- hey, fair enough, no one is gonna judge you because of that. But whatever your reasons, it's not because tournaments are "taking over" the game or anything of that sort.

 

[Sugarlessllama]

I have no issue with this type of gaming.  I play paper and dice RPGs for the similar feel.  I don't personally enjoy doing it with 40k, even though I readily admit that GW views their games more like you do than I do.  

 

I look at game systems like tools. I could put in a wood screw with a hammer. And it might even work. However, it wouldn't be as effective as simply using a screwdriver. 

 

Developing a large living document to dramatically alter a rule system in order to accommodate tournament play seems like using a hammer on a screw. To me at least. I would rather have one system for tournaments, and one for casual. But I really need to stress, that this is how I approach things, and that I am not saying that other people have to do it. If ITC 40K in preparation for tournament play is your thing, then kudos! Seriously. I'm happy that you are having a good time.

 

I'm just saying that it is not my cup of tea.   

 

I love RPGs. However, D&D doesn't handle mass combat well. And so, for me, 40K scratches the itch for narrative mass combat. 

 

When I want to have go for the throat competitive play, I have Warmachine ( Burn Heretics! For the Law Bringer!) and board games. For competitive on demand gaming, I have video games. 

 

That is how I would divide my "right tool, for the right job" philosophy of gaming. :D 

[fluger]

I'm looking forward to putting more time into Warmachine to try and get good enough to be competitive at it.  I keep getting caster assassinated and it makes me twitchy.  I'm only about 10 games in spread over 6 years, so I'm by no means even a novice.  

 

One of the things I like about competitive 40k compared to WarMachine is that list building in 40k is so granular.  I *really* enjoy the feel of a finely crafted list that maximizes every possible point available down to the last meltabomb.  A 50 pt WarMachine list doesn't seem as potentially unique to me.  I also dislike how it seems just as easy to write a bad WarMachine list as it is to write a bad 40k list.  I think a lot of the perceived "tournament-worthiness" of Warmachine is a factor of it being smaller scale with fewer variables rather than a better rule set overall (though, admittedly, PP is MUCH quicker at addressing rules questions and they arise with less frequency).  

 

If I could have my druthers, I'd have the people who balanced Starcraft re-balance 40k every 6 months via a living rulebook.  :D  

[Sugarlessllama]

Well if you ever want to chat about roster building concepts for Warmachine, I would be happy to go geek out about it any time. 

[fluger]

I like Khador.  I wrote up a list I think is pretty cool.  Going to proxy it on the 19th.  See if it suits my style.  

 

It's based on Epic Irusk and leverages his bonuses to use a big Man o War unit as a moving screen.  Then it has a Winter Guard Death Star with Kovnik Joe and big unit of Iron Fang Pikemen with IF Kovnik.  A war dog, 4 widowmakers and the WM Solo, then just a Destroyer IIRC for my Jack.  Oh, and the great bears as well.  How could I forget.  Plan is to hide the bears, widowmakers, and Irusk behind the Man o Wars and the WGDS and the IFs on either flank.  Destroyer stays close to Man O War as well.  

 

No idea how good that will be, but it looks neat.  

[InfestedKerrigan]

Hey guys, this is a 40k Sub-Forum discussing ITC.  Keep it on topic, and keep that Warmahordes in the Heretical Archives where it belongs.

 

Pfft. I'd expect this kind of derailing from myself, pretre or pax.  Seriously, guys.

[Guest Mr. Bigglesworth]

Mod I call for lock down this post has gone heretical.

 

ITC is great I like a well organized FAQ. Do I like all the decisions no but I can't think of any game I love every aspect.

 

As for narrative play is played however you want. The main intention of any FAQ is to create an understanding between parties who might not have an agreement. So using a garage hammer game as an example of why one doesn't like ITC makes no sense. Garage hammer is played however you want, but if you try to bring your garage hammering to a stranger it creates an awkward beginning.

 

I have played at a few different stores and each store has there own interpretations. Me walking in off the street for first time makes for a long akward exchange to make sure I'm playing the same game. A standard FAQ helps. I like ITC because it is the most widely known and used, not because it made the best calls. Almost everyone store I have walked into the player base knows of ITC.

[fluger]

Hey guys, this is a 40k Sub-Forum discussing ITC.  Keep it on topic, and keep that Warmahordes in the Heretical Archives where it belongs.

 

Pfft. I'd expect this kind of derailing from myself, pretre or pax.  Seriously, guys.

[Blustorm]

Hey guys, this is a 40k Sub-Forum discussing ITC.  Keep it on topic, and keep that Warmahordes in the Heretical Archives where it belongs.

 

Pfft. I'd expect this kind of derailing from myself, pretre or pax.  Seriously, guys.

I was just curious why a thread with Warmachine in the title was posted in the 40k forum, so I clicked on it. But, then I realized the poster was Fluger....so.... you know.... it's all good.  

[fluger]

I changed the title because the thread had evolved. 

 

[InfestedKerrigan]

Maybe we should have an ITC forum between AoS and Fantasy Battles.  You know.  Because Space Marines.  Yay!

[InfestedKerrigan]

I changed the title because the thread had evolved. 

 

 

[Guest Mr. Bigglesworth]

I changed the title because the thread had evolved.

 

[fluger]

I just want a thread where we only talk using emojis and reaction gifs. 

[fluger]

image.jpg

[InfestedKerrigan]

I just want a thread where we only talk using emojis and reaction gifs. 

 

Language

 

 

 

[PourSpelur]

I just want a thread where we only talk using emojis and reaction gifs.

 

[InfestedKerrigan]

[dalmer]

I'll be honest...  This distinction between Tournament players and casual players is a bit..thin at best.  Its a way over played card.

 

No one comes to lose.  No one has unlimited funds.  No one has unlimited time.  

 

Given those restrictions, a certain narrowing of focus can be explained and expected.  Most tournament lists arent that far from the ones those players normally use. Everyone tinkers, but ultimately a best practice emerges and requires practice.

 

I do note this though:  Those with less time to play tend to bring the most powerful builds and those with more time tend to bring a more flexible force.  Thats one thing I do notice.  Thjat has nothing to do with "tournament playrs" but it is probably true that such players will be attracted to tournaments, given their lower amount of time to play.

 

 

I agree with ITC bringing a "somewhat knows what to expect" aspect to the gaming locale, I think (like others have said) that it's a good thing for folks to know at least the rough framework of how things are.  Like college football and pro football having different specific rules, but players still know where the sidelines are, what the vast majority of rules that are enforced are, formations, etc.

 

With regards to what the players expect / hope for / prepare for / etc., that's just shooter's choice.  I don't come to a tournament or gaming session to win.  I come to enjoy myself and improve... because I possess the knowledge that there are far more accomplished players out there.  Same thing for lifting, how I am at work, how I am with my family, etc.  I might not be deemed the best by some poll or listing, but I can strive to be.

 

Stay safe,

 

don