ITC, Cheesemongers, and you!

[Limey_ElJonson]

I know - but a big part of the problem, that many have with ITC, is the FAQ! I actually quite like the scenarios...

This is my problem too. I thoroughly dislike the FAQ.  It shouldn't actually be called an FAQ - it should be called an edict.

 

I ran Foodhammer 40K last year straight out of the box and allowed people to bring what they wanted with the provision that they police themselves and not be cheesy asshat filthmongers.  I saw no titans over Knight level, one Tau'nar Supremacy Armour and two all knight armies . None of them won. EVERYONE had a great time. 

 

My opinion is that the ITC is not necessary unless there are major prizes and serious play involved. And that's not OFCC.

 

I need to think about whether I need to bother bringing a team, or just a Malifaux crew.

[CaptainA]

This is my problem too. I thoroughly dislike the FAQ.  It shouldn't actually be called an FAQ - it should be called an edict.

 

I ran Foodhammer 40K last year straight out of the box and allowed people to bring what they wanted with the provision that they police themselves and not be cheesy asshat filthmongers.  I saw no titans over Knight level, one Tau'nar Supremacy Armour and two all knight armies . None of them won. EVERYONE had a great time. 

 

My opinion is that the ITC is not necessary unless there are major prizes and serious play involved. And that's not OFCC.

 

I need to think about whether I need to bother bringing a team, or just a Malifaux crew.

 

 

What I like about the FAQ is that it answers a tons of questions that come up due to GW's poor rules. You can't necessarily say just play it RAW as there are many rules that can be written both ways. If we take away the FAQ then we open the floodgates of, "Well how are you handling x and y." Something I don't necessarily want to do.

[Limey_ElJonson]

What I like about the FAQ is that it answers a tons of questions that come up due to GW's poor rules. You can't necessarily say just play it RAW as there are many rules that can be written both ways. If we take away the FAQ then we open the floodgates of, "Well how are you handling x and y." Something I don't necessarily want to do.

 

If you mean that they can be read both ways then there is a problem either with players failing to comprehend or with GW's design team who really should read their own work. Either that or someone is trying to force their interpretation (RAI) because it is to their advantage. That's what a judge is for. 

 

People have asked me how I am handling x and y and I have told them that it was RAW out of the book. I had no issues that were not pleasantly resolved by a short conversation. 

 

Are you enforcing the ITC edict, or giving people leeway to play within the rules as written, with the ITC document as a possible solution to questions?  This is an important point and should be clarified in the main body of the tournament outline.

 

I completely ignored the ITC document last year. My opponents seemed to as well. 

[fluger]

If you mean that they can be read both ways then there is a problem either with players failing to comprehend or with GW's design team who really should read their own work. Either that or someone is trying to force their interpretation (RAI) because it is to their advantage. That's what a judge is for.

 

GW's inability to write clear rules is an issue. I rarely see the supposed boogeyman of TFG trying to beat his/her rules interpretation over your head because they are trying to hoodwink people.  More generally, it's people just reading the rule differently than someone else and genuinely believing that interpretation is correct.  No malice, no deceit, just ambiguous as [big bad swear word] rules and people from different gaming groups who interpret things differently and interpret "cheese" differently.  

 

Having an impartial FAQ ahead of time obviates the need for a judge to be called over and eliminates bias.  It also helps avoid the instance of having a TO make a judgement on your list that you weren't expecting.  

[JMGraham]

I need to think about whether I need to bother bringing a team, or just a Malifaux crew.

Ooh! Bring a team. I'm playing 40k this year and I'd love for us to be matched against y'all!

[galahad911]

This is my problem too. I thoroughly dislike the FAQ.  It shouldn't actually be called an FAQ - it should be called an edict.

 

I ran Foodhammer 40K last year straight out of the box and allowed people to bring what they wanted with the provision that they police themselves and not be cheesy asshat filthmongers.  I saw no titans over Knight level, one Tau'nar Supremacy Armour and two all knight armies . None of them won. EVERYONE had a great time. 

 

My opinion is that the ITC is not necessary unless there are major prizes and serious play involved. And that's not OFCC.

 

I need to think about whether I need to bother bringing a team, or just a Malifaux crew.

 

How exactly do you enforce not being a cheesemonger?

 

If you mean that they can be read both ways then there is a problem either with players failing to comprehend or with GW's design team who really should read their own work. Either that or someone is trying to force their interpretation (RAI) because it is to their advantage. That's what a judge is for. 

 

People have asked me how I am handling x and y and I have told them that it was RAW out of the book. I had no issues that were not pleasantly resolved by a short conversation. 

 

Are you enforcing the ITC edict, or giving people leeway to play within the rules as written, with the ITC document as a possible solution to questions?  This is an important point and should be clarified in the main body of the tournament outline.

 

I completely ignored the ITC document last year. My opponents seemed to as well. 

 

Acting like a person who may have a different interpretation of a rule to your own is automatically a person who is trying to get one over on you is incredibly short sighted and really comes off badly. Having to call judges for the many, MANY rules that are read differently by different people gets really out of hand when you get into running event beyond the local level.

[Limey_ElJonson]

How exactly do you enforce not being a cheesemonger?

 

 

Acting like a person who may have a different interpretation of a rule to your own is automatically a person who is trying to get one over on you is incredibly short sighted and really comes off badly. Having to call judges for the many, MANY rules that are read differently by different people gets really out of hand when you get into running event beyond the local level.

 

How? There's a basic amount of trust that people are mature enough to leave the grand prize tournament lists at home when it is a friendly event where hobby, sportsmanship and camaraderie are paramount - like OFCC and Foodhammer.  And Ordo has a list rating committee. And a TO (like Joel did last year) who tells people outright that their lists are not fit for the event.  I've done it too, it's simple and if a person doesn't want to play unless they can bring their face beating filth then it probably isn't the event for them anyway and they should go to the Adepticon Championships or NOVA Open.

 

I agree that acting over defensively does come off badly. I never said that I would or have act like that. I've seen it and had to moderate it recently while sitting in as ringer/gopher on a local tourney - it's pathetic and was awkward for me trying to resolve the issue and talk the overly defensive guy into not leaving, ruining the event for more people than himself. Actually, he was dealing with That Guy, so it was kinda pathetic on both sides of the table.

 

I ran Wet Coast GT 40K over the last three years without the ITC edict. No problems, and we have had players from as far afield as California. Maybe I'm just lucky! 

[CaptainA]

If you mean that they can be read both ways then there is a problem either with players failing to comprehend or with GW's design team who really should read their own work. Either that or someone is trying to force their interpretation (RAI) because it is to their advantage. That's what a judge is for. 

 

People have asked me how I am handling x and y and I have told them that it was RAW out of the book. I had no issues that were not pleasantly resolved by a short conversation. 

 

Are you enforcing the ITC edict, or giving people leeway to play within the rules as written, with the ITC document as a possible solution to questions?  This is an important point and should be clarified in the main body of the tournament outline.

 

I completely ignored the ITC document last year. My opponents seemed to as well. 

 

We will be asking players to adhere to the ITC FAQ yes.

[Limey_ElJonson]

Ooh! Bring a team. I'm playing 40k this year and I'd love for us to be matched against y'all!

Sorry Jim, I'm not playing 40K under the ITC. It's a BS crutch.

[pretre]

Sorry Jim, I'm not playing 40K under the ITC. It's a BS crutch.

It shouldn't matter if you're looking to get in some good games.

[Limey_ElJonson]

It matters to me.

 

*breathe*

 

40K has its flaws and those flaws bring reasonable conversation about the game in an environment where hobby, sportsmanship and camaraderie are important - like in Ordo Fanaticus.  The same with Malifaux, Kings of War, 9th Age, Sigmar, Warmachine, and Infinity.  Thankfully half a dozen internet celebrities in California haven't decided to mess with those too.  That document is not RAW, it's not even RAI.  It's "How I Would Play It" and it is NOT how I would play it.  Fine - if that is the way they would play it then more power to them.  I just don't like it being forced on me.

I would like to get some good games in but for now I'll play elsewhere, by the rules that Games Workshop wrote - not rules written by some power gamers who think they know better.  I will grant that a lot of the stuff is reasonable where it answers some ambiguity - but outright changing rules "for the purposes of the event" is a load.  Reece Robbins and his gang are not the Adeptus Terra. 

 

Joel had it right last year when he gave people the option to play by the real rules after discussion with their opponent.

 

This makes me sad. I've always looked forward to the 40K event at OFCC.

[galahad911]

It matters to me.

 

*breathe*

 

40K has its flaws and those flaws bring reasonable conversation about the game in an environment where hobby, sportsmanship and camaraderie are important - like in Ordo Fanaticus.  The same with Malifaux, Kings of War, 9th Age, Sigmar, Warmachine, and Infinity.  Thankfully half a dozen internet celebrities in California haven't decided to mess with those too.  That document is not RAW, it's not even RAI.  It's "How I Would Play It" and it is NOT how I would play it.  Fine - if that is the way they would play it then more power to them.  I just don't like it being forced on me.

 

I would like to get some good games in but for now I'll play elsewhere, by the rules that Games Workshop wrote - not rules written by some power gamers who think they know better.  I will grant that a lot of the stuff is reasonable where it answers some ambiguity - but outright changing rules "for the purposes of the event" is a load.  Reece Robbins and his gang are not the Adeptus Terra. 

 

Joel had it right last year when he gave people the option to play by the real rules after discussion with their opponent.

 

This makes me sad. I've always looked forward to the 40K event at OFCC.

 

What rulings specifically in their FAQ bother you so much that you would refuse to go to an event this important to the region? What has got you all worked up? 

[alexcragg]

I have long since accepted that somehow the ITC format has become the 'tournament standard' in this region.  As a TO it is nice to have a FAQ to reference to answer odd questions about codicies you aren't familiar with - and the assumption is the FAQ is neutral and well thought out. 

 

The ITC has gone from FAQ to Warhammer 40k.2.1.1

I have enough difficulty keeping up with SOME of the published rules for this game, and have no time to constantly keep up with the 'fixes' being wrought by Frontline game.  I think their hearts started in the right place, but it's bloated into a mess.

 

My real issue with the ITC is it ENCOURAGES beardy players and lists.  Instead of fostering a community of respect and evenhandedness they go out of their way to make the game even MORE complicated and their changes and restrictions don't make the game have a lower power ceiling, it just changes the shape of that ceiling.

 

I hate Invisibility, it is easily the worst thing in the game in my opinions - but I play it as is because the rulebook is neutral and we all paid $85 for it.  The fixes to the game issues start with the players, not the rule set.  OFCC should be an event where players self moderate without adhering to Bill&SteveHammer.

But what do I know?  I still play with one codex at a time and use a CAD.



Thats my 2 cents

[galahad911]

I have long since accepted that somehow the ITC format has become the 'tournament standard' in this region.  As a TO it is nice to have a FAQ to reference to answer odd questions about codicies you aren't familiar with - and the assumption is the FAQ is neutral and well thought out. 

 

The ITC has gone from FAQ to Warhammer 40k.2.1.1

 

I have enough difficulty keeping up with SOME of the published rules for this game, and have no time to constantly keep up with the 'fixes' being wrought by Frontline game.  I think their hearts started in the right place, but it's bloated into a mess.

 

My real issue with the ITC is it ENCOURAGES beardy players and lists.  Instead of fostering a community of respect and evenhandedness they go out of their way to make the game even MORE complicated and their changes and restrictions don't make the game have a lower power ceiling, it just changes the shape of that ceiling.

 

I hate Invisibility, it is easily the worst thing in the game in my opinions - but I play it as is because the rulebook is neutral and we all paid $85 for it.  The fixes to the game issues start with the players, not the rule set.  OFCC should be an event where players self moderate without adhering to Bill&SteveHammer.

 

But what do I know?  I still play with one codex at a time and use a CAD.

 

 

 

Thats my 2 cents

 

 

I keep seeing things like this said by you guys on this board. What rulings, *specifically* are "Encouraging beardy players and lists"? What changes *specifically* make the game more complicated? Because I am simply not seeing either of those things.

 

I can understand not wanting to keep up with changes, but that certainly has little to nothing to do with cheese or complicatedness, and everything to do with either not caring enough, or not motivated enough, to read some words on a website.

 

Lastly, hoping that players will decide to lower the "power ceiling" on their own is nothing short of naive. What you, or anyone else, thinks is beardy is completely arbitrary. Looking down on others and calling them names like "cheesy asshat filthmongers" because they don't see the game in the same way you do really makes you, not you specifically but a general "you" attributed to the people making these statements, look you like the [Clown].

[fluger]

What I love is listening to European players or NOVA format players who think that ITC is nerf hammer designed by whiny babbies who can't handle real competition and people who play ITC are soft and uncompetitive.  

 

Then I hear stuff like this.  

 

Guys, for real, is it possible, just POSSIBLE to admit you don't like the FAQ on personal grounds and stop adding all these personal attacks on the motives of the people doing it?  

 

I seriously do. not. get. the idea that people who are spending all this time and getting all this grief are doing it because they want to do something nefarious.  

 

I get taking a hard stance on not enjoying a format.  I openly stated that if OFCC went to the proposed 2v2 set up I wouldn't attend.  I despise that format intensely.  HOWEVER, I wouldn't then claim that the TO is holding a gun to my head and telling me how to play the game.  Nor would I say that people who promote the 2v2 format are trying to set themselves up as the Adeptus Terra or are promoting dumb 40k.  

 

I'd probably care less about this if you weren't casting aspersions on people I value both as humans and as fellow hobbyists.  These cutting remarks that imply that their version of 40k is inferior to your own are so laughably petty.  

 

If you don't like a format of 40k (be it ITC, 2v2, competitive, tournaments in general, etc), that's [big bad swear word]ing fine, but this tribal mentality of divide and insult/dismiss is infantile.  Just because someone wants to play the game in a way you don't enjoy doesn't mean they are a bad person.  

[Limey_ElJonson]

What rulings specifically in their FAQ bother you so much that you would refuse to go to an event this important to the region? What has got you all worked up? 

I'll answer that when I get home.  

[pretre]

Oh, and for those keeping track, it's that time of year again: change your smoke detector batteries.

[fluger]

I have enough difficulty keeping up with SOME of the published rules for this game, and have no time to constantly keep up with the 'fixes' being wrought by Frontline game.  I think their hearts started in the right place, but it's bloated into a mess.

 

This I can totally agree with.  40k is spiralling into nonsense levels of complexity with the rapid codex releases as well as formations and dataslates and FW and all this.  Just keeping track of what is what and how it works is hard.  Yes, adding ANOTHER thing to keep track of to be able to play games is onerous.  

 

This is a critique I appreciate.  

[JMGraham]

Sorry Jim, I'm not playing 40K under the ITC. It's a BS crutch.

 

Well, that bites. Know that the A-Club Underdogs will be missed. I hope you're still playing Malifaux so we can at least chat and have a beer!

[Limey_ElJonson]

This I can totally agree with. 40k is spiralling into nonsense levels of complexity with the rapid codex releases as well as formations and dataslates and FW and all this. Just keeping track of what is what and how it works is hard. Yes, adding ANOTHER thing to keep track of to be able to play games is onerous.

 

This is a critique I appreciate.

Honestly, I wish I'd written this because this is how I feel and I'm glad that we agree on this Nathan.

 

I'm not as eloquent as Alex or Doc and I let my passion get in the way at times - evidence here. I wish I'd slept on it before taking it to Facebook as I'm feeling much more reasonable this morning and a little foolish. If anyone took my comments as a personal attack I will be happy to apologise. Just drop me a pm and I'll be happy to talk about it.

 

Like Alex, I play with one codex and a CAD. I have played with a Lion's Blade detachment but it felt dirty.

 

The game IS bloated and yes, having to look up a rule and then look at another document to see what a third party's opinion of it can be time consuming. It could even slow a game down.

 

Actually, on that I do have a helpful suggestion for those who may not have thought of it. Print the document and highlight all of the lines in the document that pertain to their army. Keep it handy.

 

HoGs, please encourage pople who don't usually play under ITC to do the same so that there are no awkward moments. I wouldn't want someone to go to an ITC event with an army they built for the event to find that their build has been negated.

[Limey_ElJonson]

Well, that bites. Know that the A-Club Underdogs will be missed. I hope you're still playing Malifaux so we can at least chat and have a beer!

Yes, I'll be playing Malifaux as I still want to support the Ordo. The event IS important to the region and is a lot of fun with a lot of great people in attendance.

[ninefinger]

Thanks for being self policing in here guys, and keeping the conversation civil.

 

If you want to discuss the nitty gritty of the ITC FAQ, or the state of 40k, please make a thread in the 40k forum and do so.

 

The senate tries very hard to gauge the community, and protect the 'spirit of the ofcc'. I know that this was a conversation during e captains meeting. The feedback survey after ofcc informs us really directly of people's experience, without the fog of 6 months of change to 40k that may affect people's mood towards the game. We had one person express concerns about our use of it in the survey, so I don't believe it was a widespread problem.

 

Our ability to run events at the ofcc is dependent on our Hogs volunteering their time to run events. If you want the event to be run a certain way, the most direct way would have been submitting a proposal to be HoG. I'm very confident in CaptainA and Mr.MoreTanks approach to the ofcc because of their proposal.

 

As other people have noted, I think the great experience the OFCC provides is a result of the people and the commitment towards hobby and sportsmanship that we have. I sincerely hope that the use of ANY rule set wouldn't be enough to change the experience you have there.

 

-Jeffrey

Ordo Fanaticus Campaign Czar

[fluger]

Honestly, I wish I'd written this because this is how I feel and I'm glad that we agree on this Nathan.

Cheers.  

 

Like I said on FB, my real issue was the subtle jabs at the integrity of the people who create and promote ITC.  

 

I get not liking formats.  And the complexity of 40k in 7th DOES make it feel like you have to be lawyer to even understand how X + Y = Z and being able to reference all sorts of obscure documents.  So, yes, adding in ITC certainly adds yet another [big bad swear word]ing thing I have to read.  

 

As I said on FB, my IG list draws rules from 3 sources and is formed based on restrictions imposed by ITC (even though I don't have to, I just want the list to be ITC compliant so I can get in more games) so I plan on printing out various unit entries (from Forgeworld and the Montka Campaign book) to ease issues.

[alexcragg]

Damn, I don't know if I have ever been accused of being eloquent before.  Maybe I should write more stuff at 5:30 am O.o

[galahad911]

I'll answer that when I get home.  

 

I don't so much want to clutter up this thread, but this didn't get answered as far as I saw and I am genuinely interested. If you and/or Alex wouldn't mind starting another thread, in the 40k forum maybe, I would appreciate it. I am honestly trying to understand your point of view here. Not trying to pick an argument or anything like that.