Lord Hanaur Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 its actually NOT worse than no FAQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galahad911 Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 its actually NOT worse than no FAQ. For the people who are complaining based solely on there being a FAQ and their not wanting to be bothered to read it, it kind of is since you're asking them to read an FAQ *and then* read addendum to the FAQ. If they are getting upset about having to read anything at all this is adding an extra step that they can't be bothered to make. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I have zero issue with someone saying "We're using the ITC FAQ, but not X Y and Z." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I have zero issue with someone saying "We're using the ITC FAQ, but not X Y and Z."I don't either, but as was elaborated it just makes the 'it's too much work' argument worse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 its actually NOT worse than no FAQ.My point was shortened. It's worse for those who don't want to read the ITC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 While I was defending and understanding of the nay sayers I would just like to state I am for using the itc it is nice to have something formal with wide acceptance soon don't have to check every faq... I obsess a little so being able to obsess over one thing is far preferential to each to doing or not doing one as the case maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 I just think its funny we read a 180 or so page rule book, plus a another at 100 for a codex (+ more pages if you have multiple armies or like to read other armies books) and then complain about 24 pages of light reading, most of which is just annotated text from the 280 pages we already read. I mean just in that single case with a rulebook and a single codex the 24 pages is 9% of what you have already read. Which just decreases the more books you read. Its not like you even have to remember both iterations of the rule if you just play ITC. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterman Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 I think everybody is entitled to their opinions. As a TO I love not having to make my own FAQ -- its a thankless, horrible but absolutely critical thing to have for any event that draws people from all over. As a player I like knowing how things will be ruled before writing lists and attending an event. Still, I have multiple criticisms about it in terms of layout (its not an FAQ when IMO without the question it is addressing), lack of updates (tons of stuff are hold overs from 6ed transition and should be revisted) and that they use the vote thing as a shield against criticism (eg well the people have spoken, don't blame us). I'm also in the camp of not liking blatant rules changes, especially without thinking through all the side effects (modified Invisibility vs Tau markers lights is a classic example). So I wouldn't argue they are above criticism either, nor do I think they take criticism as well as they could (its much better now though as seen by the 2016 format changes). It could be better and I hope it gets better as time goes on. However, this idea that the ITC FAQ encourages cheesemongering (or is done in the name of cheesemongering by cheesemongers) is absurd to me. Win/Loss/Draw tournament play encourages cheesemongering. Period. Proven time and again over many editions. Although the flips side is also true -- ITC FAQ does nothing to curb it either. What it does do, or at least tries and does an OK job of, is curbing negative play experience. That's the whole point. You might play against a deathstar but at least its failing 66% more saves then it would have. Might see 50 warpsiders but at least they jump once a phase. Finally its awesome you can run a 40ish man tournmament without an FAQ. I have done it both ways, totally doable. Try doing it with a 120-300+ event. With a ton of cash on the line. End of the day that is why the ITC FAQ is there and why it is the way it is. And why CaptA and MrMoreTanks are using it. Take it or leave it. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torg Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 lol - I've never read the whole rulebook in any version (well I did read the RT book before it fell apart lol)… I read the basic rules - then look up things as I go - pertaining to a question about something in particular. I don't really read my codexes anymore - as GW spends lots of time revising fluff as well as rules. - so I only read the meat of the codex - new rules … stat sheets…etc. in the last decade I only read what I have to read to play at OFCC lol. I don't play enough to justify the waste of time. I will skim and read through things as I build an army when I play next. Thats pretty much how it has been for the last 6-8 years. ITC? has changed more than once since I last played 40k I think (OFCC last year)… and I will wait to skim that when I play 40k at and ITC event again (not this year). -d 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 It could be better and I hope it gets better as time goes on. Exactly this. I think more people buying into the idea and putting more effort into making it better will (who would have guessed?!) make it better. The wording on their polls have gotten better over time even though apparently it doesn't sit well with some people still. I would like to see a more formalized process for submitting things to be reviewed or re-assessed. Like a online signature form that needs a certain number of things to put it on the next ballot. Currently it is very nebulous in terms of when they put it up for a vote. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Their polls got better? Lol. No. But I do also hope it improves. Starting with a massive GW FAQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.MoreTanks Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Their polls got better? Lol. No. But I do also hope it improves. Starting with a massive GW FAQ. Well that's like, your opinion man. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Their polls got better? Lol. No. But I do also hope it improves. Starting with a massive GW FAQ. Seriously, they have. The first couple they ran were incredibly sloppy and full of bias. They've still got a ways to go, but they have gotten better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Starting with a massive GW FAQ. That'll be the day... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Well that's like, your opinion man. I'm reasonably confident that it is. =) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.MoreTanks Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 This isn't Vietnam after all. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 This isn't Vietnam after all. Say what you will about the tenets of ITC, at least it's an ethos. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Come on, guys, the next obvious line is someone who doesn't like ITC saying, "Am I the only one who gives a [big bad swear word] about the rules?" 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PumpkinHead Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Am I the only one who gives a [big bad swear word] about the rules? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Do you see what happens, Larry? Do you see what happens when you FAQ a stranger in the ***? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Do you see what happens, Larry? Do you see what happens when you FAQ a stranger in the ***? Winner. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Do you see what happens, Larry? Do you see what happens when you FAQ a stranger in the ***? I don't like your jerkoff army, I don't like your jerkoff FAQ, and I don't like you...jerkoff. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Let me tell you something, pendejo. You pull any of your crazy sh*t with us, you flash a FAQ at the table, I'll take it away from you, stick it up your a*s. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 You want a FAQ? I can get you a FAQ, believe me. There are ways, Dude. You don't wanna know about it, believe me. Hell, I can get you a FAQ by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with a ruling on invisibility. These f*cking amateurs... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.