June 16, 2019, 12:02:51 PM

Poll

How many shots are fired at attackers ?

3
0 (0%)
4
0 (0%)
5
0 (0%)
6
0 (0%)
7
0 (0%)
8
0 (0%)
9
0 (0%)
10
4 (100%)
over 10
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 4

Voting closed: May 18, 2009, 09:59:43 PM

Author Topic: Question about stand and shoot  (Read 8975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lex

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1444
  • I wonder...
    • Loc: Bergen op Zoom, Netherlands
    • Warmuster . BitzBox
Re: Question about stand and shoot
« Reply #30 on: May 14, 2009, 10:36:08 PM »
Actualy that is not a rule, but a procedure statement   8).

makes me curious - what is the basis for above statement?


Let me try and explain; if you look at the Rulebook (actualy ANY rulebook, or workmanual etc)  there are 3 different kind of writing in there

- Rules
- Procedure
- Fluff

In general, more traditional games will have VERY clear Rules and Procedures, and hardly any fluff, or at least the fluff stays in its own sections and does not clutter the rules. Eg. look at Monopoly. Clear, sectionalized rules, which little complexity and thus no need for eleborate Procedure.

- Rule: when you hit the policeguy, go to prison
- Procedure: instead of following the normal track, which might cause you to cross start and get money cf. the normal rule, go direct to the boardspace marked prison
- Fluff: none, WHY you go there is left up to imagination

GW produced games tend to have VERY much overlap between Rule, Procedure and Fluff, which often leads to people reading "rules" that are never intended as such, or ignoring stuff as "being in the fluff".

- Rule: If you have missile weapons you can shoot at enemy in sight and in range, with the OBLIGATION to shoot at the closest enemy
- Procedure:
1) determine LOS for the unit shooting
2) measure distance to nearby units
3) roll dice to hit
etc
- Fluff: no sane man/elf/gobbo would ignore the guys with pointy bits comming closer and closer to shoot at the friggin big dragon further away.

Quote


actually i don't really see reason for discussion as the rules are quite clear in my opinion! :)


Well, one of the reasons that for the Playtest and Development I try to get people from many places, with all their own interpretation and playstyle together. Especialy people well versed in English, that need to translate the Rulebook to others in their community are prone to spot certain areas of possible misinterpretation. Travel to play, and you will be supprised by what YOU concive as "clear" may not be as clear as you think. Most players are limited to their own meta-gaming-scene, which will also "set" certain (pre)conceptions. Take it from one that traveled half the world to play his games of Warmaster.

Offline Lex

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1444
  • I wonder...
    • Loc: Bergen op Zoom, Netherlands
    • Warmuster . BitzBox
Re: Question about stand and shoot
« Reply #31 on: May 14, 2009, 10:41:37 PM »

@Topic: Gotta agree with mspaetauf. How do we distinguish rule from procedure?


Hmmmm  I agree that is not always easy. I always try and think of it like this:

Rules generaly define circumstances
Procedure tells me when, what and/or how

In itself it is an interesting excersize to look at (parts of ) the rulebook and try and make the distinction. And personaly I am of the opinion that would we want to do a WM-rules.V2, we would NEED to .

Offline wmchaos2000

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 158
  • Sir Killalot II for the masses!!! /mvh ola
Re: Question about stand and shoot
« Reply #32 on: May 15, 2009, 11:01:56 AM »
The first attackers gets 3 +3 dragon shots and the second charger gets 1 + 3 dragon shots, so I would say all in all 10 shots are fired in s&s.

Joy-destroyer!  :)
Since you spoiled the poll, I vote that you get to come up with a new one.  ;)