Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

Star Trek: Attack Wing» Forums » General

Subject: Should we ignore old rulings? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Waspinator
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a subject that came up after a local tournament the other day. Given that the Wizkids rules forum has never acknowledged the authority of the old Andrew Parks and Chris Guild rulings and in fact frequently contradicts them, should we now ignore all old rulings that have not been repeated by the WORF? I'm not sure they're official enough any longer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Griffin
United States
Marietta
Georgia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheWaspinator wrote:
This is a subject that came up after a local tournament the other day. Given that the Wizkids rules forum has never acknowledged the authority of the old Andrew Parks and Chris Guild rulings and in fact frequently contradicts them, should we now ignore all old rulings that have not been repeated by the WORF? I'm not sure they're official enough any longer.


If you're having your own tournament, you can do what you want. If it's an OP tournament your TO probably can still modify the rules you play if it's what you want to play. But I'd guess if your players have aspirations on playing in regionals or nationals, you'd probably be better off using the WK rulings where possible even if they may not always be to your liking. Plus this game is hard enough to try to remember without multiple versions of the rules but maybe that's just me.

But that's just my opinion. I expect wiser heads will pipe up.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Lin
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
They do seem to be only picking and choosing which old rules to respect.

If it comes down to trying to stay as close to 'official' as possible (IE What they would probably try to enforce at a NECA/WizKids run Major Tournament) then you would only use any rulings on the updated FAQ and the Forum. Anything else is pretty much assumed in the air.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trueflight Silverwing
United States
Waverly
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Meh, I stand by anything Andrew Parks (co-designer of the game) said over anything the no name people at WK who have never played the game say any day.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Lin
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
While that works for your local store and in any casual environment - you've always been free to make up or alter the rules as you see fit, after all - if we're strictly looking to ask what is the rules to use 'by the book', then we can only assume only the documents they provide are valid, even if their decisions are unpopular and growing steadily more so, apparently.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As the others say, if you're running an event then you can do whatever you feel like, but personally I really don't see any value whatsoever in ignoring old rulings and think it's a pretty terrible idea.

If you thought that the old rulings were creating some kind of systematic and unsustainable tension with the new ones, then that'd be a reason to worry, but if the question is just "hey should we unanswer a few hundred pages of questions that we currently know the answer to?" then I'm gonna go with "no," because neither WORF's imprimatur nor the fact that they've overturned a ruling or two (heck, so did Andrew and Chris) means as much to me as not having to undo 99% of our rulings and ask stawrulesteam about every last one of them on the off chance that they've changed their mind.

SeijiTataki wrote:
if we're strictly looking to ask what is the rules to use 'by the book'


If we did that, hours would seem like days whistle
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
H. Tucker Cobey
United States
Torrance
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
At Colorado Regionals, we were specifically instructed that we were to ignore all of Andrew's and Chris's rulings in lieu of the judge's. This was a terrible plan for many reasons, but appears to be the official line going forward.

Take that as you will. Personally, I tend to do the exact opposite.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Waspinator
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tsuyoshikentsu wrote:
At Colorado Regionals, we were specifically instructed that we were to ignore all of Andrew's and Chris's rulings in lieu of the judge's. This was a terrible plan for many reasons, but appears to be the official line going forward.

Take that as you will. Personally, I tend to do the exact opposite.


Well, that does seem to make clear what the Wizkids position is on the subject: ignore the old posts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
D Conklin
United States
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All previous OP and tourney results are null and void because they were subject to pre-WORF rulings!

Time to re-play the Dominion War!!

< / sarcasm>
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Dulsky
United States
Bryn Mawr
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It does simplify things quite a bit. Most recent OPs I have been too, the TO prints out the Dec 4th Faq. Chances are even new rulings, that are not yet migrated into that FAQ document, would still probably be at the TOs discretion if asked in the middle of the match.

If you are doing something critical to one of those recent rulings, I'ld suggest printing the thread and keying your T.O. in on it before the tournament.

As for old rulings... I tend to air on the side of simplicity, just use the new FAQ document.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bob Anderson
United States
Greer
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
While the trend is that previous rulings have been changed, remember that the original FAQ that WORF started with was nothing more than the FAQ that was here.

So while I expect changes, until WORF says otherwise what's in their FAQ is true.

But this does bring up a point. If we stop asking WORF questions, will WORF stop ruining the game?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan M D Thomas
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Alyksandyr wrote:
But this does bring up a point. If we stop asking WORF questions, will WORF stop ruining the game?


Basically...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Griffin
United States
Marietta
Georgia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmdt784 wrote:
Alyksandyr wrote:
But this does bring up a point. If we stop asking WORF questions, will WORF stop ruining the game?


Basically...


If we stop using petroleum, it will last forever, right? Except that won't happen and neither will people stop asking questions of WORF. People need the answers and many times a bad answer is better than no answer you end up having an argument about.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel van de Laar
Canada
Winnipeg
Manitoba
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Should we ignore old rulings?

Let me set a precedence that I will build upon to answer the question according to how I understand it.

The first time Andrew Parks was asked about the Borg's 360 degree firing Arc, Andrew said that the Borg's Firing Arc was a "Forward" firing arc. From that moment on the "official" ruling was that the Borg's 360 firing arc was a forward firing arc.

A follow up question caused Andrew to reconsider his original ruling, and after consulting with Chris Guild, Andrew ruled that the Borg's 360 degree firing arc was not a Forward Firing Arc, but was in fact a new and peculiar sort of Arc - such that none of the rules concerning Forward Firing Arcs applied to it.

I give you, in this anecdotal example, a precedence: official rules not only can, and do change over time - but have been doing so even before the WizKids Official Rules team took over managing the dog's breakfast created by poorly planned/tested expansions.

In other words, it seems wise to hold off on vilifying the WORF crew for doing what both Andrew and Chris have done when the baton was in their care.

We all know, or ought to have learned by now, that with each new expansion, more and more card combinations are being introduced - and because these expansions have not been sufficiently vetted before being rushed onto shelves, the sheer number of ambiguities being introduced with each new wave is growing exponentially, since each new expansion card has an unfortunately synergistic capacity to affect every other card in the game.

Yes, the WORF team is radically retrofitting the rules to accommodate new expansions, and in doing so they have gone the way of introducing a sort of interpretative framework that allows them to apply broad rules across the board, rather than write a dozen rules for each new card in order to explain how each card works in a multitude of situations.

I pity those guys. They have an impossible task, that just happens to be thankless - and one which provokes a lot of criticism and mud-slinging (not that anyone in this thread is doing such).

Anyway - I think it is a mistake to regard the older rulings as having more credibility than the new. We may prefer the old rulings, or regard them as having a greater authority simply because they were personally penned offhandedly by the original designers, but we need to remember that the designers weren't clarifying original intentions in their answers - they were patching holes and putting out fires with no set plan or framework. The word that comes to mind is "reactionary" - meaning that they were reacting to unforseen flaws in their ambiguously worded, and poorly planned expansion plan.

That's how it looks to me. I may have regarded the old rulings as more in days gone by, but now I see them as having always been a temporary solution, and the new rulings as being an effort put something more permanent in place.

In case anyone imagines that my opinion is influenced by some preference for the new ruling system - it isn't. I don't have a lot of confidence in the direction the WORF team seems to be going, and I have shaken my head along with everyone else at some of the rulings; so when I say we should treat the old rulings as temporary, it isn't coming from some love for the new stuff.
6 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.