It really has been six months since my last blog post. I use google
reader to get updates on all of the blogs that I follow and/or subscribe
to. In the eight months since 6th edition hit, more than half have
fallen completely silent.
Does this trend indicate some
sort of mass exodus from 40k among players? Personally, my local group
has done almost nothing 40k related as a group since the time we sat
down and first read through the rules of 6th edition.
However,
the competitive groups seem to be doing just fine. The internet
presence is still strong and new lists are being developed all of the
time.
Since the release of 6th, two codices have been
released by GW. These two books mark the first time since third edition
that I have not purchased the current codex release by GW. Unless the
price on new codices drops significantly, I will not ever be purchasing a
codex from Games Workshop ever again.
For the $50 price tag and sub-par product, they can go fuck themselves.
Now
for the brighter news. I have been asked (and have accepted) to be the
head judge for the 40k portion of the NOVA Open this year. So,
naturally I need to learn the rules and play more games of 40k.
I don't actually hate playing 40k, but I have no desire to invest anything needed to be "good" at the game.
Nevertheless
I thought it would be a good exercise to discuss the difference between
a rules judge and a referee. As a rules judge, I will not actively
interact with ongoing games. If I happen to walk by and notice someone
doing something that is against games rules, I will not intervene in the
game, unless prompted by one of players in that game.
The
stance that I take is born out of an issue of fairness. I cannot
referee every game, so in fairness to everyone, I will not referee any
game. (Unless I am refereeing invitational games, where every table has a
ref, of course)
As a follow-on, I will be very hard
pressed to change something that both players have agreed upon. I have
seen games where players will agree to something at the beginning of the
game only to have a judge rule that "no, X is not Y" and affect the
outcome of the game. As a judge, I do not want to affect the outcome of
any game. If I can make it through the NOVA Open 2013 without
affecting any game, I will be very pleased.
The best
example of a judge ruling affecting a game is the "do we have time for
another turn?" question. This is a big one, and actually one of the
biggest problems in competitive 40k. I have certainly had my fair share
of games where I know how much time is left and either I, or my
opponent intends to use ALL of it in order to make the game end when he
or I desire. Anytime I rule on something like this, it appears that I
am playing favorites. This subject could easily encompass an entire
blogpost, so I will shelve this articular nuance.
One
thing I have noticed recently (on the internet) is the subject of
cheating with loaded dice. If you really believe that your opponent is
using fixed or loaded dice at the NOVA Open I want you to do two
things. First, convince yourself that the person is actually using
"fixed" or "loaded" dice in your game. If you really, really, really
believe that they are, and not that they just rolled three sixes to blow
up your Stormraven with a Hunter-Killer missile, then consult the NOVA
guide and ask to use their dice for your rolls as well. If they refuse,
then call me over.
I have a 40k game scheduled for
Wednesday evening where I will continue to playtest missions from the
NOVA packet. I also have a few more judge-related posts to make in the
coming weeks/months.
Until next time,
Saint Omerville
