¥ Terminus Est Search Engine ¥

Blood Vow

Happiness is success... (Buddha)

Friday, February 12, 2010

HIWPI vs. RAW

HIWPI = How I would play it

RAW = Rules as written

Here is a mantra you will hear every rules lawyer and RAW advocate say:

"OH GAWD!!! OH NOES NOT AGAIN!!! GW FUBARED HTE RULES AGAIN!!!"

Rules lawyers and RAW advocates are deconstructionists. First they must destroy so that they can rebuild the rules to suit them. They tell you how horrible is GW but they themselves can never ever create their own game. It's easy to cry like a little baby that needs to be burped but it takes an adult to play the game as it was intended and be a great sport about it.

I find it amazing that the HIWPI crowd has a lot more terpitude than RAW advocates. RAW advocates bend the rules very hard by playing intense word games and to me they are huge mobile douche bags.

Let's discuss.

G

10 comments:

Magilla Gurilla said...

HAHA!
Okay, you have to give the background for this rant. I am way to busy with school to troll the forums.
-Magilla-

Green Blow Fly said...

Well the background to this rant goes back a long ways and that's all I can say at this point.

:P

G

Brent said...

Man, I'm curious as well.

I tend to agree with your primary point though; it seems like a lot of arguments get lost in wall-of-text buildups and moot points.

Circular logic - gotta love it.

Not really.

Green Blow Fly said...

I went to my local comic book store today to buy the new Fantastic Four and there was a group of young kids playing 40k (12-13 y.o.). It was a battle royale consisting of several factions and one of the children got into a big argument because he want to shoot flamers and drop ordnance on a big assault blob. I kept my mouth shut and just listened like the proverbial fly on hte wall. It was kind of funny but also kind of sad at the same time. Finally one of the clerks walked over to the table and told the kid if he didn't quiet down he would have to call his mother to come get him. You could see by the look on the child's face that he was enraged but he simmered back down and they all then continued with their game. I know from experience that when young children play it's hard for them to grasp all the rules. To them they might think they are right and not cheating. Unfortunately the same kind of thing can happen when adults play and I suppose that's the point.

RAW can be a good thing but it can also be another means to bending the rules for an advantage. I see it so often on some forums when people argue about rules. You try to use some common sense and then someone will crack that common sense is subjective. We all know that GW is not going to start writing ironclad rules. Prior to the advent of RAW people would use RAI to interpret the rules. It's funny to me that people who use HIWPI seem to be trying to abide by the what the rules mean while many RAW disciples seem to be looking for any advantage they can muster. A great example is DoM and combat weapons from the new Tyranids codex. GW has never written any rule that allows a power/ability to effect units embarked in transports other than when said transports are wrecked or destroyed. Now some people would like to interpret the DoM power Spirit Leech to affect units embarked in transports. GW does not have any rules telling us how to handle a situation wherein an embarked unit has to suddenly take a morale check. There are also some people of the opinion that the DoM should not have warpfield because it's not explicity described as a Zoanthrope. Finally there was a lot of arguments how close combat weapons work for Tyranids.

G

MorbidlyObeseMonkey said...

I used to be a hard advocate of RAW, but I'm happy to say that has changed. Right now, I firmly believe that the game should be played using the context of the rules. So basically that would mean RAW should be used when applicable and RAI should be used when applicable.

For example, there was a lot of debate on the interwebz before the IG FAQ about whether or not the Master of Ordnance's orbital bombardment can be "guided" by a mortar team in the same squad. My solution is that the RAW was not very clear on this, "broken" so to speak, so we have to turn to RAI. The obvious solution is that it still scatters 2d6 for a hit and 3d6 for a miss. And this is not subjective at all unless you are braindead.

MorbidlyObeseMonkey said...

One thing I forgot to add was that being a hardcore RAW player strikes me as being somewhat immature. Not sure why, but it does.

Green Blow Fly said...

Just look at some posts on Dakka by people like Gwar. He is immature to say the least... One of those who will post up "I'm right you're wrong" all day long. He has pulled the wool over many peoples eyes with his SW FAQ, rewriting it such that it very closely matches the final GW version. I'm honestly surprised at how many people over on Dakka have such short term memory. First Gwar said that GW was wrong then he went back and copied there, claiming that they had copied his.

G

MorbidlyObeseMonkey said...

Did he actually change his own FAQ after GW published theirs? Just wow is all I can say to that.

I also find it hilarious how Gwar insists that some GW FAQs are "wrong". Last time I checked, GW makes the rules. To me this is like saying:

Player A: "No, my infantry can move 12 inches and fire their STR10, AP1 bolters."

Player B: "Uh no that's against the rules."

Player A: "Nope, GW just got those rules wrong. My way is correct."

Matt Varnish said...

With regards to Doom of malantai, I always hear about "Hey what happens to people inside a vehicle if they have to take a ldr test?"

It can happen. Plasma gun toting command section firing from a chimera hatch (5 models can fire) and you roll a pile of ones, and fail 2 saves. Now you've gone and taken 25% casualties in a single phase, and have to test. What happens if you fail?

We have played it that they disembark and run away like pansies, back to the medic station if you need a fluff reason. There is some precedent to this in other codices as well, where for example a Greater Demon possessing a model, the model staggers out of the transport before exploding in gore, etc.

Now I'm not one of those guys who thinks DoM should affect embarked units, and I even play Nids, but still, just wanted your take on what happens to command section that takes 25% casualties from plasma overheats..

Green Blow Fly said...

About embarked units having to take a Ld test and what happens if they fail... The example of a squad of guardsmen firing their plasma rifles, overheating and dying in droves is a good example... A possessed champion falling out of a transport because he transforms into a daemon is not; GW has a rule that tells us what to do. For the former example GW has not told us that embarked units must take Ld tests but their rules do tell us you a take a Ld test whenever you take so many wounds so it's covered... But from a fluff POV would a squad leave the safety of their transports to run away? The INAT FAQ ruled embarked squads don't take Ld tests when suffering so many wounds and while that's not official at least it gives us a take how others would handle this situation. The plasma rifle example is something that's not going to happen all that often while the DoM and Leech Essence is something that has already been happening quite a bit.

G