Indy FAQs

Premise
I have not had a lot of major issues with sixth edition rules so far. Overall I like the rulebook and think that for the most part GW has been doing a better job with their FAQs. It's not perfect but like I said I haven't had any major problems except for one specific instance. Compared to previous editions it's an improvement in my opinion.

Two Questions for You
1) I am very curious to know what you think and what are problems you've encountered so far with the rules.
2) I am also very curious to know how you resolved these issues.


There is an Old Adage...

Leave well enough alone.

Here is another one...

If it's not broke don't fix it.

I am an engineer and to be honest I've never really liked either of these sayings. Everything can be improved. Often I say we should question everything. If you can make something better and the solution saves significant money then over the course of time it will pay for itself. Is this a win win scenario? No it is not because these types of solutions invariably impose problems for some that don't want to have to leave their comfort zone and they will resist... It's human nature.


Houston Is There a Problem?
I have always said that in order to best manipulate any system already set in place you must convince enough people there is or are problem(s) that should be addressed. Manipulation could simply be an enhancement or it could be to better serve yourself. You are setting the stage to justify your will. If there is no problem then the two adages quoted above hold true.

Independent Ruling Bodies (IRB)
So I ask you again are there any major problems with sixth edition that still need to be addressed. To me it simply depends upon on whom you are playing at any given time. In a tournament I can possibly see the value of a FAQ developed by a group of veteran players independent of GW. You could go into a tournament using their rulings knowing better what to expect - their FAQ might help to remove some of the grey areas.

Where Do We Draw the Line?
If we except the rulings from an IRB it is total submission... As a player you cannot simply follow only the rulings which you see as fit. It's all or nothing. While an IRB may have many good things that bring a lot of value invariably they will cross the line... That is they will change some rules based upon their own experiences for whatever reason. There is a big difference between changing a rule and clarifying a rule. Sometimes this is very subtle and it can be extremely subjective. I think we should never change the rules because it is not fair.

So there will be some things you like and some that you don't and this varies from person to person.

Do I Need an Independent FAQ?
I have played in too many tournaments to keep count. My experience has been that the majority of the time when there was a dispute involving the rules the judges ruled in my favor without the use or need of an independent FAQ. So for me based upon my experience overall there is not much value in an independent FAQ. This is my own opinion though and I realize some feel different about it.

Level Playing Field
I like to see a level playing field as opposed to one group above any other. As a TO though you are the ultimate authority. In my opinion if you plan to use another set of rules created outside those established by the manufacturer (i.e., Games Workshop in this particular case) then it should be made public knowledge well in advance of your event and you should be willing to adapt it to better suit the views of the majority of the people attending your event. This is fair and gives players time to decide whether or not they will except it.