Re: (TFT) Howard Thompson versus Steve Jackson

["gem6868" <gem6868@verizon.net>]

In our game groups, whoever hosts the game scenario (not the house host) 
makes the (house) rules.  No pun intended.  This works quite well as they've 
set up the game and should've thought of any issues that would arise like 
weak rules, overpowered weapons, murky victory conditions, etc.  They often 
don't, of course, and then they just need the spine to say "you can't do 
that, sorry."  Our group can be a bit aggressive when it comes to trying to 
get the edge.

To this point, I'd say that it's nearly impossible to think of everything. 
Maybe they did listen to all the feedback, there's always someone around who 
insists on messing with the system.  There are two versions of Melee 
available thru this list - I downloaded the smaller file and it had the 
cover I remembered.  Did the same with Wizard.  But I don't know the 
differences between the two, so that would be something nice to add in the 
future.  And as for Warhammer, that's loophole central!  Any GW game is 
pretty much open to exploitation by power gamers, another reason why they 
get so much drop-out even though the figs and books are a visual feast. 
Personally, I've sold much of my GW, and am working on selling off nearly 
all of it.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Sgt Hulka
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2011 9:49 AM
To: tft@brainiac.com
Subject: Re: (TFT) Howard Thompson versus Steve Jackson

Why so much Howard Thompson hate? If a rule is a good rule, who cares who it 
came from?

It's pretty clear to me that Steve Jackson did not properly playtest TFT. 
Or, if he did, that he did not adequately listen to the feedback. In my 
opinion, that automatically disqualifies him for the pedastal most people on 
this list place him on.

Melee/Wizard/TFT are my favorite muscle-powered age of warfare miniature 
skirmish rules. Sadly, every version has a hole in it that is easily 
exploitable and skews what it is trying to model. If everyone agrees not to 
exploit that hole, it works great. But if anyone starts trying to work the 
system, it has to be house ruled or the game falls apart. That saddens me 
because I don't feel I can ever just put a copy of the rules on the table 
and say "we're playing this", without qualifications.

Why does that matter? Because house rules are subjective. Just look at the 
current debate about the historical accuracy of the dominance of pole 
weapons. I think they dominated. Others are equally adament that they 
didn't. How could we possibly agree on a house rule to address pole weapons? 
We have opposite points of view on what the model should try and simulate. 
So all we can fall back on is the rules as written. And if those rules have 
an imbalance, the game falls apart and we have to move on to (shudder) 
Warhammer or something.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"