Sanctus Reach: Stormclaw unboxing

Did a quick photo/narrated unboxing.  It looks like a very nice set for what you get vs. what you pay.  I'm on my way out on a trip, so I couldn't do much more than that...

Enjoy... see ya soon!

The Framework... or Mission cards = Tourney and Casual players living in harmony

   So, I have digested 7th edition, and I like it a lot.  I think they are really fixing some things that didn't work, and presenting a system that will play well.  Of course, that "play well" comment is made in relation to narrative, or casual gaming.  The tourney scene is a little muckity-muck right now since there is a lot to fix or change to make this play well in the tourney scene.

  The first tournament I got invited to for 7th edition was truly hilarious.  Within days of the edition releasing, the tourney rules were listed with all these changes to the Psyker phase.  After NEVER playing it, this guy figured he HAD to fix it.  The sky, was indeed, falling after reading the rules.  Well, hell, when you play it out, it's really not as broken as was thought.  Those daemon spawning armies usually lose, even after summoning an extra 1,000pts of daemons.  Against any decent player, your psykers are being blown away and you see diminishing returns very quickly, against a bone-head, you will win decisively. 

  I still see local tourney stuff with limits on the psykers and while I don’t agree with them, they are certainly representative of a feeling in the community.  But, as always, I have a few thoughts on why the rules are like they are, why there are unbound armies and 'why' a few other things too. :)

The framework (or... make some damn mission cards)

  I think that GW is actually heading down a path toward making the game work for everyone, casual and competitive.  Now, before you click away in fury and disgust, hear me out.  I think they have tried to create a rules framework that will, in time, be able to appeal to everyone.  They have tried to create a system that works for a much broader range of play style than before.  Even damage allocation is a lot more forgiving (and some say wonky-broken) and LoS has changed so that I have eyes in my hands now...  That will get fixed, I think :)  But they are trying.

  We have all heard the rumours that there will be a tourney style rule set coming from GW soon.  Why would they want to cut out a customer base (The tourney guys) that buy a lot of models and spends a lot of money on the hobby?  GW may make a lot of mistakes, but even they aren't that stupid (are they?).  They have also, steadfastly maintained that they are NOT a tourney/competitive rules company and they only embrace casual/friendly/narrative/shake hands gaming styles.  (Notice how EVERY freakin battle report has the obligatory 'shake-hands' picture?)  They like narrative gaming, and guys playing out the fluff in grand style.  That is their way, but I think they are not as dull-witted as a lot of people think.

  Well, the rules are designed for the narrative players, and screw the competitive guys, right?  Not so fast, hombre!  Did you also notice something else in this edition?  There are a lot of VERY simple changes to the system that will allow tournament style play to go smoother too.  There are things that can be pulled out of the game without breaking the rules, as in some other editions. 

  Look at the missions themselves, the new card based mission are IMHO, awesomesauce.  The cards, however, are a bit wonky (They look more like a slapdash last minute addition to the boxes).  But what happens when the big T.O.s start making their own card decks for their tournaments?  You can completely change the flavour of the game by just making new cards.  What is going to happen when BAO/Adepticon/FoB etc all come out with mission cards that are going to define the scope of the game that they want to see?  They won't even have to ban any particular thing, they just make sure the mission cards reflect the things they want to see.  Rather than banning unbound armies, they just make missions that an unbound army cannot do well at.  Easy-peasy lemon-squeazy.  Want to fix the daemon psyker "issue", make cards that make sure they cannot win the day.   

  Hell, GW is doing that exact thing with the Ork codex, or the supplement.  There are 6 or so different cards coming that reflect orky battle mission requirements.  And does anyone honestly not see some supplements coming down the road that will have new mission cards in them?  What a perfect way for them to capture "the narrative feel" of a campaign without a whole raft of new rules!  I see a ton of new cards coming to hobby store near you.  

  Oh, and during all of this, GW will be happily selling you tailored mission cards for your particular factions and making money as well.  We all see unbound armies as a way to sell models, but tell me you're not even a little bit happy to see that mechanic so you can play a list you have always wanted to try???  If you say no, you're a dirty stinkin liar :)

  So, is this framework idea bullshit?  I don't know.  Is seventh just a way to separate the hobby from it's money like all the haters claim, I don't think so.  Will 7th put casual gaming and competitive gaming on a more even keel?  Let me also say, that if GW does make a tourney style rules supplement, I bet it will suck, big-time.  They just don't have the chops for it, I don't think they have the kind of people there that can do it.  But I have confidence in the big names in the tourney scene to fix it right up.  (Come on Reece, get to it!!!)

  I think GW is trying to fix the tournament play scene in 40k, without having to come out say they are trying to help the tournament scene.  They can't stay true to their "narrative gaming" statement and help out the tourney guys, but they can damn sure write a very open set of rules that allows people to "play their own style".  In this way, they make the tournament guys happy, and the fluff guys are happy too.  It's a win-win for GW, even though they cannot come out and claim it, because the interwebs crowd would jump all over them that!!   After all, we must hate GW, right?

  I think we will begin to see a lot of changes to the game in just the mission card format coming soon.  Not rules changes mind you, but play style changes, and the folks creating the tourneys will have a field day tweaking and balancing their mission cards to make their tourneys better.  I think it's just that easy.   Along with all the other stuff they have to do for tourneys... But that's another article titled "It's easy to put on a 256 player tournament"... LOL

Why does GW hate the internet and the hobby?

  I know, I know, I am a GW apologist, I freely admit it. I do not believe that “they” are an evil empire, plotting to run everyone’s fun and make things bad for everyone. I do believe that they made a big mistake when they went public and then had to serve two masters, the hobby community and the dreaded shareholders… Let me ask if you know about which one matters more, lol. Shareholders do not think long term; they do not think of tight, manageable rule sets, they do not care that a hell drake now has a collar that makes its weapon hard mounted. Nope, they see a spreadsheet with a line that points up or down, that’s it. But there are a few issues I want to take on…

If you were GW, would you go on the internet right now???

   Seriously, we can all agree that by slowly taking their presence off the interwebs, they did themselves a disservice. But what is done, is done. If they were to make a serious attempt to get back to the internet with a large presence (FB, forums etc) they would be crushed. To prove it, go to any forum you like and read a while. There is a whole sub-culture dedicated to hating everything GW does. My personal favorites are the ones who start out with “I really don’t care what GW does BUT…” and then a three page tirade about GW. Another treasure I like is the ones who criticize them for doing exactly what they said, in print, that GW should do.

  But really, if they made a GW facebook page, do you think it would help sales or the company image right now? Wouldn’t it simply become a magnet for the haters to go and smear everything they said and did? Keeping in mind that haters post, the indifferent read and the fans generally just sigh and move on.

   Beyond that, an internet presence, for that company does not seem to me to be a winning strategy. In fact, it does nothing more than point out the flaws that they have. 1) they have pissed away the old goodwill they had in the old days and 2) They are not a digital game company.

   Yes, they have pissed away all the old, good feeling about GW there was in the past. When you could call the help line and get Jervis to walk you through something. Back when you could call an order a shoulder pad for a single model. There is nobody at fault but themselves. They sold out to corporate task-masters and now they pay the price. This does not make them evil, to me, but rather dull-witted and misguided. The lure of the quick buck got to them, and they went public.

   But even worse, there is the issue of “digital-ness”. Everything that company does is not digital. It is tactile. You have to work at the hobby to get enjoyment from it. You have to build, paint and actually take part in the effort. That does not appeal to today’s generation of “kids”. They are used to Xbox, PS4, Android, iPhone and so forth and other instant delights. To actually have to work at having fun is something is foreign to them. I hear people talking all the time about how GW is forgetting the younger player, not getting the new generation of gamers of going. Well, that’s just another total misinterpretation of the truth. There are NO hobbies that are growing and flourishing with this generation of mindless, ADD-drug-infused, mush-heads. 

  I am a model railroader as well, and the number of ‘kids’ in that hobby is staggeringly low. Even with all the high tech that is coming in to that hobby, it does not appeal to the microwave generations that we see now. How many kids do you see fly fishing these days? How many youngsters are getting into board and counter wargaming? Yes, there are some, there is always some, but not in the numbers we once saw. This is a problem not limited to GW, so let’s not make believe that it is…

Litigation for IP, or if it moves, sue it…

   I have seen so many people who think the Chapter House ruling was a huge win for the little guy, a true story of David and Goliath where justice won out in the end. Well, it’s time to wake up now and put away your kiddie story books. Every time IP (intellectual property) is challenged and defeated in court, more of your freedom goes with it. I am NOT saying that the ruling was bad, it was, in fact pretty well thought out and just. Chapterhouse should not be penalized, nor others for making niche industries around a major player. But, mark my words; the more of this type of ‘victory’ there is, the less you will see of the start-ups that make it big.

  You see, intellectual property is one of the hardest things to defend in law. The interpretations of the court are often skewed by argument that does not necessarily pertain. There is also the fact that unless you defend your IP vigorously (i.e. sue everything that moves) the court will see you as being selective in your application of IP rights and will therefore rule against you. Whether you like it or not, GW will continue to issue CaD order and lawsuits, they have to. If they don’t they lose all their IP rights, and once IP is even eroded, it is lost, in the eyes of the court.

   And please do not delude yourself into thinking that all these other companies are so noble that they don’t sue anyone because of their inherent goodness. That’s utter bullshit, and unless you are 12 or the night manager at a 7-11, you know it’s not true. The first time some third party vendor offers up models or alternatives to some warmachine models that start to impact their bottom line, Privateer will be all over their asses. They don’t have a choice.

The war on competitive gaming?

   Now here is one I really don’t get. Why the onslaught on competitive gaming in the 40k world? Even if the authors really want to downplay the ‘competitive’ aspects of the game, don’t you have to acknowledge that it is there? Why do you want to bite the hand the feeds you? Competitive players buy armies, and as far as I can see, more than most do. Why can you not have a section of the rules dedicated to competitive play? Why does the community have to do all the work?

   Regardless of how much you want to portray your game as a fun, friendly game to have a cold drink and some good laughter over, don’t you have to understand that there is a large faction of the community that wants to play differently? Even in the rules as written, you talk about agreeing with your gaming buddy about what kind of game you are going to play. What if you decide to play competitively?

   I cannot understand why they don’t have a compendium or separate product that has tournament rules. Not only would it generate more money, but it might do a lot to repair your bad reputation in the hobby world. Give the Tourney guys something to start from and let it go from there. Sit back and be amazed at how many ways the game can be played, and where they will take it. And relax, you’ll still sell models… and maybe more?

All in all.

   Yep, I can’t hate GW, but there is a lot I don’t understand. They make decisions at time that defy logic, but I don’t think they hate us. I don‘t think they hate the hobby. I just think that they think a little too corporate at times. <sigh> But I just don’t have time to hate.