paradox

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll reference this again when I get a chance to pick some of it up and play.

I'm a casual Malifaux player. I play only Guild, and I have the original 3 Guild boxes + a few odds and ends. Mainly Book 1 stuff. It's been awhile since I have last played, and I am far and away a Justice fan. I've dabbled a bit in Ortega's, and maybe used Sonnia once or twice (though I want to play her more). I recently picked up Storm of Shadows and I am interested in McCabe. I have some Guild Hounds still in the blister that I need to assemble, and I like the sculpts. I can't say that I'm super attuned to how things are supposed to fit together. I miss alot of tricks in just reading the rules, probably because I play infrequently. However, can anyone help me understand how McCabe's box and Hounds might work together? Maybe a basic tutorial on his tricks and tactics? I'd much appreciate it.

So you're going to drink all my beer AND steal everyone's prize money....nice!

Local Painting celeb...cash painting prize...paid entry...I totally see where this is going. So what happens if I bring a Growler Jug instead?

Yeah! I think I'm gonna kick him in the nuts next time I see him!

I bet...

Good writing is never soulless. And no matter what you wish to imagine, the books are mass-produced. In fact, a company that does not strive for clarity and perfection in writing is likely one that does not care much for its product. I would have quite the opposite opinion as you if there were uncrossed t's and undotted i's in a book. It would tell me that they did not care enough to make sure their readers had as much clarity as possible. Company A wants to put out the best product possible, so they take time to make sure their work is the best it can possibly be. Company B just wants to push product out. Tehy do not take time to edit, polish, corect etc. the shoddy worsmanship shows they simply want your money and do not care waht they sell you. Wyrd has already shown that they DO care. They delayed the Terra-Clips line quite a bit because they did not like the initial product (though that too was pretty impressive). If Wyrd went for the "rough around the edges" approach, you would have a sub-standard product that did not perform or hold up as well as you would like, and Wyrd would already have your money. That is soulless. Quality work is never soulless. Careing about what you produce is never soulless. Striving for perfection is never soulless. I gave Wyrd my feedback and criticism because I believe they will take it on board for what it is and look to see what can be improved. If I thought they didn't care, I wouldn't bother wasting my time. I'd be selling off what I had and moving on.

I'm trying to decide if you are being willfully ignorant of the point being made. It's one thing if grammatical "errors," "misspellings," and poor diction occur in character dialogue. That would be "in character" for the text and I would be entirely OK with it. That is not what I am criticizing. It's a whole other thing when it occurs in the narration that is obviously the voice of the actual, living and breathing author narrating the story. In this case it does not add "charm" or "character," it is simply bad writing. Because the product in question here is the story itself, and it is being sold for profit, it is a professional work. It is unprofessional to write poorly when you are a professional writer writing a piece for publication and sale. If you enjoy bad writing, bad grammer, bad diction, and confusing dialogue, you are certainly entitled to that. I suspect you will be rather lonely, though. I do not enjoy such things. I'm no english professor. I commit my own writing sins. And we are all human. But if you are going to publish an internationally distributed book of fiction, maybe you should expend a little extra effort and do real and professional proofing and editing. That said, I'm sure Wyrd does. But alot slipped through the cracks in this book, enough for even me to notice, and I'm no professional. If it were someone writing fan-fic in an internet forum, I would not care enough to comment. When it's published and sold professionally it's a different matter. To answer your question, that is what I find wrong with enjoying the work as it exists. Now it's my turn. What's so wrong with wanting Wyrd to improve their product and produce grammatically correct, well-written material?

No offense, but this is possibly, literally, the most ignorant thing I have read. Further, there is a difference between honest constructive criticism and attacks. The commentary on the writing and grammar so far have been the former. There is no call to rush to defend Wyrd from people who actively want it to produce a better product.

No. No I don't. It's one thing when it's deliberately written into the dialogue. It's another when it's unintentionally in the meta-prose.

I have not yet finished Book 3. I am mostly done with it, though. I agree that the prose is lacking in spots. There are large sections early in book 3 that are just terribly written. The grammer is bad, the diction is bad, and the dialogue is outright confusing in places. However, once I reached the actual faction model sections, each faction piece was notably better than the previous areas mentioned. Wyrd needs a new editor, and a better one. Some of the early parts felt like reading an unproofed rough.

So what you're saying is that we will really be cookin on Friday....

I dunno, man. Do you actually play games?

I have all day free on Friday, Dec 23rd. I'm thinking about setting up shop at RIW from 11 til whenever. Anyone want to catch games?

I'd bet it does not do so in a way that makes it profitable in any sustainable way.

30ish ss range is about 1 1/2 - 2 hrs, in my experience.

Yea, I just don't see it....

Since I do not play Mali tournaments very often, can you please post the format rules, or direct me to them?

I'm going to tenatively say "Maybe." We'll see how that week shakes out.

As my class next week got bumped to a sunday, I plan to be down 5-5:30 til about 8:30-9. I'll be grabbing some WM, but I plan to have Mali on hand too, if anyone is game.

Yes. No.

Getting ground into the dirt because you don't "own the right models" is no fun either. Because the game takes two willing participants, it takes both players to agree it is fun to work. If one doesn't, it won't be a fun game on either end. I'm with Math. I do not enjoy curb-stomping my opponent. It's not a triumph of genius, its a flaw in the game. Whether that flaw is in a disparity of player skill/experience, or in game mechanics may vary. I have minimal experience vs FILTH, no experience vs Dreamer, and minimal experience vs Hamelin. I will not play a Hamelin player again. That game is not fun, whether I win or lose. I don't like how it plays. I think Wyrd messed up in the design there. I can relate to people who don't like games where they feel they have no options and just lose every time. There comes a point where you decide that maybe it's not jut you, but the game. However, the main point is: Saying people are annoying for having an opinion contrary to yours is not polite and does nothing to advance the conversation. There is no reason to be annoyed about the fact someone doesn't like X. It's their preference.

Multiple games in rapid succession and minimal screwing around and goofing off. I enjoy fast, intense games. Im happy to hang around and BS later, at the bar.

It's one thing to say that you find it fun to aplay against when others do not. It is another thing to say that it's annoying to not agree with you. Who is doing the flaunting here? This thread is about the FILTH list in general. The topic can touch beatability/power levels. It can also touch fun/enjoyability. You can have arguments about the former. It's pretty hard to argue the latter. It more comes down to a poster saying how they stand on the issue, and others disagreeing. Not much further to go from there on the latter point. If you think FILTH is fun to playa against, that's fine. If you think it's annoying that other people post they do not find it fun, that's also fine. If you make a post telling a poster that they are annoying for thinking so, that is rude and not OK. You are not entitled to attempt to adjust a pure opinion of another person in polite conversation. It is better to agree to disagree and let the issue pass. Sometimes it can be hard to separate the issues, but if a player says "FILTH is beatable but not fun to play against" then take on the issue of beatability or powerlevels, and how that may improve the fun factor. Do not attack the opinion of fun itself. That is pointless and rude.

If I were playing in a tourney and I saw Hamelin hit the table, yes. However, in a tourney you often have advanced out-of-game knowledge about who is running what, even if lists are not pre-set. Even at a tourney, where you go to compete, I would rather take a loss and sit a game out (or play a for-fun game vs my opponent with a different master) than play that boring load of crap that is Hamelin. It has a bit to do with the power-levels and a whole lot to do with the way it plays. It's just not fun. Period. Even a tourney has a basic level of fun required. This is a hobby in my free time. I feel not reason to do something I know I will not enjoy.