Leaving behind the ongoing narrative of Brent and his Necrons (which was touch and go, I was thinking of... in fact, screw it, here goes).
“Brent clenched his teeth and calmly reminded himself in a sing song voice that this was what he had forgotten. The structured armies composed to exploit the benefits of scenarios and accommodating as much as possible in those situations. He gently goaded himself into remembering that this was why his Necrons, the inhabitants of the Tombworld Khase (pun here), has re-entered slumber. The scenarios had been against him this time. Again.”
Numerous platitudes exist to extol the virtues of diversity. Fish in the sea, change and holidays, a variety of spices. Which is fine in a seafood restaurant whilst travelling overseas. A key rule in retail is that you adapt and change to suit the customers. A broader comparison would be the fact that you adapt to your changing environs or you die. There are many ways to die. War for one. And considering that in a certain grim dark future there is only war, it would seemingly indicate a rather lot of ways to die.
I have no problem or comments with regards to scenarios. With rather limited experiences it would be both hypocritical and douche-y for me to comment on things I have no experience of. However I can offer an outsiders perspective or a couple of suggestions if you will.
The question is:
The standard scenarios in the rulebook are seen as the 'normal' scenarios by most players, and they appear to define the competitive tournament scene. Would it be a positive or negative to see these scenarios expanded significantly in 6th edition?
Regardless of negative or positive, both would have their equally vocal proponents. More variety is good (but additional rules mean less fun and more referencing manuals), less variety means less rules and referencing (but may resulted in stifled and repetitive play).
Here are the suggestions:
1. Why not include some sort of random generator allowing the players more control over scenarios? Similar to how a Dungeon Master would govern environs in Dungeons and Dragons, some proviso or chart could be used to generate the scene and its components, similar to campaign play but on a smaller scale. For example, a running battle where as you are constantly moving, some units are unable to fire or use certain weapons – simple yet crippling if in the right circumstance and completed determined by chance.
2. Every year there are tournaments, some bigger than others. Perhaps on Games Day or the like, a new scenario is released. This is what is played that day. In this way armies that suit certain types of play and have been balanced are on a level playing field as they would have no idea of the type of scenario or what it involved. The most adaptable commander would win (theoretically). This would give Games Workshop a year to develop and play test new scenarios and expand those on file. At a certain point, you could say at the smaller tournaments (at the beginning of play) that out of the X amount of scenarios available only A, B, F, G and H scenario will be used.
As I said, ideas and suggestions. I believe that there is no such thing as a bad idea, just a deficit with regards to a situation and circumstance it can be applied to.
Appendix 1 (follows Appendix 2, which followed Appendix 3- see above under Appendix 3 for explanation) - Drafted 12-12-11.
No comments:
Post a Comment