by Hermjard
fardoche wrote:
Usually, in the boardgame hobby, if very specific and far-fetched cases (as in your 4 or 5 last posts in LoT) are not addressed in the rulebook, one should use common sense to determine the most likely intent of the designer.
In the most good rulebooks are these cases either specifically covered, or they are already included in a very accurate wording of the whole mechanism, or they are very often solved by the designer in favor of the most possible literal interpretation of the written rules.
The cases where the author deviates from his own rule book in favor of some sort of common sense or even must admit a mistake (which are collected in FAQs and Erratas usually) are very rare. At least from my experience.
In the end, I does not bother me, how an official rule clarification actually concluded. I may good be, that the author would decide against me in all my assumptions. Well, ok. Most imporant is, to have the clarification. But up to this time, I must follow the principles, most rule clarifications are based on.
fardoche wrote:
Of course you can ask here on the 'geek and most people will answer courteously with what they assume is the most probable interpretation of the rules. However, if you know you will argue against the majority anyways, why bother posting and asking our "worthless" opinion? Just send a geekmail directly to the designer.
I will not repeat again, what I said about majorities, minorities, and considering the opinions of others here. Read my postings. At least, it is not, what you wrote in this paragraph.
fardoche wrote:
And congrats: your "rules police" microbadge is very appropriate. I sincerely believe you should spend more time and have more fun actually playing the game instead of dissecting the rulebook and nitpick about futile details that are not specifically addressed... With all the card combos Troyes is subject to, it would be really hard to cover every possible situations that can arise during a game.
Yes, I have chosen my microbadges carefully. Nevertheless, its not like you assume. "Rule Police" because, I am the one in our gaming group, who has to settle rules discussions within minutes after starting the game about many of the topics you call "far-fetched cases".
I don't know, if you can imagine how is it, to play with people, who want every super-special-case of the rules before they touched a single meeple, who plan hours ahead taking every special case into account, they have just learned from me, who squeeze everything out of the rules, which is for their advantage. Not twisting the wording of the rules, but taking every situation into account, and working with these situations. At the moment, they know that certain game material is limited, for example, some of them work out a plan, to deny this material to others by amassing it. This sort of planning.
What lucky I am, that it is my honorable task to serve these able and cutthroat players and friends by preparing them with the best knowledge about the rules, I can get, and to watch about their abidance. This is rule police. But this is only possible, if you know about the rules in every datail.