Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Kelly Wilkinson]

As "Bob" from Knights of the Dinner Table would say, "No one should ever touch
another man's dice!"

kelly

Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:


Mark Stone wrote:
> (1) I think the loaded dice problem is a moot point. I had an opponent some
> years ago in the NICT (not someone I knew), who brought no dice to the
> tournament. He explained, very politely at the beginning of the game, that it
> was simply his policy to use the same dice as his opponent. I thought he was
> being overly paranoid, but I wasn't offended, and we had a very pleasant game.
> So I think in general anyone should feel free to share dice with an opponent,
> and any opponent who believes he has fair dice should not be offended by such
a
> request.

I agree with this; I would note that at least one boardgamer, and
a couple of wargamers, I know do this precisely because they have
previously been involved in accusations of loaded dice. Which
seems a sensible response.

[And as I noted, I don't think Mark's being contrarian in his
(lack of) experience of dice problems]

E


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[scott holder]

Statement: Warrior is not a dice rolling game.

>LOL. Okay, it's not yatzee but anyone who plays Irr A might say
otherwise....or anyone who's entire game hangs on the ability to make *one*
counter roll at the oh so crucial moment. Warrior then becomes a dice
game:):)

>Just funnin' with ya Demetrius, or is it Antigonus? I knew what you meant.

Monopthalmus



Skill at rolling dice
should have nothing to do with this game. If you want a game that is
based on how well a player rolls his/her dice, there are plenty of
them out there. Thus, it shouldn't matter to you whether random
factors are produced by your dice, someone else's dice, a ping pong
ball pulled out of a lottery machine, or a computer's random number
generator.


Question: Are you protective of people's constitutional right
to "roll their dice as they see fit" (even though this should have
nothing to do with the game), to the point that you would defend
someone carefully placing dice in a cup so that the roll he wants is
face down, and then carefully flipping the cup lip completely onto
the table top, trapping the dice within? Where do you, personally
draw the line? Where do style and superstition end and cheating
begin? Even if the hypothetical dice roller is not 100% successful
at controlling results, he is still not producing random results. If
his method does truly produce random results, then he should have no
legitimate objection to any other equally random method. See my
point?


Corollary question #1: Why is this person so anal (to use your word)
about how he rolls "his" dice? A person like this should play a game
like Yatzee, Risk, or craps, not a tactical simulation game like
Warrior. You see my point: Why would it matter to someone how his
dice are rolled, or even who rolls them, as long as everyone knows
it's random? Only if he thinks he can "control" or "impact" his dice
by rolling them himself, his way. This is either superstition or
something worse. Either way, in my personal opinion, there is no
reason or justification for tolerating or sanctioning it, given the
design assumptions of the game itself. It is easy enough, as Scott,
Ewan, and others have suggested, to let people have the "fun" of
rolling their own dice while still assuring that the results are
random. What's the big deal?


Corollary question #2:Why would anyone object to any randomizing
system that could be shown to be foolproof?



Greek





Yahoo! Groups Links

This is a good point Jon. While I think it is of some interest as a
topic and in some ways related to Warrior, I agree 100% that it
should be of minor concern to anyone playing Warrior. And yes, all
of my bad experiences are a decade old. I have returned to DBA and
Warrior, though not yet DBM, and I find everyone as interested in fun
as anything else.

Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 5/27/2004 15:14:20 Central Daylight Time,
> jjmurphy@s... writes:

> As far as NASAMW is concerned, the 'atmosphere' has completely
turned around
> over the years and I think we have some of the most gentlemanly
(and
> -womanly) tourneys around. I think NASAMW should balance any
perception that
> players of any rulesset might include scurrilous types with the
fact that players
> can be very personal about their dice and dice rolling. Yes, I
have seen
> cheating in my 31 years of gaming, some with dice, and some in
ancients tourneys.
> But that does not require any kind of overreaction here.
> Everyone relax. Roll your dice the way you like, so long as it is
random,
> and everything will be fine.
> J

[Ewan McNay]

Holder, Scott wrote:

> Statement: Warrior is not a dice rolling game.
>
>
>> LOL. Okay, it's not yatzee but anyone who plays Irr A might
>> say otherwise....or anyone who's entire game hangs on the
>> ability to make *one* counter roll at the oh so crucial
>> moment. Warrior then becomes a dice game:):)

Right. The one game I have serious suspicions about, the guy was
using Gauls (in a 25mm theme period, so decent choice to begin
with) and the die in question was his Irr die. Turning the 40%
chance of an up roll into, say, 70% would be a big deal.

[Bill Chriss]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Holder, Scott"
<Scott.Holder@f...> wrote:
> Statement: Warrior is not a dice rolling game.
>
> >LOL. Okay, it's not yatzee but anyone who plays Irr A might say
otherwise....or anyone who's entire game hangs on the ability to make
*one* counter roll at the oh so crucial moment. Warrior then becomes
a dice game:)
>
> >Just funnin' with ya Demetrius, or is it Antigonus? I knew what
you meant.
>
> Monopthalmus
>


Not a problem philomou. You da' man. Greeks (or in your case
Macedonians) rock! Actually, I did get a little too seriously deep
into the random factor thing. Sorry about that, but we all have
things that aggravate us. Actually, I prefer Antigonos Gonatas among
the Successors (I'm knock-kneed myself). He was the closest to a
philosopher-king of all of them. His army list has disadvantages, of
course, but hey, that's never stopped me before! I haven't been
Macedonians in some time though. The real Greekness of Hoplites,
flamin' pigs, or Byzantines is just too irresistable. Some day I hope
to paint up a Mycenaean army, just so my toy box will be complete!

But there really is no substitute for being able to say "Okay,
lighting pigs in countercharge."



Greek