In defence of the workhorse rules

[Sane Max]

Roll a d6.

on a 1 it’s Your definition of workhorse.
on a 2 it’s Miriam Webster’s definition of Workhorse.
On a 3 it’s the definition of workhorse Howled by a maniac kept in a box.
On a 5 the Games designer missed number 4.
On a 6 you misread the word and end up part of the cast of ‘Oliver!’

[Not Connard Sage]

Sane Max wrote:

Roll a d6. on a 1 it’s Your definition of workhorse. on a 2 it’s Miriam Webster’s definition of Workhorse. On a 3 it’s the definition of workhorse Howled by a maniac kept in a box. On a 5 the Games designer missed number 4. On a 6 you misread the word and end up part of the cast of ‘Oliver!’

Makes as much sense than a lot of the other merde on this thread. I particularly like #6. Chapeau.

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Sean Clark]

I’m saying interpret the word as a the average person in the street would interpret the word. I don’t think it’s a complex concept to grasp.

[Ivan Sorensen]

You guys did all notice I put a definition in the original post right? 🙂

[Not Connard Sage]

Ivan Sorensen wrote:

You guys did all notice I put a definition in the original post right?

 

Ah but was the officially approved Wargames Union definition, your definition or the man in the street’s definition?

Before we can move on we need to define the definition.

Pass the dice…

 

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Guy Farrish]

Not Connard Sage wrote:

Blimey, it’s true what they say about wargamers

Suave, debonair, handsome with a rapier like intellect you mean?

Yes, I get that a lot.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Guy Farrish wrote:

Not Connard Sage wrote:

Blimey, it’s true what they say about wargamers

Suave, debonair, handsome with a rapier like intellect you mean?

Yes, I get that a lot.

I mostly get “round”.

[Not Connard Sage]

<p style=”text-align: left;”>I mostly get ‘old’. 🙁</p>

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Not Connard Sage wrote:

<p style=”text-align: left;”>I mostly get ‘old’. </p>

To be fair you did describe Italian Unification as a “concerning future development” at that dinner party.

[Guy Farrish]

Sean Clark wrote:

I’m saying interpret the word as a the average person in the street would interpret the word. I don’t think it’s a complex concept to grasp.

You know you’ll get #3 in the list above if you do that, right?

[Not Connard Sage]

Ivan Sorensen wrote:

Not Connard Sage wrote:

<p style=”text-align: left;”>I mostly get ‘old’. </p>

To be fair you did describe Italian Unification as a “concerning future development” at that dinner party.

Did I mention the time I had lunch with Mr Disraeli?

 

Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

[Sane Max]

Did I mention the time I had lunch with Mr Disraeli?

you’re lucky…. I got Lloyd George, and it was just the two of us.

[Jim Webster]

Sane Max wrote:

Did I mention the time I had lunch with Mr Disraeli?

you’re lucky…. I got Lloyd George, and it was just the two of us.

 

Lloyd George knew my father…..

https://jimssfnovelsandwargamerules.wordpress.com/

[Sane Max]

Jim Webster wrote:

Sane Max wrote:

Did I mention the time I had lunch with Mr Disraeli?

you’re lucky…. I got Lloyd George, and it was just the two of us.

Lloyd George knew my father…..

On the bright side, I am now Duke of Headingley.

[Paint it Pink]

Assumptions, people!

It’s all about assumptions.

We assume that others know and or share our assumptions.

When we discover – shock, horror, probe – that they don’t, then we end up we a long exchange of opinions that often talk past each other.

I have spoken (just to demonstrate I’m up with the current zeitgeist)

One is good, more is better
http://panther6actual.blogspot.co.uk/
http://ashleyrpollard.blogspot.co.uk/

[John D Salt]

Paint it Pink wrote:

We assume that others know and or share our assumptions.

Worse, we often assume that we are not making any assumptions, when in fact we are.

This was demonstrated very forcefully to me when, in my first week as a language assistant in northern France, I spent about an hour walking around the place trying to find a post-box to post a letter to my parents. I must have walked past perfectly good post-boxes dozens of times until I appealed to a local for help in finding one. It’s much easier to do if you don’t assume that post-boxes must be red (French post-boxes are yellow).

All the best,

John.

[irishserb]

For whatever it is worth, I tend to enjoy threads like this where gamers share their thoughts and preferences about tehe hobby, even if we don’t all make the same assumptions.

In my case, when you say “workhorse” rules, I tend to think of something that I think fits your (Ivan’s) description maybe with the addition of the word “dependable”, modeling whatever period/setting/amies that I am trying to play in a way that I understand.

I tend to be suspect of what people sometimes refer to as “clever” or “innovative” mechanisms, as I often find issues with abstractions associated with them.   “Workhorse” rules tend to be my preference for most of my gaming, though in my case, that means either my own or a friend’s homebrew rules.  Unfortunately, given that neither is published, my offering doesn’t add much to the conversation.

[Author]

Posts