Univeral Rules Document

The place to ask all rules questions related to MECCG.
Manuel
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:31 am

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Manuel » Tue Nov 02, 2010 1:25 pm

This is great. Thanks a lot!

Eyelid
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 5:11 pm
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Eyelid » Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:42 am

--> Benjamin, would it be possible to perhaps add page numbers (and update the table of contents accordingly) to make it easier to find what you're looking for? This is a document I'd like to print out and keep handy, so an index with page number references would go a long way in swiftly locating a particular rule or ruling.

Alternatively, if this is not something many people will use, is there a way I can do this myself?

Thanks!
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." Ford Prefect
"If you believe in Eternity, then life is irrelevant". House M.D.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2618
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Bandobras Took » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:17 pm

4.2 -- Quick Page Number Version. If printed out, I suppose you can manually write in page numbers on the Index. ;)
Attachments
Middle Earth Universal Rules Document 4.2.pdf
(555.35 KiB) Downloaded 730 times
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Eyelid
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 5:11 pm
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Eyelid » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:42 pm

Excellent, thanks for responding so promptly, Benjamin, that's exactly what I'll do!
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." Ford Prefect
"If you believe in Eternity, then life is irrelevant". House M.D.

User avatar
Khamul the Easterling
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:16 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Khamul the Easterling » Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:22 pm

I'd like to add thanks and a big compliment to the authors and editors and to everyone being involved in compiling the Universal Rules Book! (For a while I had my own project of putting all rules together into a single document, German, but this became some kind of neverending story). I'm convinced it will prove itself most useful, every MECCG-player will greatly benefit from it.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:59 am

While I appreciate and admire Ben's effort on this document, I feel it's necessary to point out this Universal Rules Document is not official, and some of the things inside should be taken with a grain of salt. Still a great tool for most players I'm sure, so cheers!

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2618
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:51 am

Er . . . no. As a member of the CoE, I was given the task to create a URD, did so, posted it in the Council Forum for their approval, and had it approved. It is as official as the CoE can make it.

However, we are also considering making the maintenance and upkeep of this document part of the official responsibilities of the NetRep, in which case, it will be your job to make sure it's official. :)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:34 am

Really, so are you saying your document supersedes the ICE rulebooks, CRF and ICE/CoE Digests? I ask because there are some differences, and this document seems to have a very, well, "personal approach". I must have missed the discussion/vote/announcement from CoE regarding this, and find it strange CoE would not have contacted their rules guy beforehand. If such a decision exists, could you provide me with a link please? (I am able to read the CoE sections but did not find it.) Thanks.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2618
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Mar 02, 2011 11:50 am

No, this document does not supersede them (as noted, though, the NetRep team in the past has been unable to consistently decide on whether the Balrog turn summary supersedes previous rules or not). It combines them. If you visit the Council of Elrond main page under "Rules," you'll notice that such a project has been on the table since the site came up. Surely you're not taking exception to the fact that I actually did it?
I must have missed the discussion/vote/announcement from CoE regarding this, and find it strange CoE would not have contacted their rules guy beforehand. If such a decision exists, could you provide me with a link please? (I am able to read the CoE sections but did not find it.) Thanks.
That's possible. Do you have access to the Rules & Errata subforum of the CoE threads? If not, it's likely an oversight on Thorondor's part.
I ask because there are some differences, and this document seems to have a very, well, "personal approach".
As I said in the very first post I made (man, I seem to be typing that a lot on the internet these days . . .) feel free to point out any errors/oversights.

And the document's "personal approach" was confined to parenthetical comments and Editor's Notes, in the hopes that players just finding out for the first time that In The Heart of His Realm doesn't actually work won't be driven off.

Finally, when there was something I wasn't clear on or didn't understand, I posted the question in the rules forum. Surely, since you have been actually here and diligently checking the forums and posting digests like a NetRep should, you saw those threads as they were created and had your chance to respond. Why didn't you?
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:16 pm

Bandobras Took wrote:No, this document does not supersede them... It combines them. If you visit the Council of Elrond main page under "Rules," you'll notice that such a project has been on the table since the site came up. Surely you're not taking exception to the fact that I actually did it?
I don't take exception that you did it, why would I? I was working on this document with Mark back when he was more active, and would have worked on it with you, had you asked me to. The only exception I take is for a document of this importance being done poorly. It seems to me like you take exception to the whole concept of a NetRep Team and try to undermine us every chance you get. Just an honest observation.

Now, to be 100% clear on this, your document is not official (endorsed by CoE might be a better term if it was approved by vote). It does combine the rules, but IMO not clearly or accurately enough. So if people find some contradiction between Ben's document and ICE rulebooks, CRF, ICE/CoE digests (current/future ones), or CoL Tournament Policy, they take precedence.
Bandobras Took wrote:
I must have missed the discussion/vote/announcement from CoE regarding this, and find it strange CoE would not have contacted their rules guy beforehand. If such a decision exists, could you provide me with a link please? (I am able to read the CoE sections but did not find it.) Thanks.
That's possible. Do you have access to the Rules & Errata subforum of the CoE threads? If not, it's likely an oversight on Thorondor's part.
I only saw there was talk of such a group before, and my name was mentioned there. However nobody ever asked me to join or told me such a section was up and running. Too bad.

Bandobras Took wrote:Finally, when there was something I wasn't clear on or didn't understand, I posted the question in the rules forum. Surely, since you have been actually here and diligently checking the forums and posting digests like a NetRep should, you saw those threads as they were created and had your chance to respond. Why didn't you?
As you are well aware, the rules board here or anywhere else is not the way to get in touch with the NetRep. I may or may not visit them, it is not the NetRep's job. You have sent me many questions via PM before, and I have answered each and every one of them in a timely manner. So let's be honest, had you really wanted my opinion, you could have gotten it.

If a bus driver stops to take a whizz, are you going to take over just because you want to get to your destination faster? Well just FYI, I won't need to make another stop for a looong time. :wink:


P.S. New and exciting Digest coming out this month, don't miss it!

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2618
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:27 pm

I won't miss it -- in fact, I'll update this URD as soon as it comes out; even the rulings I don't agree with.

My goal was not to undermine the NetRep team. But I've known players to be turned off by rulings and explanations that are essentially dictatorial and appear on the surface to be inconsistent. My goal in commenting on the vagaries of cards and interpretations, not to mention reversals by the NetRep team, was to build authority for the NetRep team through trust rather than through -- for lack of a better term -- elitism. A person who sees open acknowledgment that rules are messy and that rulings can be overturned is more likely to be patient with a ruling from the NetRep team that he does not favor.

I do however, take exception to inconsistency in rulings, and I'm not really alone in this: Konrad Klar and I disagree on almost every rule question out there, but he also has commented on the inconsistency in the stated guiding principles of the NetRep's rulings vs. the principles that are actually at work.

I certainly wouldn't take over bus driving for a bus driver, but there is a point where I'll get out and walk if it's quicker than waiting for him to get back to driving the bus.

Now, again, if somebody finds an error, they're free to PM me or put it in this post. Konrad Klar did so; I updated it. This is a work that is and will be in progress. It's completely open to corrections from any and all sources -- there's even some .odt source in one of the posts so people can make their own versions, formatting them as they like. As I mentioned before, I'm heavily in favor of putting this under the domain of the NetRep, to update according to new digests, etc.

Use the word "endorsed" if you so desire; no member of the CoE objected to this being made publicly available, and the thread went to over 7 pages in the CoE Rules & Errata subforum. This is at least as official as, say, a potential NetRep ruling that equates "move to" with "at," which would absolutely flat-out contradict ICE rulebooks. ;)

And one final note. I didn't say the NetRep was required to diligently visit the forums; it's my opinion that the NetRep ought to -- especially when he mentions publishing a digest in January 2010 and it's now March 2011. :) I didn't contact anybody for help because the surest way to make sure a product is never released is to refer it to a committee -- working by myself, I got it done in about three weeks, and that includes my daughter being born at the same time and a good portion being typed while holding her. We've got a product on the table that can be improved as needed by not only the current NetRep (and I emphasize again -- feel free to point out the errors, I really won't mind), but by any member of the community that happens to think of something and point it out. I believe this to be a good thing.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by miguel » Wed Mar 02, 2011 4:23 pm

Just three weeks sounds quite fast, thinking back when I was going through the earliest digests with Mark and Manuel, the process was really slow. But then again we checked and cross-referenced every single ruling that wasn't 100% clear, so that took most of the time. If I do get full editing rights as you mentioned in another thread, there will be changes, maybe some big ones (less bulletins, more text; no editorials (sorry); etc.), but I'm sure you and everyone else would be happy with the end product. And naturally I'd keep the file updated after finishing the initial work. :)

thorondor
Council Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: salzburg, austria
Contact:

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by thorondor » Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:07 pm

Bandobras Took wrote: Do you have access to the Rules & Errata subforum of the CoE threads? If not, it's likely an oversight on Thorondor's part.
hmm, interesting. when starting this subforum, i have added the group called NetRep Team. so mikko should be able to read it.
i iwll check ...

thorondor
Council Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:53 pm
Location: salzburg, austria
Contact:

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by thorondor » Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:17 pm

well, i just checked, and it was inded my mistake!! the NetRep team is now in.
sry guys!

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2618
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Univeral Rules Document

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Mar 02, 2011 10:34 pm

That was three solid weeks, by the way; often three-four hours/night.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”