|
|
Post by jdkimbro on Aug 29, 2007 13:53:43 GMT -5
Could someone point me to an updated errata sheet for 1ed?
The list I have is from 1998...
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Aug 29, 2007 14:41:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Aug 29, 2007 16:03:11 GMT -5
Wait a minute here. I seem to remember quite a bit of arguing some months ago about this very subject. Is the addendum official or not? It was argued by you and others that it IS official, yet now you say it is not. And yes, James, I AM yanking your chain on this. In the absence of any OFFICIAL rules, we really dont have an answer for this. I just thought it was funny your position changed. For the record, I support the Addendum and hope it IS made official when the time comes. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Aug 29, 2007 18:03:07 GMT -5
Where did I say it was official? As far as I can remember, I've always said it was unofficial. I found only one post (back in March) where I mentioned whether it was official or not, and I said it had never been adopted. I did say that I use the addendum several times, perhaps that's causing confusion?
Also for the record, I too wouldn't mind seeing it official. Although I'd rather they go through and clean them both up first. There's a lot of rewording and whatnot that's there for completeness's sake, but not really necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Aug 29, 2007 18:58:02 GMT -5
Working in the addendum to the Handbook to make a complete document would be nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by dbaker on Aug 29, 2007 19:10:08 GMT -5
I too would like to see a comprehensive rulebook.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorr on Aug 29, 2007 20:40:45 GMT -5
Addendum -is- official, written by the rules committee.
It says, right at the top of the document, that the info in the addendum supercedes the Handbook.
There are 13 additional Errata found there.
|
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Aug 29, 2007 22:08:17 GMT -5
Addendum -is- official, written by the rules committee. It says, right at the top of the document, that the info in the addendum supercedes the Handbook. There are 13 additional Errata found there. Here is an interesting problem, then. It is official to WHOM? Obviously MLE considers it to be official, which is why its representatives support its veracity (no offense, just stating a point). I am sure there are other groups around the world that ALSO recognize it, including my own. Question is - Does LM recognize it? It has been speculated that they WOULD since Tim Smalls name is on it, but as James has also speculated, he may not be the one currently making the rules. This becomes evident when he gets into discussions on the board with the other Design Team members regarding different rulings, and most of the time is overruled. We also have Greg who isnt quite sure if The Raven is allowed in Type One tournaments. Which really isnt his fault, since it may have been Mike Sager who said what is and isnt allowed, and may not have really informed the Design Team of that decision. All in all, what we have is a group of people in charge of things who dont really seem to know whats going on and seem to have a hard time coming to a consensus. Amidst this, we STILL do not have a rulebook for the CURRENT edition, much less one officially recognized for the previous (which is admittedly at the bottom of thier priority list, and who can blame them). |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Aug 29, 2007 23:12:16 GMT -5
Addendum -is- official, written by the rules committee. It says, right at the top of the document, that the info in the addendum supercedes the Handbook. There are 13 additional Errata found there. It may say it's official, but as far as I know TCG never said it was. I could very well be wrong. I didn't follow MLE much, so didn't pay too much attention to the mailing list for a long time. I'd love to see a message, press release, or something to that effect. We've always used it and will continue to do so, but it doesn't hurt to know the company whose game you're playing approved the rules you're using.  |
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Aug 30, 2007 12:21:52 GMT -5
As far as I remember it was LM (the design team) that stated the rules to be used for Type One tournaments were: 1- the rulebook 2- the handbook 3- the addendum These were the rules that we were told to use and have used since we started running Type One tournaments. As for JDKimbro's question, you could look in some very old postings to find the link or ask Thorr to reshow the web addresses.  Headswillroll |
|
