Re: [DS] Why play DS?

I was intimidated by DS (and SG) when I first read them. However,
the rules necessarily cover almost any eventuality, and these
rarely occur in one game. The basic mechanics are quite simple,
and the addition of one or two addition elements (Orbital
insertion, EW or whatever) doesn't slow things down at all.

If you add things in a little bit at a time, soon you'll be
playing with every rule in the book, not using it for reference,
and playing several games in an evening. . .

At least, that's what happened to me.

Paul
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: JDoch226@aol.com [SMTP:JDoch226@aol.com]
> > Sent: Monday, December 07, 1998 1:31 PM
> > To:   GZG-L@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> > Subject:	  [DS] Why play DS?
> >
> > I'm a big fan of FT and SG, but every time I try to read DS I long
for
> > the
> > elegant simplicity of FT and SG.  In contrast DS just seems too
> > cumbersome and
> > detailed.  Now I haven't actually played DS yet, and it doesn't seem
> > like Jon
> > can write a bad set of rules, so my question is, what am I missing?
> > Do the
> > rules actually play clean and fast, despite appearances?  Are there
> > any
> > sizable chunks of the rules that could be ignored easily (like ECW)?
> > Jed Docherty