Prev: Re: Printed works of future combat Next: Re: Background List Proposal (Re: Other Forces)

Re: FT Munchkins (Re: Mars #2 FT article)

From: Jeff Lyon <jefflyon@m...>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 08:35:40 -0500
Subject: Re: FT Munchkins (Re: Mars #2 FT article)

At 11:24 PM 8/12/98 -0600, Mark A. Siefert wrote:
>> Yeah, I particularly liked his
>>
"this-is-the-way-I-build-ships-'cause-they-win-and-if-you-don't-too-you'
re-s
>> tupid" attitude and his patronizing (and wrong) analysis of naval
military
>> history and design.
>
>	Try telling that to the people I'm forced to game with.

<snip horror stories of The Munchkins of Doom (tm)>

Ack!

My condolences.  I'm lucky in that I hang out with a more mature group
of
"stodgy" historical gamers, most of whom are open minded enough to also
play sci-fi and fantasy games when they are being hosted.  Even those
who
tended to design uberships admit that the only reason they did it was
because under the FT2 design system there were no reasons not to.  Most
of
them seem to welcome the FB's changes as an improvement.

I've not had the misfortune of running into the "too British" argument,
but
then these guys also play DBx, so they aren't prejudiced that way.

Jeff

Prev: Re: Printed works of future combat Next: Re: Background List Proposal (Re: Other Forces)