First, an update on my crash Sunday. I am walking much better now, but I'm not anywhere near full mobility. The joint where my leg meets my hip gives me shooting pain still when I bend certain ways, so I'm definitely not fully healed. I have a race this Sunday that more and more is looking like it's not going to happen, which is a bummer. I've been looking forward to this event all summer, as it was the official end of the racing season, and its probably the hardest race of the year.
But my problems are small potatoes compared to what happened to the other guys involved in the crash. Dr. Matt, who was the first to crash, is in really bad shape. He suffered 6 broken ribs, a collapsed lung, broken hip, and shattered his shoulder. He is really messed up. He is a surgeon, and he had to cancel his surgeries for the next 3-4 months. I couldn't imagine what I would do if I was facing his medical bills and the 4 months loss of income. In all honesty, I'd probably be moving in with my folks.
Dr. George, the guy behind me who crashed into me, suffered a broken knee cap. He had no idea at the time. He finished the ride home and went about his day, but Monday morning when he woke up his knee was swelled up like a basketball. X-rays showed a fracture. So he will be out of commission for a few months. So compared to these guys, I got off lightly.
On the 40k end of the spectrum, Kennedy made an interesting comment in his already interesting article. He advised us that it is profitable to not look at war-games as war simulation, but as a set of rules, like any of the rules we encounter at work or in life. I interpolate that to mean that as people are adept at figuring out ingenious solutions to the rules they are given on a work project, why do so many people ignore that ability while gaming? Clearly, they would be better and more competitive gamers for it if they did. But you know what? I'm glad they don't. I was at a tournament once and had an extremely awful game against a gentleman who was the definition of WAAC douchebag. The game was not fun for me, and I highly suspect that the game isn't even fun for him. Afterwards, one of my buddies made a very astute comment about him, "that guy isn't even playing Warhammer, to him the game is a really difficult math puzzle, and he doesn't seem to even enjoy it."
And it's true. He reduced the game to a set up rules to be exploited or overcome, and the end result was just painful. I know Kennedy was not suggesting to do that, but I throw it out there as a cautious warning of what can happen if the game is taken too abstract and simply becomes a math puzzle.
Dethtron coined a new term: FAAC. Fluffy at all costs. I like it. I will do my part to make sure it spreads around the 40k-web. I've already mentioned a "WAAC douchebag" in my post today, hopefully in the future there will be "FAAC douchebags" given similar mention.
Kirby is exploring the depths of his love affair with Master of the Forge. He subsequently posted a few 6 dread lists of various flavors. I enjoyed this whole series and have been following it closely. The only thing that I'm concerned with is that 6 dreads in a list is slapped with the label "competitive." I'm not convinced these lists are winning in the real world tournament scene. I played such a list at this year's 'Ard Boyz semis and the 6 dreads DID scare my opponents during deployment, but during the game they were simply a nuisance. Granted this was at 2500 points; at 2000 points or 1750 points, I could see 6 dreads being significantly scarier as the opponent will have ton less utility to deal with them. At this point though, I would caution anyone of running out and buying 6 AoBR dreads without playtesting first. While lists with 6 dreads qualify as 'Tricky and Cute' for sure, 'Tricky and Cute' does not automatically mean competitive.