Rules version

[Egor_Redcloak]

Does everyone here use the '05 rules? Or am I the only one who thinks that '01 version is better?

[IVhorseman]

i prefer the '05 rules as core rules, but there's a LOT of material from '01 that i recycle and reused/converted into '05 rules.

i like the '01 rules, but they required far to much memorization or (gasp!) printing out tables.

[Blitzen]

I use the 2005 Core Rules as a... a core. I usually include some other things from 2001 and add more weapons. You can never have too many weapons. But most of the 2001 load is too specific for my games so I just trash it and go for the simpler 2005 rules.

[IVhorseman]

You can never have too many weapons.

spoken like a true brikwarrior. this is probably my biggest complaint with the 05 rules: the lack of weapons. yes i know we're going for simpler and less useless memorization, but for someone who has all of their battles taking place in the distant future to have only two kinds of ranged weapons brings my thirst for chaos into complete dehydration. where's the miniguns, the death guns (the reason some of us bought d20s), the lolermatic assault rofls and the flamethrowers?

[EvilTobbacconist]

I like the 2001 rules, but since I'm big on introing people to the game and am really bad at explaining things through speech, I stick to th 2005 rules, much more user friendly, As for more weapons? I just use the weapon modifiers stuff from the 2001 rules.

[Houndis]

I pretty much use the '05 Core Rules, but you're absolutely right: I also find the lack of weapons disturbing (anyone get the reference?). That's why we (includes me, my brother and two friends) have developed new guns. We have artillery, a sniper rifle, a minigun and a flamethrower. But I think someday soon I'll go those weapons through and chance them.

I have glanced through some of the '01 rules, but they're are much more complicated, so I stick in Core Rules.

[piltogg]

you should post pictures of those guns

I prefer the 01 rules because they cover almost every situation and you can vary the amount of complexity in your battles.
also they include somethings i never would have thought of. [like the parachute]

[Houndis]

you should post pictures of those guns

Were you talking to me? If you were, I'll try to remember that. It can take a while, though, 'cause I'm taking pictures of our new map for now.

And for the parachute, we were talking of maybe doing that someday, but it had been waiting because we don't have a battle big enough to involve paratroopers. That's a shame, but we'll have time for that later, when we get bigger gaming base.

[IVhorseman]

I prefer the 01 rules because they cover almost every situation and you can vary the amount of complexity in your battles.

but is that always a good thing? having to keep track of all those pips and ker-(noun) tables, along with stories of height and 4d6-5s flying around, you're doing a lot more calculating than you are destroying

[The Lizard King]

I use a bunch of rules from pretty much each addition

[King of Brix]

I use an odd blend of the 2005 and 2001, and apply liberal amounts of fudge to it. It works for me though...

[Evil Wayne]

NELUG uses the 2001 rules almost exclusively. They're complex and dense like legalese documents. Even then, we usually have to build some house rules to cover situations or build them into specific scenarios (ergo, the 01 rules apparently aren't complex enough).

[Moronstudios]

We here at moronstudios use the 2005 rules because they are simpler (printing the 2005 rules used enough paper.

[james+burgundy]

you might want to look at this i found it in the brikwars archives.

http://www.brikwars.com/underconstruction.htm

[Moronstudios]

I found out about that too, you did a good job finding it because it is quite hard to find (at least by my metheds).