Quantumsurfer wrote:Anything that anyone comes up with is canon. The BrikVerse is nothing if not diverse. We've allowed all sorts of ideas into the "canon" that most of us thought were blatantly stupid. I think if we're going to say anything is less canon than anything else, its any kind of rules decision, given that the core rulebook itself, that vaunted tome around which all of this is based, advises us to ignore it whenever possible. Note, I like rules discussion and take a totally opposite philosophical stance on the issue. But it isn't my creation, whatever I might contribute to it, and I'm sticking as close to the spirit of the thing as I can. As for myself, I see things as being "more canon" the more work a player puts into its presentation. An army is more canon the more is written about it and the more often it appears in forum battles and battle reports. If you've taken the time to draw up your own stat cards, so too will I see that as being more "legitimate." Even if I totally ignore it. This is as much because I want to reward creativity as encourage it.
You get it. You get exactly what I have been trying to articulate over the past couple of posts - the fact of the matter is that the rules are a framework to make the idea of brick toy combat work, and can be messed around with by the players as much as they damn well please, including ignoring stuff other people have created for X Y or Z and just do it in a way that suits them and their needs. Yes there is now a forum-canon sniper. Do I give a shit? No. That sniper only represents one way of doing a sniper in the game, one that does not fit into how I envision snipers working within my games and my world. Therefore I am perfectly
at liberty to ignore it and cook up my own house rules for snipers that work in a way I feel they should work. This isn't Warhammer 40,000 you know... So long as the sniper's points system are fair within the general CP cost thingymajig, then it's fine.