Rules lawyering

[Cav Dog]

So we're playing a D-Day scenario and I'm the Germans, my buddy is the Americans. We are playing 1:1 WRG with some house mods for amphibious landings because WRG doesn't really address beach landing in its earlier versions. He manages to get 1 of his 16 DD tanks alive on the beach and tries to engage one of my panzerturm bunkers with a french tank turret. On a D6 he needs a minimum of 3 to hit, but his 75mm Sherman can't kill a bunker unless he is within 250m and he is at 450m. I'm thinking you can't kill it so why bother, wouldn't it be smarter to shoot smoke, but hey it's his tank. Anyway, he rolls a 5 to hit which he claims gives him the effect of a turret hit (to hit of 3 & minus 2 for a hull down target). Of course the 75mm obliterates the turret at that range. I'm thinking "Hmmmmm, not sure I'm buying that call." I gave it to him because, A) He was really getting pounded, and B) I can see that happening in real life. But he should have claimed that was what he was doing before he rolled. The offending DD did get smoked by the other panzerstellung on my next turn. That plus most of his first wave failing to even make it to the beach caused him to give up three turns later.

WRG doesn't address where a shot lands other than front or side/rear so technically he shouldn't have gotten away with it, but it was a colorful interpretation of the rules and random impropable events do add color to what can be an out of control math excercise at times.

Thoughts on his diabolical but very effective rules lawyering?

[Donald M. Scheef]

My first impression is that you handled the situation well. In a friendly game, negotiation and bargaining should be used rather than appeal to rigid rules. Since you agreed that his interpretation was reasonable, go with it.

For application of rules to war games, refer to Patton's tactics during the pre-war Louisiana war games and the movie "Down Periscope."

In competition, the judge's ruling stands.

Don S.

[voltigeur]

My only problem with his logic was that he announced after the die roll how he was interpreting the rules. I play WRG alot and they don't handle hybrid weapon syswtems like that very well.

I would have agreed if he had told me before the roll what he was trying to do. I probably wyould have suggested that he roll as if he were rolling against the vehicle as hulled down. (This may not have changed his numbers.) If he made his to hit roll then let him roll for knock out.

But I think it should have been discussed before he rolled the dice.

Just MHO

[Pitfall]

Every rule set has its own loop-holes. We play a home-brewed set in which it is easier to target an aperture in a bunker than the gun poking out of it...

I agree if you're getting "literal" with the rules it is best to announce to the other players how you're figuring things and then reach a consensus. In that particular instance, I wouldn't have gone along with the reasoning. The "to-hit" numbers are assuming that the turret is on top of a chasis, elevated from the ground rather than sitting at ground level. Sure, it is a turret, but it in this case you are comparing apples to oranges.

[Mk 1]

I too agree with several of the prior posts -- I don't object to the interpretation of the rules, but would have felt better about it (were I the one suffering from the interpretation) if the variance from the rules were discussed and agreed to prior to the die being cast.

I much prefer rules that don't try for 3 pages of detail on every conceivable variance to the basics. The guys I game with most often are amenable enough, and almost every game we play has a few scenario-specific rules added in just for interest. Usually the guy who oranizes the game winds up being the gamemaster, and will interpret or modify the rules as-needed to account for the odd-ball events. For this reason the gamemaster is usually given a subordinate command in our games (provideed there are enough players for superior-subordinate chains of command to be established).

As to hitting the turret vs. hitting the bunker ... from what I understand about WRG rules from years gone by (haven't played 'em since mid-90's) there is no "penetration" consideration on a bunker shot. So I have always interpreted the role to kill a bunker as relying on hitting the aperture anyways. With this in mind, no kills against the bunker portion of the panzerturm should be possible (most panzerturms I have seen had no aperture below the turret -- just a concrete case often covered by earth. The only way one could hit/kill it would be a turret shot, and it would be no different to hit than a shot at the equivalent tank located hull-down behind an earthen berm instead of a bunker wall.