Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

[Cheesegear]

I skipped over this. I shouldn't have.

To continue with the MtG example, back when I played I built decks that weren't good, because the purpose of the decks was not necessariy to win; it was to get some stupid combo to work. Sometimes getting the combo to work resulted in winning

...Then you aren't talking about what I'm talking about. If your 'combo deck' ever won, then your idea was a good idea and it has merit. You won games built around a combo you found interesting. You noticed some mechanics that interacted well, and you utilised them.

What was the purpose of the combo? If the combo gave yourself an advantage, or your opponent a disadvantage, you were playing to win. Stupidly, maybe, depending on the combo. But I guarantee you that the purpose of the combo wasn't to make you lose games. Losing may have been a possible - or even expected - outcome. But it certainly wasn't the intent.

An old Dredge deck, for example, isn't the same as 'I'm going to deck myself out and lose every game on purpose.' Because Dredge isn't necessarily a mechanic that makes you lose - there's a point to it. Milling yourself out of the game, on the other hand, without Dredge, is just dumb.