Field of Glory Renaissance Reviewed

Post by **admin** » Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:00 am

A great review of <a target="_self" href="http://slitherine.com/games/fog_r">Field of Glory Renaissance</a> has been published on specialist site <a target="_blank" href="http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2011/01/ ... html">Bell of Lost Souls</a>. 
The article is definitely worth a read. To taste a bit of it, here are a few quotes:
- Field of Glory Renaissance is on my list of top rulebooks ever written.
- For starters, the organization of this book is top notch. Each section is color coded on the exterior page edge on the right hand page so it makes flipping to that section easy.
- Some incredible possibilities exist in these rules. First they give you their point cost formulas so you can design armies not covered by their companion army lists.
To read the article in full, just follow the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2011/01/ ... trong>.

pudzy · Post by **pudzy** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:35 pm

I had to stop reading in the third paragraph when the author got on his high horse over the use of the word 'dice' as a singular noun. He is wrong and makes the whole review seem foolish. Either 'dice' or 'die' are correct. In fact it is the author of this review that has made a grammatical error.

I probably should be more forgiving as I suspect that the author is not actually English.

In England the use of 'dice' as both singular and plural forms of the noun is more prevalent and is grammatically correct.

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:52 pm

Since when?

pudzy · Post by **pudzy** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:39 pm

Are you merely saying you don’t believe me or are you asking for an actual historical date?

If you don’t believe me then maybe you will believe the Oxford English Dictionary.

Here is a link to the online Oxford Dictionary page for the word “Dice” in which it is referred to as a singular noun whose plural is the same.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entr ... _gb0223980

At the bottom there is a note on usage which says:

“In modern standard English dice is both the singular and the plural: throw the dice could mean a reference to either one or more than one dice.”

The page for the word “Die” in this context is here:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entr ... key=RUhqjQ

The note on usage says:

“In modern standard English, the singular die (rather than dice) is uncommon. Dice is used for both the singular and the plural.”

Seems pretty straightforward to me and I would think that the authors of FOGR would have wanted to use modern standard English when writing their rulebook.

If you are asking me for a date when this usage became standard, well my printed edition of the OED is dated 1991, so for at least twenty years.

I suspect it is actually at least a century, and it certainly goes back as far as I can remember, which is more than half a century, and it is certainly for as long as I have been selling dice as part of my living, which is a quarter of a century.

Still - Each to his own though eh?

nickdives · Post by **nickdives** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:24 pm

Die, Dice or Dices, I still only manage to throw 1s!!!

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:37 pm

Pudzy, OED is a good source, and given the 1991 date suggests that this perhaps came into effect in the 1980s. When I was last in full time education in the 1970s, it was not standard english - I remember because I got marked down for incorrect usage in my English GCE 'O' Level in 1977. I knew it was wrong as soon as I got out of the exam. Anyone who used dice as the singular would even today be thought of as ill spoken and lacking in education where I live and game.

Derros · Post by **Derros** » Sat Jan 29, 2011 11:40 pm

Anyone who used dice as the singular would even today be thought of as ill spoken and lacking in education where I live and game.

yeah its the same where i live, (U.S.A) i was always told die was singular and dice was plural.

but it does not really matter as long as everybody knows what you mean.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 12:05 am

There is a theory that "dice" has always been more correct, because each separate side of the dice is a "die" - as in "die stamp". Unfortunately, I cannot find any source for this possibly apocryphal theory.

However, as pudzy says, it is irritating to be lambasted for a grammatical error, when I am and always have been aware of the grammatical usages. (And in fact used "die" in DBM, but have since been persuaded that "dice" is either more, or at least equally, correct in UK English, and sounds more natural to UK ears).

The rules are written in UK English, the authors being English, so American usage is moot.

Derros · Post by **Derros** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:31 pm

well that makes sense to me. and now that i think about it, before this was brought up i honestly didnt notice.

david53 · Post by **david53** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:55 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
......the authors being English...

Were do you live again...

durrati · Post by **durrati** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:33 pm

david53 wrote:
rbodleyscott wrote:
......the authors being English...
Were do you live again...

In an English colony?

Good review as in 'biggin up FOG(R) in a blingin stylee', which is good as I would agree that it is a very fine set of rules, will be interesting to see how it develops over the next year or so.

Crap review as in 'he hasn't actually played a game so he dosn't know what he is talking about', if he wants to review a set of rules he could at least get a couple of games in.

Also disagree with him on the 'its really easy to find stuff' as that is not my experience. The 1st to 4th game I played where to Goodendandigdag and every game I played involved both sides leafing through the rules trying to find something and getting confused. This was usually ended by someone saying 'look, I bet RBS is really bored just enjoying playing his own game - lets go and ask him a simple and annoying question about the rules as we can't be arsed to keep digging to find the answer'.

Oh, as for the die / dice debate - who gives a fa? If someone tried to correct me for 'correct english language on the singular of a dice' they may as well stop talking as I would have stopped listening to anything they had to say.

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:03 pm

If the index is not good enough, mia culpa. I have posted a thread that corrects some errors in the index. If there are other things missing I will be glad to find the page reference(s) and add it to the thread.

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:06 pm

The index is good. I think many people don't t think to check it.

I prefer the Index in a file that can be printed out separately on blue paper for people to flip through while finding the page in the book.

durrati · Post by **durrati** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:08 pm

Ah, use the index, hmm, there's an idea. To be honest I do think part of the problem may be people not using the index, as people think 'ah, it must be in section x, and it is not so people try figure out on there own where it may be. Although it partly seemed that people may either use the index to get to a subject, or get themselves their own their own only to find that they then had to go on and look at another section or two. In some situations rules that affect the same situation seem to be scattered across several places. Obviously and unhelpfully I can't think of an an example now.....

Usually I would put this down for myself to dyslexia - as it is handy to have an excuse to let someone else do the legwork of looking up rules, but as I say it seemed a fairly common thing to find the exact rule that was needed took some to-ing and fro-ing. Not even sure that this is a critisism, as FOG is a fairly complex rule set so it must be impossible to put all related rules in the same section, as it would mean lots of rules would have to be in more than one section it might have to just be accepted as 'in the nature of the beast'. If I ever write a complex and succesful set of rules that are perfectly laid out I will get back to you as to how easy it was.

On the plus side, there were lots of people there that had not played many games (shocker!) so knowing the rules should get easier with practise. Plus, everything else being equal, it is always fun to ask rules authors pointless and silly questions - and I am sure they enjoy it to......

pudzy · Post by **pudzy** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:29 pm

I am really sorry. I am being completely childish and pedantic but I have now done a little research into the historical usage of "dice" as a singular noun and have found the phrase "Protesting never to touch a card or throw a dice again" occurs in the novel 'The History of Miss Betsy Thoughtless' written by the English novelist Eliza Heywood and published in 1751. (I was asked 'Since when?').

However, as I did say before, each to his own. Both forms are equally correct and nobody is ill educated or poorly spoken according to which form they prefer to use.

Once again, apologies for bringing it up again. I much prefer to discuss games with toy soldiers. Good luck on your dice rolls to all!

durrati · Post by **durrati** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:29 pm

Pudzy

One last post on the great 'dice / die' debate is acceptable. One thing in your post that most certainly is not acceptable on a toy soldier forum however is making a post after doing some research - this is considered very bad form. You should only make posts of opinion, based either on reading the Osprey of the subject, petty national prejudice or the fact that you have brought an army so it stands to reasons the troops in it should be graded as superior. If you carry on this whole 'research' nonsense I am afraid the moderators will have to ban you.

Quoting your sources indeed, have you no idea how to conduct a proper debate on a toy soldier forum?

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:41 pm

MikeK wrote

'
I prefer the Index in a file that can be printed out separately on blue paper for people to flip through while finding the page in the book.
'

I have the materials to do it and put in a PDF but could only so with with the permission of Slitherine.

If there is enough interest in a downloadable PDF Index (with bigger fonts for people like me whose eyes are not as young as they once were), I will approach Slitherine and ask.

Regards
Tim

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:43 pm

How about an admin renames this dicey thread "Dice or Die?" and restarts the review thread so people interested in reviews can get links to and read about, well . . . reviews.

puster · Post by **puster** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 11:31 am

MikeK wrote:... restarts the review thread so people interested in reviews can get links to and read about, well . . . reviews.

What review???

Well, actually I found the part on the die/dice informative and conclusive - unlike many other debates. I already knew the review.

waldo · Post by **waldo** » Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:59 pm

pudzy wrote:Are you merely saying you don’t believe me or are you asking for an actual historical date?

If you don’t believe me then maybe you will believe the Oxford English Dictionary.

Here is a link to the online Oxford Dictionary page for the word “Dice” in which it is referred to as a singular noun whose plural is the same.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entr ... _gb0223980

At the bottom there is a note on usage which says:

“In modern standard English dice is both the singular and the plural: throw the dice could mean a reference to either one or more than one dice.”

The page for the word “Die” in this context is here:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entr ... key=RUhqjQ

The note on usage says:

“In modern standard English, the singular die (rather than dice) is uncommon. Dice is used for both the singular and the plural.”

Seems pretty straightforward to me and I would think that the authors of FOGR would have wanted to use modern standard English when writing their rulebook.

If you are asking me for a date when this usage became standard, well my printed edition of the OED is dated 1991, so for at least twenty years.

I suspect it is actually at least a century, and it certainly goes back as far as I can remember, which is more than half a century, and it is certainly for as long as I have been selling dice as part of my living, which is a quarter of a century.

Still - Each to his own though eh?

Well, if you are quoting the OED, my pocket Oxford of 1980 only 'allows' die as the singular, so dice as an 'accepted' singular is quite recent. I remember being corrected as a young lad. I wonder when dices as the plural becomes acceptable to the OED? I've heard people say it.

Then again that old pocket OED also only 'allows' often with a silent 't' and that sems to be changing rapidly as the working class become literate... a quick check on the Oxford website shows that 'often' with an audible 't' is, alas, now accepted.

And, as a final authority, Wikipedia has die as the singular.

iacta alea est - the dice is cast?

Walter