audrisampson wrote:
To follow your quote from the rules. A game can be completed to victory during the lockout situation. The Gambit rule facilitates this. Assuming you get a lockout fairly early in the game you can easily make the pts for a 200pt win by just sitting in gambit and both players spinning figs because there are no other options due to the lockout.
If the gambit rule did not exist then yes I would agree with your interpetation of the rules. In this case however you are advancing the game just at a slower pace then the killing of figs.
Only if the 5 rounds of no engagement doesn't happen. If "no side takes damage, makes an attack roll, or makes a saving throw for 5 complete rounds", the game ends early. If you're playing specifically to end the game this way, it is impossible to get 200 points unless you've already gotten at least 175 points (in which case, I'm totally fine with you locking out your opponent's last 25 points worth of dudes).
If you open the door every 4th round, take a shot, then close the door again and keep collecting gambit, that's totally fine! You'll eventually hit 200 points, and aren't intentionally and flagrantly trying not to. Heck, if you use Dr. Evazan to have GOWK keep rolling saves every round and keep your opponent locked out, that's pretty lame but is technically not against the rule if you're playing at a speed that you'll actually get 40 rounds of Gambit within the hour (that's the other part, you have to play at a speed to do so, so if you aren't playing fast enough to get those 40 rounds of Gambit then you are still stalling).
In the situation that's being discussed, the game ended after 5 rounds of non-engagement, and neither player had reached the victory condition, and the winner actually intentionally avoided the victory condition so he could win on a tiebreaker. This is against the rules and stalling as far as I understand it.