dswanick Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 say we use the book form. The summary was poorly written and not fact checked in some cases. Take Jump Packs vs. Jet Packs charging into difficult terrain. They have the exact same skyborne rules and no differences in their ability to charge into difficult terrain. The chart lists Jet Packs as only rolling 2D6", not 3D6" drop the highest like Jump Packs. So one of them is wrong. Not to mention the misspellings that made it into print. Except that the chart is not incorrect. Perhaps you should re-read the Assault Phase and Jump Pack/Jet Pack special rules again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 It just seems to open up some oddities like this: A rhino with squad A suffers a shaken result ("Passengers can only make snap shots in their next shooting phase") - then what happens when squad A gets out and B embarks? It's the passenger's (of the damaged vehicle) next shooting phase- now what? They aren't oddities if you give ownership to the embarked unit when the effect occurs, instead of giving ownership to the vehicle. Squad A remains shaken until their next shooting phase. The vehicle remains shaken until next shooting phase. Squad B fires as normal. or Squad A stops being shaken. Vehicle remains shaken. Squad B becomes shaken. Between the two, which one makes more sense? They both meet the RAW, depending on how you read them. For me, the first scenario is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 It just seems to open up some oddities like this: A rhino with squad A suffers a shaken result ("Passengers can only make snap shots in their next shooting phase") - then what happens when squad A gets out and B embarks? It's the passenger's (of the damaged vehicle) next shooting phase- now what? They aren't oddities if you give ownership to the embarked unit when the effect occurs, instead of giving ownership to the vehicle. Squad A remains shaken until their next shooting phase. The vehicle remains shaken until next shooting phase. Squad B fires as normal. or Squad A stops being shaken. Vehicle remains shaken. Squad B becomes shaken. Between the two, which one makes more sense? They both meet the RAW, depending on how you read them. For me, the first scenario is right. The first scenario makes more sense. The second fits the rules better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 They both meet the RAW, depending on how you read them. For me, the first scenario is right.Unfortunately, scenario A does not meet RAW, according to the chart in the back. That says what happens to the current passengers, not the previous passengers. Scenario B fits the rules a lot better. On the plus side, today I personally floated the entire set of problems with that darn chart to John Shaffer when I had a conversation with him today at Gencon. He said he'd see about getting it booted up the chain to the FAQ team, who is in the process with BRB FAQ 1.0 as we speak. I'm totally stoked that these just might get answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Unfortunately, scenario A does not meet RAW, according to the chart in the back. Cept the chart in the back is very poorly vetted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpnightsend Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 I hear what you're saying and understand what you're arguing. Fluffwise, Im in agreement too. I jsut cant shake the feeling that something's off. Wasnt it worded the same way in 5th? And is it not entirely relevant as the restriction is dependent on them being "passengers" in order for the damage result to happen. If they had said "the unit that was embarked" etc. I would not argue this. I feel that if you are not a passenger when you are shooting, then this restriction does not apply but, I really do get what you guys are saying. It just seems to open up some oddities like this: A rhino with squad A suffers a shaken result ("Passengers can only make snap shots in their next shooting phase") - then what happens when squad A gets out and B embarks? It's the passenger's (of the damaged vehicle) next shooting phase- now what? Is the key to this maybe in the verbiage "when the transport sustains damage" ?" thoughts? I think you're trying too hard to argue this for the sake of arguing Mort. If you're in agreement fluff-wise, and its only a "feeling" you have that something is wrong, maybe we should agree the rule is actually written correctly and there isn't any weird wording? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Unfortunately, scenario A does not meet RAW, according to the chart in the back. Cept the chart in the back is very poorly vetted. Exactly :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDunc Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 S1: Squad A remains shaken until their next shooting phase. The vehicle remains shaken until next shooting phase. Squad B fires as normal. or S2: Squad A stops being shaken. Vehicle remains shaken. Squad B becomes shaken. S3: Squad A remains shaken. Vehicle remains shaken. Squad B becomes shaken. That fits the rules the best. It's also not completely lacking in sense. You can't ignore the summary chart, which S1 is basically doing. And you can't read pg80 as a conditional because it isn't written as a conditional. S3 doesn't do either of these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morollan Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 I hear what you're saying and understand what you're arguing. Fluffwise, Im in agreement too. I jsut cant shake the feeling that something's off. Wasnt it worded the same way in 5th? 5e rules say "Passengers may not shoot from the vehicle (my emphasis) in their next shooting phase, but are otherwise unaffected." " as opposed to 6e which says "Passengers can only make Snap Shots in their next Shooting phase, but are otherwise unaffected." To me, this would seem to be a deliberate change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpnightsend Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 I hear what you're saying and understand what you're arguing. Fluffwise, Im in agreement too. I jsut cant shake the feeling that something's off. Wasnt it worded the same way in 5th? 5e rules say "Passengers may not shoot from the vehicle (my emphasis) in their next shooting phase, but are otherwise unaffected." " as opposed to 6e which says "Passengers can only make Snap Shots in their next Shooting phase, but are otherwise unaffected." To me, this would seem to be a deliberate change. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.