RE: [NetEpic ML] Re: [v5.0] Core Rules Part II

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 14:35:20 -0400

Hi!

-----Original Message-----
From: Weasel Fierce [mailto:septimus__at_hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 6:00 AM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Re: [v5.0] Core Rules Part II


>--> Proposed change: only barrages from Artillery units may be fired
>indirectly (without LoS). This removes the necessity to state "Cannot
>be fired indirectly" on each and every barrage weapon not actually
>possessed by an artillery unit (SM Dreads, Flyers...). So substitute
>the word 'barrages' with 'artillery barrages'.

´Simply make a tag in the unit description reading "Artillery" and have
an
entry in the core rules that clarify what this means.
The same goes for Infiltrators, Fearless and other common abilities.

I've mentioned this before but it needs to be done rather than each unit

with such an ability having a description that may or may not
contrradict
each other

----> Damn, that’s a good idea too.


>--> No need of this rule here, IMHO. Better place it in the Tech-
>Marines, SM Medics (Apothecaries!!!), Bonesingers or whatever
>description... It's a special ability, not a core rule, after all.
>

I would prefer not to increase army list sizes with these descriptions.
Its
much much much nicer to have a single rule in the core rules, and then
add
"healer" or "repair" to the unit description.

Avoids contradictions and differences.

This is sort of what was done in Heresy, where the core rules have a
section describing "general" powers. Of course, if they are NOT general
they should be left to the army list. For example, artillery should be
in the core rules, healer, since no all have them should be in the
corresponding arly list.

> > I propose to remove all rules on titans and praetorians to each
>army list >containing them. Even though it will be repeated, in my
>experience the army >list books are the most used during games and it
>gets cumbersome to look up >the core rules for titan/praetorian
>rules. In fact the only thing core >rules get look for is precisely
>titan rules, so it's better to have it in >the appropriate book.

Again I would disagree :)

Leave rules that pertain to all armies in the core book.

I dont think its a good idea to add a couple more pages to every army
list
(more printing)

Good argument too. I guess the happy medium is to give a general
description in the core rule and repeat the appropriate stuff in each
army book.

Peter
Received on Sun Apr 21 2002 - 18:35:20 UTC