Re: [NetEpic ML] Warmonger Playtesting from Daniel

From: Daniel Wolf <MasterDanielWolf_at_...>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:11:21 +0100

Hi!

When we use it the way as hellreich said, it will make titans and praetorians much better!
I think it's worth some playtesting.

So far from me....
Dan Wolf

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Peter Ramos
  To: netepic_at_egroups.com
  Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 11:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Warmonger Playtesting from Daniel


  Hi!

  I would not mind using Hellriech's interpretation for all titans regarding damaging and already damaged location. However remember that weapons would add their bonus OR the bonus for second and subsequent hits whichever is higher.

  I would like to hear other opinions on this point.

  Peter
    Hi!

    Sorry in the rule book v3.0, v4.0 and v4.1 it's stated as i said it. Look at this example:

    Quote Rulebook:
    Example: A Warlord Titan receives a penetrating hit to the reactor; the first roll for damage is a two, meaning the reactor is off line. A second penetrating hit again hits the reactor; the second roll is a 3. This second roll is added to the first 2 + 3 = 5, the total is the new damage level. This means that the reactor explodes destroying the Titan (the effect stated for a damage roll of 5).
     
     
    But i have to say that i like your way of interpretation. When it'S used this way, then a roll of a d3 is perfectly ok.
     
    Mhhhh..... What does our GrandMaster Peter say?
     
     
    Bye
    Dan Wolf
Received on Mon Nov 13 2000 - 19:11:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:11 UTC