Re: [Epic] Mega-Gargant Krooz Ques

From: Alun Gallie <gallie_at_...>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 08:36:43 +0930

>Ah, but when I was in the [US] Navy, we carried our harpoons in the
>ASROC magazine that were fired from the ASROC box launcher - fire one,
>reload, fire one,reload..., but fired only one at a time. Mebbe they
>wrote 2 x cause if one is knocked out on a damage roll there is still
>one left. So as he shoots one a horde of grots runs up the scaffolding
>with the reload to the tower or the tower itseld rotates down to pick up
>two more missles ...given this is the only orky thing that goes more
>than 45cm they gotta have more than two.
>
>Actually I figger its 50-50 as to what the designers meant ... if they
>ever thought about it after they wrote it.
>
OK Kevin, I surrender. We could go round and round with very valid arguments
from both sides. That is why I posted Allen to get him to ask JJ this "silly
question" so we have an answer, right or wrong that is clear.
From Chris Miller

-------> Might wanna check some earlier posts- we've pointed out how >GW
>has printed stats for thigs which are irrelevant and/or will never be
>used.
Does that now mean for everything we read that is unclear we just ignore it
and write it off to a design error or do we attempt to clarify it ?
> As for the Navy comparison, well, I'm betting orky missiles
>40,000 years in the future might be different, just like infantry
>weapons of the age don't compare to the army's weapons today, nor the
flyers to the current air force. (Maybe they're inflatable and use
compressed air for thrust...)
It was an example of having one shot missles as opposed to multiple shot
launcher not a comparison between a Harpoon and a Krooz. I think you are
stretching things abit, if you read the fluff the function and composition
of the various units is fairly close to modern day. Lets not throw in
maybees , ifs and buts into an already very murky pool.

    And since vortex missiles specifically _say_ "one shot weapon" and
these missiles do _not_ specifially say "one shot weapon", who can say
"well the designers meant it to be one shot".
Easy fixed, why don't we just ask the designers !

    FWIW I'm a stickler on this because it came up, and being of the
SM/TL school I believe it should be 2 one-shot missiles. But, they
didn't bother to put that anywhere in the rules for this edition. They
can call it a SQ, even, but when introducing someone new to the game,
and they want to see the rules, if it ain't in there then I don't think
that's MY fault, I think it's sloppy design, as we've seen several
examples of on this list.
I think people are trying to find faults too quickly though, read something
and chances are how you interpret it the first time is the right way. Human
nature leads us to over complicate things. Designing a game so that no one
anywhere can find one ambigouous statement or one contradiction is
impossible (well, I'm yet to see one).
If doubts still exist, make a house rule. I find it funny that you, Kevin
and I have been having a three way debate on this issue and yet in principle
we all feel it should be interpreted the same way.
Anyway hopefully Allen will get an answer and we can lay this one particular
beast to rest.
Cheers
Alun
Received on Wed Dec 17 1997 - 23:06:43 UTC