Re: [Epic] "FIREPOWER" and Blast Markers

From: Greg Lane <greg_at_...>
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 21:38:15 -0500

Aaron Day wrote:

> Eric Harding wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >YES! Now, is there any other information to support or deny the question
> > >of whether you can deduct from the FP whether it is in range or not?
> >
> > Use logic. Would you be trying to fire a weapon that is out of range?
> > No? Then why would you deduct the blast markers total from weapon that
> > arn't firing unless you're trying to be cheesy.
> >
>
> Since Blast Markers are supposed to represent (among other things) minor
> damage to weapon systems, it wouldn't matter if the weapon were in range
> or out of range.
>
> Aaron

Thank you, Aaron, I am definitely not being CHEESY ... to the contrary, I am
trying to protect both the "gaming" and the "simulation" aspects fo E40K. I am
using logic, as Aaron notes, the BM's have a much broader representation ...
fundamentally suppression, and my full argument spoke to the suppression issues
most directly.

Principally, the issue I addressed was one of the suppression of SHW's prior to
FP which is an unfortunate consequence of the way the orignal rules were
written. Then, I raised the point about subtractign from FP which was the
RoolzBoyz comment and anwer to my question ... and they specifically said to
subtract from FP ... EVEN if it was out of range. Then, we see the post with
the additional new errata which reinforces the point about subtracting BM's
from FP FIRST This all seemed somewhat supportive of the RoolzBoyz comments,
which may have been accidental and wrong or may have been a response based on
input they got related to the new info in Firepower ... I do not know. ... ALL
I asked was if there were any other info in the new Firepower book, which could
help clarify the part of the answer I had received from the RoolzBoyz about
whether the FP had to be "in range". And, it does seem pertinent.

Now, I think you can see I am only trying to clarify the information I have
received from multiple sources ... not trying to be cheesy or beardy or even a
rules lawyer ... just trying to figure it out ..ok?

Greg
Received on Thu Sep 10 1998 - 02:38:15 UTC