Re: [Epic] Epic 40k - answers to our questions!

From: Erik Rutins <snowdo1_at_...>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 23:50:20 -0400

Richard:

> As promised, here are the answers to 4 of the more controversial aspects
> of Epic 40k that have kept us guessing for the past few days!

Thanks for compiling/sending/receiving this information! It is a great
help in clarifying the new rules.

> The first interpratation (sp?) is correct. Each blast marker stops one
> super heavy weapon from firing.

I'm glad to hear this - it makes common sense and keeps the SHVs from being
too powerful.

> Strictly by the rules, two stands can be carried. As a house rule for
> thos willing to put up with the extra complexity, only allow one stand,
as
> per 40K.

This is also reasonable.

> Unfortunately a number of errors creeped into the example detachments in
> the army book. Fortunately, in every case where there is a
> contradiction, the detachment list is correct, and the example is wrong.
Bear this
> in mind and you should be OK.

I will have to re-read to see if I have understood Jervis' point or not.

> In other words, they get the best of both worlds!

Woo-hoo! Rejoice, Eldar players. Again, this rule makes a lot of sense,
since Exarchs are supposed to make the squads they're with better!

So far, I'm liking the response, though I wish these had been more clear in
the rulebook. Perhaps the new WD battle report will clarify some of this
too, I'll wait until us US folks get the WD.

Thanks again,

- Erik
Received on Sat Apr 12 1997 - 03:50:20 UTC