CC and Yari Shogun questions

[warzoneD]

Caronte - you raise thoughtful and provocative questions.  Kudos and have some Karma for contributing.

D

[Caronte]

Thanks, I do not want to be provocative (at least not in a bad sense), just I am thinking as a Warzone player again and writing my doubts

[dmcgee1]

Free thinking is allowed here, Caronte.  Please, continue to raise any issue that you feel is in need of clarification.  You won't get flamed here. 

[Silently]

Ooops, I did not mean to kick over a can of worms.

I think my (and possibly other folk's) confusion happened because I assumed that the FAQ section "Ranged Weapons used in Close Combat" was meant to clarify the rules in the book.  Instead, the FAQ response is inteneded to completely replace most of the book rules, at least that is how I read dmcgee1's reply.

I think Archer is trying to pull together all the related but scattered text from the existing rule book and clarify that, while dmcgee1 is saying to use the FAQ rule instead.  Is that correct in a nutshell?

[dmcgee1]

That, in a nutshell, is correct.

Let me state the following, for the record:

Archer's research is not without merit.  John is an avid player, and has been involved with UWZ from it's inception, including playtesting (you'll find his name in the credits - check it!).  I am not trying to overrule John, here.  I am, merely, trying to keep everyone on the same page when it comes to playing the game as designed.

John has researched this particular question - a lot - and has had discussion with Thom on this subject.  However, it is my stance that the rules should be played as written, with the FAQ as the final arbiter to any discrepancies, ambiguties and/or mistakes of omission/inclusion that have surfaced in the rules. John and I have discussed this - a lot - and have yet to reach concordance.  This is not to day that John is wrong.  I believe that the perfect answer lies somewhere in the middle, but I am convinced that the rules and the FAQ are there for a reason.  That reason is to be able to provide a common set of rules for all to play.

This particular issue is, in my opinion, one of those that will continue to draw debate until such a time as new rules supercede those currently written.  Until then, it is my opinion that the rule should be played as FAQ'd (which, by default, supercedes the rules).

You have not kicked over the proverbial worn can, rather, you asked for help, and got several viewpoints.  You are free to play it as you see fit amongst your group, though, I recommend familiarity with the rules and the FAQ in the event you play/teach others from outside your group.

Silently (forgive the pun), continue to raise issues.  Discussions like these have a way of making others' ears perk up and listen.  This subject is important, your opinion valid, and has not, to my knowledge, rubbed anyone the wrong way.

Karma to you, bud. 

[Archer]

What he said.

  I have my disagreements with the rules and the FAQ in spots.  Most are minor but the damage in CC for Rifles and larger is the one I have had the largest problem with- especially after I did the research to verify the very obtuse/obscure rule as to what it *should* say were it written in one place (*grumble grumble* bad editing *grumble grumble*)....
  I am not saying I am correct all the time- far from it (too many editions in my brain to get it right all the time).  Dave an I have had many a lively discussion on some parts of the rules and on some of the proposed units to see Sanctioned Release.  Rare is the disagreement.... except on Shadow Walk.  And even Thom beaned us on that one after we cornered him on a clarification for it.

  The use of rifle dmg in CC is an earlier Edition rule- and yes, I did not like it then either.

As Dave has said, what the FAQ states is what's to be used on an official level.  I can only hope the FAQ team revisits their ruling on this and discusses it again to either find the clarifiers for their current view on how it works or re-writes the FAQ ruling to represent the information as found in the book.

  I have zero control/say over any deliberations as I'm not part of that very knowledgeable group of players; all I can legitimately say on this matter is "Guys... I think y'all screwed this one up."

[Silently]

Well, I'm pinging you both with good karma for having such firmly held opposing opinions while keeping it civilized.  I think I like this forum.

[dmcgee1]

Thanks, Silently.

John and I have been buds for a long time, now, both here and in the real world.  We butt heads out there, too!  However, I respect John's opinions, no matter how wrong they are 

Seriously, though, he is an all-round good guy, and deserves any kudos he gets.  Also, John and I firmly believe that this forum is one of the best as far as people's freedom to discuss all manners of topics, here.

On top of that, we've got one heckuva a moderator crew around here.

Thanks for the "K's" - right back at ya!

[Archer]

Same goes for me with regards to Dave- no matter what I think he's smoking.

thanks for the Karma though....