I think the issue is really just that we try to have as few footnotes as possible; in an ideal world we'd have zero. So a number of us feel like we shouldn't be adding footnotes unless there's an unresolvable ambiguity.
From an in-book context (rather than from the perspective of a reader trying to outsmart the author), I think it's reasonable to assume that the Grand Master would figure that his Kai Weapon is the strongest weapon in his possession and therefore the one most likely to destroy the Claw of Naar.
Ben On Thu, 22 Aug 2013, John TFS wrote:
Well, we've had a little discussion over this issue, so, for at least some people, it doesn't go without saying. I suppose my argument for putting a footnote in there is "why not?" As you said, most of time people can choose which item they want to do something with and they might assume that this is the case here, despite what the text indicates. Putting a footnote in fully clarifies the situation. So, unless it's just a pain in the ass to do or otherwise a lot of work, I'd say to do it.Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 08:21:55 -0700 Subject: [projectaon] Re: 27v Errata From: jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 7:00 AM, John TFS <johntfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I think so. Something like "Even if you have access to another Weapon or Weapon-like Special Item such as Sunderer or the Andarin Warhammer, you must use your Kai Weapon in this instance and accept whatever damage it receives. You may, of course, choose to use other Weapons or Special Items like the above in future combats."Doesn't this footnote go without saying? For the first part, Joe makes it clear that this damage is to your Kai Weapon. For the second part, don't the rules assume that the reader generally gets to choose which items to use? If the footnote boils down to "follow the rules" ... :) -- Jon ~~~~~~ Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
~~~~~~ Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
