[projectaon] Re: Book 13 Erratum
- From: Simon Osborne <outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:38:15 +0100
On 11/05/2012 00:57, Jonathan Blake wrote:
Is it just me or is there just too much going on with this. It seems
like a simple change from "can" to "should" does not give enough
information to help the reader make an informed choice. It's beginning
to seem like this would be best handled by an extended explanation in
the Readers' Handbook?
If I roll a 5 and a 5 for EP and CS in Book 1, I don't then re-roll my
stats at the start of Book 2 in the hope of picking better numbers
simply because "some of the opponents might be harder". And if I did and
picked a 9 and a 9, should I then re-pick the numbers at the start of
Book 3? Or now that I'm satisfied, is it time to stick with what I've
got? I can't see how the transition from Magnakai to Grand Master is any
different. To my mind, "should" is the correct word here; and if players
want to do otherwise, they can, but such rules-meistering is not "by the
book". (Compare the fact that we haven't included any "dual-wielding"
rules in the RH because they are not in the original rules, irrespective
of how vocally and passionately some argue that 'carrying two Weapons
makes dual-wielding an implicit rule'.)
But I'm still feeling grumpy and crotchety right now. :-p
--
Simon Osborne
Project Aon
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
