blasts

[CubertFarnsworth]

I found some old threads but I want to make sure that the new rulebook applies here...........i know there have been some "changes" since the V2 cards and rulebook.

About multiple blast markers: Can you place the markers, as long as the rules are followed about not overlapping and first marker has to be touching a portion of the original target, so that they "loop back" to to the original target, producing more damage to the the original target.

If not, please tell me where in the rulebook does is say that you cannot do that. My info is coming off pg 46 of the new rulebook.

Thank you

[WEiRD sKeTCH]

Well, since you're on page 46, read a little closer...

Any model, other than the initial target, touched by one or more suffers damage one severity lower than what was inflicted on the target. Any additional effects suffered by the target, such as the effects of Triggers, are not suffered by the other models touched by the unless specifically stated otherwise.

I bolded and underlined what you're missing.

Short answer:

No you can't "loop back" for more damage.

[CubertFarnsworth]

Well, since you're on page 46, read a little closer...

I bolded and underlined what you're missing.

Short answer:

No you can't "loop back" for more damage.

AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH.........thanks WEiRD sKeTCH

Just had to read into it a little more!

[Ferb]

Hi,

I have a different interpretation of that rule. I accept that Weird Sketch is a rule marshall so his interpretation will be correct. But I would like to put forward my reasoning for consideration.

The rule states:

Any model, other than the initial target, touched by one or more suffers damage one severity lower than what was inflicted on the target. Any additional effects suffered by the target, such as the effects of Triggers, are not suffered by the other models touched by the unless specifically stated otherwise.

The highlighted part is contained by 2 commas making it a restrictive clause. That is that the meaning of the rest of the sentence is contstrained by the clause.

So it says that models other than the initial target get the reduced effects mentioned. This must mean (because its a restrictive clause) that the initial target doesn't suffer the reduction. Therefore it must mean that the initial target can be hit by multiple blasts each at the full effect.

That's my interpretation anyway. I fully accept that Weird Sketch's interpretation may have come from behind the scenes work with the rules writers etc. and be the intended outcome. But just in case i thought I'd throw this out there.

Thanks for reading :-)

Ferb

[Ratty]

Hi,

I have a different interpretation of that rule. I accept that Weird Sketch is a rule marshall so his interpretation will be correct. But I would like to put forward my reasoning for consideration.

The rule states:

Any model, other than the initial target, touched by one or more suffers damage one severity lower than what was inflicted on the target. Any additional effects suffered by the target, such as the effects of Triggers, are not suffered by the other models touched by the unless specifically stated otherwise.

The highlighted part is contained by 2 commas making it a restrictive clause. That is that the meaning of the rest of the sentence is contstrained by the clause.

So it says that models other than the initial target get the reduced effects mentioned. This must mean (because its a restrictive clause) that the initial target doesn't suffer the reduction. Therefore it must mean that the initial target can be hit by multiple blasts each at the full effect.

That's my interpretation anyway. I fully accept that Weird Sketch's interpretation may have come from behind the scenes work with the rules writers etc. and be the intended outcome. But just in case i thought I'd throw this out there.

Thanks for reading :-)

Ferb

Nowhere does it say damage is caused by a blast other than inside the clause, so only other models are affected by blasts.

The initial target ofc comes under normal damage.

[Ferb]

Thanks for the quick reply. So, for my own understanding, would this wording be correct:

Any model, other than the initial target which can't be the target of these blasts, touched by one or more suffers damage one severity lower than what was inflicted on the target.

Thanks,

Ferb

[Ratty]

Thanks for the quick reply. So, for my own understanding, would this wording be correct:

Any model, other than the initial target which can't be the target of these blasts, touched by one or more suffers damage one severity lower than what was inflicted on the target.

Thanks,

Ferb

Target has a very specific meaning... So it's not quite right.

Any model which is not the the initial target (who does not take damage from the blasts) touched by one or more suffers damage one severity lower than what was inflicted on the target.

[Ferb]

Thanks :-) Got it now.