I've little to say about this rule, but I'd like to voice a note of encouragement to you here, Ginrei. Some of Infinity's mechanisms are unusual (when compared to other games) and often otherwise unexpected or unintuitive for various reasons. I also entirely agree with what youre saying and go further because I think the rules are not just poorly written or badly translated, but oblique at best and atrocious at worst! (And I say that as a fan of the game, an admirer of the company Directors and senior staff, and a well-known and outspoken defender of their right to design and develop their game howsoever they choose... @Andre82 isn't that right, mate? ) So for whatever its worth, be assured that someone at least finds your questions worthwhile, intelligent and reasonable.
As much as i agree that the Infinity ruleset is horribly written i do think this case is actually pretty clear. Just look at the skill you are using and you are done with what attribute you use. Unless it is stated somewhere that you can use a different attribute for a skill i assume you don't. (For example the Jammer states you use WIP for its BS Attack). You are totally correct. That's pretty much the point. All weapons where the attributes change for a skill actually state that pretty clearly. Pistols don't. So no change from the Skill description. Also if you really want a RAW explanation why you don't get range modifiers you can check the example under weapon profiles: http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Weapon_Profile#Range "Range Example A Combi Rifle firing against a target at Short Range (from 0.01″ to 8″) applies a +3 MOD to the shooter's BS Attribute. At Medium Range (8.01″ to 16″), it applies a +3 MOD to the shooter's BS. At Long Range (16.01″ to 32″), the Combi applies a -3 MOD to the shooter's BS. Finally, at Maximum Range (32.01″ to 48″), the Combi Rifle applies a -6 MOD to the shooter's BS. Any BS Attack made with this weapon against a target farther than 48 inches fails automatically. " For one it states you only get the mod on the BS attribute. And second the range starts from 0.01" and not from 0". The ranges on the profiles are more or less abreviations. I had to check that once in a game where the troopers where exactly 16" away from each other. Seriously though there is way worse stuff in the Infinity ruleset.
I'm not saying Infinity is a well scripted rule set, I'm saying that fairly often recently you're ignoring the script entirely to try and prove a point. In this case you're figuratively walking backwards, complaining that the fence you just walked into wasn't sign posted in the direction you chose to look. If you read the rules in the order you are declaring things it will be much clearer, because the exceptions and alterations to rules will come in the correct order. Also, pistols are listed under CC Weapons in Army...
I admit this topic is one of the more extreme cases to use as an example of what's unclear. I'm basically trying to add fuel to the fire. The size of the log doesn't matter a whole lot. Maybe I should consider it more, i'll have to think on that. It's amazing how many things players need to keep in mind when reading the rules. For instance, even though it says it modifies the BS attribute, MODs are applied to the relevant attribute, whatever that may be. These things set precedents. So when looking at the CC Attack rules, from the context of the Infinity rules, it seems perfectly reasonable to question whether CB actually means all CC attacks MUST use the CC attribute. I mean, plenty of BS weapons don't use the BS attribute lol. I don't even recall ranges explained that way before. But on the face of it, it's another example of the rules contradicting themselves without a clear indication which is correct. Your assumption, that the profiles are abbreviations, is the same one I'd make. But a good rule set would never force a player to make an assumption to begin with. lol, Another case of things not being consistent is supposed to provide me with more faith in the rules? Things are about to get freaky... I see it differently. Your analogy is based on the context of the real world. Our world has adopted certain rules and we're taught these growing up. Imagine walking around on an Alien Planet. Maybe warnings are on the back of the signs because they all walk backwards. Growing up on that planet you'd be taught to keep an eye out for warning signs as you walk. It is natural for them. Instructions for newcomers might just be to watch out for warning signs. Once a newcomer realized their natural assumption was wrong, they'd be smart to question things they take for granted. Infinity is another new world with it's own rules. On this world not everything is as it appears and the words used don't necessarily mean exactly what they say. Or they make assumptions I wouldn't normally make. Infinity has taught me to second guess everything i think i know. I should add that last line to my sig.
Who said I was trying to fill you with faith and maybe we can't help you understand the rules if your requirements are that they work backwards as well as forwards?
Which is exactly my point, thanks. It's pretty easy to resolve when there is a veteran helping a new player. The trouble of course is for two new players on their own. Or someone checking out the game by themselves thinking about getting into it. The minis got me to look closer at Infinity as a retired Warhammer player. However, I wasn't filled with a lot of confidence when I first started looking at the rules. It required a lot of patience and effort that I don't expect everyone to put in. It's worth a lot, thanks!
I would say the rules set of Infinity is like a highly skilled other who has created a wonderful book, but skipped an editor and sadly as such is full of plot holes and minor contradictions.
Well, we know the rules have issues, but we also know the rules work fairly well when you're willing to jump through its hoops. We're on the forums here to help people find those hoops and discuss how to jump through them. That doesn't mean this is a lobbying platform for a complete rules rewrite or abandonment of the game (can't tell which agenda it is)
He doesn't actually play. So he can't really abandon the game. The only agenda I can see is poisoning the well.
The reality is the small group I play with has moved onto other games. Trying to play now is like pulling teeth. No matter how much I want to play Infinity I completely understand and agree with their decision. As fantastic as the aesthetic and game play is, it's not enough to make up for the foundation of the game, the rules. I decided to move along with them, not much of a choice really, it's not like anyone else in my area/local stores are playing. What does it say about Infinity that some players have the models, location, and understanding to play the game but do not play it? We've already gotten over the major hurdles of learning the game from scratch and making the initial investments. It might be futile of me making a fuss over the rules needing to be changed, but what are my options? Sell my stuff and never look back? Wait and hope CB recognizes the issue? Or try to make a fire big enough they take notice. That fire would look a lot bigger if I persuaded others to do the same, but I'm not going to network and go to those lengths. Those who seem to have a problem with me... do whatever it is you want to do. There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying your very small community the way it is. I'm glad it's working out for you, but don't think for a second it's working out for the majority of people who want to try this game out. CB is free to produce their game however they want. They can make it as niche as they want. I'm simply giving them another perspective to consider. Yeah, I'm an evil viper out to destroy you all... /facepalm
I'm not reading anything inflammatory or divisive in Genrei's objections myself; only frustration at a lack of clarity in the rules, and exasperation at those forum veterans who're highly knowledgable and/or excellent writers but also somehow (to my mind still) failing to fully explain things here. It may be that Genrei's questions are difficult because respondents don't understand what's not clear to him personally, but note that the general educational principle in these situations is that the greatest fault is not with the failing student, but with the failing teachers! What is the problem for those others then please Toadchild, and is it applicable here? I suspect Ginrei's problem is that certain key assumptions about Close Combat that the rulebook hasn't made clear enough (which would hardly be an unusual experience ) Are the following true @veteran_forum_members; and is this sort of clarification any help to you @Ginrei? A trooper can make a Ballistic Skill attack with pistol or other BS weapon in the same Order that CC is begun Once Close Combat has begun, actions in subsequent Orders cannot invoke BS attacks... So when a Pistol is used in CC after the first Order, it's really being used as a club - a primitive CC weapon, and not a BS weapon...
No, this is not grimdark. You open fire with your pistol as your CC attack. This is why you use CC stat and not BS stat (if someone managed to get there, he should be rewarded with your CC10 instead of your BS175+), and because you apply the full damage and ammo of the pistol.
Considering that a knife does PH-1 damage and a Pistol in CC is Dam 11... no you are not pistol whipping with the butt. I mean even dedicated CCW only hit at PH Dam which would be a lowly 10 on a pistol equipped moderator. Doing 11 on pistol whipping really ? But that said, rule wise there is no difference between which ends of a pistol you are imagining using. So if it is easier to consider you are pistol whipping in a CC Attack skill fine with me. I imagine the CC Attacks use of your CC skill is being able to align the barrel of the pistol on the enemy to fire it point blank, which is different than aiming long range using BS skill in BS Attacks.
1. Only if you can do an ARO BS attack, it may not be possible at all (ex stealth ...) 2. True, since being engaged prevent you from doing BS attack 3. No, you try to shoot with it, the only problem is, since you are in melee, you have an opponent who can prevent it by grabbing your arm, tripping you, hitting you ... EDIT: Precision for the 1. IF you are doing a BS ARO attack, you are doing a BS ranged attack vs CC attack as a f2f, that has nothing to do with a CC vs CC f2f. That's why you use your visual/range modifiers, and you can not benefit from skills like MAx (but your opponent can use his skill). You must know if you are doing a BS attack or a CC attack, and refer to the according rules. The pistol can do both, but it's up to you to determine which attack mode is best (or simply available) for you.
I am not sure where or why the issue came up, rules on this particular subject are quite clear. I am sure we could deliver a perfect edition that there is no possibility of misunderstanding what the rules say and it would be a glorious 800 pages of just rules and extensive examples. I fully understand what the OP says, but I would advice against such comments as indenting to make the situation worse (add fuel to fire), gives the belief that there is no intention for a discussion on the subject. I am sure it is not the intent.
I did have the thought the rules would be cleaner if profiles were simply given a CC weapon comparable to that of a pistol in close combat. Which would eliminate this exception of weapon usage altogether. But it has some holes and i have to agree with CB in that the thematic scenes Infinity provides is important. So being able to shoot that pistol in close combat or bludgeon a trooper with it is important and any improvement should reflect that. A pistol profile already shows changes in Burst while in CC. Another inconsistency as far as I'm concerned that the BS/CC changes are not reflected on the profile as well but moving on. The precedent is multi weapons are shown as an extra profile. Something similar for pistols seems a reasonable improvement. All the info should be in one place when selecting your weapon. It would be nice if things like Nanopulsers were obvious they use WIP. I understand they have ammo types to tell us that, but a pistols ammo type is normal so the change to the CC attribute are not there. How do I explain to a new player where the attribute they roll against is found? When making a BS Attack you use the BS attribute... but first check or memorize the ammo types as some do not use BS. Also, don't forget to check the Traits as well, some weapons use PH. For CC Attacks you need a weapon that has the CC Trait. and always use the CC attribute. So ignore the fact pistols, indicated as BS weapons, using the BS attribute to make BS attacks, is actually the CC attribute in these cases. Trying to figure that out from the written rules alone isn't easy. Employ the CC attribute to make CC Attacks doesn't explicitly tell me to override the intuitive instinct a gun using BS sometimes doesn't other times. Games that can be explained simply as... 'this point on the profile' are miles ahead of Infinity. That point can be the attribute or a weapon category, it doesn't matter, as long as there are no exceptions. And as I've said before, i can forgive games that take a different approach and have me memorize many more rules/exceptions than are truly needed. But how many times does Infinity ask us to do this? That argument has been made before, 'the rules would be 800 pages long OMG'. I'm willing to bet the rules would be shorter than they are now, not longer. It's not about adding more words to explain things. It's about clear structure that needs no explanation. It's about eliminating exceptions that are not necessary. It's about removing explanations that are only there because of terrible labels, shared terminology, or simply poor wording. Call it what you like, if adding fuel to the fire is too inflammatory, how about not sticking my head in the sand? That's probably too similar. Maybe addressing areas for improvement within Infinity? I thought I heard it mentioned there was going to be an effort to clear up some rules recently. Can't exactly clear them up if no one points them out. Or is the real problem that it's a sore/tender spot for many here? Where exactly do I discuss these topics if not in the rules forum? Maybe a new subsection would be enough to sweep me under the rug?
Nanopulsers are Direct Template Weapons, they don't use an Attribute at all, except when using Intuitive Attack. You explain it by telling them to look at the Skill that's being declared, with the sole exception of Technical and Thrown Weapons. There are no ammo types that change the Attribute rolled against, just Technical Weapons that replace BS with WIP, and Thrown Weapons that replace BS with PH.
@psychoticstorm I'm fairly sure that an improved version of the rules would not be 800+ pages. There are many cases where a uniform and consistent rules language would reduce the number of words required to adequately explain a rule. I also think it's getting time for CB to seriously consider making a Infinity N3.5 release (not an N4, which would imply major shake-ups, but N3.5 to incorporate a large amount of standalone FAQs into actual rules to plug many of the issues that's been exposed over the years). I'm not under the illusion that it'd be shorter, mostly because Infinity suffers a bit from under-explaining things, but also since certain things such as clarifying Change Facing Shenanigans using a "Tactical Tip" box might be a very good idea. It's just... how to pitch this idea as something positive, you know?
The clearest thing i can think of would be to separate pistol into 2 rows in army. One row for the BS profile, with ranges, burst 2 ... and another row similar to a CCW, with no range mod, burst 1 and the CC trait. But that would then add a row to the weapon list of many units for a very situationnal weapon that can easily be understood by reading the rules.
