Discussion in 'Rules' started by Hachiman Taro, May 8, 2020.
Example of Climb 1 on page 40 is pretty unambiguous.
Yeah, I agree what's supposed to be going on. I'm just saying that the image doesn't match the text.
The image shows an S2 Trooper using C+ to Move 4" up a 3" high building, if you apply the visual language we've been taught over preceding pages.
That green lines shows measured movement in literally every image that isn't about Climb.
The N3 Climb images (which Nazroth posted an example of) are a better visual match for the Code One rules.
If you want to show the 4" is building height and the difference between full base path and that value, it should look like this. The 4" should be orange as well, but I couldn't be bothered to do the pixels.
That's showing a 4" move not a 4" high building. The building is less than 3" high.
Basically, that diagram is actually correct. It's the Climb diagrams that are wrong.
I agree the text of the example is relatively unambiguous, but:
1) The diagram accompanying it isnt, and can easily be read to contradict it.
2) The actual non example rules text can easily be read to contradict it
As I said, I think it would be better if Code 1 & N4 did not have examples contradicting and / or correcting a reasonable reading of the actual rules text, rather than just demonstrating and clarifying it.
At least one (very experienced with the rules) poster in this thread already read that text as simply poorly expressed and not intended to mean what it actually says in the context of the rest. And others thought it worked a different way than it apparently does.
It could and would be better if it were expressed more clearly and consistently overall.