Discussion in 'Solved Rule Questions' started by ObviousGray, Apr 22, 2019.
More important to break logic than let Tohaa not be the most competitive faction, I guess.
So... that means that you don’t need to use Symbiomates against Flash Pulse.
Which gets back to the used vs cancelled argument.
I still argue that benefiting from TI is making use of Symbiomates.
And because of recursive logic loop, if you don’t use Symbiomates vs Flash Pulse then you must use Symbiomates versus Flash Pulse. The only way to break that loop is to conclude that using Tai granted by a Mate isn’t actually using a Mate.
Gods that's tortuous, please @HellLois errata this to add an example of a ‘Mated Trooper getting hit by a Flash Pulse.
I can see both sides of the interpretation. I think they really needed an extra example in the book that showed just a non-lethal weapon being used.
Does switching the hyphens to a more usual comma help at all? I’m not sure it does at this point.
“When a trooper in the Active Symbiont Armor state with a SymbioMate suffers a successful Attack, or is affected by any weapon or rule, that forces any ARM or BTS Rolls”
I believe the intention is not:
“When a trooper in the Active Symbiont Armor state with a SymbioMate either:
A) suffers a successful Attack
B) is affected by any weapon or rule that forces any ARM or BTS Rolls
It’s certainly not the best piece of writing in the world but I’m not sure it’s quite at “this statement is false” levels of paradox. It feels like the grammatical equivalent of this:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Spoiler: Possibly an easier to read format for SymbioMates
During the Deployment Phase, a SymbioMate is assigned to a trooper possessing Symbiont Armor and is placed in base to base contact with that trooper on the game table.
This piece of Equipment is not applied when facing a Hacking or Comms Attack.
A SymbioMate provides its user in the Active Symbiont Armor state an ARM and BTS value of 9—replacing the ARM and BTS values of the user's Troop Profile—and it also provides the Total Immunity Special Skill.
When a trooper in the Active Symbiont Armor state with a SymbioMate suffers a successful Attack—or is affected by any weapon or rule—that forces it to make an ARM or BTS Roll, the SymbioMate will be removed from the game table at the end of the Order.
Your recommended wording?
Because yeah, that's far clearer to work the way rule if it's the way that's intended.
I didn't actually change much. I just removed double information and moved the bullet point about hacking and comms up.
And from multiple threads and posts discussing it already this is how it is intended to play.
The fact that there *is* double information honestly suggests that this rule was changed somewhere through the design process and not playtested properly.
I don't think that's a reasonable conclusion. I think it's more reasonable to conclude it wasn't allowed to be proofread properly.
I'm just happy that my interpretation in that previous thread isn't totally insane.
You also need to look at the interaction with Crits and how that would be effected if you don't have constant TI while the Mate is active.
Say I crit with EXP ammo against a unit with a mate. If you only get the TI when "use" the mate how would you handle it. The Crit means you take 1 wound and roll 2 ARM twice. Because you are rolling the Mate would activate (in the old sense). Now you would gain TI and not need to make the other two rolls meaning you didn't need to activate the Mate creating an oroboros-like situation. With TI constant you take the wound, but do not lose the mate due to making ARM/BTS rolls (though possibly due to losing Symbiont Armor). It is a much cleaner interaction and fits with the rulings that have been given.
I think if it wasn't proofread the odds of it being playtested properly are low.
I would look at it the other way. They wrote the rule down then played it and realized it needed to be changed. Added the changes to the rules without looking at the whole rule.
I guess I'm more cynical than you. Also, my first reaction to hearing about the SymbioMate changes was "Sweet, Flash pulses knock them off without the chance to pass a BTS roll!"
Then seeing this leads me to believe they're still very much set on SymbioMates not having counterplay, which is... why people didn't like them in the first place.
I think you mean no counterplay other than a dice roll. Which is still a step up from before.
Well before you could always crit.
Now a ML crit doesn't toast the unit, so...
Crits and the new Mates could use some looking at for sure. Hence the thread I started that was quickly hijacked to talk about this topic.
I don't think that they just didn't playtest rules or that they made completely thoughtless edits. But playtesters and proofreaders aren't always the same thing, and playtest feedback is going to be based on how the playtester interpreted the rule. For some hypothetical badly written rule, for example, it could be possible to get feedback from two independent playtest groups, one which thought it was way too strong and another which thought it wasn't good enough, because they took opposite interpretations of the text.
I'm not specifically defending CB's rule-writing process or playtesting process, as I don't know much about either of them. But I think that statements that things just weren't tested are probably inaccurate and seem kind of reductive.
SymbioMate and Total Immunity and a few others read to me like they wrote the rules continuously while playtesting.
They're structured like they are written as a single paragraph that was then split up into bullet points instead of writing out the logic as bullet points first.
I find this semi-return to N2 way of writing rules disheartening, as it gets messy and hard to read when pressed for time, and I hope CB will allow for a bit more work restructuring the rules before publication in the future.