[SF]Possible misunderstanding/Misphrasing on Reload Weapons!

[Halfbat]

Hi
Having made an assumption about the Reload SA, I was introducing another friend to SF and noticed the phrasing may not quite be what I expected which, in turn, led to two completely different interpretations. The RAW says that reloaded weapons can be used in "any subsequent turn". It also says that weapon systems cannot be reloaded in the same turn they're fired.

The possible misunderstanding arose as SAs have to be made in the Move Phase - so the weapons are ready and reloaded - for the Attack Phase immediately following in this turn. Taken literally, this phrasing ("subsequent turn") means that reloaded weapons cannot be fired in the Attack Phase of the same turn they are reloaded.

Is this what was intended? Do reloaded weapons really have to wait a turn and not fire in the same turn they were reloaded?

As a Klingon-ophile, I really hope so, as it means that any damaged ship is easy prey for two turns of Photon Torpedoes in succession wince!


-------
If so, should the last line of the Reload Weapons! actually be phrased more like "Weapon Systems cannot be fired in the same turn they are reloaded". The difference may seem slight, but is actually much more in keeping with what the sequence of events actually is. It's almost as if the first phrasing theorised SAs being made after an attack...

Hope you're watching, Matt!

Cheers, all.

 

[McKinstry]

Hi
Is this what was intended? Do reloaded weapons really have to wait a turn and not fire in the same turn they were reloaded?

Yes. If you choose the Reload special action during your movement in the turn and for the remainder of that turn, including firing, you may not fire that weapon. It applies to both photons and plasmas and is also an energy drain.

 

[Keeper Nilbog]

Mainly down to plasma users, i would think - not usual to have a loaded torpedeo (usual F-type) whilst reloading. As it's a seperate weapon entry, it should be able to fire. Photon's are generally a single entry, so either load or fire system.

 

[archon96]

however an infired plasma is a different weapon. each weapon line represents a different weapon system. so if you stagger fire youre plasmas then you can fire one while reloading the other.

 

[Icarus]

If I remember my original SFB it took 2 turns to load a Photon, you could NOT fire them every turn, which would be the consiquence of the other interpretation.

 

[Ben2]

You are correct, reload weapons cannot be fired in the turn they are reloaded.

Turn 1 - Fire

Turn 2 - Reload

Turn 3 - Fire

Like so.

 

[The Big D]

Hi
Having made an assumption about the Reload SA, I was introducing another friend to SF and noticed the phrasing may not quite be what I expected which, in turn, led to two completely different interpretations. The RAW says that reloaded weapons can be used in "any subsequent turn". It also says that weapon systems cannot be reloaded in the same turn they're fired.

The possible misunderstanding arose as SAs have to be made in the Move Phase - so the weapons are ready and reloaded - for the Attack Phase immediately following in this turn. Taken literally, this phrasing ("subsequent turn") means that reloaded weapons cannot be fired in the Attack Phase of the same turn they are reloaded.

Is this what was intended? Do reloaded weapons really have to wait a turn and not fire in the same turn they were reloaded?

As a Klingon-ophile, I really hope so, as it means that any damaged ship is easy prey for two turns of Photon Torpedoes in succession wince!

Yep thats right. after a reload action they may fire on a subsequent turn but not the same turn.

-------
If so, should the last line of the Reload Weapons! actually be phrased more like "Weapon Systems cannot be fired in the same turn they are reloaded". The difference may seem slight, but is actually much more in keeping with what the sequence of events actually is. It's almost as if the first phrasing theorised SAs being made after an attack...

Hope you're watching, Matt!

Cheers, all.

This gets a little more confusing than the other way round. It is less noticable on federation ships where other then the BCJ they each have only one weapon with the reload trait. Romulans and Gorns have many and it is with these that the true meaning of the rule becomes apparent.

As it stands a ship may have 2 (or more) reload weapons. The KR for instance has 2 plasma S. Say, for example, 1 is fired on turn 1 and now needs a reload action to fire again. The other has not so is able to fire. Turn 2 the reload special action is used. The second plasma is fired in the shooting phase of turn 2. On turn 3 The first plasma is able to fire as it was subject to a reload action in turn 2. The second plasma S cannot fire as although a reload action was used last turn it was also fired last turn so did not benefit from the action was not 'reloaded'.

The alternate phrasing, while actually little different as 'reloaded' is not a defined term in the rules, could lead to other problems. The ship in the above example taking a "reload weapons!" action on turn 2 could be argued that it could not fire either plasma on turn 2 as the were both reloading or could both fire on turn 3 as a reload weapons action was performed last turn. It's all a bit vague really and could go either way on both versions. It really needs a definition of 'reloaded' to work without ambiguity.
Perhaps a simple addition to the second sentence of the reload trait "After that they will need to be reloaded by performing a Reload Weapons! special action. Once reloaded they may fire again."

It does seem that some rules may have been razored to bring the word count/sentences to the absolute minimum, that 'fired again' is used rather than simply defining 'reload/reloaded' in the rules in another sentence.

Geoff

 

[Halfbat]

That seems to be an obvious concensus.

 

[H]

is reload a SA, or just a weapon specific action then?

 

[Iain McGhee]

It's an SA, with Power Drain.

 

[H]

It's an SA, with Power Drain.

i'd shoot the designers for that one!

"what do you mean, after using our primary weapon it doesn't have an autoreloader, and drains our power systems....."

 

[tneva82]

It's an SA, with Power Drain.

i'd shoot the designers for that one!

"what do you mean, after using our primary weapon it doesn't have an autoreloader, and drains our power systems....."

Well at least you aren't drifting in space next turn *cough*victory*cough*

Enemies of feds would be screaming bloody murder if they DIDN'T take reload.

 

[GalagaGalaxian]

It's an SA, with Power Drain.

i'd shoot the designers for that one!

"what do you mean, after using our primary weapon it doesn't have an autoreloader, and drains our power systems....."

The game designers took the ball of Kirk always shouting at Scotty for "More Power!" and ran with it. Power is a vital commodity on starships! :lol:

 

[Greg Smith]

[
Power is a vital commodity on starships! :lol:

And rare too!

 

[nekomata fuyu]

It's almost as if the power core has a single plug socket, and the chief engineer has to keep swapping out plugs depending on what the Captain orders.

"Skitty! We need those torpedoes reloaded NOW!"
"But Cap'ain, that would mean unplugging the engines!"

 

[AdrianH]

Someone needs to physically put something back into the weapon. Whether it's a projectile for a film-style torpedo, a light-bulb for a TOS-style torpedo, or glowy liquid for a plasma bolt, some engineers have to open a hatch and put it in. While they're doing that, they're not running on the treadmill which powers the rest of the ship. One alternative is to get gunners to do the loading, which is why you can't fire all your weapons. In particular, you can get the torpedo gunners to load the torpedo, which is why you can only fire phasers - the phaser gunners have an easy life and are excused from heavy lifting duties.

 

[GalagaGalaxian]

Except when the phaser-control room fills with toxic gasses! Which TOS episode was that again?

 

[tneva82]

Except when the phaser-control room fills with toxic gasses! Which TOS episode was that again?

Balance of terror?