Too Powerful or Too Weak?

[Greg Smith]

One of the reasons the Demos was downgraded in P&P was because it could spend every other turn on CBD.

Now I can certainly agree, that there is a very good reason to say SL and OS don't count as weapons for CBD purposes, but I don't know anyone who plays it that way.

 

[katadder]

its something I pushed for ither in 2e testing or P&P testing, cant remember which, probably P&P testing as a fix for the demos.

 

[Greg Smith]

There was a suggestion that disallowing SL weapons from reloading when CBD was in place, which was a good one too.

 

[Democratus]

What criticism do you mean? Around here, at least, the Demos can't fire its Ion Cannon on CBD while the Torpedoes are offline. Likewise, it can't use the torpedoes to contribute to the Hunting Pack if they are unable to fire.

"Around here" clearly equates to house rule. I'm talking about the rules as written - house rules are a completely different kettle of fish.

All people playing the game play by "house rules" because everyone must play in the way they interpret the rules. There is no absolute truth because people must read and understand the words in the books.

Playing devils advocate here, because as I said before in general I agree in principle with your house rule, but who is to say that your interpretation is any more or less valid than any other?

See above. You are also using house rules - which is any interpretation that you and your friends use when playing.

The point is, when there is a disagreement, you must go back to the original source material to seek clarity and at no point does the rule book ever say that a O/S weapon system ceases to be a weapon system. It just says that "it may not be used for the rest of the game" - which is also a clear implication that it still has a valid existence.

At no point does the book define what it means for a ship be "with" a weapon system. A ship can be have a weapon system per page 4 of the rule book. But the word "with" is never used. So, by the same uber-strict technical reading no ship in the game is "with" a weapon system (one or more).

At some point you have to simply use reason to interpret what such things mean. If a ship that "has" a weapon system looses it to a critical - it is entirely reasonable to conclude that the ship is no longer "with" that weapon system. Once could also conclude that this ship is still "with" the weapon system if desired. Both are equally valid interpretations that are not further helped by text in the rulebook.

As an aside, CBD is a very poor rule in the first place!

Agreed. Most of the special rules are poorly written - and use different verbiage than the other parts of the book. For example, what the heck is a ship's "turn rate"?

 

[Taran]

I can't say anything about anyone's House Rules. I can only speak on the rules I have played under. Those with most import would be the ones from MavenCon '08, which was run by Mongoose officials.
OS weapons, once fired, did not count as weapons for the purpose of CBD. SL did.
A year ago, just before the P&P "expansion," Democratus, the Demos was still being criticized as too powerful, in large part because of the Torpedoes and how SL interacts with CBD.
At the same time, there was no discussion about how OS weapons interact with CBD because it was generally accepted that OS weapons, once fired, don't count.

 

[Greg Smith]

Are there any ships currently where OS would be an issue on CBD. I can't think of one.

 

[Digger]

Doesn't the Ka'Tan have a one-shot E-Mine?

 

[AdrianH]

Yes, but it also has plenty of other weapons so that when it declares CBD, it doesn't care whether the energy mine counts as a weapon after firing. The same applies to the G'Quan. Those 8" range guns have a use after all.

Personally I'd have thought that a one-shot weapon which is out of ammo does still count as a weapon for the purposes of CBD, and perhaps more importantly, for the purposes of random weapon selection when determining which weapon was knocked out by a critical. The launcher or cannon is still there, it's just empty. The fire control system is still there. The crew for the weapon is also still there so, having nothing better to do, they can help with the closing of blast doors while another weapon crew sticks to its guns. Likewise a weapon which has been knocked out by a vital systems critical and will never be repaired for the rest of the game still counts.

 

[Digger]

I agree with AdrianH - Just because the gun isn't loaded, you still have a gun in your hand! :?

And if your ship arrives at a Space Station, chances are it would be reloaded.

I think it still counts when applying Crits and CBD!

 

[Burger]

Greg is clearly correct, it is still a weapon. Just because it is reloading or fired its load or taken a crit, it still counts as a weapon.

But yes I would probably support changing the CBD rules to read one usable weapon system. Although, that could cause problems if you put a ship on CBD and all but one of its weapons gets taken out by a crit before it gets to fire!

 

[Taran]

Greg is clearly correct, it is still a weapon. Just because it is reloading or fired its load or taken a crit, it still counts as a weapon.

But yes I would probably support changing the CBD rules to read one usable weapon system. Although, that could cause problems if you put a ship on CBD and all but one of its weapons gets taken out by a crit before it gets to fire!

That's a risk you run.

 

[Triggy]

Greg is clearly correct, it is still a weapon. Just because it is reloading or fired its load or taken a crit, it still counts as a weapon.

But yes I would probably support changing the CBD rules to read one usable weapon system. Although, that could cause problems if you put a ship on CBD and all but one of its weapons gets taken out by a crit before it gets to fire!

I'm with this ruling too and also agreeing with the majority that there is scope for a house rule saying that OS and SL weapons (and destroyed weapons) not counting for the purposes of CBD.

For that matter, when rolling for loss of weapons with a critical, just because the weapon has been destroyed already doesn't mean it isn't eligable to be destroyed by another critical. The weapon can be repaired and nobody complains when people roll multiple speed crits that are the same type!

 

[Greg Smith]

[For that matter, when rolling for loss of weapons with a critical, just because the weapon has been destroyed already doesn't mean it isn't eligable to be destroyed by another critical. The weapon can be repaired and nobody complains when people roll multiple speed crits that are the same type!

I concur. The same applies to trait loss.