Quick question on Fear

[Zensyntax]

Just started playing Dark Age with a buddy, and we have really been enjoying it.

A question came up during our last game, and we could use some help.

A Hoodoo activates and moves near a group of coils that are on hold. The Hoodoo is close enough that the coils would be subject to his Fear. Do the Coils become subject to the fear when they use their on hold action to shoot the Hoodoo, or do they only become subject to fear during their next activation? What happens if the coils kill the Hoodoo with the ranged shots from on hold?

Thanks!

[Galyn]

[sigh] This may be another head turner... (New blood is GREAT! You folks always find the stuff everyone else has taken for granted for years.)

As Written...

Getting the Jump, RA-From Hold, or Evading do not count as the Unit's activation.

Units that Activate within the 10cm radius of a Fear-Causing Unit, or Units that move into the Fear radius must immediately make a Fear Test.

By Rule then:
"Get the Jump" and "RA from Hold" would not trigger a Fear Check. "Evade" from Hold, however would (as it is Movement)

[FYI: Oldbies may have noticed -- I *always* rule by purely the game as written, until Errata'ed. Even if I think it an oversight. ;) ]

---

As to the second question: if the Fear Causing Unit is no longer on the table, there is no Fear Causing Unit within 10 cm when they activate. [You don't give them a Fear Token until/unless they fail a Fear test -- They never even take one.]

[gunslinger]

[sigh]
[FYI: Oldbies may have noticed -- I *always* rule by purely the game as written, until Errata'ed. Even if I think it an oversight. ;) ]

---

I would expect you to do nothing less and would rather pissed off if you did it any other way. Nothing chaps my ass more than RAW vs RAI (rules as written vs rules as intended).

[poet]

[sigh]
[FYI: Oldbies may have noticed -- I *always* rule by purely the game as written, until Errata'ed. Even if I think it an oversight. ;) ]

---

I would expect you to do nothing less and would rather pissed off if you did it any other way. Nothing chaps my ass more than RAW vs RAI (rules as written vs rules as intended).

I actually prefer rules as intended

[gunslinger]

the intention of the rules should be inherently part of the rules as written. DA spend alot of time hashing out verbage so that rules as written is exactly what is intended. Where those issues get overlooked and there in a conflict, our playtest teams etc and competent staff fix it so that as written = as intended.

because let me ask you. how does the individual with the book know what the intention of the staff is? quite frankly the answer to that is that they don't. it's the staff (and the DA staff do a bang up job here) that must let their intention be known.

[mr_sad]

I am actually the other side of this question posed by Zensyntax. I was running the Hoodoo.

I agree with Gunslinger that the rules should be played as written until otherwise errated. And that is the way I am going to play it.

However.. I think perhaps this rule may not have been truly intended or perhaps just never happened in play testing.

IMO...If the Hoodoo causes fear, just because the Coils were waiting for something to happen doesn

[poet]

the intention of the rules should be inherently part of the rules as written. DA spend alot of time hashing out verbage so that rules as written is exactly what is intended. Where those issues get overlooked and there in a conflict, our playtest teams etc and competent staff fix it so that as written = as intended.

because let me ask you. how does the individual with the book know what the intention of the staff is? quite frankly the answer to that is that they don't. it's the staff (and the DA staff do a bang up job here) that must let their intention be known.

I agree, the rules should be played as they are written.
But if the staff says something on the lines of... well, basically what DA_Galyn did...
The rules work like so and so right now but we will look into it.
I feel much better about it, unlike in other game companies where you get:
The rule works this way, deal with it.

And of course the way DA_Galyn answered means that if we, as players, were so inclined we could try out a hosue rule knowing that was the intention of the person writing the rules, and possibly helping out with making the rule better.

[gunslinger]

However.. I think perhaps this rule may not have been truly intended or perhaps just never happened in play testing..

I think I was still playtesting when the Hoodoo was introduced and I didn't specifically have that situation, but I do remember the discussion being brought up. Of course, we have gone through staff changes and original intention and current intention can change as well.

DA has been very good are revisiting rules that seem to confuse people. However, there are many cases, where that result (confusing as it might be to some) is exactly the way it was intended.

Galyn has the current final say in most rules questions (I think he does anyways), so it's always best to default the question to him. and you should always keep a notepad handy in order to right down those extremely odd cases that might have been overlooked even with many playtest sessions.

[bj]

Galyn has the current final say in most rules questions (I think he does anyways),
and bj too

so it's always best to default the question to him.
or me, Galyn is most active in the mornings, I'm more active on the boards in the late afternoon and evenings. If a situation arises that demands imediate attention before Galyn can get in on the morning I'll step in, but we tend to discuss hard topics in the Dev section from time to time.

[gunslinger]

my apologies BJ, I didn't mean to overlook you..

[bj]

:wink: