Engineered Humans Question

87 posts / 0 new
Last post
Interesting.

I find it odd that they would rule this, but also state specifically that it doesnt stack with your other origin's bonus.

I can see the RAI here, of course - they're basically saying that if you're an EH then you just get a flat +2 to everything instead of the normal single +2. But the rules definitely don't seem to imply that at all to me. I see them as RAW either being

A) You don't get it unless you pick it
B) The aforementioned +2 / +6 /+2 type stuff.

Either of those are legitimate interpretations at extreme ends. This CS ruling seems to heavily imply they need some major errata. Oh well, not like thats unusual for WotC, lol. I guess I can use that in my game. Not that any of my players are likely to want to play an EH.
This reminds me more and more of the Commander's Strike issue early on in 4e.  There was a wild idea that it had unlimitted range.  On a couple of occassions, a carefully-crafted question to CS got a response that supported that position.  WotC finally put the answer in the FAQ, but never actually updated it. 

I don't think GW really calls for that level of commitment either from WotC or from it's fans.  It's just a much more casual game.


I agree with Chandrak that the valid interpretations of RAW (so far) are the two extremes, which is amusing.  But, then, RAW so often is amusing in it's Murphy's-Rules-like absolutism.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

I asked how the +2 overcharge bonus for EH works, since EH both has no origin and is virtually always a secondary origin, and specifically referred to the passage on pg 34.


Can we see the exact text of what was asked, and what was said in response please?
AlexandraErin: If last season was any indication, I think Encounters is pretty much the elemental opposite of "organized" play!
Just got my Gamma World book, and this issue jumped right out at me.

Very confusing, seemingly mostly through editing.

I agree with whoever says it seemingly looks like EH went through revisions and it wasn't cleaned up.

Pretty irritating considering 80% of the book is just reused 4e rules.



I hope ExcalibursZ pops in to tell me how stupid I am.
Did we ever get a conclusive OFFICIAL ERRATA answer to this?

I just got the game today, and it immediately confused me.

After reading this thread, and rereading the rules, this is how I'm interpreting it:

Show

1. EH, when rolled, is specifically a SECOND origin, but not necessarily the SECONDARY origin. (p30 & p34)

2. EH has no power source, but gets +2 to all overcharge rolls. (p56)

I don't see Primary and Secondary origins coming into play otherwise, so I would safely assume that if you rolled for EH, it doesn't matter which is your Primary or Secondary origin.

The only time (that I can tell, again I just got the game) the PRIMARY origin comes into play is when determining the Primary Power Source for standard overcharging Alpha Power rolls. (p34 & p67)

I would interpret that as meaning that EH's get +2 to ALL overcharge - overriding the "Primary" origin. Although I don't specifically see that as written, i see feel like that was the intent. And according to one reply, what CS also concluded (Assuming CS means Customer Service.)







Also, does RAI stand for Rules As Interpreted? Or Rules As Intended?)
Rules As Intended.

Not a lot of respect for 'interpretation' among the RAW/I crowd, ironically enough...


Your interpretation is fine.  You're taking the specific rule presented under the EH and giving it precedence over all other rules about overcharge bonuses, in all cases where EH is involved.   The other origins are technically just as specific, but EH does have 'obvious exception' written  (OK, implied) all over it.  ;)
 

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!