New Posts For Thread: Engineered Humans Questionhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26024213/Engineered_Humans_QuestionAlright, so the only way you get to be an Engineered Human with the base rules (so no picking) is if your Second Origin Roll = First Origin Roll (pg 34), thus making your second origin as Engineered Human.The only modifiers to using an overcharge poRules 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 overchargehttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26024213/Engineered_Humans_Question?post_id=475434073#475434073Rules 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 overchargeWed, 24 Nov 2010 02:19:25 -0600Did 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:Spoiler: Show 1. EH, when rolled, is sphttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26024213/Engineered_Humans_Question?post_id=475429821#475429821Did 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:Spoiler: Show 1. EH, when rolled, is spWed, 24 Nov 2010 00:33:06 -0600Just 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 80http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26024213/Engineered_Humans_Question?post_id=473138989#473138989Just 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 80Fri, 05 Nov 2010 23:54:24 -0500Can we see the exact text of what was asked, and what was said in response please?http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26024213/Engineered_Humans_Question?post_id=472816473#472816473Can we see the exact text of what was asked, and what was said in response please?Wed, 03 Nov 2010 14:58:24 -0500This 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 fihttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26024213/Engineered_Humans_Question?post_id=472810129#472810129This 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 fiWed, 03 Nov 2010 14:14:51 -0500