[ASLML] Re: The disappearing DRM caper

[Sean]

At 5:11 PM +1100 12/2/03, Bruce Probst wrote:
>when it should actually be read as:
>
>- Subsequent First Fire
>- FPF
>- Final Fire vs adjacent units
>
>See the difference?  Once you correct your erroneous interpretation of how
>the sentence is read, I think you'll find that it's all perfectly
>consistent.

Uhhhh Bruce,

Your interpretation now says FPF might be possible against 
non-adjacent units. After all, we know that all First Fired units may 
only FPF or Final Fire at Adjacent units. Now, I think you have the 
right intent of the rule (HS that fires SW and is now marked First 
Fired may SFF, FPF or Final Fire it's IFP per normal restrictions) 
but, I'm not so sure that's what the rule says. I'm NRBH at the momen 
so, relying on your quote of the rule for this, will check it later.

Sean