[Aslml] Falling Rubble and Bridge/Gully

[Bruce Bakken]

>
>Sure there is...the bridge catches the rubble. I see nothing in the rule 
>that specifically notes that rubble continues to fall through multiple 
>locations:
>"24.121 Falling rubble transforms any non-Water Obstacle terrain it falls 
>on into a rubble counter..."
>

"... at ground level".  Which for a Gully, whether bridged or not, is -1.  
This rule suggests that a Rubble counter is placed in the Gully, i.e. under 
the bridge.

>This says terrain not hex. The rubble fell on the bridge terrain getting a 
>rubble counter.

Ah yes, the EXC at the end:  "bridges remain intact but with a rubble 
counter on top".  Interesting.

>Technically if your view of the rule is correct (which it probably is) the 
>bridge should have a rubble counter on it and the gully underneath should 
>have a seperate counter. There is no allowance for a single rubble counter 
>to exist in two seperate location. However, the rule doesn't say that.
>

The only reference to placing Rubble on a bridge is this EXC.  It is dicey, 
because it does not say that both Locations in such a case receive a Rubble 
counter.

Perhaps it could be interpreted that the first part of the rule instructs us 
to place a Rubble counter in the Gully, and then the EXC acts as instruction 
to also place a Rubble counter on the Bridge.  I don't know.

It would be odd to place only Rubble counter...  Interesting.

By the way, that whole penultimate sentence in B24.121 is jacked.

To Whit: "The movement costs and TEM of rubble" (the subject) "replace" 
(verb) "whatever terrain was previously present" (the object).  The subject 
and object do not agree.  You are not replacing the terrain, you are 
replacing the "movement costs and TEM" of that terrain.  The reason my 
assertion is true is reinforced by the last sentence of B24.71: "... the 
rubble and the TB are removed."  Remove the rubble and what remains?  The 
terrain that was previously there, of course, along with that terrain's 
restored movement costs and TEM.

So if the sentence is wrong, to what does the EXC refer?  "Bridges remain 
intact" does not address itself as an exception to "movement costs and TEM". 
  Is it an exception to "whatever terrain was previously present"?  Yet we 
just established that this phrase does not agree to the subject of the 
sentence, and is therefore incorrect.  Therefore, the EXC is not even 
required in the first place, since it does not "except" _anything_.  If the 
intention is to inform the player that bridges are not destroyed by falling 
rubble and should have a rubble counter placed on it, it is sorely misplaced 
in this spot.

Which still leaves the problem of where to place the Rubble counter...  
Personally, I would use two as you suggested, though I don't think I could 
back that up.

Regards,
Bruce "ranting about writing again" Bakken

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Shopping upgraded for the holidays!  Snappier product search... 
http://shopping.msn.com