- Aug 16, 2004
- Reaction score
- In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
- First name
I understand what you are saying but I am curious why such a question was asked in the first place. Rather than trying to invent new rules we should be applying COWTRA and RAW (rules as written).Are you discounting the 1st edition Q&A that Klas quoted above? (Not sarcasm, just an honest question.)...
C3.74 Resolution vs Multiple Targets: Regardless of the number of targets in a Location struck by a CH, the special provisions of a CH apply only to the target(s) determined by Random Selection. Attacks on other units hit in that Location are resolved as if struck by a normal hit [EXC: If a CH is obtained vs a vehicle, the vehicle always receives the CH and any other units affected Collaterally are attacked normally; D0.8]. If using the Area Target Type or OBA, and more than one occupied Location is hit, use Random Selection to determine the occupied Location in which the CH occurs.
The underlined clauses IMO support treating those two categories of targets separately.
In a similar vein, I would argue that units receiving different DRMs are also receiving different concentrations of a blast, and that the same logic should apply there too. (I can't prove it by quoting a rule, but I think the argument I'm making is fair.)...
Rule A.5 is unambiguous:
Whenever an attack (italics are mine) is made against multiple defending units, if a modifier applies to some but not all defending units, that attack is made with only one DR by applying the appropriate DRM only to those units - thus getting two or more Final DR from the same Original DR....
Rule A7.4 is also unambiguous and clear:
"Except during Defensive First Fire (8.1), all Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable -PRC in the same Location are considered targets of fire that does not have to specify a particular target, with the outcome of such fire affecting all those enemy (or Melee) units in the target Location
I do not see any scope for not applying A7.301 and there exists no exception absolving other units in the hex within Chapter A or within the CH rules (C.3.71 and C3.74). I went line-by-line through all the pertinent rule sections, there is no relief.
The only time a fire attack does not affect all units in a hex is during the movement phase. As we all know, in this case only the moving units are affected.
Together the two rules clearly explain applying the affects of attacks on the IFT:
- one Original DR is made to affects on the IFT and this DR may generate more than one result, from #KIA to PTC.
- during the PFPh, DFPh and AFPh "all Personnel-units/unarmored-vehicles/Vulnerable-PRC" in a Location are considered a target of an attack that does not need to specify a target.
I suspect the question arose from a player not liking the risks imposed on him caused by stacking powerful units together and/or concentrating their firepower.
The solution is do not stack. The solution is to be extremely careful with units possessing FTs,.... and so on.
Why not ignore VBM freeze as too deadly? In fact, why not dumb down any other host of rules that impose risks on the players?
If a player makes bad choices and gets hurt, this is not the fault of the IFT or the rules as written.