Essential and Missing Cross References

[Pyth]

I'm hoping to start something a little bit like "One Thing About...." -- a useful collection of information that isn't always at the ready. I have this bad (good?) habit of double-checking and second guessing myself on rules I already know, looking things up and rereading the entry, "just to make sure" (and every now and then it's, "oh shizzle I've been playing it wrong..."). Doing this I time and again I find myself looking for a rule I know exists but can't seem to find. It's usually buried in a non-intuitive cross reference. Sometimes it isn't indexed or cross referenced at all. A10.5 Routing for example contains a call out to [EXC: Surrender:20.21] and that EXC contains essential routing logic. I've got that EXC circled and "Surrender 20.21 is part of rout logic" noted in the margins of the RB. When I'm double-checking (for the 10 millionth time) the Routing rules I want to make sure I'm using 20.21. (God help me I don't want to have to wade into the comprehensive example!) That's an essential Xref, but at least it's there in the RB. The one's that REALLY hang me up are the Xrefs that don't exist at all. Here's a rule everyone knows: Leaders and heroes are elite. No, I shouldn't need to look that up.... but I want to... so where is that in the rule book? Ok I realize +50% of this forum already knows and is thinking "except Partisans!" but pretend you don't the answer: it's not in Leadership. It's not in Elite it's not in Heroes and it's not in the index at all, not even under the correct subject header in the index. The rule of course is found in A1.11 SMC. Would it really have been too much trouble to say, in the hero rules, "Like leaders, heroes are elite status"? Yes. Yes it would. But it would not have been too much trouble for 15.2 Heroes to say: A hero is represented by a SMC [1.11] with a Strength factor 1-4-9."then at least there's a chance of going to SMC to find the rule (But, alas, the Xref isn't there.)

I feel like the essential xrefs are fairly common. The missing cross-refs (a debatable category I admit) a good bit rarer... but does anyone have any other examples of rules that for whatever reason seem exceptionally hard to look-up?

 

[Robin Reeve]

The Index really helps to regroup references on a given topic.
I often go there first, when I have a rules question.

 

[djohannsen]

> "...it's not in Leadership. It's not in Elite it's not in Heroes and it's not in the index at all, not even under the correct subject header in the index."

As a novice, this is the aspect of the rulebook that I find most frustrating. I would love to see the size of the index tripled. Alternately, as much as I hate electronic documents, a fully searchable rulebook would certainly help to alleviate this difficulty.

 

[Robin Reeve]

It is under Nationality Distinctions, A25.24 Partisans.
Quite a logical place to find it.
One should note a "nationality's" specific rules when one wants to play it.

 

[jrv]

If all the noobs can figure find things in the ASLRB, I can't pad my record anymore. It's a bad, bad idea. What I really need is a way to make things invisible in the ASLRB until I point them out.

JR

 

[klasmalmstrom]

If all the noobs can figure find things in the ASLRB, I can't pad my record anymore. It's a bad, bad idea. What I really need is a way to make things invisible in the ASLRB until I point them out.

Noted for the 3rd Edition.

 

[jrv]

Even better: if I could switch between a number of options, depending on my current needs.

JR

 

[jrv]

BTW, there have been lists in the past. They usually come up in the middle of other threads rather than being in a thread on their own, so I don't have a good suggestion on how to find them.

JR

 

[Ric of The LBC]

I'm hoping to start something a little bit like "One Thing About...." -- a useful collection of information that isn't always at the ready. I have this bad (good?) habit of double-checking and second guessing myself on rules I already know, looking things up and rereading the entry, "just to make sure" (and every now and then it's, "oh shizzle I've been playing it wrong..."). Doing this I time and again I find myself looking for a rule I know exists but can't seem to find. It's usually buried in a non-intuitive cross reference. Sometimes it isn't indexed or cross referenced at all. A10.5 Routing for example contains a call out to [EXC: Surrender:20.21] and that EXC contains essential routing logic. I've got that EXC circled and "Surrender 20.21 is part of rout logic" noted in the margins of the RB. When I'm double-checking (for the 10 millionth time) the Routing rules I want to make sure I'm using 20.21. (God help me I don't want to have to wade into the comprehensive example!) That's an essential Xref, but at least it's there in the RB. The one's that REALLY hang me up are the Xrefs that don't exist at all. Here's a rule everyone knows: Leaders and heroes are elite. No, I shouldn't need to look that up.... but I want to... so where is that in the rule book? Ok I realize +50% of this forum already knows and is thinking "except Partisans!" but pretend you don't the answer: it's not in Leadership. It's not in Elite it's not in Heroes and it's not in the index at all, not even under the correct subject header in the index. The rule of course is found in A1.11 SMC. Would it really have been too much trouble to say, in the hero rules, "Like leaders, heroes are elite status"? Yes. Yes it would. But it would not have been too much trouble for 15.2 Heroes to say: A hero is represented by a SMC [1.11] with a Strength factor 1-4-9."then at least there's a chance of going to SMC to find the rule (But, alas, the Xref isn't there.)

I feel like the essential xrefs are fairly common. The missing cross-refs (a debatable category I admit) a good bit rarer... but does anyone have any other examples of rules that for whatever reason seem exceptionally hard to look-up?

X-ref? You plan on doing this in Autocad?

 

[Rock SgtDan]

OK so maybe MMP is legally prevented by HasBorg from doing a decent Erules or rewrite.
But why can't they create a truly comprehensive index?
Like, run the existing RB thru a professional indexing application, and hire some professional indexers from the book trade to clean it up. Then publish that. Digitally.

Or- why can't they create web page that will do a digital search of the existing RB, and return the page & section reference, not the content? In fact, AFAIK anyone could do that , because it would not publish content, just the pointer to the content.

 

[Pyth]

Hey Rock SgtDan

Why can't MMP create a truly comprehensive index? keep modules in print? release erules? etc. etc. They CAN do those things and chose not to... I think it's commonsense that it's a business decision. As an ASL consumer I don't "agree" with all their decisions, but I also know that I don't know how those decisions are made. I think it's worth taking a moment to look at the razor-wire tight-rope MMP walks and to appreciate the minor miracle that ASL exists in the state of health it currently enjoys. MMP is charged with selling and protecting intellectual property in our digital age. It has (incredibly wisely imo) released enormous amounts of that intellectual property to free media (Vassal VASL) in order to maintain and grow the consumer base for their product... yet they've done this without releasing so much of the product that it has become entirely free and MMP obsolete. MMP has finessed the digital marketplace more successfully than the entire music industry... and they've done it with a product about as niche and marginal as could be conceived -- a history based hex and counter wargame with rules that run to the hundreds of pages. So, I'm not happy with every ASL descision MMP makes, not by a long shot, and erules sure would be nice, but by God, just in general MMP has done damn well, they've done the impossible. It's 2018 and I'm playing ASL. and there's new (and old) content to buy. Keep it in perspective, eh? Indexing isn't cheap. How much would you pay for a digital index -- or do you just feel entitled to one?

 

[von Marwitz]

Hey Rock SgtDan

Why can't MMP create a truly comprehensive index? keep modules in print? release erules? etc. etc. They CAN do those things and chose not to... I think it's commonsense that it's a business decision. As an ASL consumer I don't "agree" with all their decisions, but I also know that I don't know how those decisions are made. I think it's worth taking a moment to look at the razor-wire tight-rope MMP walks and to appreciate the minor miracle that ASL exists in the state of health it currently enjoys. MMP is charged with selling and protecting intellectual property in our digital age. It has (incredibly wisely imo) released enormous amounts of that intellectual property to free media (Vassal VASL) in order to maintain and grow the consumer base for their product... yet they've done this without releasing so much of the product that it has become entirely free and MMP obsolete. MMP has finessed the digital marketplace more successfully than the entire music industry... and they've done it with a product about as niche and marginal as could be conceived -- a history based hex and counter wargame with rules that run to the hundreds of pages. So, I'm not happy with every ASL descision MMP makes, not by a long shot, and erules sure would be nice, but by God, just in general MMP has done damn well, they've done the impossible. It's 2018 and I'm playing ASL. and there's new (and old) content to buy. Keep it in perspective, eh? Indexing isn't cheap. How much would you pay for a digital index -- or do you just feel entitled to one?

Is there still someone taking time to react to RSD's usual posts in the line of: "I want that others do work instead of myself! They woulda, coulda, shoulda..."? He is not playing ASL and he has not taken up repeated offers by numerous veterans to teach him. Yet he apparently still keeps on telling others what they should do to accomodate his whims.

My advice: Don't waste your time on him.
If in one aspect the new forum software that was introduced one or two years ago is really superior to the one before that, then it is the better effectivity of the ignore function. RSD was the first one who ever made it onto my Ignore list. I never regretted that decision.

von Marwitz

 

[Pyth]

Well, back to rules and references... Does it trouble anyone (but me) that "elim" isn't defined anywhere, at least not anywhere I have found. It's not in the index and Eliminated and Elimination are indexed but without a single citation in chapters ABCDE -- (it's mostly Os and Ps and T's (and a G pointing to caves) -- T? P?) In a game where DR and dr is an important difference I'd love for the rules to say, once, Elim means the same as elimination. (It does, right?)

As for what an elimination does to passengers and riders ... this is entry #2 on my essential cross reference/missing index reference list -- it took 15 mins to find D6.9 Survival.... (Survival? Crew Survival has a rule called Crew Survival, seems like called Passenger/Rider Survival could be similarly named. ) Survival could sure use an entry at PRC in the index!

 

[Robin Reeve]

Found the reference on the Index in about 8 seconds - faster than yoir 15 minutes :7

CS# (Crew Survival Number for all PRC: If bold [red on counter] the vehicle has a tendency to Brew Up, if italicized [in lower case (cs#) on counter], it applies to Passengers/Riders only): D5.6, D6.9 [Brew Up: D5.7]

 

[Pyth]

Found the reference on the Index in about 8 seconds - faster than yoir 15 minutes :7

CS# (Crew Survival Number for all PRC: If bold [red on counter] the vehicle has a tendency to Brew Up, if italicized [in lower case (cs#) on counter], it applies to Passengers/Riders only): D5.6, D6.9 [Brew Up: D5.7]

Yes, it is there, and there's a mention in the index at Passengers, and a mention at Riders... but no mention at PRC. Is it me? I guess it's just me.

 

[sfcmikej]

Pyth, it is just you. Only kidding. I find it interesting that some of the most obscure rules references seem to stick with me but some of the more common elude me, especially when trying to help a new player understand a rule.
Mike