Prev: Re: Thoughts on FT Next: Re: Ramming and Suicide Attacks.

Re: Ramming.

From: A stalwart bastion of bachelorism <KOCHTE@s...>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 08:49:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Ramming.

>>I don't see where there's a big deal with this Ramming stuff. I feel
>>the rules given in FT cover the situation quite well. You can announce
>>attempt at a ram, but it's *no* guarantee you'll *do* it! You still
>>to roll a '6' just to make the attempt.
>Actually I don't have a problem with the mechanics of the ramming
>just the idea of a crew of relatively normal people deciding on a death
>glory charge - which with some players happens with monotonous
>if they're losing... From that viewpoint I do have a hassle, because it
>seems really unrealistic from the viewpoint of what a normal commander
>would do in a battle.

I see that as being reflected in the roll of a '6'. Could enhance the
rule to say each ship is limited to 1 attempt in a given game. That way
if a ship fails it's roll to make the attempt, it can no longer make
another attempt the rest of the scenario.

>>And with any other rule, the ramming rule can be just
>>ignored altogether. Don't like it? Don't use it!  :-)
>Ignoring rules is fairly easy with those listed in More Thrust, but if
>they're in Full Thrust you'd really have to both agree before the game,
>my opinion.

Agreed that both should to agree to it, BUT, Jon does specifically say
the FT rulesbook "...if you're not happy with a rule or system, throw it
and use your own..." Which gives you leave to drop rules in the FT book,
I'd be more on the take that both have to agree to *use* a rule rather

   o/		      ..     .
  /@		       .  .	      If you insist on reaching for a
  <|\			  .  )	      star, be prepared to take a long,
   |		     /\ 	      hard fall.
   |		    //
   /		 o //*		      Indy - climber, astronomer,
  /		<%- /|\ 	      supreme. Have rope, will travel.
 /		/\ / | \

Prev: Re: Thoughts on FT Next: Re: Ramming and Suicide Attacks.