|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 2, 2016 3:19:44 GMT
Hey guys, Some confusion at a recent game, someone was saying 'that a PS that was backed up directly by another PS and recoiled was destroyed because?... it couldn't interpenetrate it', the exact wording being lost in space-time. Anyway it seemed to be just that, a PS with another PS directly behind it would be killed if recoiled, due to the last para of Recoiling_or_Begin_Pushed_back.pg12 and its inability to interpenetrate. I can't really imagine how this could be right. And yet "official FAQ" and "phil agrees" was used by more than one person. Mind you I even hear myself saying 'at previous tournaments' and 'in 2.2' occasionally to try stop an argument about a fairly well established rule. Anyway hope this is mostly right. Not entirely sure that I've got the argument right. If the PS backed up by another PS is killed when recoiled, why? cheers, Alex. Looks like you got it all correct Alex. Yes, the Ps recoil and push back the rear Ps. Joe Collins
|
|