|
|
Rank: Massassi Sith Mutant
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/14/2009
Posts: 10
|
was their errata for huge to gain stable footing if so where i could i few this?
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator, Rules Guy
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
|
No. There is a change for DCI only about figures ignoring Huge.
All errata can be found on the Errata page on WOTC.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/8/2008
Posts: 2,220
Location: East Coast
|
SB: ignoring "Huge"...or "Rigid"?
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator, Rules Guy
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
|
Yeah, it was supposed to be Rigid. Not sure how I mixed it up.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/25/2008
Posts: 516
Location: Dover, DE (soon Cedarville OH)
|
That said, there's nothing wrong with having a house rule that huges gain Stable Footing.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 871
Location: Cincinnati, OH
|
Also while on the topic of Stable Footing, there wasn't a glossary change that snuck in somewhere that made it to both Low Cover and Difficult Terrain? The card doesn't list both but BlooMilk has both in the definition and I really don't think that's right. http://www.bloomilk.com/Glossary/SpecialAbility/276
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator, Rules Guy
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
|
You take the most complete defination. According to the rulebook glossary, it is both Difficult Terrain and Low Objects.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 871
Location: Cincinnati, OH
|
Ok, it was ruled wrong at the Regional then. No one had a rulebook with them to check, and none of us remembered it being different than the card. Glad I decided to check, lol!
|
|
|
Guest |