Dramatic SFB: Ready to rock and roll

[Mike Johnson]

Thanks for the welcome everyone.

I also have a question pending but otherwise ready to advance.

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 7:39 AM Michael Helbig <admgrraven at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have a private message out to our esteemed moderator.  Once I have a
> reply I'll be able to do my orders.
>
> Michael
> Director KGB forces
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020, 12:34 AM Matt via SFBdrama <
> sfbdrama at lists.mattnet.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> In the setup it states the tug will have "as many attached
>> tug-appropriate cargo pods as it can carry".  For the Puma this is two
>> pods.  However the victory conditions refer to the destruction of only a
>> single cargo pod.  Should I assume both pods have to be destroyed or only
>> one of the two?  Or possibly just restrict the tug to having only one pod?
>>
>>
>> The description is somewhat vague in order to accomodate those tugs that
>> can only carry one pod (i.e. Hydrans) or those that can carry two (i.e.
>> Klingons) or those that *must* carry two (i.e. ISC). What the scenario
>> is attempting to reach for, is that there is no pod on the tug if they can
>> only carry one or that there is a pod already mounted on the tug in a
>> fashion as to allow the other to be attached directly.
>>
>> If the tug can only carry one pod, then any mention of a second pod
>> [attached to the tug] is superfluous. Victory conditions to the effect of
>> two pods destroyed/disengaged, are ignored and either side can only move
>> the victory levels by one spot instead of two (due to pods. Other means are
>> still in effect.)
>>
>>
>> --Matt
>>
> ____________________________________________________
>
>
>> Dramatic SFB campaign chatter list
>> http://sfbdrama.mattnet.org
>> SFBdrama at lists.mattnet.org
>> http://lists.mattnet.org/listinfo.cgi/sfbdrama-mattnet.org
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mattnet.org/pipermail/sfbdrama-mattnet.org/attachments/20200411/7a866912/attachment-0002.html>