[EricH]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

so the question i would have is this:

Is a human hand an appendage? or is it the fingers? or is it the arm? We can spend all day arguing the points of the question. We'll have to find out week one or in an update. The gnashing of teeth is wasted energy.

Under conventional definition, or GDC definition?

Under GDC definition, when a finger broke the plane, it would be an appendage. When another finger broke the plane, it would be a different appendage if there wasn't a contiguous element (i.e., the palm area) on the outside of the plane. Then when the palm broke the plane, it would be one appendage again. Or you could break the plane with a fist, then expand into a flat hand, and you'd be legal.

There is a slightly different interpretation of one of the Q&As that has to do with exactly which phrase a particular modifier (contiguous, IIRC) applies to. Under the most common interpretation, it applies to the parts of the appendage; it could also plausibly apply to the appendage as a whole (which is what common sense would have it apply to).

Either way, it's a big PITA, and my guess is that IRI will handily forget to check appendage contiguousness if FRC doesn't.

(I have been thinking of a way to make an uncontiguous appendage contiguous for a short time while deploying--it could theoretically be easily applied with a little bit of leftover weight and an hour or so at an event. No design drawings yet, though--I'm still plotting and scheming how to do it.)