Canonicity of inferred MG-toting UrbanMech variant?

[Frabby]

A throwaway line in TRO:3050 implies that an hitherto unnamed UrbanMech variant exists sporting a machine gun.
A MUL team member told me that they had considered and deliberately rejected it. They assume that the TRO author made a mistake, and that no such 'Mech exists.

But an omisson does not a retcon make. The TRO text, erroneous or not, is still a canonical publication and has not been retconned/rescinded.

To clarify the matter, I hereby ask:

Do you officially declare the mention of an UrbanMech with MG as an OOC mistake, retconning it out for good; or do you leave the matter open to fan speculation?

[Welshman]

Hello,

A one line mention of a possible design does not automatically equate to their being a design. Prior to the creation of the MUL, this left open a lot ambiguity and Catalyst understood that this caused confusion for the fan base.

As a result, the MUL is the official list of what units exist in the universe (based on current out of universe development). You can search for all unstated designs by unchecking the "Only units with BV." This will allow you to see units that have not had modern record sheets made or even been stated in a canon book.

At this time all UrbanMechs variants known to exist in the universe have been stated and record sheets exists. None of these units have a machine gun. This does not preclude the existence of custom or one off designs of the UrbanMech. It does preclude them from tournament play.

This is not to say the TRO is in error, at least from an "OOC" perspective. TROs are written in universe and are fallible. The in universe writer could have been referring to a custom design or more likely to a failed variant. Manufacturers test new variants all the time, trying to find the next "perfect" design.

Thank you,
Joel BC
Catalyst

[Frabby]

I'll take that to mean "not expressly canonized, but not expressly ruled out either".  :)

Thanks for the answer.

[Welshman]

It is not canon now. It is not on the MUL at this time and that is not an omission or errata.

The future is the future and until it is written, it isn't.

[Frabby]

Oh, I understand that. But since its inferrence in the TRO isn't retconned out there is at least some room for speculation from a canonical source.
Puts this Urbie right up there with Hyperspace Squid Monsters.  ;)

(And if Herb should ever solicit a "TRO:Oddballs" then please please remember me - I so want to write this Urbie's fluff and stats. And the League DropShip. And the Uma, Cameron and Leviathan JumpShips. And... oh wait, the Emperor of China is requesting an audience on the other line. Hold on.)  :D

[HABeas2]

Hello,

The point of the matter here is that the MUL is a living document, constantly reviewing and verifying the legality of the various units fed into it. A unit that does not appear which may have been referenced in an official source reflects one that has either not been added YET, or which has proven illegal for some reason (bad construction rules, faulty premise on the part of the writer, in-universe retcon, and so forth).

So "not on the MUL = not in canon" means simply that the unit's canonicity is either pending or has been purged as a bad idea. If you want it on your table, nobody's stopping you, but don't expect us to support fiction and/or source info based on a unit model that has not yet been properly vetted and verified.

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
  BattleTech
  Catalyst Game Labs