Jump to content



Photo

More info on Code of Chivalry news posted


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 Caboose

Caboose

    Member

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 07 February 2011 - 08:01 AM

There is more news about Code of Chivalry set to be released.

 

www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=1957

Two items I noticed -

1)Knight units (mounted or not) are only 3 units.  Plus they ignore 1 SoS.

2) I noticed on both cards they both say "see weapon card".   It has been a while but I don't recall any weapon cards.   Thus is this a possible change to allow units to have different weapons?!?



#2 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,076 posts

Posted 07 February 2011 - 02:26 PM

 Yeah weapon cards are like short swords, long swords, knight's lances, arbalest...all the weapon cards contain the actual damage stats and special effects.

Some people do in fact treat units as if they have different weapons...I am aware of a fairly popular house rule that allows Green Archers to also wield short swords in melee combat. But no official rules exist to this effect as of yet. at least as far as I'm aware; I haven't gotten the Bearded Brave yet. 



#3 caradoc

caradoc

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 07 February 2011 - 06:36 PM

It will be interesting to see what banner colours these new units are.  While I imagine they are both red, the extra speed combined with the ability of the foot troop of  a 'lower' banner colour could be a lot of fun.

 

Cheers,

Giles.



#4 Caboose

Caboose

    Member

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 08 February 2011 - 06:40 AM

awayputurwpn said:

 Yeah weapon cards are like short swords, long swords, knight's lances, arbalest...all the weapon cards contain the actual damage stats and special effects.

Some people do in fact treat units as if they have different weapons...I am aware of a fairly popular house rule that allows Green Archers to also wield short swords in melee combat. But no official rules exist to this effect as of yet. at least as far as I'm aware; I haven't gotten the Bearded Brave yet. 

But my point was that the card said "see weapon card".  Doesn't say the ACTUAL weapon.    Relook at both cards and you'll see that is the case.   Sure the text underneath each card mentions the weapon (long sword) but there is no mention on the reference card.

Also if memory serves, the human foot soldier had a short sword and the mounted a long sword.   Thus if that is the case, one would "presume" a short sword for the Foot Knights and that doesn't appear to be the case (assuming the text underneath it is correct).

Cab



#5 Caboose

Caboose

    Member

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 07:14 AM

Rules are up for this expansion

www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=1974 

 

Here is what you get

4 units of Red Banner Mounted Knight

4 units of Red Banner Footed Knight

3 units of Blue Banner Arbalests

2 Units of Red banner Mounted Knight Lancers

Also mentioned in the rules is the following : "Also included are new mounted knight lancer stickers as well as

enough current stickers to replace the current Scottish Wars banner stickers."  - very odd.

 

 



#6 superklaus

superklaus

    Member

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 11:18 PM

I would be in favor to ditch "weapon cards" at all. They are a mess. The best solution would be: per type one troop card like M44.



#7 toddrew

toddrew

    Member

  • Members
  • 621 posts

Posted 15 February 2011 - 03:09 AM

Caboose said:

Also mentioned in the rules is the following : "Also included are new mounted knight lancer stickers as well as

enough current stickers to replace the current Scottish Wars banner stickers."  - very odd.

 

 

Not so odd, but probably could use a better explanation - seems the banner emblem for the former Mounted Knights/current Mounted Knight Lancers has changed from the full figure depiction to just the lance itself.  They've included enough stickers to "correct" the three units that came with Scottish Wars.



#8 FragMaster

FragMaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 134 posts

Posted 15 February 2011 - 05:39 AM

Many players complained that the Mounted Knights image is so similar to the basic cavalry image that they couldn't distinguish the two.

By changing the image this problem is solved. Nothing more, nothing less. I really like that FFG is trying to correct some mistakes that Days of Wonder did when they had the game's rights. I don't like the whole series expansion policy at all but at least they are trying, I give them that.

If only they stopped releasing so small packages. I'd prefer 1-2 expansions per year with lots of content rather than 4-5 small boxes with a few new units that they are doing right now. I'm tired of writing about this over the years though.

I have already stopped buying BattleLore products after Bearded Brave. I want to hear a clear and precise answer from FFG on what are they planning to do next. A preview at least. If they are going to continue releasing small expansions with new units even after Age of Chivalry then I'm not going to support them anymore. I have plenty of BL left to play.

I want to see completely NEW content, gameplay changes or something dramatic, not necessarily a new race. I've gone past that stage. Imay even say that I don't want to see a new race if this is going to mean a year's worth of expansions just to bring it up to par with the others. A few new units won't cut it anymore.



#9 Caboose

Caboose

    Member

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 15 February 2011 - 09:22 AM

Doubt you will get any answer.   Pretty sad that Westlos has now like 4 expansions (could be 3) since it's release and basically really nothing NEW for Battlelore other than repackaging of older items with a few trinkets thrown in since FFG acquired Battlelore.   Just think they acquired Battlelore so they could do Westlos, in my opinion.   

And we STILL have yet to see any of Richard's other expansions out either...<shakes head>

Cab



#10 superklaus

superklaus

    Member

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 16 February 2011 - 01:19 AM

Caboose said:

 Just think they acquired Battlelore so they could do Westlos, in my opinion.   

 

unlikely



#11 DragonWhimsy

DragonWhimsy

    Member

  • Members
  • 218 posts

Posted 16 February 2011 - 01:45 AM

Currently BoW has released the core game and two expansions. In that same time period BL has released three expansions.

BoW products: 3

BL products: 3

Known BoW expansions on the schedule: 2

Known BL expansions on the schedule: 1 plus a ton of old stuff being put back in stock

Summary: BoW is up one announcement. Which was only announced yesterday. BL seems to be doing relatively well attention wise at the moment when compared with other Command and Color style games that FFG produces.

If the expansions are being kept smaller... well so has BoW expansions. I'd assume Tides of Iron has shown them that after the initial big boxed set players are less willing to spend a lot of money. So they break it up so you can buy what you want. If they'd combined the Horde and Bearded Brave expansions you'd have payed the same money, gotten the same stuff. But for anyone who doesn't care about the goblins for example they're saving money.

If caboose was correct and FFG's bought BattleLore only to make BoW's then that means BoW's is DIRECTLY responsible for BL fans getting SIX more expansions than they would have gotten otherwise (and hopefully more in the future). In that case it might be time to put aside bitterness and paranoria and be happy the game wasn't allowed to fade into oblivion which was where DoW was going to let it drift. Possibly in that case you might even be grateful BoW exists.

Would more information be nice to have? Sure. But this is par for the course for FFG. They do this with most of their games, their cards are always close to their vests. If you go to the Tides of Iron forums you find the same desire for information not too far back. If you go to the Battles of Westeros forums the same thing. Only the release of Fury of the Bear and the Lords of the River/Tribesman of the Vale info has pushed that back a bit on those respective forums. Generally the fans of a game seem to know what the next expansion is and that's about it.

I expect it's to prevent outrage when an expected product is cancelled or delayed. I've been a party to some of the workings of Catalyst Game Labs and they went to that format there after one outrage too many.


"Do you know the difference between an error and a mistake, Ensign? Anyone can make an error, but that error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." -Grand Admiral Thrawn

 


#12 Caboose

Caboose

    Member

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 16 February 2011 - 03:40 AM

I see one of the Westlos lackies have come into this area again.   first, Westlos is NOT Battlelore, even with a Battlelore name on it.   But then I guess you folks think otherwise since the name is on the box, right?   You keep believing that.

It is a KNOWN fact that FFG has NOT supported Battlelore in ANY shape unlike Westlos.   Not FFG people show up here, have killed basically a known support site for Battlelore and have really, barring Creatures/Dragons (I consider it really one expansion since there is overlap), have not produced a NEW expansion At all - everything else is repackaged from prior expansions from DoW.

Sure we have new AoC cards, but that really will not cut it.   There is NO base set (and I doubt we ever will get a base set from FFG) and hard to really have a product without a base set.   

And I've been very supportive of Battlelore since the beginning, even demoing the product at various cons and shops.   So don't tell me I don't know "jack" about what I've talking about.    But then FFG can't even dedicate an employee or some support person here either...guess that is par for the course for FFG ("lead the people on - thinking there is something new").    FFG can't even make a FAQ for Battlelore...how hard would that be?  I guess must be real hard - again, without support, a product dies PERIOD.    And it isn't odd that within like 1 year of FFG buying Battlelore they bring out Westlos - but I guess that is no concidence either, right?   And people have dropped like "flies" in this forum due to the fact of no support and/or word from any FFG employee about Battlelore.

Expansions - Great, you have your 3 NEW expansions to our 1...whoopie!   Then go play with your new toys then and quit trolling (yes I know you are a Westlos lackie Dragon).   Unless you know the FULL story and have also talked with the author of Battlelore, your words don't hold much weight with me nor the Battlelore community as a whole.     FFG knows Westlos is no Battlelore but they put the Battlelore name on it to appease the Battlelore hold overs and it doesn't even come close to playing like Battlelore.

And go look at those "new" Battlelore expansions - they are just repackaged old ones.   So thus nothing new.    But then I guess you must think that anything new would be better than nothing, right?  Not really.  

So go back under that Westlos rock you come out from and have fun with your "Battlelore" game.   Like others, I am sick of the games and would like see some support and direction (if any) that FFG plans for Battlelore other than abuse the name for another game that is NOT even close to Battlelore.



#13 grubman

grubman

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 16 February 2011 - 03:53 AM

I agree with Dragon Whimsy on several points (and will even go a bit further). Despite the constant outcry for more, more, MORE! There has been a rather “steady” flow of BL products. For gawds sake, do we really need more than one every 3 months or so? I love the game, but I’m not playing it non-stop around the clock. There is already a ton of stuff out there to use and explore.

 

I will say I’m not exactly sure who decides what products should come out, or why they make the decisions they do. Heroes, Dragons, and Creatures were great ideas, but more Goblins, Dwarves, & Humans could certainly have been put on the backburner for more lucrative products for Battlelore fans (and isn’t that who is still buying the supplements?) such as a Master Rulebook (much needed at this point), a Campaign Book, the core game (if they plan to widen the fan base), and eventually New Armies (and a simpler system for implementing them and all other troops than CtA) .

Still, I’m not really “complaining”…and others should probably stop too, because it’ll suck even worse if products just stop altogether.

Remember, in the end, BL is the property of FF, not the fans. While I’m sure FF is concerned about keeping fans happy, and putting out products they think are quality and add an element of fun to the game…the bottom line is they are a company, and companies thrive on profit (and die without it). If BoW (or any other FF game) is generating a profit (or a larger profit) it would be an idiotic business blunder not to capitalize on that. It’s not like Battlelore is their flagship game.

The glass is way more than half full IMHO.
 



#14 caradoc

caradoc

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 16 February 2011 - 08:18 PM

I don't think DragonWhimsey has said anything worth criticism.

 

I just recieved Horrific Hordes and Bearded Brave last night (and spent a couple of hours stickering, glueing, reading, stowing etc.) - I am very very happy with these two expansions - I believe they will add a lot to the game.  I'm hoping to get a CtA game of BL in this coming weekend - with the Goblins facing off against the Dwarves - hopefully the Ogres meet the Bear Riders somewhere in the melee for a showdown royale.

 

I personally wish all success to BoW - the more successful products FFG has, the better the company is able to fund support for all their product lines.

 

The things I'd love to see from FFG are a scenario editor and a setting.  A setting gives a lot in my view, and is the foundation (alongside a quality game - which they already have) to building a solid and lasting franchise with direction.  A sceario editor I would rarely use - but again, it's all about the community building.

 

However, I am looking forward to anything and everything produced for BL - be it new base set, new armies, new lore cards, or whatever - I really enjoy playing this game - and that's it as far as I'm concerned.

 

Cheers,

Giles.

 

 



#15 DragonWhimsy

DragonWhimsy

    Member

  • Members
  • 218 posts

Posted 17 February 2011 - 05:51 AM

I see one of the Westlos lackies have come into this area again.

I'm not sure how to respond to that other than I probably shouldn't bother. Still I'll bite this one time.

first, Westlos is NOT Battlelore, even with a Battlelore name on it. But then I guess you folks think otherwise since the name is on the box, right? You keep believing that.

Why do you think I care? I'd never even heard of BattleLore before Battles of Westeros. It's name means nothing to me either way. I had no bias toward any game and researched all the Command & Colors games with a neutral eye. I picked the one I thought sounded the most fun for me. Should the Memoir '44 gamers be angry at you for selecting BattleLore?

It is a KNOWN fact that FFG has NOT supported Battlelore in ANY shape unlike Westlos.   Not FFG people show up here, have killed basically a known support site for Battlelore and have really, barring Creatures/Dragons (I consider it really one expansion since there is overlap), have not produced a NEW expansion At all - everything else is repackaged from prior expansions from DoW.

FFG people don't show up at the BoW forums either. Or most of their forums. They seem very hands off where it comes to online communities. FFG didn't kill off BattleLoreMaster... the FANS did. The FANS did not submit things or keep it's forum active. Why put work into something that no one looks at? It's depressing.

That you don't consider the Creatures/Dragons expansions seperate doesn't change the fact it is so. I can't comment on the contents of the other expansions other than to say I think bolt throwers sound neat and I hope to see them in BoW's. Peronsally I think the last three expansions are preparing the way for how they want to have the armies available in the future after they get through the repurposed sets.

Sure we have new AoC cards, but that really will not cut it.   There is NO base set (and I doubt we ever will get a base set from FFG) and hard to really have a product without a base set.   

They're bringing out the repurposed sets. They're hardly going to announce a new version before they get through those.

FFG can't even make a FAQ for Battlelore...how hard would that be?  I guess must be real hard - again, without support, a product dies PERIOD.    And it isn't odd that within like 1 year of FFG buying Battlelore they bring out Westlos - but I guess that is no concidence either, right?   And people have dropped like "flies" in this forum due to the fact of no support and/or word from any FFG employee about Battlelore.

Given how they may very well release a new edition after the repurposed sets it probably seems like time wasted, or maybe more specifically, time they will have to duplicate again later when they go back through the rules for the new edition.

Expansions - Great, you have your 3 NEW expansions to our 1...whoopie!   Then go play with your new toys then and quit trolling (yes I know you are a Westlos lackie Dragon).   Unless you know the FULL story and have also talked with the author of Battlelore, your words don't hold much weight with me nor the Battlelore community as a whole.     FFG knows Westlos is no Battlelore but they put the Battlelore name on it to appease the Battlelore hold overs and it doesn't even come close to playing like Battlelore.

You have had 3 expansions to match our three released products. Their policy for these games seems to be one per season. Which seems about right to what players would buy and makes sure the cost to keep up is reasonable. I could be wrong but I doubt Memoir '44 gets releases any quicker than that.

I've not talked to the BL author, they are just guesses like anyone here may have. They seem more reasoned than yours however.

As for BattleLore being on the box... if they hadn't you or someone taking your place would be complaining that they stole the majority of the rules from BattleLore without giving it or Richard Borg any credit. Though it may have major differences it clearly takes many elements from that game which could not be justified as an independently produced game. It's even possible they legally had to put the name on there somewhere.

Even if that is not so it was a policy they use in Arkham Asylum and Mansions of Madness. It is not a BattleLore only policy.

Once again, if your theories are correct, then you owe Battles of Westeros for the last six expansions you did receive and for any you get in the future.

And go look at those "new" Battlelore expansions - they are just repackaged old ones.   So thus nothing new.    But then I guess you must think that anything new would be better than nothing, right?  Not really.  

They seem to have completed the three armies. If they're thinking long term then possibly they even know what they want to include in the future base set and so set up these three expansions to be the immediate follow up to it, setting up the game to be packaged how they want it for the long term.

So go back under that Westlos rock you come out from and have fun with your "Battlelore" game.   Like others, I am sick of the games and would like see some support and direction (if any) that FFG plans for Battlelore other than abuse the name for another game that is NOT even close to Battlelore.

There really is no point to being insulting. It doesn't effect me one way or another and it undermines your arguments.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that every other FFG game has active participation by FFG staff and that the players for those games have knowledge to the next year or more of products. I can assure you that is not the case. FFG rarely participates on the forums and at best players know what their next product is. At this exact moment in time BoW does know what it's next two products are which is really what they should do for all their product lines but it seems to be a rarity.

I have seen similar complaints on some of the other forums so  you are hardly being picked on.

Fans of BattleLore:

  • -FFG staff should be more engaged with us
  • -What's our next product?
  • -We need a FAQ!
  • -We want a scenario editor!
  • -We want a campaign book!
  • -We want all new races!

Fans of Tides of Iron:

  • -FFG staff should be more engaged with us
  • -Where's Fury of the Bear?
  • -Where's the Fury of the Bear previews?
  • -We want a campaign book!

Fans of Battles of Westeros:

  • -FFG staff should be more engaged with us
  • -Where's the Lords of the River previews? (until just recently)
  • -What's our next expansion after that (until just this week)
  • -We want a campaign book!
  • -We want a scenario editor!
  • -We want a new major faction!
  • -We want the other two scenarios from the A Day of Ice And Fire event. You have them just sitting there ready... just post them already!

In fact the only games with active forums are the one's who bring in non-board gamers such as living card games and role-playing games. Board Gamers just don't seem loyal enough to a specific game to spend time in any one community. The only excpetion seem to be Dust: Tactics which is because it brings in tabletop wargamers, and Decent which is because it brings in role-players.

Even visiting the Memoir '44 forums from DoW doesn't show a particularly active community though the game is very popular.

Despite your hostile tone I have nothing against BattleLore. Quite the contrary I am quite aware Battles of Westeros would not exist without it and am most impressed with Richard Borg's system that has been adapted so well to so many different era's and settings. I may even purchase BattleLore one day depending on where they go with it next.


"Do you know the difference between an error and a mistake, Ensign? Anyone can make an error, but that error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." -Grand Admiral Thrawn

 


#16 Boromir_and_kermit

Boromir_and_kermit

    Member

  • Members
  • 72 posts

Posted 17 February 2011 - 08:32 AM

I would like to clarify a couple of points.

Battleloremaster didn't shut down due to the fans or the community as you state. It shut down because FFG wasn't creating any buzz for Battlelore anymore. When at DOW, Battleloremaster used to get advanced previews from them and would hint at things using a character called "The Raven". When Battlelore moved across to FFG, that all stopped. There was no advanced hints or warnings and a lot of the fun was sucked out of running the website for the owner.

So until FFG started making some more varied additions to the game (rather than just adding one or two units to the current races), then he said it might start up again.

The development of the packs that we've recently gotten (Bearded Brave, Horrific Hordes and Code of Chivalry soon) has surely not involved much. The number of new units in Horrific Hordes was 2 out of 5, the number of new units in Bearded Brave was 2 (and a Dwarf spotter) out of 5 (with the arbelester units receiving the same sculpt as the base game Dwarf Crossbowmen) and Code of Chivalry will receive two new units out of four, with one of the new being extremely similar to the red banner cavalry that already exists. The rest of the sculpts/units are identical to those previously released.

There were also some scenarios and the CtA cards.

This may be due to setting up for another base game or perhaps they were just cutting down on the development time for them. Not providing a new sculpt for the Arbelester Dwarfs was a bit of a cheapo move, unless they are planning on changing the Base game Dwarf Crossbowmen to an Arbelester - but even then didn't provide a replacement flag to do so. Even the art on their specialist card displayed humans using the arbelesters with just the dwarf crest on it...

This has turned out longer than I had wanted it to, but its suffice to say that if FFG actually let the community in on what they had planned (or even hinted at it) besides reprinted stock, then it would appease a high percentage of the games fans. For example, I know that there are a lot of gamers that aren't buying these new FFG releases until they know where the game is heading. They don't want to support the company in closing the game down. That in and of itself can give mixed signals. I personally have bought their expansions and will be buying Code of Chivalry and will trust that FFG will do right by the game, but sadly unless FFG doesn't tell - only time will...

Cheers,
Ben.



#17 superklaus

superklaus

    Member

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 17 February 2011 - 11:29 AM

At the moment the situation of BL is a mess. The game has in about 15 expansions and half of them are quite worthless, non-innovative and just "more of the same". Another 2 Units of arbalester or  some lizard riders. Does this really advance the game in a positive way? I say no.

Most of this boring stuff came from FFG. IMO this company does not really care about the game or us fans as long as they can sell us their overpriced 40 plastic warriors (or 3 monsters) sets for 30$.

So now we have 15! expansions and not even:

-a simple point-buy-system (like the excellent one for C&C ancients)

-another army

-siege rules

-a campaign book/campaign system

-an active website (after battleloremaster closed)

 

Thanks FFG.



#18 DragonWhimsy

DragonWhimsy

    Member

  • Members
  • 218 posts

Posted 17 February 2011 - 08:23 PM

Battleloremaster didn't shut down due to the fans or the community as you state. It shut down because FFG wasn't creating any buzz for Battlelore anymore. When at DOW, Battleloremaster used to get advanced previews from them and would hint at things using a character called "The Raven". When Battlelore moved across to FFG, that all stopped. There was no advanced hints or warnings and a lot of the fun was sucked out of running the website for the owner.

I stand corrected then. However I'm betting when he went to create the site originally he did not suspect he would be getting early previews from DoW. And if the online community had stepped up he may have found himself with a new and more rewarding joy in running the site.

That FFG can do more to generate online buzz for their game lines I do not argue against. And not just BL but all of them that are meant to continually expand. They are a board game company and they are used to releasing a game and perhaps an expansion and then moving on. Despite their Living Card Games and RPG's that is still their mindset even as they seem to have realized it is more profitable to have game lines that generate ongoing loyalty.

But they still don't understand how to create an online community. Partly it's mindset, partly it's just having so many game lines.

Nudge FFG all you want. As fans you should do that to make the game better. But the insulting and bitter attitude toward BoW and it's fans only means the complaints are not taken seriously and you alienate those who heard of BL BECAUSE the name was on the BoW box.

 

 


"Do you know the difference between an error and a mistake, Ensign? Anyone can make an error, but that error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." -Grand Admiral Thrawn

 


#19 Interceptor

Interceptor

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 06:38 AM

Wow, this topic got a little heated.  I was a little bummed out when Westeros came out, simply because I read the first Song of Ice and Fire book and I was not thrilled with the stories or setting.  Nothing against George R. R. Martin...it's a decent enough fantasy, but I've read much better (anyone read Joe Abercrombie's First Book of the Law series?  Now that's good fantasy!).  Anyway, when Westeros came out, I was not thrilled because I was not interested in playing battles in that setting.  BattleLore was great because I love reading about the middle-ages, and with BattleLore, you can play all sorts of medieval era battles using the medieval lore rules (and once Code of Chivalry comes out, that will really boost the human army...in fact it will boost it to a point that no one would really be able to field all those units in a single battle, so there are more than enough components to create all sorts of epic wars, campaigns, and battles).  I also like the fantasy element...this allows me to create battles in a fantasy setting of my choosing.  I really like the idea of desigining my own campaigns (I'm working on re-creating the famous battles of Vlad the Impaler), and after that I want to re-create some battles of the War of the Roses as well as Hastings, and some fantasy battles (in the Dungeons and Dragons Forgotten Realms Setting).  The potential with BattleLore is endless, and I'm happy with the products that have been released.  Also, to say the FFG expansions are boring...I could not disagree more.  The Creatures, Dragons, and Heroes expansions were awesome.  To have a huge slug-fest between a dragon and a hydra is epic, and to have earth elementals and giant spiders creeping across the board causing general mayhem...how cool is that?  Also, with the new troop expansions, there are a lot of soldiers being fielded with all sorts of different unit types.  I have to say, when I set up a game of BattleLore and I look across the field of battle, it is quite an impressive and exciting sight with all the various troops, banners, and creatures standing ready to slug it out.  I can't wait to send the armies forward in a ground shaking clash of steel...when you come right down to it, it's just plain fun to create medieval carnage across the gameboard using all the rules and components, and that's what tabletop wargaming is all about, right?



#20 DragonWhimsy

DragonWhimsy

    Member

  • Members
  • 218 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 06:48 PM

Very well said! :)


"Do you know the difference between an error and a mistake, Ensign? Anyone can make an error, but that error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." -Grand Admiral Thrawn

 





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS