Jump to content



Photo

A couple of questions...


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Kopos

Kopos

    Member

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 29 May 2011 - 02:21 AM

Hi there!

We had a 5 players match last night and because we havent played WK since September we had a few problems with some of the rules

1. Head of Church and events

The rules state that "when "important event" is revelead, the Head of the Church chooses a Baron to draw and resolve the top event card. If the top card ir red the HEad may draw it himself or he may pay 1 faith to choose an opponent to draw it.

a) i dont understand the reason why it is stated like this, but why is it necessary to choose a player to draw a card if the Head of the Church could do it himself instead since he has the opportunity to allocate the event to another player? it would make more sense if the HotC chose the Baron that would draw the card AND be the target of the event, harmful or not.

b) if i read it correctly, a Baron can cancel a continuous harmful event in another turn after it has been played by paying 1 additional faith right?

 

2. Assembly phase

During and assembly, you receive your votes before having an opportunity to, for example, rescind a ban on a Baron. If the barons decide to rescind a ban, can that baron still participate in that assembly? If he participates, does he get the chance to receive votes or not?

3. Regular troops

a) The rules state that "regular troops are never discarded casualties". So, if i have a casualty token in one of them and the noble dies, i simply remove that token and that's it?

b) If i dont have any money at all, i cant pay wages. I know what happens to mercenaries, but not paying any wages has any effect on regular troops?

4. Bargaining and favours

The rules say that you can pay another player to spend votes or faith in certain way, but you cannot trade actual votes or faith tokens.

a) I'm not sure about this, but this rule says that you cannot simply buy 1 faith (example) from another baron; you can only pay for the action of using 1 faith BECAUSE you want to prevent (example) something, i.e., you have to bargain for a real reason right?

b) can you "pay" by saying something like "i'll help you against X if you help me win with 1 faith" i.e., without having to pay with coins?

c) Can someone ask for money or something useful just to let pass a noble through his territory?

5. Battles

a) If exhausted nobles are attacked, can they still use their abilities?

b) If 2 enemy nobles meet in a neutral city, this battle is considered an open battle between the two?

6. Flow of the game

this is not an actual question but a situation that arose from the game. It was the 1st time we played with 5 barons (my previous experiences were with only 2 players) and some in my group thought that even with 5 barons the game didnt offer a lot of encounters between the nobles. 
Let me explain briefly how the game went:

3 barons placed 4 nobles on the table, 1 3 nobles and 1 with only 2. Everyone but 1 baron chose 1 overseas city to assault. So we had 17 nobles on the table, 13 of them on the kingdom map. End of turn 1 i had 2 cities already and was sieging another, 1 other baron had 1 city and there were a lot of sieging going on. Turn 2 most of the sieging ended, and i sieged two other cities and the other baron which conquered 1 city in turn 1 assaulted and conquered another city. By the end of turn 3, i had 5 cities already and my 2 main challenger had only 3 cities. By this time i decided that, ok, im gonna build up my position since this game is going to end in a turn or two and im currently leading by 3/4 influence points.

The thing is, since they saw that there were still neutral cities availabe they decided that they should go for it instead of trying to prevent my predictable victory. They argued, at the end, that the nobles moved very slow and i stated that the rule is to use roads when possible or that they could use ports as a way to instantly move from one point to another very quickly. 

In your first games did you experienced this kind of issues with your buddies? later, did you evolve to a more aggressive style of play and, as a result, saw more battles between nobles?

thanks for the feedback



#2 Furelli

Furelli

    Member

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 08:48 AM

 

Hi there!

Hello

 

We had a 5 players match last night and because we havent played WK since September we had a few problems with some of the rules

1. Head of Church and events

The rules state that "when "important event" is revelead, the Head of the Church chooses a Baron to draw and resolve the top event card. If the top card ir red the HEad may draw it himself or he may pay 1 faith to choose an opponent to draw it.

a) i dont understand the reason why it is stated like this, but why is it necessary to choose a player to draw a card if the Head of the Church could do it himself instead since he has the opportunity to allocate the event to another player? it would make more sense if the HotC chose the Baron that would draw the card AND be the target of the event, harmful or not.

Red events are harmful - some more so than others, the Head of the Church must pay one faith to give it to someone else OR takes the Red event himself. Whoever takes the card (and reads it) is effected by it.

Green events are good - some less so, the Head of the Church gives the card to someone else OR pays one faith to take the Green event himself.

In both cases the target is chosen before the card is read.

 

b) if i read it correctly, a Baron can cancel a continuous harmful event in another turn after it has been played by paying 1 additional faith right?

Correct

2. Assembly phase

During and assembly, you receive your votes before having an opportunity to, for example, rescind a ban on a Baron. If the barons decide to rescind a ban, can that baron still participate in that assembly? If he participates, does he get the chance to receive votes or not?

The noble will be able to attend future assemblies but not the one currently ongoing.

 

3. Regular troops

a) The rules state that "regular troops are never discarded casualties". So, if i have a casualty token in one of them and the noble dies, i simply remove that token and that's it?

Yes, I don't like the rule but that is correct.

b) If i dont have any money at all, i cant pay wages. I know what happens to mercenaries, but not paying any wages has any effect on regular troops?

No, no effect at all. Mercs leave, Regulars stay. Only rule is that Regulars are paid first, so if you have a little money, it goes to the Regulars and you will lose your Mercs.

4. Bargaining and favours

The rules say that you can pay another player to spend votes or faith in certain way, but you cannot trade actual votes or faith tokens.

a) I'm not sure about this, but this rule says that you cannot simply buy 1 faith (example) from another baron; you can only pay for the action of using 1 faith BECAUSE you want to prevent (example) something, i.e., you have to bargain for a real reason right?

You have to come to an agreement with another player for them to spend faith or votes in a way you would like, the only tools you have to bargain with are money or promises of future or immediate favours - but note none of this is binding. You could offer someone 5 gold to pay one faith to cancel an event, you give him the gold and then he backstabs you.

b) can you "pay" by saying something like "i'll help you against X if you help me win with 1 faith" i.e., without having to pay with coins?

Yes, favours are a perfectly usable form of currency.

c) Can someone ask for money or something useful just to let pass a noble through his territory?

Yes. But best to get money, because favours can be ignored later. 

5. Battles

a) If exhausted nobles are attacked, can they still use their abilities?

No, a nobles ability only appears on the ready side of his card to illustrate this.

b) If 2 enemy nobles meet in a neutral city, this battle is considered an open battle between the two?

Yes, neither player gets the benefit of the strength of the city.

6. Flow of the game

this is not an actual question but a situation that arose from the game. It was the 1st time we played with 5 barons (my previous experiences were with only 2 players) and some in my group thought that even with 5 barons the game didnt offer a lot of encounters between the nobles. 
Let me explain briefly how the game went:

3 barons placed 4 nobles on the table, 1 3 nobles and 1 with only 2. Everyone but 1 baron chose 1 overseas city to assault. So we had 17 nobles on the table, 13 of them on the kingdom map. End of turn 1 i had 2 cities already and was sieging another, 1 other baron had 1 city and there were a lot of sieging going on. Turn 2 most of the sieging ended, and i sieged two other cities and the other baron which conquered 1 city in turn 1 assaulted and conquered another city. By the end of turn 3, i had 5 cities already and my 2 main challenger had only 3 cities. By this time i decided that, ok, im gonna build up my position since this game is going to end in a turn or two and im currently leading by 3/4 influence points.

The thing is, since they saw that there were still neutral cities availabe they decided that they should go for it instead of trying to prevent my predictable victory. They argued, at the end, that the nobles moved very slow and i stated that the rule is to use roads when possible or that they could use ports as a way to instantly move from one point to another very quickly. 

In your first games did you experienced this kind of issues with your buddies? later, did you evolve to a more aggressive style of play and, as a result, saw more battles between nobles?

Aggression is key in this game, otherwise a player will get a lead early on from lucky card draws and be undefeatable. More influence in the starting pot helps, but in general everyone should always be thinking about threatening another players stronghold.

 

thanks for the feedback

you are welcome, i've missed a few of the questions because I am not sure. I'll try to check and get back asap. 

 

 

 

 

 

edit: more answered. :)

Furelli

 

 



#3 Kopos

Kopos

    Member

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 23 June 2011 - 01:36 AM

Thanks! that really helped a lot!:)

bruno



#4 Magneman

Magneman

    Member

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 04 July 2011 - 04:01 AM

Furelli said:

 

 

b) if i read it correctly, a Baron can cancel a continuous harmful event in another turn after it has been played by paying 1 additional faith right?

Correct

 

 It is stated in the official FAQ that if you don't pay immediately, you are stuck with it for the remainder of the game. Paying 1 additional faith is an optional rule.

 

QUOTE FROM FAQ:

FREQUENTLYASKED QUESTIONS
CANCELING EVENTS
Q: If I have a lasting event played on me (such as
“Heretic”), can I cancel it at a later time or do I need to
spend the Faith as soon as the card is played?
A: Event cards must be canceled at the time that the event
is played. Once an Event card with a lasting effect is
played (and not canceled), the victim is stuck with it for
the remainder of the game. (See also the “Miracles Can
 Happen” optional rule at the end of this document.)

FAQ can be found here: http://www.fantasyfl...?eidm=48&esem=4






© 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