Jump to content

Borgopolis

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    83

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Borgopolis

  1. Posted

    Pilgrim said:

     

    It is still an interesting question and worth submitting.  Frankly, I think it would be interesting if you COULD stand them up with that card.  I love little surprises like that in a battle.

     

     

    Going by the card text, I would also say they can't get into the fight.

    But wouldn't the card be so much more intersting if they could. Jumping on a routed enemy is as difficult as stealing candy from a baby, but with this card around allowing you to stand up units ...

    And since FFG is never really THAT accurate with card text, I still see a possibility ... :)

     

    PS please note you CAN stand them up before a battle on your turn, so maybe that's balanced out vs not being able to stand up when being attacked :(

    Then again, since cards are supposed to BREAK the normal rules, why not allowing those units to get into the fight altogether ?

  2. Posted

    Rally Cry ( tactics card )

    Play during a battle or during your turn.

    Stand up to 4 of your routed units and/or Heroes.

     

    Situation.

    An enemy activates an area you control and invades it with units, triggering a battle.

    You have 5 units in there, but 4 of them are routed.

    Can you play Rally Cry on the 4 routed units

    or

    Can you only play Rally Cry on units which actually get routed in THIS battle ?

  4. Posted

    Asylur said:

    The rulebook on page 16 then explains that the figures may move to or from any number of spaces, as long as it ends its turn adjacent to the space it started.

    This is simply another example ( the umpteenth ) of poor and confusing wording IMO.

    What they really are trying to say IMO is :

    " Any or all figures may move 1 space to an adjacent friendly or empty space.

    Figures may not move out of an activated area. Mountains and water borders work as normal. "

     

    I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to move a unit multiple ( friendly or empty ) area's to finally end up in an area adjacent to the one you started the turn in.

  5. Posted

    I also still think this matter is not completely solved.

    Let's quote step 3 of Combat first.

    Quote :

    3. Resolve Special Abilities: Both players reveal all Fate cards drawn that have special ability icons on the proper section of the card. Starting with the attacker, each player resolves his units’ special abilities (as printed on the faction sheets) a number of times equal to the number of special ability icons on cards he drew.

    End Quote

    Let's take a closer look now :

    "Both players reveal all Fate cards drawn that have special ability icons on the proper section of the card. "

    OK, I think we're all on the same page here. Both Players reveal their "Orb-results" ( for that initiative level ) simultaneously.

     

    "Starting with the attacker, each player resolves his units’ special abilities (as printed on the faction sheets) a number of times equal to the number of special ability icons on cards he drew."

    This is where the confusion starts.

    First of all, why does the rule say " starting with the attacker, each player RESOLVES..." since the attacker clearly DOES NOT start, it's simultaneous.

    and second, the abilities do NOT RESOLVE starting with the attacker , all the abilities are like "put on the stack" and then they all resolve simultaneously.

     

    I find it very strange that this rule specifically indicates that the attacker starts this procedure while it clearly doesn't matter who starts at all since everybody gets to do his thing anyway.

    I think all this confusion could have been avoided with a more precise wording like :

    "3. Resolve Special Abilities: Both players reveal all Fate cards drawn that have special ability icons on the proper section of the card and resolve their units’ special abilities (as printed on the faction sheets) a number of times equal to the number of special ability icons on cards he drew."

     

     

  6. Posted

    broken said:

     

    Corey's answer:

    "Yes, the Berserker MAY still trigger his ability. The point of the Concurrent Attack Rule, is that any units that draw cards at the same time are resolved Simultaneously. Even though the attacker technically resolves his cards first, this does not have an impact on the defender resolving his special abilities.

    I hope this answers your question!
    -Corey Konieczka
    Lead Game Designer
    Fantasy Flight Games    "
     

     

     

    So, now it's the Berserker's ability which dominates, as a sacrifice can always trump any other ability.

    If I understand it correct all Orb abilities (per initiative level) go "on the stack" ( to speak in Magic terms )

    Attacker's abilities first and then resolve in a "last in , first out order"

    I can live with that , but as far as I recall the rulebook is not very clear on that and I expect a lot more questions will arise on that matter.

  7. Posted

    Kias said:

     

    Basically, I am basing my reading on the intent of: "if Fate cards have already been drawn for a unit type, then all of the cards will be resolved regardless of whether those units are later destroyed or routed."

     

    The Berserker's Orb result IS  resolved ... only problem is ... there is no standing Berserker anymore to sacrifice

    Kias said:


    The intent here seems to be that if units have the same initiative, their actions are performed simultaneously, meaning that by this point in the combat those units shouldn't be interruptible.

     

    Yes, units from the same initiative bar draw their fate cards at the same time

    but ... attackers draw first ... AND resolve their cards first.

    So, that's definitely not intended to be resolved simultaneously.

    Kias said:

     

    To be fair, I can see the point of either reading, so an official word on this would be preferable.

     

    Seriously, this is as clear as it can get IMO.

    If we go on like this we'll need an official word on every line written in the manual :)
     

  8. Posted

    I really don't understand this discussion.

    If you score a Touchdown , but there was a flag and a holding penalty, the TD is cancelled.

    Apparently some people here want the TD to count at all cost even if there was a flag.

     

    There is supposed to be something in this game called "tactics" and "strategy"

    If you put yourself in a situation where you can't execute your Special Abilities, you're not playing very well.

    On the other side, playing the game such that you can do "your thing" and prevent your opponent from doing " his thing" is what I call "playing well".

     

    It shouldn't be so hard to understand that this is part of the game ... not an error.

  9. Posted

    broken said:

    I don't understand what, besides the word "special", makes the special abilities so special in this regard?  If the berserker had drawn a damage icon, he would still have resolved the damage as normal, even though he was routed by the pegasus rider's special ability, and routed units can't attack. 

    You're right but It's just a game mechanic, it's not exact science.

    The Berserkers' Orb ability would resolve as well, even if he was routed, ... if there was another standing berserker in the area.

    What we are discussing here is one very situational ... eh ... situation ;) which may not come up at all in the first 100 games you play ...

  10. Posted

    I just wanted to post the percentages when I saw your post.

    Thanks for saving me the time.

     

    I wish you good luck trying to convert this to dice.

    With all the different percentages , forcing you to use different types of dice I think dice will be a cumbersome affair.

    Also, are you going to hide each player's dice roll ? How are you going to prevent players from cheating ?

    I suggest you try it for a few games and then use the cards again.

    You'll probably find out that the cards do a better job in this case.

  11. Posted

    The game tries to give a boost to attackers - which are at a disadvantage in a lot of (other) games ... like TI3 for instance

    So, the attacker gets to resolve his results first.

    In this case the Berserker is Routed before he can use his ability.

    What's the problem with that ?

    You want to use the Berserkers' Special Ability ?

    Fine, you should have left more defenders then.

     

     

     

  12. Posted

    I agree that this is definitely a battle.

    The only problem I see is that the terminology in " cancel the battle " is not very well chosen and that's exactly the part that leads to this discussion.

    It probably would have been better if the card had stated something like " .. resolve this battle in the following way ... etc "

  13. Posted

    broken said:

     

    Oh dear, I'm afraid there's been a misunderstanding here.  You see, he was looking for players for Runewars, whereas you were talking about football.

     

     

    I was just trying to be funny :) poor attempt probably.

    Anyway, I'd like to help the OP out but being from Belgium, I don't think I'll qualify for "san Diego Area" ;)

  16. Posted

    Gameshop told me the distributor in Belgium ( Intrafin) is expecting Runewars to come in on their wednesday shipment,

    Gameshop receives their orders on Friday, so with a little luck I'll be playing next friday evening :) ... one more week to go :-i

  17. Posted

    I just checked the rulebook again and I think the rules are very clear :

    Quote :

    “Mobilize” and “Conquer” Order cards allow a player to activate an area and move any of his units into the area as long as the units started two or fewer areas away. If there are enemy or neutral units in the activated area, then the player must start a battle with them or attempt diplomacy.
    Although all units may move a distance of up to two areas with a “Mobilize” or “Conquer” Order card, units may only move
    through friendly or empty areas to get to the activated area (see “Mobilize/Conquer Order Example” below).

    End Quote.

    Thus, you may move any unit to the activated area as long as the units started two or fewer areas away

    and

    may only move through friendly or empty areas to get to the activated area.

    A previously activated area, containing one or more friendly units is a friendly area, which you may pass through.

    What you may not do though is move units which would start their movement in an area containing an activation counter.

    Any figure which originates from an area which does NOT contain one of YOUR activation counters and which is within two areas of the area you just activated may move to that activated area, - moving through friendly and/or empty areas - even if their route takes them through an area which you have activated during a previous turn.

  18. Posted

    I think some rules are being misinterpreted.

    When the rules say that "you cannot move units out of an area with an activation token.(p15)", I'm pretty sure the rules are referring

    to the units which ended a previous turn in that area, not units moving through that area on the current turn.

     

    The activation marker is nothing more than an indicator to show which area and which units have already been activated, it's not a "move stopper".

     

    I'm quite sure of this, but ... I guess CC will have to step in and give the definitive answer.

  19. Posted

    Chancellor of Sol said:

    Would in this case player A win the battle without any of his units actually surviving the battle, and player B be forced to retreat ?

    I'd say yes and call it a pyrrhic victory.

    fyi, a  Pyrrhic victory is a victory with devastating cost to the victor.

  20. Posted

    YourBestFriend said:

     

    DarkElf said:

     

    Friendly Area : you have at least one friendly unit and / or Stronghold in the area and there are no enemy units in the area.

     

     

    Correct, it should be worded like this.

    Keep in mind that this wording leads to a small issue with Allied Neutral units (they do not desert you when in a contested area).

     

     

    Thanks for the confirmation CC.

     

    I think the small issue with Allied units you mention seizes to exist if you reword the following rule ( p19 Allied Units )

    from

    "If these allied units are ever in an area not controlled by the player, then the units stop being allied to him."

    to

    " If these allied units are not in a FRIENDLY area at the end of any player's turn, then the units stop being allied to the allied player.

    By checking for the Allied Condition at the end of every turn, instead of "all the time" as indicated by the use of the word " ever" in the current rule, you sidestep a lot op potential issues and you get the desired result.

     

    Another rule which creates issues and which I would suggest to reword is

    "Note that allied neutral units may move without being accompanied by player controlled units, as long as the neutral units end their movement in a friendly area."

    Problem here is that neutral units which help attack an enemy area do not end their movement in a friendly area but in a contested area.

    Solve this problem by rewording to :

    "Note that allied neutral units may move without being accompanied by player controlled units, as long as the neutral units end their movement in an area which contains at least one Friendly Unit and / or Stronghold."

  21. Posted

    Taki said: The rules seem clear enough to me,

     

      Even when they contradict each other ?

     

    Taki said: This is a kind of rules lawyering that I would never have guessed possible.

     

      Don't take this wrong but If you think this is rules lawyering, prepare to be shocked when you bump into some real ruleslawyering.

     

    I'm merely highlighting some unclear and contradicting rules.

    Maybe playing Magic for years has made me expect clear and precise rules from everyone and let's be honest, FFG has never been a leader when it comes to writing rulebooks. It's always been some kind of an achilles heel. Sure they've gotten better over the years but they still spend very little coin on critical proofreading before printing, I reckon.

    It's usually left to the community to point out the errors or ambiguaties (sp?)

    Please forgive me for preferring precise rules over contradicting and incomplete rules :)

  22. Posted

    In the Frequently Used Terms on page 15 of the Rulebook you can read :

    Controlled Area : A player controls an area if he has at least one plastic unit (including routed units) of his color and/or one of his strongholds in the area.
    Having only a hero or neutral units in an area does not make an area controlled. Players always control areas in their home realm unless enemy units are present.

    The current definition of Controlled Area implies that you control an area if you have a friendly unit in it, meaning, when you attack an opponent, the area which you attack becomes " controlled" by both players because you both have at least one unit in it.

    This seems highly illogical and unintuitive to me as I would rather think the area becomes "uncontrolled" as soon as two armies occupy it.

    What's more, when you start a battle that area is at the same time a

    1- controlled area ( you have a unit in it )

    2- enemy area ( enemy has a unit in it - thus controls it )

    3- friendly area ( you have a unit in it - thus you control it )

    4- contested area ( there's a battle or duel going on here )

    IMO only 4 should apply to a battle area and none of 1, 2 or 3.

    So, I think the definition of Controlled Area is currently incomplete and should read like this :

    A player controls an area if he has at least one plastic unit (including routed units) of his color and/or one of his strongholds in the area and there are no enemy units or uncontrolled neutral units in that area.

     

    The fact that there is something wrong with the current official rule is also illustrated by the last sentence : "Players always control areas in their home realm unless enemy units are present."

    So, ... you always control the areas in your home realm

    but ... if there are enemy units present in them, you no longer control that area, ... even if you have units in that area.

    And yet ... the rule says ( about area control in general ) that you control an area when you have at least one unit in it.

    Complete contradiction.

    IMO, what the designer meant is

    Friendly Area : you have at least one friendly unit and / or Stronghold in the area and there are no enemy units in the area.

    Contested Area : you and an opposing player ( both ) have at least one friendly unit and / or Stronghold in the area.

    Enemy Area : an opponent has at least one unit and / or Stronghold in the area and there are no other player's units in the area.
     

    Controlled Area = Friendly Area

     

     

  24. Posted

    ckessel said:

    The question is more generic about any of the "do X if the hero lands here" events and locations, but for example, if I have two heroes land on a "Temple" token, do I get 2 influence or 4?

     

    The rules are pretty clear, I think : 

    "Temple : Keep this token faceup in the area. When a hero ends his Quest Phase in this area, his controller gains two influence."

    I can't say it more clearly, I'm afraid.

    So, yes, if two of your heroes end their turn there you get 2x2 influence.

    ckessel said:

     If two heroes land on a "Raiding Party", do both take 1 point of damage?

     

    Again the rules are very clear, IMO.

    Two Heroes CANNOT land on a raiding party

    One Hero enters the Raiding Party area. Raiding Party gets resolved and DISCARDED.

    Now activate your second hero. There's no raiding party anymore.

     

  25. Posted

    It wouldn't hurt if a player anticipated a possible loss of battle and kept a few standing units in the area where his retreating units would/could retreat to ... that would solve your " 1 archer kills all " problem.

     

    On the other hand, I am a little concerned as well about units automatically being routed when they have to retreat.

    Gameplay will tell if this is too harsh of a penalty and whether maybe retreating units should not automatically be routed but still be standing ... after all, a retreat is not necessarily a rout, right ?

×
×
  • Create New...