Jump to content

Dunwich Horror

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dunwich Horror

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://www.homefrontcenter.de
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    RLP, Germany
  1. Another overlooked rule which drastically changes (and breaks) gameplay when played wrong: When your warlord commits to a planet, all units in the HQ accompany him, but they arrive exhausted! We got this wrong during our first few games, wondering why we should ever go to a different planet than the first... and how this "snowballing effect" of the player with initiative could be stopped because he accumulated more and more troops each turn...
  2. Yes, I know, but that doesn't explain the mysterious little sentence in the rulebook "(An attack order is required to enter enemy or contested areas)" . I heavily suspect that this sentence is a leftover from the Warp...
  3. Happy New Year! Just a short question... Until today, I had the impression that combats (via attack orders) are always resolved from adjacent areas; you don't enter the target area with your attacking units but attack them across the border. Only when the target area is cleared, you get the opportunity to advance into the target area with some of your remaining attackers. The rulebook and attack order cards are quite clear about this. Today, my opponent asked me about a tiny little sentence on page 21 of the rulebook in the Movement sentence and now I'm confused. The sentence states: "A unit may only move into and through friendly or neutral areas (An attack order is required to enter enemy or contested areas)". This is the only place in the rulebook where entering an enemy occupied space appears to be allowed but all other rules in the rulebook contradict this sentence. Could anyone explain to me how I could possibly _enter_ an enemy occupied or contested area with an attack order instead of attacking it from an adjacent space? Thank you!
  4. Hi, we just played a game with the optional "Withdraw" rule and encountered a situation which felt weird (or at least gamey). I was attacking a Stark infantry unit with a Lannister cavalry and was planning to flank them afterwards with a Lannister infantry unit. Since the Stark unit wasn't engaged yet and active, and would have been flanked afterwards by the other unit, the owner decided to withdraw his unit. The FAQ states that a unit must be withdrawn to one of the two hexes towards your own board edge, but one of the two hexes was already occupied by another Stark unit, so there was only one hex left where he could withdraw his unit to. Unfortunately, this meant that his withdrawing unit was still adjacent to the attacking unit - and we had the impression that this wasn't a true withdraw because (theoretically) my attacker was still adjacent and could still attack his fleeing men. The rules don't state whether a withdrawing unit has to conduct a withdraw in a manner that they are not adjacent to the attacker afterwards, theoretically, they could withdraw and still remain adjacent to the attacker (which wouldn't be a withdrawal at all, only a kind of position change...). We solved this question by modifying the rule, so that after a withdrawal, the withdrawing unit musn't be adjacent to the attacker any more. If the only possible hex is blocked by other units, too bad for him - he should have left a withdraw corridor in the first place. Is there an official ruling about what to do if the only hex where a unit could withdraw into would leave it still adjacent to the attacker? Thank you!
  5. Thank you for your valuable insights and your comments - and for pointing out my popular "Core Pack" mistake Obviously, I was confused by Core Set vs. Asylum Pack. I corrected the "Pack" in all our articles. I deliberately avoided any discussion about the pre-history because I wanted to concentrate on the Core Pack and its contents alone. I also didn't dwell on the game mechanics and on gameplay as such because I am planning to write a review about the CoC game system in the future. Currently, I'm concentrating on writing reviews for the LCG Starter Packs - A Game of Thrones will be next. Thank you again for your helpful comments! johnny shoes said: The core set article is quite a thesis. It's really great and extensive. I heartily agree with the hard work. I have differing opinions and observations here and there, and will only address one or two for now. It's the Core Set, not the core pack. Wouldn't matter if this was some post on a thread, but you are writing something for keeps, the first grand core set review. The debatable stuff you hit briefly nicely. One could be more parsimoneous regarding the alleged financial benefit of LCG. The seismic shift was far more complex than as sold by FFG - to keep it viable and non-collectible. Though a pre-history for core isn't really a focus, more could be written. Where it was. What it is not. What new players will miss. What of the old player. I look forward to reading the review in its entirety. A really nice piece of work.
  6. Thank you for your comment upon the review, it is much appreciated! Posting on boardgamegeek is a very good idea, thank you!
  7. We just re-launched our (war)gaming website but since we are dedicated LCG players as well (CoC, AGoT, WI, looking forward to LotR), we also wrote some stuff about LCGs. I thought some of you might be interested in our introductory articles to CoC, AGoT and WI which were written with the idea in mind to tell new players what these games are about. They also offer helpful links (rules, FAQ) and a link to this forum for asking rules questions. If you want to convince friends or relatives who have no idea what LCGs are about or who don't know how to get into the game, you could hint them to our introductory articles for all three games wargamecenter.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/call-of-cthulhu-the-card-game-introduction/ In addition, we wrote a review about "the Call of Cthulhu Core Pack and its qualities as a standalone game" to answer the popular question of "do I have to buy Asylum Packs or can I play the Core Pack until I'm old and grey?" wargamecenter.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/review-call-of-cthulhu-the-card-game-lcg-core-pack/ Remember, it's not a review of the entire CoC game system, but of the "Core Pack as a standalone game", which explains the somewhat low replay value. We will certainly write a review of the entire game (including APs) somewhere in the future.
  8. Hello, today I got the Tales from the Red Keep chapter pack and I'm not sure about how to play "Flogged and Chained" (L, F65). The card reads: "Condition. Attach to a non-Army character. Response: After a character is knelt by a triggered effect, kneel attached character." Does this mean that I attach this card to an opponent's character (no Army, of course) and then I can kneel his character each time a character anywhere on the table kneels because of a triggered effect (mine and his alike)? Thanks for any clarifications and sorry if this is a dumb question
  9. Great link, thank you! I was right then; now I understand the cryptic sentence in the FAW One final question, though: Does Greatswords get +1 each time a unit enters their zone (ie if I play 2 units, do they get +2) or do they get +1 when one (or more) units are played into their zone this turn?
  10. The Destroy vs. Sacrifice mechanics works similar to Call of Cthulhu, then, okay. Another question: We had some debates regarding The Greatswords ("Forced: After a unit enters this zone, TG gains 1 P until the end of the turn"). At first, we played that each time a unit was played into the same zone as The Greatswords, The Greatswords gained one additional attack symbol. So when the owner added two more cards this turn, the Greatswords got 2 more attack icons. Then, we discovered the "clarification" in the FAQ and were confused: "The GS forced ability does go off when they enter play". At first, we understood this as "this ability is only triggered that turn the Greatswords enter play - not in later turns". By browsing the forums, I came to the conclusing that the sentence could also mean "If Greatswords enter play, count them as well for the duration of the turn, because they just fulfilled their own forced condition: so that turn you would get 1 additional icon for Greatswords and 1 icon each for any other unit played into the zone". Since the FAQ clarification wasn't very elaborate, could someone please clarify how to play Greatswords?
  11. Hello, I just got the Core Pack and we played our first 8 Warhammer Invasion games last weekend (and my Destruction forces were both smashed by the Dwarves...). We encountered some card questions and need some clarifications: 1) Fledgling Chaos Spawn ("Forced: After this unit is destroyed, deal 1 damage to one target one in any player's battlefield") and Bloodthirster ("Forced: After your turn begins, each player must sacrifice a unit in this corresponding zone"). If I choose Fledgling Chaos Spawn to be sacrificed because of Bloodthirster's forced effect, can I trigger Chaos Spawn's effect afterwards, or is sacrificing a unit not the same as destroying a unit? 2) Shrine to Taal ("After your turn begins, choose a target unit in this zone. That unit gains 1 P for each of your developments in this zone until the end of the turn"). How many icons does the unit get, the number of developments in the zone at the moment, the effect is triggered (ie at the beginning of the turn) or the number of developments in the zone in the moment the number of icons is used (so that a player could play another development in his Capital phase and then use the icons in the battlefield phase, for example). When do I actually count the number of developments? 3) If a unit is corrupted, can I still use their actions (provided they don't require corruption of the unit, of course) and do forced actions still resolve? Thank you!
  12. Quick question: Scalethorn Asylum (Cthulhu) states: "Any phase: Exhaust Scalethorn Asylum and pay 1 to choose a character. Until the end of the phase, that character gains the Deep One trait and 2 combat and 2 arcane icons" My question: "gain" suggests that the character gets the icons in addition to his normal icons (as, for example, Son of Yeb who "gains 1 combat icon for each cultist in play" or the Anthropology Advisor who allows all investigators to "gain an investigation icon"). Is it correct that the character I choose with Scalethorn Asylum gains the icons in addition to his icons or do they replace his normal icons (since Deep Ones usually only have 2 combat and 2 arcane icons). Edit: sorry, wrong forum, I thought I was in the rules section. Could a moderator move this thread to the rules section? Thank you!
  13. Mmmh, not a very satisfying situation. How are these effects usually played (on tournaments or in your private matches) until we get an official ruling? Any inofficial agreements?
  14. Yes, that was our thought as well - "when he commits, he names a struggle". His condition is met as soon as he commits to a story. If the struggle type is named and he is removed afterwards, we didn't see a reason why his effect shouldn't continue during the story phase - it's not a "while he is committed" effect, his presence at the struggle after naming isn't part of his condition. We also played that he has to name the struggle type as soon as he is committed - and before the opponent committs. But since his ability isn't an action, we were not sure about this and thought it was a passive effect for a reason (for example probably allowing him to wait for the opponent or even wait until resolving a struggle). Just wanted to be sure.
  15. This weekend, we had a debate concerning Field Researcher's (F 103, Miskatonic) special ability: "Response: After an opponent wins a story but chooses not to trigger the effect, exhaust Field Researcher to trigger that story's effect as if you had won the story" If the opponent wins his third card and if this card is Dreamwalkers, can Field Researcher still trigger the ability, forcing the opponent to shuffle a story card back into the pile? I don't think so because the rules state that a game ends immediately when a player gets his/her third story card. I don't think he could choose whether to trigger its effect or not - since the game ends before he could take this decision (and deciding would be quite pointless because the game was over anyway). Players only win a story and then choose to trigger the effect on cards 1 and 2. Field Researcher's ability requires 1. that a player wins a story, and 2. that he actually and actively chooses not to trigger the effect. But if I doesn't choose anything because the game is over before I could or would choose anything, is she allowed to use her ability nevertheless? Thank you for any clarifications!
×
×
  • Create New...