Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Recherche
Forums » Small World - English » F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules - Base Game
Montrer: Messages du jour 
  
AuteurSujet
ArchAnemone
Junior Member

Messages: 6
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2007
Re:SMALL WORLD - CLARIFICATION RULES - PLEASE HELP ME Wed, 16 December 2009 05:47
Quote:

- In the region is a Halfing token + "hole in the ground" piece

- In the region is a token of a certain race + "dragon master" piece

- In the region is a token of a certain race + HEROIC piece

The Sorcerer's ability will not work for any of these. Each of these abilities specifically excludes other players' racial and special powers specifically to make it clear that Sorcerers cannot affect these regions.
      
player586843
Junior Member

Messages: 4
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2009
:SMALL WORLD - CLARIFICATION RULES CHAPTER 2 - PLEASE HELP ME Fri, 18 December 2009 21:50
Hello !

Pillaging
Each non-empty Region you conquer this
turn is worth 1 bonus Victory coin at turn's
end.

Regin mountain ( no tokens inside ) its a zone empty or
non-empty ??
      
GeneralV
Junior Member
Cadet

Messages: 26
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2005
Re::SMALL WORLD - CLARIFICATION RULES CHAPTER 2 - PLEASE HELP ME Sat, 19 December 2009 18:08
player586843 wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 15:50

Hello !

Pillaging
Each non-empty Region you conquer this
turn is worth 1 bonus Victory coin at turn's
end.

Regin mountain ( no tokens inside ) its a zone empty or
non-empty ??



Regions with only mountain tokens are considered empty for powers such as pillaging.

Those regions would be non-empty only if a lost tribe token or another race token, active or in decline, was present along with the mountain token.
      
player590531
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2009
Re::SMALL WORLD - CLARIFICATION - RANSACKING Sat, 26 December 2009 01:42
I have a question about the ransacking ability. In the rules it states "Each time you successfully conquer a Region containing an opponent's active Race token, he must immediately pay you 1 Victory coin from his own persona stash (unless he has no coins left)."
Does it mean that you can only ransack regions that have one, and only ONE token?
I am asking that because in the spanish rules it says something more like "1 opponent's token".
      
XRipper
Member
Cadet

Messages: 74
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2009
Re::SMALL WORLD - CLARIFICATION - RANSACKING Sat, 26 December 2009 12:34
player590531 écrit le Sat, 26 December 2009 01:42

Does it mean that you can only ransack regions that have one, and only ONE token?
I am asking that because in the spanish rules it says something more like "1 opponent's token".


In the french rules, it says only "Each time you successfully conquer a region owned by an active people...". So, as far as I'm concerned, you don't care the number of tokens. The only condition is that you can only ransack regions from an active people.
      
xbeaker
Junior Member
Cadet

Messages: 26
Enregistré(e) en :
August 2005
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 31 December 2009 07:44
The Kobolds - What happens if you have a single token left at the end of your turn. Can you use it to attempt a reinforced attack (or a berzerking attack)? obviously if it suceeds you cannot hold that territory, but it could be useful to kick an opponent out of a territory.

My guess is no, since you could not hold it, you cannot attempt the attack. But I would like to get on official ruling on this if possible.
      
SnipedintheHead
Member

Messages: 32
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 31 December 2009 16:03
Well, I'm not official, but the rules state they can never occupy or conquer a region with a single token, so I would say no Very Happy
      
Docwhiskey
Junior Member

Messages: 7
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 21 January 2010 05:08
Seafaring vs. Sorcerer:

I am having a hard time trying to figure out why you cannot use the sorcerer's ability to swap out a seafaring race's token. The way I look at it, it is the ONE way someone can actually counteract that power and do away with that token that is constantly giving their opponent the bonus (especially with an in decline race, on the 5 player map, that's 3 VP they will get no matter what even if the rest of those race's tokens are wiped out). The problem I then have with seafaring is that it is far too powerful of an ability as their is no way you can counteract it (even spirit can be beaten by conquesting those territories). I always thought that sorcerer was a clever way of getting rid of an opponent's source for victory points.

Sorcerer vs. In decline and lost tribe:
Again why can't you take out those tokens that way, it seems the sorcerer race is actually not that useful if you are this limited in who you can and cannot sub out (no fortress units, no seafaring, no decline, no lost tribe, etc.)

Multiple first conquests:
Are you allowed to enter the board from more than one spot (provided you keep tokens in hand?) For example can someone enter from the west side of the board, take over a territory that gives them a bonus, and then take over some spots on the east side, redeploying troops at the end of their turn to be able to still make a push their next turn?
      
Antoine
-= Crew =-
Historien

Pages Perso
Messages: 1667
Enregistré(e) en :
April 2007
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 21 January 2010 14:12
Hi,

Re. your questions:

player586214 écrit le Thu, 21 January 2010 05:08

Seafaring vs. Sorcerer:

I am having a hard time trying to figure out why you cannot use the sorcerer's ability to swap out a seafaring race's token

They can, but not in a water region. Converting a token is a conquest, and non-seafaring Sorcerers, like anyone else, cannot conquer water regions.

Quote:

The way I look at it, it is the ONE way someone can actually counteract that power and do away with that token that is constantly giving their opponent the bonus (especially with an in decline race, on the 5 player map, that's 3 VP they will get no matter what even if the rest of those race's tokens are wiped out).

No. in this case, just focus on the active Race of that player (unless he has the Elves). Attacking his active Race will force him to put it in decline after two or three turns... and he will lose his in-decline seafaring tokens because of that.

Quote:

Sorcerer vs. In decline and lost tribe:
Again why can't you take out those tokens that way, it seems the sorcerer race is actually not that useful if you are this limited in who you can and cannot sub out (no fortress units, no seafaring, no decline, no lost tribe, etc.)

What do you mean, "etc."? Fortresses, Troll's Lairs and Mountains does not prevent a Sorcerer from converting a lone token (but Encampments do). And Sorcerers are particularly powerful in a 4-player or 5-player game.

Quote:

Are you allowed to enter the board from more than one spot (provided you keep tokens in hand?)

No, unless you're Flying.
      
matthh
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
February 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 28 February 2010 17:46
Need clarification on when sorcerers can use their ability. We have understood it to only be during *each opponent's* turn (assuming each player takes a turn one time before the crown moves to the next round):
- From the posts, it looks like they use it during the sorcerers own turn? And they can use it one time for each opponent? Please confirm.
- Can they use it during their opponents turn? If so, is there a specific time when they can? We've had the sorcerer doing it when the player first picks up their tiles in preparation to start conquests (kind of a real time 'gotcha' move) as well as more lazily during the re-deployment phase if the opponent left an adjacent area with 1 race token

Please advise. Btw: great game, super fun! Thanks.
--
matthh
      
*player38092
Senior Member

Messages: 771
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2004
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 28 February 2010 18:11
matthh écrit le Sun, 28 February 2010 17:46


- From the posts, it looks like they use it during the sorcerers own turn? And they can use it one time for each opponent? Please confirm.

That's it.
And they can use their power only against active races (that rules out races in decline, including lost tribes, which are in decline from the beginning).
The "conversion" power is a form of conquest, which takes place during the Sorcerers' owner's turn.

I don't see how it could be used during the turns of other players.
      
player622654
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
March 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Wed, 24 March 2010 01:12
"A: Ghouls act like an active race when in decline, so would only lose 1 token per region lost."

I'm not saying that the rules are wrong, but I would like for someone to explain to me how this is balanced.
      
*player38092
Senior Member

Messages: 771
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2004
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Wed, 24 March 2010 09:28
player622654 écrit le Wed, 24 March 2010 01:12

"A: Ghouls act like an active race when in decline, so would only lose 1 token per region lost."

I'm not saying that the rules are wrong, but I would like for someone to explain to me how this is balanced.

Ghouls lose a token when attacked and they lose a region, as it is the case of an active race.

Practically, the Ghouls will get weaker and weaker if they are attacked (and as they spread out).
So their capacity is an asset, but it is not "unbalanced".

Note too that, if they don't have the "Spirits" power, they will have to be removed from the board as soon as the next active race of the player goes into decline - as any in decline race...
      
Amaterasu
Junior Member

Messages: 13
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 06 May 2010 22:13
About the Gypsies, can they do this-?
Start turn >
Conquer 4 regions >
Abandon 3 regions at the end of the turn >
Put all Gypsies on 1 region >
Put 3 coins of the regions you abandond >
Earn the coins now (4 coins, all Gypsies on 1 region).

Is that move leagel? Or can the Gypsies only abandon regions at the start of the turn?

[Mis à jour le: Thu, 06 May 2010 22:14]

      
*player38092
Senior Member

Messages: 771
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2004
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 06 May 2010 22:29
Amaterasu écrit le Thu, 06 May 2010 22:13

About the Gypsies, can they do this-?
Start turn >
Conquer 4 regions >
Abandon 3 regions at the end of the turn >
Put all Gypsies on 1 region >
Put 3 coins of the regions you abandond >
Earn the coins now (4 coins, all Gypsies on 1 region).

Is that move leagel? Or can the Gypsies only abandon regions at the start of the turn?
They are not allowed to abandon regions at the end of their turn.
They only can abandon regions at the beginning of their turn, before conquests, leaving a coin in each abandoned region (and abstaining from conquering it).
      
twosummers
Junior Member

Messages: 2
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 09 May 2010 03:34
Question about the Kobolds:

The race banner states they may never occupy nor conquer a region with less than two tokens. However, many special powers allow a race to conquer a region with 1 less than the usually required number of tokens (Mounted, for example). In the case of the Kobolds does the special power trump the race banner?
      
particle_man
Junior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 22
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 23 May 2010 21:36
Antoine wrote on Thu, 21 January 2010 05:12


No. in this case, just focus on the active Race of that player (unless he has the Elves). Attacking his active Race will force him to put it in decline after two or three turns... and he will lose his in-decline seafaring tokens because of that.


So to be clear: The Seafaring tokens explicitly stay in the Lake/Seas after the Seafaring race goes into decline. It is only if the player goes into decline *again* (say with the swamp tritons that replace the seafaring whatsits) that the Seafaring tokens finally get removed.
      
daner1231
Junior Member

Messages: 3
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Tue, 29 June 2010 19:33
Berserk Sorcerers:

Situation:
I have 6 sorcerers in hand.
I roll a 0
Decide to use the Sorcerers ability to attack.

Question:
Do I get to roll for the next attack or am I stuck with the previous roll?


Thanks!
Dana
      
keithcelt
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 04 July 2010 07:57
Quote:

Sorcerer vs Diplomat
The Sorcerer's substitution power is an attack, so you couldn't use it against a Diplomat who picked you as his friend.


We ran into this today. One argument is the position stated above. Here's my position.

The Sorcerer's power description specifically says "substitute" and not "attack" in order to conquer a region (with only one active token) therefore, the Diplomat ability did not apply.

All defensive powers specify protection from conquest and other special powers (see Dragon, Heroic, Halfling). Diplomat does not specify this protection, therefore it is vulnerable to both conquest and special powers (just not attacks).

The behavior and requirements for the Sorcerer's power are completely different from attacking:
- 2+n attackers vs 1 Sorcerer
- move attackers in vs substitute from tray
- reinforcements vs no reinforcements
(If the Sorcerer ability is an attack, then shouldn't I be able to reinforce that ability and substitute against larger forces?)

Can we please have some clarification on this? It seems odd that the authors would go out of their way to create all these differentiators but then have the players treat the ability as an attack.

Cheers,

Keith

[Mis à jour le: Sun, 04 July 2010 17:51]

      
Antoine
-= Crew =-
Historien

Pages Perso
Messages: 1667
Enregistré(e) en :
April 2007
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 08 July 2010 09:54
Quote:

The Sorcerer's power description specifically says "substitute" and not "attack" in order to conquer a region (with only one active token) therefore, the Diplomat ability did not apply.


It should have. The Sorcerer's ability is definitely an attack. If a Diplomat player chose the Sorcerers as Allies, then they cannot attack him, nor can they use their substitution ability against him.

Btw, Diplomat prevents from attacks of any kind (Dragon, Sorcerer, etc.) A Diplomat Race is immune to her ally's conquests & racial & special powers.
      
KnagrocK
Junior Member
Kursant

Messages: 4
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 11 July 2010 22:48
Sorry if this was covered already, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

I understand that Ghouls get passed the Diplomat power, I assume because the diplomat power specifically addresses tokens in decline, but what about the Sorcerers special ability? It only says that it works on active tokens and the declined Ghouls are played as active tokens so...?

I can see this going either way, I just want to know how to rule it.

Thanks.
      
SnipedintheHead
Member

Messages: 32
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Fri, 16 July 2010 18:01
KnagrocK wrote on Sun, 11 July 2010 16:48

Sorry if this was covered already, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

I understand that Ghouls get passed the Diplomat power, I assume because the diplomat power specifically addresses tokens in decline, but what about the Sorcerers special ability? It only says that it works on active tokens and the declined Ghouls are played as active tokens so...?

I can see this going either way, I just want to know how to rule it.

Thanks.


You sorta answered your own question in your post. While Ghouls may ACT like active tokens, they are still in Decline & thus immune to the Sorcerer's special.
      
particle_man
Junior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 22
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sat, 17 July 2010 02:32
1) With the Tales and Legends deck, it seems possible to run out of victory coins. Does that mean that one could not "buy" any race except for the top one, when introducing a new active race?

2) Similar to above, at the beginning of one's first turn, if "Cursed" is the Special Power modifying one of the races at or near the top of the column, then is one unable to buy the race that is 4 or 5 down from the top of the column, because one has only 5 victory points?

3) I assume that the "Wizened and Old" Tales and Legend card allows one to get 2 victory points for each of the 1 to 3 in decline race tokens one discards, or there is no reason to discard more than one race token.

4) I assume that the "Ungodly Bribe" card allows a player with a new race coming into play to avoid starting with 2 less race tokens if they can and do pay the 3 victory point bribe.

5) Since conquered elves don't lose active tokens anyhow (except to Sorcerers) would they still have to pay their non-sorcerer conquerors 1 victory coin per elven region that is conquered while the "Wealth Distribution" card is in play? I assume elves don't have to pay, because of the word "instead".

6) For "The Art of Combos", is this auction at the start of every player's turn, or only at the start of the turn of the player with the pointiest ears?

7) For "The Art of Combos", is the Special Power being auctioned taken from the top of the stack (where it has been seen for a while, and if it were not being auctioned, it could have been "bought" normally by paying 1 victory point on each special power/race combo above it in the column) or the bottom of the stack (where it has not yet even been seen before the auction)? I assume the former, as then it will be visible for a while and people can make plans accordingly before the event happens.

[Mis à jour le: Sat, 17 July 2010 18:52]

      
KnagrocK
Junior Member
Kursant

Messages: 4
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 18 July 2010 07:10
I would like to explore the Flying Sorcerers/Giants dilemma from a pure game mechanics point of view.

We have a Conquest Modifier. ( Flying )
And two Races with Special Conquests. ( Sorcerers and Giants )

Flying modifies conquests in this manner - that spaces on the board no longer need be adjacent to be eligible for a conquest. Not that all spaces are considered adjacent in relation to conquests as I believe some have misinterpreted it.

The two races in question have Special Conquests with their own modifiers in this manner, though simplified -

Sorcerers = swap a 1 lone active token with 1 from your pool ( Conquest ) + cannot be used except on regions adjacent to a Sorcerer ( Modifier )

Giants = -1 to conquests ( Conquest ) + cannot be used except on regions adjacent to an already controlled Mountain region ( Modifier )

In my humble opinion the Flying modifier should allow both races to make conquests while ignoring the rulebook given adjacency rules, but it in no way should be able to remove the modifiers put in place by the races own Special Conquests. I'm not suggesting that Flying cannot assist in Special Conquest powers, such as with the Orcs, but if two rule modifiers seemingly contradict each other, and in this case in the exact same fashion, then the can't modifier should supersede the can modifier. At the very least if the rule is decided that the opposite is true, that can supersedes cannot, there should be some consistency in it so that both the races are ruled the same.

In the case of the Sorcerers the way it is ruled now Flying not only takes away the adjacency requirement from its Special Conquest, but wipes its Special Conquest modifier entirely. So that you can use the Special Conquest even without a Sorcerer present anywhere on the board... How that works I haven't figured out yet, but wouldn't that same logic work in favor of the Giants Special Conquest?

As a side note, I am strongly considering removing the Sorcerers from my game set purely so I will not have the misfortune of having to explain this to anyone when playing this otherwise fun and simple game.
      
*player38092
Senior Member

Messages: 771
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2004
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 18 July 2010 10:44
In the Giants case, it is the adjacency of a Mountain that counts.
Their power is much more linked to terrain than the Sorcerer's.
That would be my line of reasoning.
      
KnagrocK
Junior Member
Kursant

Messages: 4
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 18 July 2010 16:10
Robin wrote on Sun, 18 July 2010 04:44

In the Giants case, it is the adjacency of a Mountain that counts.
Their power is much more linked to terrain than the Sorcerer's.
That would be my line of reasoning.


Regions are only ever adjacent or not adjacent to other regions. what makes a mountain adjacent to another region is exactly the same as what makes a token adjacent to another region. Or, to quote the rule book -

"Each newly conquered Region must be adjacent to (i.e. sharing a border with) a Region already occupied by his active Race tokens," page 4 last paragraph

Obviously only regions have borders and determine adjacency. The fact that one specifies a region with a token, the Sorcerers, and the other specifies a specific region, the Giants, doesn't change this.
      
*player38092
Senior Member

Messages: 771
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2004
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 18 July 2010 17:27
Now, the bottom line of this argument is what the official game designers determine.

This only is a game, and it is set in a fantasy world.
So, trying to enforce "realism" logics is useless.

Now, one could await some more clear wording to differenciate between Giants and Sorcerers' mechanics.
      
KnagrocK
Junior Member
Kursant

Messages: 4
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 18 July 2010 19:06
Robin wrote on Sun, 18 July 2010 11:27

This only is a game, and it is set in a fantasy world.
So, trying to enforce "realism" logics is useless.


Are you really suggesting that any game, and as you say that is what this is, doesn't have to have rules that make sense as long as the game has a fantasy theme??? I'm not suggesting that the game is devoid of reality because it claims that Wizard is a Race and not a Class, I'm just asking that the rules that are laid out in an effort to explain the way the game is to be played function logically and consistently.

In any event, I appreciate your attempt to give an explanation in your first post, and I didn't intend my response to be offensive if it was received that way. I was only saying that your reasoning wasn't sound given the rules to the game.

Now, I think I understand, after reviewing my own explanation of the problem, why there is so much confusion and why the designers made the ruling the way they did.

If in the description of the Sorcerers power they were simply restating that conquests including the Sorcerers power acted like normal conquests in that they had to be made against regions adjacent to your own active tokens then that makes the original rule and the restated rule the same. It's not specifically tied to the Sorcerers power, just conquests in general, but looks like it is because of the way it is inserted into the description of the Sorcerers power. So, if the original rule and restated rule are the same then when Flying nulls the the original rule it would also null the rule as it appears in the Sorcerers power. Since the Trolls restriction (i.e. having to be adjacent to Mountain regions) is tied only to the Trolls power itself it would not be removed by Flying since Flying should only remove the original conquest adjacency rule. Also, this would allow the Sorcerers to enter the board with their power if they had Flying.

I believe the real problem here is just the wording of the Sorcerers power as with this interpretation everything makes perfect sense.
      
*player38092
Senior Member

Messages: 771
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2004
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sun, 18 July 2010 19:14
I was just stating that this is a game.
Thus "realism" arguments are void.
In detailed wargames, like ASL, gamers often come up with "realism arguments" which forget that it is just a game.
The fantasy theme makes the contact with "reality" and "logics" even less important than with historical based wargames.

Now, I believe you and I agree that the wording of the rules needs some clarifications.
You think that you have the correct interpretation - all the best for you: I don't think I am as smart as you are (or convinced about my own intellectual superiority).

On my side, I simply consider that the official ruling is the one to follow - but the rule should be rewritten to adress the problem.

Now, one can also see the official ruling change and stick to your understanding, of course - such modifications already have occured.
      
player543461
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 22 July 2010 16:04
T&L The Great Curse + Spirit power: Does an in decline Spirit race (with another in decline race) get wiped off the board this turn?
      
SnipedintheHead
Member

Messages: 32
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Tue, 27 July 2010 23:56
player543461 wrote on Thu, 22 July 2010 10:04

T&L The Great Curse + Spirit power: Does an in decline Spirit race (with another in decline race) get wiped off the board this turn?



I am by no means "official", but thought I'd give my 2 cents on this combo, as we have had it come up in play.

Our ruling was that the race (provided there were 2 in-decline races) was removed from the board. The rules state that you are only able to have 1 in-decline race, with the exception of Spirit. Thus when spirit, however temporary, was removed from the board, so was the race. And while spirit would "technically" come back onto the board the turn after, it would have no race to attach to and would have to be discarded.

We had someone with Spirit White ladies & he was looking to send his 2nd race into decline, when The Great Curse came up, really causing him some headaches. In our opinion, that's what this expansion is about, forcing you to play the game in ways you haven't before, and that's why we think it's so great.
      
Lithanial
Junior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 29
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Wed, 18 August 2010 20:53
There is definitely a lot of rule interpreting with this expansion. I came across an interesting scenario playing my wife when The Great Curse came into play for the turn. I went in decline the turn prior to this, so the Great Curse was in play when I got to choose my new race.

When choosing the new race, the special power "Cursed" was attached to the first race available. Now, I paid the three VP without even trying to look up and see if there was a ruling if Cursed's fee should be waived for this situation.

Does anyone else have a ruling on whether the three VP should be paid at this time?
      
player654438
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
August 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Tue, 24 August 2010 06:14
I've tried finding the answer to this on my own, and I'll admit, I didn't look THAT hard, but I did try to find it in the span of 30 mins with no luck, that or I'm blind. I'm voting on the latter.

Anyway, in the rule book for "Following Conquests", it states:

"Each of the newly conquered regions must be adjacent to (i.e. sharing a border with) a region already occupied by his active race tokens, unless permitted otherwise by his race and special power combo."

In a recently played game, I came head to head with someone where this rule wasn't specific in how it wanted us to proceed in conquering regions.

From what I could tell, no where else in the rule book does it define what came up to question...

So, what came up to question you may ask?

Well, I was following what I thought the rules meant as I was conquering regions. I started from the top of the board with my race, conquering the regions all the way down to the bottom, picked up my playing pieces, then started again at the top of the board... conquering a region ADJACENT to one of the regions I had first conquered.

One of the players of this game questioned that and said what I was doing was against the rules... that I could only conquer regions adjacent to the region I had just previously conquered.

Well, I quickly pointed out that the rules doesn't state that... it only states that I can conquer any region so long as it's adjacent to a region I own.. at least that's what I got from it.

My my question is basically asking who's in the right and who's in the wrong? The rules could be taken either way.
      
particle_man
Junior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 22
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Mon, 06 September 2010 06:51
player654438 wrote on Mon, 23 August 2010 21:14


Well, I was following what I thought the rules meant as I was conquering regions. I started from the top of the board with my race, conquering the regions all the way down to the bottom, picked up my playing pieces, then started again at the top of the board... conquering a region ADJACENT to one of the regions I had first conquered.

One of the players of this game questioned that and said what I was doing was against the rules... that I could only conquer regions adjacent to the region I had just previously conquered.

Well, I quickly pointed out that the rules doesn't state that... it only states that I can conquer any region so long as it's adjacent to a region I own.. at least that's what I got from it.

My my question is basically asking who's in the right and who's in the wrong? The rules could be taken either way.


I would say you are more in the right, but that the rules are even more flexible than you think. You could conquer region A, then conquer any region next to A (say, region B), then conquer any region next to either region A or region B (say, region C), then conquer any region next any of A or B or C (say region D), etc., until you run out of race tokens to conquer with.
      
JohnnyOffice
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
November 2006
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sat, 11 September 2010 10:30
Not taking their powers into consideration, would in-decline Ghouls contribute extra tokens to active Skeletons? Example: 6 declined Ghouls conquer 2 regions killing 2 "other" tokens and then 12 active Skeletons take 4 more regions killing 4 "other" tokens. Do the Skeletons get 2 or 3 extra tokens during redeployment?
      
SnipedintheHead
Member

Messages: 32
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sat, 11 September 2010 15:59
Ghouls would not affects the Skeletons. While you do control both races, it's important to remember that they act independently of each other. Commando or Flying Skeletons would not give their -1 or flying ability to Ghouls, and neither would Ghouls give their in-decline ability to Skeletons. Thus only those territories captured solely by the Skeletons will add to their numbers.

Also, the Cursed question is answered in this thread http://www.daysofwonder.com/en/msg/?th=20021&start=0
      
player665027
Junior Member

Messages: 1
Enregistré(e) en :
October 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Fri, 15 October 2010 14:58
More about flying sorcerers vs. flying giants...

While it has been quoted from the rules that the special conquest of the sorcerer must target adjacent territories, it seems the intended wording is something like "Sorcerers can only convert race tokens in territories targetable by ordinary conquest."
It seems obvious that the intention with the adjacent-paragraph in the sorcerer description is to avoid the misunderstanding that sorcerer-convertion allows for flying-style targetting, unless they are actually flying.

Of course, this doesn't explain why flying sorcerers can use conversion to enter the board, while normal sorcerers can't.
      
ilfiniol
Member

Messages: 62
Enregistré(e) en :
April 2009
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Sat, 30 October 2010 00:12
player665027 écrit le Fri, 15 October 2010 14:58

Of course, this doesn't explain why flying sorcerers can use conversion to enter the board, while normal sorcerers can't.


Sorcerers can only convert a token in a closed region. It's the rule.

But, if they are flying, they can ignore this condition and go wherever they want.
So they can convert a token to enter the board : it isn't closed to them but they take not account to this rule by the way.

[Mis à jour le: Sat, 30 October 2010 00:23]

      
ludd_gang
Junior Member

Messages: 11
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Fri, 31 December 2010 18:34
One point of confusion: The rulebook is unclear whether you can conquer a region with more troops than necessary. Seems like it would be useful in the FAQ.

Someone explained to me, you must conquer with the exact number of troops required. It doesn't usually matter, but is pretty important for barbarians.
      
Pupukummu
Junior Member

Messages: 3
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2010
Re:F.A.Q: Clarification of Rules Thu, 13 January 2011 18:52
Question:

For the Historian special power (in one of the expansions), if there are remaining lost tribe tokens in play, do these count for one of the declined races?

Thanks in advance and sorry if someone asked this already.
      
Pages (7): [ «  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  >  » ]     
Sujet précédent:Famous Last Words & Other Fun Quotes
Sujet suivant:Interesting Race Banners/Special Power combos
Aller au forum: