>>1. No Defender Doubling: combats are resolved by each side rolling simultaneously.
>Simon: This doesn't give an advantage to a counter-attack. I'm not sure how it would play out.
>Daniel: Would make people less inhibited about attacking, so would be more combats. Either way. Doubling makes it more realistic, as it tends to make one side or the other take heavy losses, and players tend to build up to attack and don't just attack wildly, but whatever. In the Email NG game it's done simultaneously, no doubling. As moves are simul there's no attacker-defender, except in the sense that someone holding defensive terrain gets the benefit of it.
SJW: We have played this since Day One, all those years ago, and it seems fine - but of course I have nothing to compare it with! I guess it does favour a less cautious style of play, a fact I wasn't aware of. It's nice to know you've actually been using a rule like it satisfactorily.
>>2. Casualties are just disrupted (with some exceptions).
>Simon: How do you kill them? Attack and attack again? Seems a bit long-winded.
>Daniel: Hmm. I'll think more about this. I just ran one of the lastest email NG battles and had the top unit disrupted in melee because the CF loss was half what the top defender has. It wouldn't kill him, but disruption seems good in that case.
SJW: If you've gone down the entire stack and still have damage left over, start at the top again - this time disrupted ones will be eliminated. This rule is relatively new, but seems ok so far - less bloodthirsty, and having more disrupted units about makes for interesting problems.
>>3. Dragonfights eliminate ALL units surrounding and stacked with it.
>Simon: Serves them right and seems fair enough. Superheroes should protect, though.
SJW: Thanks, yes it seemed right to us. You're probably right about the SH's, too (see 7 below).
>>4. Dragon CF = 20.
>Simon: I liked the fact that a dragon is as hard as everyone attacking it.
SJW: Is that a house rule of yours? I thought they were equal to the ones they were stacked with - i.e. if a Dragon's stacked with a Duck, it's CF is 1, which really didn't seem right. Equalling the attackers is an interesting idea though...
>>5. Assassins only kill individuals (must scout the stack first).
>Simon: They can slip into a camp at night and buthcer everyone in a unit. It makes them look hard.
>Daniel: Thesy could take out the leaders or poison a unit's water, or curse their magic or whatever.
SJW: OK, but lone assassins massacring regiments just didn't feel right to us.
>>6. When a Scapegoat is chosen, it must be an individual if one is present.
>Simon: Why? Surely if the Ducks killed Beat Pot then Jar-Eel would want to kill the whole of the unit.
>Daniel: I'll stick to possibly full units. If your best friend were killed by "those guys there" you wouldn't stop at just the ones who actually hit him. Kill them all, and let Daka Fal sort em out (after we scalp them).
SJW: Oh, by all means, slaughter those Ducks! I just meant, if there happens to be an individual around, they should be the one to get the blame - makes it more personal. (BTW, how would those Ducks kill Beat-Pot? In every game we've played, they've been utter dross. Until the first playtest game for Rule 2 - then they were heroes! Amazing.)
>>7. Superheroes and Dragons do not give immunity to units stacked with them...
>Simon: It makes it easier if the have an umbrella all the time for all magic.
SJW: I guess you are right about this. I just thought Rule 2 ('disrupt only') would make it unnecessary - but probably not. You have successfully spotted one that hasn't been tested yet!
>>8. Spirits are not allocated for "DSM", but assumed to be with their magician...
>Simon: Only if they aren't being used - if they are used to attack someone else then they shouldn;t be able to help defend as well.
SJW: And another untested rule. Until last night, that is - when my opponent's (disrupted) Crimson Bat couldn't get back to Lunar lines and needed some DSM sent out. I relented on this rule - so I don't even play it myself! (Re-reading the DSM rules now, I think we've not been playing it right. We've had the spirits atop their own magicians and added the MgF together - but is that wrong?)
>>9. Casualties must be selected from the the top of the stack down.
>Simon: So, if you put Harrek on the top of a stack then he virtually ensures the others are safe, unless you do a lot of damage.
>Daniel: ? It's already that way. That's the normal rule. You mean also for magic attacks?
SJW: Sorry to cause confusion but I abbreviated this rule, to save space in already over-long (and presumptuous?) first post. Yes, I did mean for Missiles, Magic and Melee too. And I missed out a clause saying individuals can be by-passed (yes, even Harrek).
>>10. Major Independents are allied by emissaries, not Diplomacy Points...
>Simon: I'd go the other way and have everyone allied by Diplomacy Points as I don't particularly like the Emissary rules.
SJW: Yes, I saw (your?) anti-emissary comments in the archives, so I thought this might not be universally liked. This is as yet untested, and I've already thought that all the Majors should get at least a -1. But I hope this might do the same job as I think Diplomacy Points were supposed to do - balance the number of allies gained by each side, and delay their arrival - and without the need for bits of paper (or hiding them from your enemy!).
>>11. Diplomacy Points are used to buy-back lost units (spirits, allies, etc)...
>Simon: Good idea.
SJW: I can only claim the extension of it to special/allies and the formula as mine, though.
>>12. Superheroes CF = 10, but cannot be disrupted and cost 20 to eliminate...
>Simon: We used 12 rather than 10 and only used the 20 when they went berserk after their best friend was killed.
SJW: Yes, that was just the sort of thing I saw in the archives that encouraged me to post this lot. 10 seemed a round figure - why pick 12?
>>13. Physical Magic adds to the CF of any units attacking in Melee Combat.
>Simon: Sounds good to me.
SJW: Me too - but as yet it's untested! MIght make Physical Magic something other than an ineffectual wats of time, though. (Or have I been playing it wrong, and there's some why it can be useful?)
>> Brontosaurs have an underlined MgF. So, can they really give support* Prax...?
>Simon: I'd say yes, because a herd is a herd is a herd. You can butcher the young, drink their blood, eat eggs, use them for transport, carry fodder with them and so on. Sure, chapparal is hard to eat, but they can survive for a while if they eat enough of it. If Grazer Herds can survive in chapparal then why not brontosaurs?
>Daniel: Didn't "Brontos" actually eat pine cones? If they can eat that then grass
and brush is easy.
SJW: Thanks, gents. A quite different reaction from the one this thought got over in the World of Glorantha forum. But it can be justified (can't anything?) and it seems like fun. Actually, it was my son's realization...
>CJ X: I like them all,... ...so I will tinker with them once I have managed to play the full game! :)
SJW: Thanks very much!
Powered by hypermail