> Dragon Pass 7.4.3: "...magicians' spirits and agents can take part in
> attack, but they cannot be the only attacking units."
> If they are not the only attacking units, that implies that there MUST
> ground troops attacking as well, yes? In other words, _Dragon Pass_
> not allow attacks by spirit or physical magic without support from
> close-combat units. Maybe that should be changed, but that is how I
> the rules now. Nowhere does it allow agents to be used without at least
> one attacking melee or Chaos magic unit as well.
> Sorry, I wasn't clear. I don't believe that DP requires magic to be
> supported by ground troops.
My experience with wargames is that if something is not specifically allowed by a rule, it is not allowed. Knowing Bob Corbett and his rules, my assumption has always been that the intent was as I understand it.
> To quote the full the sentence in DP 7.4.3: "Every inactive unit
> that was adjacent to an active unit must be attacked by at least one
> of those adjacent active units; magicians' spirits and agents can
> take part in the attack, but they cannot be the only attacking units."
> Since the part about "can take part in the attack, but they cannot
> be the only attacking units" is a sub-clause of the first part of
> the sentence, which deals with which enemy units must be attacked in
> ground combat, I've never interpreted it as a prohibition on magical
> attacks on enemy units that are not adjacent to friendly units. It
> didn't occur to me that it wasn't the consensus.
Well, do the rules for spirit magic or physical magic shed any light on the question at hand? I am not as steeped in the rules as I was 10 or so years ago when I was working on Nomad Gods.
> If the intent of the NG rules truly is to prohibit attacks against
The intent of the NG rule was to clarify the DP rule that I found unclear, or at least that left open a loophole.
> non-contacted enemies, then the part about "Any stacks that the
> magicians' spirits or agents were committed to attack must be
> attacked by them and at least one adjacent unit" should perhaps be
> copied to 7.3.3, "Which stacks can be attacked."
> Anyway, this is getting a bit complicated. If there is a new edition
> of the rules in the offing I would be grateful if these sections
> could be looked at. Some examples in the rules, as Paul mentioned,
> would go a long way towards clearing this up, probably.
I have no problem with rules being changed, as long as there is a reason for the change, and the change does not affect game balance too greatly. "Changing" the rule that magic attacks must be used in conjunction with ground troops is a big change that would need some serious playtesting. Not just "we've always done it that way" statements, but specific testing of the change to see how it affects the game.
No objection to such a consideration, as long as Greg indicates that it is an acceptable model in Glorantha. It may be that such long-range magic, at this scale, does require "spotters".
> But I can't keep myself from mentioning another thing I'm
> uncomfortable about in the NG rules: Physical Magic. It looks like
> Elemental Demons placed by a Great Spirit on an enemy stack can
> attack twice in a round - once in the physical magic sub-phase, and
> then again in the Rally Phase (if there are enemy units still in the
?? Why would they attack in the rally phase?
> This seems a little awkward, and makes the already powerful Great
> Spirits even greater. It could perhaps be simplified by allowing the
> Great Spirits to place their demons anywhere within their RF, just
> NOT on top of inactive units, then have them conduct combat as if
> they were regular units or disembodied spirits.
> Also, do defenders get an opportunity to fight back in the physical
> phase? It does say "normal combat" is conducted, but I'm not sure if
> that just refers to the demon attacking.
I'd have to look at that section of the rules again. The intent of the great spirits and their agents was a bit complicated, and with some increased understanding of Prax and Glorantha, may actually be unnecessary nowadays. (I.e., there is perhaps some room for expanding the scope of magic in the game!)
> In any case, I guess this is something that would be looked in
> making any combined rules book, since it would face having to
> distinguish between DP-style physical magic and the NG variant.
The intent of NG was to be 100% compatible with DP, and to clarify some rules in DP that were open to multiple interpretations, such as the multi-hex battles section. Some additional refinement in these editions is of course necessary.
Powered by hypermail