On a side note, I sent you a message/email on boardgamegeek some time ago, did you get it?
> Perhaps of interest is that I've *never* had Androgeous in a game of DP
> (except as the Exiles in the 3 player). I've probably played the full
> game about 30 times and the 3 player about 6 times. So i'm always faced
> with getting rid of 2 superhero stacks.
I'm confused -- if it's a three-player game, you should get Androgeous if the Lunar and Sartar players have their super-heroes. Or do you mean that it's a 2-player game, and the other player allies Androgeous? If that is the case (and I don't have my rules to check, admittedly), yes, that is one thing I'd change.
> Fortunately, there's often only
> those two major stacks, along with some flotsom, left by the 3rd or 4th
> turn. But killing a superhero with a bit of CF is a dangerous thing to
> try. For example, say a superhero stack is in clear ground (don't
> contemplate it otherwise :-). They're probably at about 20+5+5+5+6
> leadership = 41. If you have a superhero stack attacking it of the same
> size, then you need a 6 for a full kill. If they put the superhero on
> top, then you need at least a 4 to do any damage at all! The doubled
> counterattack essentially means a good chance of losing everyone in the
> attack. Even if you augment the original (doh - of course you will)
> another two stacks -
Whew, for a second I thought you were tarting to augment the attacking superhero with his Great Speaking Voice 3W3 or something. :)
> three in all around a single superhero stack -
> they're likely only of the order of 5+5+5+maybe a 4 single entity = 19.
> So we have defender _at_ 41 and attacker at 41+19+19=79. That's better but
> there's still a good chance of failing and the counterattack being
> potentially devastating. Imagine you've got to succeed with the attack
> twice (against 2 superhero stacks), both times almost fully with the SH
> coming back, and it's a pretty hard slog. It's possible, but hard. Of
> course, after the counterattack, then it's their turn to move with you
> in a terrible strategic situation with three stacks near a remaining
> superhero (or two!).
> So, in short, I'd love to hear some other options! Instead of doubling,
> maybe half again? Why should the counterattack be increased at all? Is
> there a better way?
Sheesh, I hadn't even considered options like this!
One factor of White Bear & Red Moon that I missed in the Dragon Pass "upgrade" was the concept of "wounds" -- each superhero could take up to 5 wounds, at which point they died. Only certain units could deal them a wound, and I know it involves some bookkeeping, but it was linked to the dismemberment of the superheroes (a la Tada and his Grisley Portions), and it is a concept I'd love to explore bringing back.
> >>It certainly played havoc when you fail to kill a superhero! IMHO I
> >>think the way I and other have interpreted the rules, which are
> >>definitely not universally canonical even though they probably are in
> >>one particular city :-), make this much more fun too. For example, if
> >>there's a superhero with 3-4 other "normal" units being attacked by a
> >>couple of stacks, the defender can order the superhero stack and they
> >>*must* be eliminated by the attacked from the top down - no other way
> >>possible (we play the same for magic).
> > Isn't this exactly what the rules say must happen in most cases --
> > casualties must be chosen from the top down.
> > I do not think the rules support this "pick-and-choose" method, at
> > for melee. It might specify it for magic, I can't recall -- been
> > since I played.
> Doh. Of course the melee ones do. We just play the same for magic
> whereas the rules state that the attacker gets to choose from within
> stack for magic. I'd really suggest people play the variation some time
> - it really changes the game a lot and, IMHO, somewhat balances the
> otherwise awesome power of the magicians.
Rather than just changing the rule outright, what I'd rather do is make this a stated alternate rule OR simply allow many units to prevent this. Thus, a normal melee stack would be subject to this "pick and choose" rule for magic. Any stack that had leadership, or was stacked with any kind of magician, would be defended against this, and so any picks from the stack would have to be from the top down.
This keeps within the existing rule, but modifies it in (to me) a logical way, allowing leadership and powerful magic to be the factors that prevent this.
Similarly, you might ALSO say that if the attacking stack contains a hero (or maybe just a superhero), a dragon, or certain other powerful melee units, and the defending stack does not, then the attacker can also pick and choose at will. This is a change that makes some combats more dangerous, true, but it also has a nice reciprocal logical feel.
This would all add a chart to the rules, of course, to indicate how casualties are selected depending on who is in the attacking stack and who is in the defending stack. But the rule is intuitive and simple enough that it would be second nature by the end of the first game in any case.
Hmm, another message to place in my archive. :)
I have my own list of rules issues I'd like to address. Some other time, when I have more time.
Powered by hypermail