Re: Date WW fell

From: Rob <robert_m_davis_at_...>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:50:10 -0000

• In whitewall_at_yahoogroups.com, "Jane Williams" <janewilliams20_at_y...> wrote:
  > Donald:
  >
  > > The problem with Tatius arriving at the end of 1619 is that
  > > he then spends nearly two years building up troops and magic
  > > to attack. If he has the sort of authority he appears to have
  > > then why did it take him so long?
  >
  > I believe one suggestion we liked was that for magical reasons, WW
  has
  > to fall on the right date. And at times Tatius is deliberately
  slowing
  > things down so as not to have the place fall too early.
  >
  > What is special about Windsday, Death week, Dark season of 1621?
  >
  > Well, I think I can see a few hints about the first two (Wind,
  > Death...), but why 1621, not 1620, say?
  

Apparently the seige of Troy lasted for 10 years. Also as a general you are not going to mount attack after attack and waste the lives of many, many troops. You have them boxed in - try and starve/ intimidate them out. Of course you have the magic thing. IMG I have the Orlanth presence super charging the Orlanthi in WW. That means that even on a full moon the resident heroes of WW can stand toe to toe with the best the Empire has to offer. I shall be testing that next game. I think that Tatius decides to overload the numbers to minimise his casualties. I don't think he arrives at this conclusion immediately but through trial and error. I think the date is mega important ritually so the troop and magical build ups will be geared that way. Why don't we have major magical/physical assaults on the anniversary of the fall of WW, with the success in 1621.

My game will bidding farewell to WW in the next few weeks, but this group has provided some rich material for our group and much fun so thanks to all the contributors!

Regards
Rob