| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
Enter a mythic world of dragons and sorcery!
| Page 2 of 2 (24 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
akuma508 said:
He can only change alignment once per turn. I'm pretty that's in the rules somewhere or FAQ (for BI).
simply check rules, under alignment explanation. no character (including druid) may change alignement more than one time in a turn. 
Newser & Reviewer @ Tana dei Goblins!
My Blog: Vita di Bordo check under bookmarks for DoX's boardgames full list!
El-DoX said:
akuma508 said:
simply check rules, under alignment explanation. no character (including druid) may change alignement more than one time in a turn.
Are you saying that we should read the revised rule book instead of basing our judgements off of outdated editions?
You know, that just might be crazy enough to work!!! 
Without signature
JCHendee said:
House Rules Under Consideration
- Fate can additionally be used after a movement roll to modify +1 or -1 (max. 6, min. 1, so only applicable 66% of the time and a minor benefit compared to cost). This is a more real "choice" use of Fate and would actually speed up the game in instances where getting to a specific space is desperately needed / wanted. It also beefs up non-combat competition and forces even more hard choices on Fate use. (We tried it just once, and when the Pool of Live popped up, a rousing free-for-all race and tumble began that brought many laughs... distracting from the imbalance of Lives for Evil characters.)
- City and Village returned to "may" visit on personalities there. Trying to figure out what to do (when nothing was needed or even possible) broke the fantasy adventuring mood, and was considered illogical and silly (even more than annoying)... and it wasted time (slowing the game).
That's a cool idea for fate modifying movement rolls. I was thinking of a variant where you could spend a token BEFORE you roll movement to be able to choose what you roll. Maybe you would have rolled that number anyway but spending a fate is a sure bet to land on the space. Your suggestion sounds like a better solution since you still have some chance involved but with additional control, and isn't that the point of fate anyway?
If you make the city and village encounters optional, people will never visit the enchantress, at least that is what I've experienced with my group. Turning into a toad is too risky even if you have a stockpile of fate. If you remove mandated encounters you end up removing the threat of the enchantress which is also the most common way of getting toaded.
Without signature
Gentlegamer said:
JCHendee said:
Gentlegamer said:
The Monk only adds his Craft value (the starting value printed on his card) to his Strength during Battle. So the Monk has a permanent +3 in Battle. Still very powerful, but not the nuclear powerful of adding all Craft during Battle.
Can you point to the rule, errata or faq where it mentions this clarification? Maybe its something we missed as far back as 2nd edition. Calling it Craft "value" doesn't clarify since values for all character attributes change throughout the game.
This a new definition for the revised 4th edtion. "Value" refers to what is printed on the card; i.e. starting value. It's a codification of what we used to refer to as "starting Craft," etc.
The Warhorse from The Reaper expansion bestows the Monk's ability (add Craft value during Battle), so the bonus you get is variable depending on which character you are. I can't wait to be the Wizard (Craft value 5) and get the Warhorse!
Oh good grief! Why mess with terminology and ignore what the community has already been using for two decades? It's like that whole attack, battle, whatever listed on the sheet that came with the upgrade pack. We were around the table, only half of us actually playing, half writers, some of us having done contract work as editors and publishers, and one of us read that aloud. Reactions varied... including needed amusement to get the game rolling.
But I thank you all for the clarification. Much appreciated. The rule mentioned combined with misunderstood terminology was the problem.
NOBLEDEAD.ORG (The Noble Dead Saga)
FANTASTICDIVERSIONS.COM (Blog for Games Additions)
CONTACT (via F.D. secured web form)
akuma508 said:
JCHendee said:
- The Druid may not draw new spells on a Woods space until after facing any waiting upturned Adventure Cards or facing another character already there. (In other words, he hasn't had time - like a true druid - to interact with Nature to gain new powers). He may draw spells before drawing a new Adventure card there.
Alignment change must be declared at a turn's beginning or end and not during. This is a rather illogical ability (by Alignment concept or actual historical druidic practice). In one situation he changed twice in one turn to gain a space advantage (praying in the Graveyard) and then picked up the Holy Lance (dropped there). One other situation raised the possibility of three switches in one turn. it was getting ridiculous by the game's end... and it still wasn't enough to challenge the Monk.
He can only change alignment once per turn. I'm pretty that's in the rules somewhere or FAQ (for BI).
Thanks... I'll poke around a bit more and see if I can find it... though it should have been on the character card.
EDIT: My mistake..."value" is on the card... and simply caused confusion versus the misunderstood meaning.
NOBLEDEAD.ORG (The Noble Dead Saga)
FANTASTICDIVERSIONS.COM (Blog for Games Additions)
CONTACT (via F.D. secured web form)
akuma508 said:
He can only change alignment once per turn. I'm pretty that's in the rules somewhere or FAQ (for BI).
I see... and again... confusing terminology on the card. It says the Druid can only be one alignment at "any time," but doesn't explicitly say when (as per his turn, or "change only once per his turn", etc.) As it stands, at a time could mean he can change during someone else's turn to avoid such things as Evil Darkness. Some attentive editing would have made additional rules, errata, FAQs unnecessary.
NOBLEDEAD.ORG (The Noble Dead Saga)
FANTASTICDIVERSIONS.COM (Blog for Games Additions)
CONTACT (via F.D. secured web form)
Carrion Prince said:
If you make the city and village encounters optional, people will never visit the enchantress, at least that is what I've experienced with my group. Turning into a toad is too risky even if you have a stockpile of fate. If you remove mandated encounters you end up removing the threat of the enchantress which is also the most common way of getting toaded.
That's a valid point concerning the enchantress... but... in the old days of 2nd edition, on average at least once per game someone had to visit the enchantress for some reason. Now there is even more reason to avoid the city. We found that in three games, only two visits to the city were ever made, and only when something other than visiting the enchantress could be done. The new rule basically dulled the influence and use of the city and village entirely.
Toading should be a rare occurrence or it just isn't that special anymore and becomes a monotonous and slowing effect upon the game. Fate as truly experienced isn't enough for most players to go to the enchantress for anything. On the other hand, avoiding the city when there was nothing else one could do there sometimes forced characters to face other challenges as the only other option... so it does have that going for it.
Either way, I don't agreed with the ideology that making these spaces forced visits somehow kept people from languishing in those corners. Even when they were optional, no one enjoyed doing nothing for a turn. And it did not slow down the game at all, as the next player's turn started that much quicker, and someone else gained something in the long run... making the languisher desperate to move on!
NOBLEDEAD.ORG (The Noble Dead Saga)
FANTASTICDIVERSIONS.COM (Blog for Games Additions)
CONTACT (via F.D. secured web form)
I like the idea of having to do something. People moving to squares just to do nothing sucks. Every move the person should have to do something.
People will go to the city if the other way means death. eg Demon C:10.
Without signature
akuma508 said:
I like the idea of having to do something. People moving to squares just to do nothing sucks. Every move the person should have to do something.
People will go to the city if the other way means death. eg Demon C:10.
| Page 2 of 2 (24 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS