Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Successors (third edition)» Forums » Rules

Subject: Sample game: Peucestas (41)and Neoptolemus (42) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
suPUR DUEper
United States
Villa Hills
Kentucky
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I may be missing something but....

These cards are identically worded and allow you to place 3 mercs and take control of a space if enemy or independently controlled. But.....

In sample game, round 4/4 Black plays the card on an uncontrolled space (Persepolis) and takes control

On round 5/3 Blue plays the Neo card in Amida and the sample says he can't convert it because there is no control marker there.

Same exact situation; two very different interpretations.

Thoughts?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BrentS
Australia
Sydney
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Neptolemus example is incorrect. A control marker can be placed.

There are several confusing rule errors in the sample play through….I made a list of them, including this one, which is posted in the Files section of this site…..linked here.

Brent.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Blumentritt
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So "you can convert the space if enemy or independent" INCLUDES spaces with no control marker at all?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BrentS
Australia
Sydney
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Statalyzer wrote:
So "you can convert the space if enemy or independent" INCLUDES spaces with no control marker at all?


Yes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Blumentritt
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Are you sure? I just looked it up and that seems contrary to the glossary's definitions of enemy, independent, and neutral.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BrentS
Australia
Sydney
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Statalyzer wrote:
Are you sure? I just looked it up and that seems contrary to the glossary's definitions of enemy, independent, and neutral.


I agree entirely but that seems to be an error in the wording of these two cards as opposed to their design intent……possibly a legacy of earlier edition card text not updated for current edition terminology?

When researching the apparent contradiction between the play of these two identically worded cards in the 3rd Edition Sample of Play, I found a Consimworld ruling by John Firer, which speaks to the intent of the card and is the only official ruling to be found.

This is from the sample of play errors file I created and has the Consimworld link.

Quote:
Round 1⁄4 (p27)
Blue plays the Neptolemus event and places his CUs and Minor General in the neutral Minor City space of Amida. The text says “Since there is no control marker in Amida it does not convert”. This is incorrect and Blue should have been able to place a control marker -­‐ reference ruling by John Firer at Consimworld :

http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?14@426.twhpcj1eNos.74@.1dd1...

Note that the Peucestas event has identical wording regarding control marker placement and is played correctly by Black earlier in the Example of Play (Round 4/4, p27)


Brent.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Blumentritt
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Interesting - surprised the Living Rules don't mention "by the way the cards are in error regarding this terminology"
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.