GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
9,575 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
16 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

Fief: France 1429» Forums » Rules

Subject: Few quick battle rules questions rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Edited for answers I think I've found. In bold.

Ok...so movement phase is over. Player A has moved into three opponents villages (B, C & D).

A is first. He says "Ok, Truce in B." (Technically, he can just say "No Battle")

B responds, "Sure." No battle. But, could he have said "No...we are battling!" No, not at this point on A's turn.

Does B need a Lord there to do this? Yes, but on his own turn.

Also, is the timing wrong (see below)? I see that 'all players must agree to the truce" so, it appears that B could force the issue right here, but not sure about have a Lord present. This is wrong. The Truce can happen after at least one roll...but now BOTH sides must agree to stop. Player A can offer, but B, with or without a Lord and keep the battle going. So, slightly different from the 'battle start' condition. This is not quite clear with Raph's repsonse that says I need a Lord to do this.

In C (with a stronghold), A says "I want to siege". So Essentially, he ends the battle immediately. Yes, he doesn't need to do a roll.

C can force the battle if he leaves the protection of the fort. Does C need a lord? (I'm guessing no). It's Yes. Did A need to have one Battle roll (like in surrender)? No. And the wording in the rule book implies that C can 'force continuation' on HIS turn, IF he has a Lord to initiate the battle.

...rules: "If a Player is attacking a Stronghold or Fortified City, he
alone can decide to end the Battle after a Roll." But the example below states: Example:

Kirsten moved her
white Lord and Knight to
L’Epervier, but feels that her
Troops are not strong enough to
attack because of the Stronghold
Attacker Penalty.
She decides not to attack, but
instead to besiege the Stronghold
and adds a 1 Battle Die Siege
Engine counter to her Troops.

Yep...so A can call it off in the middle, or immediately call it off, and lay the siege at the end.

In D, A attacks...but D plays an ambush/assassin and kills his only lord there. Does the battle continue if A wants it to? He he doesn't (asking for Truce) or can't (because of lord question) - Can D continue the battle? Does he need a lord to do this?

Still not sure. There is definitely a difference between two side not agreeing to a truce and keep fighting (no lord needed) AND continuing the battle on the opponent's turn (lord needed).



ON B's turn, if A&B agreed to a truce...and B has a lord there, can B say "Just kidding, I'm attacking YOU now!" Yes. Any reason someone would do this? (Since they can't move reinforcements in...they have the same odds...unless some card or diplomacy happened I suppose.) Probably the latter, or to see what happens with another battle.

On C's turn, can they also decide to attack (assuming they have a lord in the village)? The obviously lose the stronghold protection. Read the rules...the answer is YES here.


Thanks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raph Moimoi
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You need a lord to trigger a battle and to continue it. You also need a lord to decide to continue the battle if you're attacked (if you're besieged you don't decide anything).
You can trigger 1 battle per village where you have an army (troops with at least 1 lord).
You don't ask for a truce : you say you don't trigger a battle and your opponants will be able to trigger one if they're able to do so. You can buy the peace, or you can ask money to not attack arrrh
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Pikaraph wrote:
You need a lord to trigger a battle. You also need a lord to decide to continue the battle if you're attacked.


I can't find this rule. I know that you 'can defend if attacked'. The attacker simply deciding to stop isn't one of the "How a battle ends" conditions. The attacker could say "I want a truce". But "Both players need to agree to the truce". Are you saying the defender CAN'T say no, without a Lord present? Where is this rule?


Pikaraph wrote:
You don't ask for a truce : you say you don't trigger a battle and your opponants will be able to trigger one if they're able to do so. You can buy the peace, or you can ask money to not attack arrrh


Again, BOTH sides must agree to a truce. This is directly from the rules. I get that the defender needs a Lord to attack on THEIR turn. But if what you say is correct, this poorly worded. It's not a mutual truce at all. It would mean the attacker can call off the attack at any time - and that is never stated in the rules. ONLY when the attacker is attacking a Stronghold/Fort...can he call it off, and go for siege. But even the rules state that the defender can come out and force continuation (meaning, still on the attacker's turn)...and no mention of needing a Lord. To be sure, in this scenario, the Attacker initiated combat, the defender is just continuing it. UNLESS...it is worded poorly and indeed the attacker can stop at any time.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kim Choy
Canada
Winnipeg
Manitoba
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The one thing you can rely on consistently in the rules is that it is poorly worded.

The Asynchron (French rules) designer has stated in the forums that a Lord is required for any army to make battle decisions. I'm unconvinced that there's any support in the actual rules text for this assertion, but in theory the designers know what the intended rules are. Note how, even with reference to his french rule book he has to add words in the explanation thread to change the meaning to be what was intended.

Designer reply

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow...it seems I'm not the only one with the question.

In most war/area control games, the attacker has the option to stop the attack, cut his losses and pull back. Usually, the defender can't press the issue. There may be cases where you "can't pull out" - like an airdrop or amphibious landing in other games, for example.

So I'm thinking "Truce" is a poor word here. I also think that 'both players must agree to the Truce' is wrong. And 'continuation of the battle' really means, the defender can attack - if it's his turn, and he has a Lord there. And the Attacker only stop fighting if he is at a SH/FC is also wrong.

Reading other threads, the French rules are much clearer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok,
(Pikaraph said in another thread)

Quote:
When in battle, the defending player needs a lord to be able to decide to continue to fight if the attacker wants a truce. With no lord in defence, you have to obey to the attacker's choice. In the french rule, when besieged and attacked, you must obey to attacker's choice even if you have a lord in defence (english rule differs but IMHO this is a translation mistake).


So, in a NON-SC/FC Village, player A attacking B's Village on his turn:

Player A can offer Truce to start (or even after some rolls). If Player B doesn't have a Lord there, that's it. If he does, He can accept the truce and nothing happens, or he can reject it - it which case battle rolls must continue until one of the 'end of battle' conditions is met. This is still on A's turn...and if on B's turn, enemy troops are still there and he has a lord, he can battle again...though I'm not sure why he would do so.

In a SC/FC Village, Player A can offer Truce to start. If B has no Lord, that's the end. Player A can't start a siege, because the rules state "After a roll" - so it would seem at least one roll has to happen (like surrender). If B has a Lord...they can still have the battle happen if they choose, but no SC/FC bonus. Or they could accept the Truce.

This is in the spirit of the 'troops need a Lord to make decisions' theme that I've seen around. Also...rules never mentions the ability of an attacker to call off the battle and pull back (like in many other games). Have I got the above scenarios right?

The main confusion is if a defender can force the issue on the attacker's turn, or if the game designer just meant that the defender can attack on his turn, if it hadn't happened yet. What I see in the rules suggest that it's the former, since the attacker can't simply pull out on his own.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sdric
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
mb
al_fredo wrote:
Player A can't start a siege, because the rules state "After a roll" - so it would seem at least one roll has to happen (like surrender).


A mistake here, no battle needed to siege :

After resolving his battles, a Player that still has Troops in a Village with an opponent occupied Stronghold or Fortified City may initiate a Siege. He declares a Siege and adds a 1 Battle Die
Siege Engine counter to his besieging troops.


By the way, I have an issue about the ''his'' battles and not ''all the''


Does that means the following scenario is correct :

Player A (1 Lord + 3 Archers + 1 Knight)
Player B (1 Lord + 3 Archers + 1 Knight)
Player C (2 Lord + 5 Knights)

A+B are at the gates of C's city.

The turn order is A-B-C

A's Turn
A attacks (B join him): Archer roll 1d3+3=6 (2 Knights from C died)
Round 1 : A+B (1 dice) 14 SP vs 11 SP (2 dices)
1d3=2 No casualty vs 2d3=3 : 1 Knight from B died
A choose to stop his attack and start his siege (all his battle are resolved)

B's Turn
B attacks (A join him): Archer roll 1d3+3=6 (2 Knights from C died)
Round 1 : A+B (1 dice -thanks to siege engine of player A-) 11 SP vs 5 SP (1 dice)
1d3=3 Last Knight from C died vs 1d3=3 : 3 Archers from A died

The city is conquered
A+B loose 3 Archers and 1 Knight
C looses 5 Knight and his city, and 2 Lord captives.

EDIT : wrong SP for C on last round.
EDIT2 : wrong number of dice.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raph Moimoi
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sdric wrote:
al_fredo wrote:
Player A can't start a siege, because the rules state "After a roll" - so it would seem at least one roll has to happen (like surrender).


A mistake here, no battle needed to siege :

After resolving his battles, a Player that still has Troops in a Village with an opponent occupied Stronghold or Fortified City may initiate a Siege. He declares a Siege and adds a 1 Battle Die
Siege Engine counter to his besieging troops.


By the way, I have an issue about the ''his'' battles and not ''all the''


Does that means the following scenario is correct :

Player A (1 Lord + 3 Archers + 1 Knight)
Player B (1 Lord + 3 Archers + 1 Knight)
Player C (2 Lord + 5 Knights)

A+B are at the gates of C's city.

The turn order is A-B-C

A's Turn
A attacks (B join him): Archer roll 1d3+3=6 (2 Knights from C died)
Round 1 : A+B (no dice) 14 SP vs 11 SP (2 dices)
0d3=0 No casualty vs 2d3=3 : 1 Knight from B died
A choose to stop his attack and start his siege (all his battle are resolved)

B's Turn
B attacks (A join him): Archer roll 1d3+3=6 (2 Knights from C died)
Round 1 : A+B (1 dice -thanks to siege engine of player A-) 11 SP vs 11 SP (1 dice)
1d3=3 Last Knight from C died vs 1d3=3 : 3 Archers from A died

The city is conquered
A+B loose 3 Archers and 1 Knight
C looses 5 Knight and his city, and 2 Lord captives.


That's a good example of alliance effectiveness arrrh

I wonder if the battle would continue as soon as the attacker is reduced to 0 dice... it seems you cannot attack when you're rolling 0 dice (and as the besieged player cannot chosse to continue fighting...) --> I also wonder if you can trigger a battle if you have 0 dice (because of foritifcation reduction) even if you could do the Archer special attack.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sdric, the rule you quote doesn't address the point, just that the battle has to resolve. From 6.3:

• If a Player is attacking a Stronghold or Fortified City, he
alone can decide to end the Battle after a Roll.

Is that not clear that has to roll at least once?** Much like:

"At the end of a Battle Roll, if both sides have Troops
remaining, an Army can decide to surrender".


**Edit: though I need to correct myself again. The example given in the rule book for Kristen says that she moved into a village and "chooses not to attack" then places siege marker.

Also, isn't 14SP, 3 dice (-2 for the city) = 1 die to roll? But point taken. If you have no dice to roll..can you still attack? Why would you? Perhaps the answer is - it's the only way to set up a siege engine.

I think B could totally use A's siege unit at that point. We already know if both put one down, they are cumulative. And B "earns" the SP of A's troops even though they just fought.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vance Strickland
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
al_fredo wrote:

... From 6.3:

• If a Player is attacking a Stronghold or Fortified City, he
alone can decide to end the Battle after a Roll.

Is that not clear that has to roll at least once? ...


The example in the 6.4 Sieges and Siege Engines clearly states that you can start a siege without a roll:

Quote:
Example: Kirsten moved her
white Lord and Knight to
L’Epervier, but feels that her
Troops are not strong enough to
attack because of the Stronghold
Attacker Penalty.
She decides not to attack, but
instead to besiege the Stronghold
and adds a 1 Battle Die Siege
Engine counter to her Troops.
Example: Kirsten attacked L’Epervier, but after one Battle
Roll felt that her chances of winning were not good. She decides
to call off the attack and begins a siege by placing a 1 Battle Die
Siege Engine counter with her Troops.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Yep...forgot the part. Edited.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastien Castano
France
Montpellier
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
al_fredo wrote:
Pikaraph wrote:
You need a lord to trigger a battle. You also need a lord to decide to continue the battle if you're attacked.


I can't find this rule. I know that you 'can defend if attacked'. The attacker simply deciding to stop isn't one of the "How a battle ends" conditions. The attacker could say "I want a truce". But "Both players need to agree to the truce". Are you saying the defender CAN'T say no, without a Lord present? Where is this rule?


You can't find it because this is not exactly true
Pikaraph is mixing up the rules of attcking a fortification and the rules of normal combat.


al_fredo wrote:

Pikaraph wrote:
You don't ask for a truce : you say you don't trigger a battle and your opponants will be able to trigger one if they're able to do so. You can buy the peace, or you can ask money to not attack arrrh


Again, BOTH sides must agree to a truce. This is directly from the rules.


Not it is not, Pikaraph is right here, he talks about the "Battle declaration phase". The "truce rules" can happen only in the middle of a battle, after each round of battle.
You guys are talking about 2 different things.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastien Castano
France
Montpellier
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
To clear up a bit:

Example 1:

Pikaraph plays before Al_fredo in turn order.

Move phase:

Pikaraph moved an army (1 Lord + troops) to a simple village controlled by Al_Fredo with another army (1 Lord + troops).
Alfredo chooses not to move.


Combat phase:

Battle declaration:

Pikaraph can declare a battle against al_fredo, or not. He doesn't need any approval from al_fredo to make this decision.
If he chooses to not declare a battle, then it is alfredo's opportunity to make that same decision himself during his own combat phase.

Note: If Pikaraph has a stronger force, he may negociate with al_fredo, and ask money against the promise he will not attack him (this is what Pikaraph was talking about earlier in the thread).

Pikaraph declares a battle against alfredo's army.
Pikaraph will be the attacker and alfredo the defender.

Then the battle starts.

A battle is a succession of rounds. A round starts when both sides calculate the number of dice according to their SP and ends when both sides have applied the damages to their troops.

So:

First round: each player rolls dice according to their SP, calculate the damages done to eachother, and apply the losses amongst their own troops.

End of first round:

Pikaraph and alfredo may, if they both agree, declare a truce, and the combat ends without any further damages done.
If they keep fighting, they'll still have the possibility to agree to a truce at the end of each round of combat.

End of Battle conditions:

The battle may end if one of these conditions happens:

- At the end of a round, Pikaraph and alfredo both agree to a truce.

- At the end of a round, one of the 2 sides has no more troops

- At the end of a round, one of the 2 sides decides, by himself, that he will surrender. All his troops are immediatly destroyed, and his lord is made captive by the opposing Lord.

- For 3 rounds in a row, no damages have been done to both sides.

- Before or after a combat round, Pikaraph's attacking Lord is killed or made captive by an opportunity card (ex: assassin card, ambush card).




Example 2: slightly the same example but with little changes in red

Pikaraph plays before Al_fredo in turn order.

Move phase:

Pikaraph moved an army (1 Lord + troops) to a village with castle controlled by Al_Fredo with another army (1 Lord + troops).
Alfredo chooses not to move.


Combat phase:

Battle declaration:

Pikaraph can declare a battle against al_fredo, or not. He doesn't need any approval from al_fredo to make this decision.
If he chooses to not declare a battle, he may lay siege and put a siege token. Then it is alfredo's opportunity to make that same decision himself during his own combat phase.

Note: If Pikaraph has a stronger force, he may negociate with al_fredo, and ask money against the promise he will not attack or siege him (this is what Pikaraph was talking about earlier in the thread).

Pikaraph declares a battle against alfredo's army.
Pikaraph will be the attacker and alfredo the defender.
Pikaraph is attacking a fortification, and has no siege token.

Then the battle starts.

A battle is a succession of rounds. A round starts when both sides calculate the number of dice according to their SP and ends when both sides have applied the damages to their troops. Pikaraph has 1 die malus, due to the castle fortification.

So:

First round: each player rolls dice according to their SP, calculate the damages done to eachother, and apply the losses amongst their own troops.

End of first round:

Pikaraph and alfredo may, if they both agree, declare a truce, and the combat ends without any further damages done.
If they keep fighting, they'll still have the possibility to agree to a truce at the end of each round of combat.

Pikaraph may end the battle on his own decision alone, BECAUSE he's attacking a fortification.
If he does so, he may still lay siege and put a siege token.



End of Battle conditions:

The battle may end if one of these conditions happens:

- At the end of a round, Pikaraph and alfredo both agree to a truce.

- At the end of a round, one of the 2 sides has no more troops

- At the end of a round, one of the 2 sides decides, by himself, that he will surrender. All his troops are immediatly destroyed, and his lord is made captive by the opposing Lord.

- For 3 rounds in a row, no damages have been done to both sides.

- Before or after a combat round, Pikaraph's attacking Lord is killed or made captive by an opportunity card (ex: assassin card, ambush card).

- At the end of a round, Pikaraph, the attacker, decides to stop the combat.

- At the end of a round, Pikaraph, the attacker, has less than 7 SP left, and hence cannot roll any combat dice due to the malus of the castle (1 die -1 = 0 die). He may play a secret passage card at this moment, to have the chance to maybe finish the battle and win.

- Before the First round, Pikaraph attacking lord is killed by the archers special attack (6+ on a D6 roll).


Edit: added the archers special attack possibility found by al_fredo
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastien Castano
France
Montpellier
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Note that if Alfredo had no Lord but just troops in those two examples, he might still be able ask for a truce at the end of a combat round.

The only change would be that alfredo couldn't declare a battle against pikaraph during his own combat phase, because he has no lord to lead an attack.

If you really need that, i can write a 3rd example... but come on, i think it is pretty clear now


The only thing that im not sure about is this:

End of combat conditions:

- Before or after a combat round, Pikaraph's attacking Lord is killed or made captive by an opportunity card (ex: assassin card, ambush card).


In this case, I know there is a possibility for the defender (alfredo) to decide to keep fighting. But im not sure if:

1/ Alfredo's (defender) needs a lord or not to take this decision.

2/ If the combat continues is alfredo now considered the attacker? and hence would lose any of the fortification bonuses?

3/ If Pikaraph was attacking a fortification (example 2), can he still choose to stop the battle at the end of a round, even if he has no lord?


If someone knows those 3 official answers i'd be glad to see it! Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok...I'm going to modify and answer my questions in the above posts, hopefully for clarity.

The thing I was hung up on was the phrase "the defender my force continuation of battle by leave the protect of the fort." But it never mentions that this must be on HIS turn, and he must have a lord present to do so.

Please check me answers in the post above.

A question I still have outstanding is...
If two side have been fighting in a non-Fort Village (let's say for 2 rolls). One side (it doesn't matter which) offers a Truce. The other side refuses. We keep rolling. Does it matter who has a Lord at this point? Do I need a Lord to offer...or a Lord to Decide to accept or not? I see vague references to a Lord needing to be present to make decisions...but this is message board stuff.

Thanks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Gunzilla,

Also note, if the attacking Lord is taken out by an archer from a fort, the battle immediately stops. The rules mentioned 'if the Lord is taken out in this way' - so it may be a special exception to stopping the battle...as opposed to the Lord being assassinated/ambushed.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastien Castano
France
Montpellier
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
al_fredo wrote:

A question I still have outstanding is...
If two side have been fighting in a non-Fort Village (let's say for 2 rolls). One side (it doesn't matter which) offers a Truce. The other side refuses. We keep rolling. Does it matter who has a Lord at this point? Do I need a Lord to offer...or a Lord to Decide to accept or not? I see vague references to a Lord needing to be present to make decisions...but this is message board stuff.

Thanks.


No it doesnt matter if you have a Lord or not.
To propose or accept a truce you dont need a Lord, although in most of the cases* a Lord will be present amongst at least 1 of the sides, if not there is no possibility that a battle had been started

A lord "being present to make decisions" is a tricky phrase that doesnt apply to every cases. You shouldn't rely on that only

For example, you dont need a Lord to decide to tansfer the control of a village.

The most important thing you should remember about the decision making is:

- you need a lord to start a battle.
- you need a lord to join the attacker side of a battle.

*: the only exception could be that the last attacking Lord was ambushed by the defender, and then the last defending Lord decides to continue fighting, and then he gets assassinated. But im not even sure, as i think in this case, when the defending lord decides to continue fighting, he's now considered the attacker and hence the battle would stop after the assassin card. But I need to see an official answer for that too.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastien Castano
France
Montpellier
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
al_fredo wrote:
Gunzilla,

Also note, if the attacking Lord is taken out by an archer from a fort, the battle immediately stops. The rules mentioned 'if the Lord is taken out in this way' - so it may be a special exception to stopping the battle...as opposed to the Lord being assassinated/ambushed.



Yes, you are right, i forgot about that possibility. I'll edit my post accordingly.

Thanks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sdric
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
mb
Just to mix your brain :

Exit from a Stronghold in a defensive move (see Templar rules)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Michaels
United States
Glen Ridge
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sdric: I saw that wording...and was not happy! I'll just treat it as a special Templar thing!
 
 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.