Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
39 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Blood Rage» Forums » Rules

Subject: Is it possible to fulfill a Quest in a destroyed province with a ship? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jesús M. Gómez
Spain
Ocaña
Toledo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In my last game to Blood Rage, the first 2 destroyed provinces for the Ragnarok where the two that forms Alfheim. In the third age I took one of the Quest of Alfheim in order to complete it by having majority with a ship but it's not clear that it's possible. So in this case there are two carts useless in third age deck.

What do you think about this?.


Rulebook Ragnarok phase: "Take the token that’s on the current Ragnarök slot and place it on its corresponding province, with the “destroyed” side facing up. That province is destroyed forever and is out of the game."
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Prior
United Kingdom
Littleport
Cambs
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A fjord is just considered an extension of the province. Anything in it is considered to be in both provinces at all times.

In essence you can not do what you did as the fjord is destroyed as well as the region with a token in it
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thaddeus MacTaggart
Netherlands
Almere Buiten
Flevoland
flag msg tools
badge
Blood Rage fan - Raven Clan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lostrikis wrote:
In my last game to Blood Rage, the first 2 destroyed provinces for the Ragnarok where the two that forms Alfheim. In the third age I took one of the Quest of Alfheim in order to complete it by having majority with a ship but it's not clear that it's possible. So in this case there are two carts useless in third age deck.

What do you think about this?.


Rulebook Ragnarok phase: "Take the token that’s on the current Ragnarök slot and place it on its corresponding province, with the “destroyed” side facing up. That province is destroyed forever and is out of the game."

As the province "is destroyed forever and is out of the game" you (theoretically) cannot be adjacent to it. Even if your ship is next to the place where the province used to be.

It happens on a regular basis that a whole region is out of the game (especially in the 3rd age), so subsequently, the corresponding quest cards are rendered useless.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J M
United States
Scottdale
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lukewild1982 wrote:

In essence you can not do what you did as the fjord is destroyed as well as the region with a token in it


Are you saying that if Utgard is destroyed, you cannot invade the fjord to pillage/battle in Andlang? Because I don't think that's true.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Saer Chy
Netherlands
flag msg tools
AceAceBaby wrote:
Lukewild1982 wrote:

In essence you can not do what you did as the fjord is destroyed as well as the region with a token in it


Are you saying that if Utgard is destroyed, you cannot invade the fjord to pillage/battle in Andlang? Because I don't think that's true.


Well the rules do say that "any effect that affects a province, also affects its supporting fjord". Which indicates that if Utgard is destroyed, that same effect (destroyed) affects its supporting fjord.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thaddeus MacTaggart
Netherlands
Almere Buiten
Flevoland
flag msg tools
badge
Blood Rage fan - Raven Clan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Saerchy wrote:
AceAceBaby wrote:
Lukewild1982 wrote:

In essence you can not do what you did as the fjord is destroyed as well as the region with a token in it


Are you saying that if Utgard is destroyed, you cannot invade the fjord to pillage/battle in Andlang? Because I don't think that's true.


Well the rules do say that "any effect that affects a province, also affects its supporting fjord". Which indicates that if Utgard is destroyed, that same effect (destroyed) affects its supporting fjord.

I think he means that the fjord always has 2 borders; the fjord itself isn't destroyed if only one of the adjacent provinces is destroyed.

So if province X is destroyed in age 2, the ships in the fjord are destroyed as well - but the fjord itself is still open for invasion in age 3.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Prior
United Kingdom
Littleport
Cambs
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AceAceBaby wrote:
Lukewild1982 wrote:

In essence you can not do what you did as the fjord is destroyed as well as the region with a token in it


Are you saying that if Utgard is destroyed, you cannot invade the fjord to pillage/battle in Andlang? Because I don't think that's true.


no I am not saying that because we are not discussing pillaging. We are talking about both the adjacent provinces of a fjord being destroyed. If there is one that is able to be pillaged then one of them is not destroyed is it!!

in essence we could look at a fjord as being able to be both destroyed and not destroyed at the same time.

As with John's odd expample the ship is considered to be within both regions and therefore can still happily apply its strength to a region for the purposes of a battle/pillage.

As for Jesus's point though both the regions are destroyed and out of the game and therefore no quest can be completed for a region that no longer technically exists. I am struggling to understand how the ship got there because if they were both destroyed via ragnorak then the ship should have been destroyed at the latest by the 2nd one and could therefore never have been there to complete a quest in which ragnorak had occurred. I would assume the the ship was illegally placed there as a march order once both regions were destroyed. Either way this situation can not actually occur without a rule being broken.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thaddeus MacTaggart
Netherlands
Almere Buiten
Flevoland
flag msg tools
badge
Blood Rage fan - Raven Clan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lukewild1982 wrote:
[q="AceAceBaby"][q="Lukewild1982"]
Either way this situation can not actually occur without a rule being broken.

Well the question is: does the fjord still exist if both adjacent provinces are destroyed? And consequently, can it still be invaded (even though it has no use to do so)?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Prior
United Kingdom
Littleport
Cambs
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Teowulff wrote:
Lukewild1982 wrote:
[q="AceAceBaby"][q="Lukewild1982"]
Either way this situation can not actually occur without a rule being broken.

Well the question is: does the fjord still exist if both adjacent provinces are destroyed? And consequently, can it still be invaded (even though it has no use to do so)?


How do you invade into something that, as you have stated, does not exist?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charlie Theel
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say you can still go into the Fjord, but you can't have the greatest strength in a province that has been met with Ragnarok. That seems the most logical, simple, and likely answer. Any other answer is convoluted.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesús M. Gómez
Spain
Ocaña
Toledo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lukewild1982 wrote:
As for Jesus's point though both the regions are destroyed and out of the game and therefore no quest can be completed for a region that no longer technically exists. I am struggling to understand how the ship got there because if they were both destroyed via ragnorak then the ship should have been destroyed at the latest by the 2nd one and could therefore never have been there to complete a quest in which ragnorak had occurred. I would assume the the ship was illegally placed there as a march order once both regions were destroyed. Either way this situation can not actually occur without a rule being broken.


In second era Ragnarok destroyed Andlang and I invaded the fjord in third rage to add support to Utgard, so I don't think I broke any rule.

Now the point is that if Ragnarok destroy a province, the adjacent fjord is disabled for the rest of the play although the other province is still alive. If so, why don't include a token to mark the fjord as destoyed?.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Prior
United Kingdom
Littleport
Cambs
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lostrikis wrote:
Lukewild1982 wrote:
As for Jesus's point though both the regions are destroyed and out of the game and therefore no quest can be completed for a region that no longer technically exists. I am struggling to understand how the ship got there because if they were both destroyed via ragnorak then the ship should have been destroyed at the latest by the 2nd one and could therefore never have been there to complete a quest in which ragnorak had occurred. I would assume the the ship was illegally placed there as a march order once both regions were destroyed. Either way this situation can not actually occur without a rule being broken.


In second era Ragnarok destroyed Andlang and I invaded the fjord in third rage to add support to Utgard, so I don't think I broke any rule.

Now the point is that if Ragnarok destroy a province, the adjacent fjord is disabled for the rest of the play although the other province is still alive. If so, why don't include a token to mark the fjord as destoyed?.


Without the board in front of me I am just getting confused
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thaddeus MacTaggart
Netherlands
Almere Buiten
Flevoland
flag msg tools
badge
Blood Rage fan - Raven Clan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lostrikis wrote:
Now the point is that if Ragnarok destroys a province, the adjacent fjord is disabled for the rest of the play although the other province is still alive. If so, why don't include a token to mark the fjord as destoyed?

As long as there's one province adjacent to the fjord, it is still in play. I would even say that a fjord in between two destroyed provinces can still be occupied. It only has no use at all.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Tolin
United States
Beaumont
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lostrikis wrote:
Lukewild1982 wrote:
As for Jesus's point though both the regions are destroyed and out of the game and therefore no quest can be completed for a region that no longer technically exists. I am struggling to understand how the ship got there because if they were both destroyed via ragnorak then the ship should have been destroyed at the latest by the 2nd one and could therefore never have been there to complete a quest in which ragnorak had occurred. I would assume the the ship was illegally placed there as a march order once both regions were destroyed. Either way this situation can not actually occur without a rule being broken.


In second era Ragnarok destroyed Andlang and I invaded the fjord in third rage to add support to Utgard, so I don't think I broke any rule.

Now the point is that if Ragnarok destroy a province, the adjacent fjord is disabled for the rest of the play although the other province is still alive. If so, why don't include a token to mark the fjord as destoyed?.


I don't have the board in front of me, but:

1. If a province is destroyed, all ships in the adjacent fjord are destroyed at the same time.

2. The fjord can still be invaded in a later age with another ship, and that ship can lend its strength to the other adjacent province (which is not yet destroyed).

3. If both provinces adjacent to the fjord are destroyed, intelligent minds could differ on whether the fjord can still be invaded in a later age. I would say yes, because the fjord itself isn't destroyed along with the provinces. Others might say no. Either way, I think we can all agree that the question is academic--there is no reason anyone would want to invade a fjord adjacent to two destroyed provinces. (At least, no reason I can think of).
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brett Rush
msg tools
Lukewild1982 wrote:
[q="AceAceBaby"]in essence we could look at a fjord as being able to be both destroyed and not destroyed at the same time.


So we are looking at Schrödinger's Fjord?

To answer the question:
You can still invade the fjord adjacent to Utgard to lend support, however you cannot complete the Alfheim quest because "[Andlang] is destroyed forever and is out of the game." You cannot complete a quest if the place does not exist. So the Alfheim quests would be useless if both Andlang and Gimle are destroyed.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kent
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My understanding is this:

- Any ships in a fjord go to Valhalla whenever one of the adjacent provinces is destroyed by Ragnarok (collateral damage rule)

- If at least one of the provinces next to a fjord is not destroyed, then that fjord may be invaded

- If both provinces next to a fjord are destroyed, then that fjord may not be invaded

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Prior
United Kingdom
Littleport
Cambs
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
my original point is just being repeated over and over again. Can we declare this as answered now?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Tolin
United States
Beaumont
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lukewild1982 wrote:
my original point is just being repeated over and over again. Can we declare this as answered now?


Not really. A number of people in the thread do not think a fjord is ever "destroyed." The pieces in it may be destroyed during Ragnarok, but the fjord continues to exist (and thus may be invaded, even if both adjacent provinces are destroyed).

Functionally, there isn't much difference, since there would be no reason to invade a fjord with no adjacent provinces, but the question is still contested and unanswered.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Fleming
United States
Orange
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DavidT wrote:

Functionally, there isn't much difference, since there would be no reason to invade a fjord with no adjacent provinces, but the question is still contested and unanswered.


I think the reason it makes a difference is to answer OP's original question. If you can invade with ships in a fjord attached to two destroyed provinces, you can use that ship to claim quests for those provinces.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Tolin
United States
Beaumont
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
moosemcd wrote:
DavidT wrote:

Functionally, there isn't much difference, since there would be no reason to invade a fjord with no adjacent provinces, but the question is still contested and unanswered.


I think the reason it makes a difference is to answer OP's original question. If you can invade with ships in a fjord attached to two destroyed provinces, you can use that ship to claim quests for those provinces.


No, you can't. Because the provinces don't exist. Whether you're in the fjord or not.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thaddeus MacTaggart
Netherlands
Almere Buiten
Flevoland
flag msg tools
badge
Blood Rage fan - Raven Clan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DavidT wrote:
moosemcd wrote:
DavidT wrote:

Functionally, there isn't much difference, since there would be no reason to invade a fjord with no adjacent provinces, but the question is still contested and unanswered.


I think the reason it makes a difference is to answer OP's original question. If you can invade with ships in a fjord attached to two destroyed provinces, you can use that ship to claim quests for those provinces.


No, you can't. Because the provinces don't exist. Whether you're in the fjord or not.

Exactly. You ship basically invades a no mans land.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Prior
United Kingdom
Littleport
Cambs
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I love the fact that people seem to be making up rules and using bizarre logic to try and justify something that seems to be have explained in so many different ways as to why you can't do this
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Tolin
United States
Beaumont
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lukewild1982 wrote:
I love the fact that people seem to be making up rules and using bizarre logic to try and justify something that seems to be have explained in so many different ways as to why you can't do this


Well, the only rule that's been made up so far is that fjords are destroyed when an adjacent province is destroyed. The rules don't say that. They also don't say that fjords are destroyed when both adjacent provinces are destroyed.

I feel kind of sheepish quibbling over this, since no one would want to invade a province-less fjord, anyway. But, it's a fun thought exercise, and my wife says I will argue about anything.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Saer Chy
Netherlands
flag msg tools
DavidT wrote:

Well, the only rule that's been made up so far is that fjords are destroyed when an adjacent province is destroyed. The rules don't say that. They also don't say that fjords are destroyed when both adjacent provinces are destroyed.

I feel kind of sheepish quibbling over this, since no one would want to invade a province-less fjord, anyway. But, it's a fun thought exercise, and my wife says I will argue about anything.


Could you please give me proof to why fjords are not destroyed by ragnarok? What I read in the rules was "any effect that affects a province, also affects its supporting fjord", doesn't this also include the 'destroyed' effect? Based on that I would conclude that fjords would get destroyed as well, but since the majority here all say fjords don't get destroyed and can still be invaded, it appears I am missing something.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
On page 19 of the online rules (I assume the paper rules are equivalent, but don't have them handy to confirm), there is an example that shows Utgard as having been previously destroyed, yet there is a ship in the adjoining fjord, contributing strength to a battle in Andlang.

Sufficient proof?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.