Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)» Forums » Rules

Subject: Can ships be mustered without ports? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mark O'Brien
Canada
flag msg tools
In a recent game I was disallowed from building a ship using a muster token on the Eyrie because the Eyrie has no port. The relevant rule is as follows:

"Ship units cannot be mustered into sea areas that contain one
or more enemy ships. If a Castle or Stronghold area has no port or
eligible adjacent sea areas, no Ship units can be mustered there."

Subtracting the other condition because this is an 'or' statement leaves us with.

"If a Castle or a Stronghold area has no port [...] no Ships can be mustered there."

One problem with this rule is as follows though:

"If a Castle or a Stronghold area has no [...] eligible adjacent sea areas, no Ship can be mustered there."

Logically, this rule states not only that no ships can be mustered without ports, but that ships can not be mustered into ports you control if the sea areas adjacent to your area are enemy controlled.

This is what the rule states so I sucked it up and followed it, but they must have written it wrong.

Can ships be mustered into friendly or neutral sea areas without ports (i.e. from the Eyrie)?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexander Steinbach
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The rule is actually quite clear. I just cannot really follow your line of reasoning.

To be clear:

"Ship units cannot be mustered into sea areas that contain one or more enemy ships."
So if the sea area does not contain enemy ships you can muster ships in an adjacent sea area no problem (respecting army supply limits of course).

You can always muster ships in ports that you control (respecting army supply limits of course).

Ergo,

"If a Castle or Stronghold area has no port or
eligible adjacent sea areas, no Ship units can be mustered there."

But if it has no port but does have an eligible sea area (for example an empty narrow sea in your case), then you can perfectly muster a ship there from the Eyrie.

I hope this helps!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kārlis Jēriņš
Latvia
Riga
flag msg tools
I'm a sheep.
badge
A lovely, fluffy sheep.
mbmbmbmbmb
"no X or Y" is the same as "neither X nor Y" (or at least it is intended to be in this case; I might not be the best to comment on actual English grammar rules), so you can't just "subtract the other condition".

Ports are not required to be able to muster ships in a sea area - you can always do it, provided there are no enemy ships present. If there are any, you can only muster ships in a port and later use a march order to get them out.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark O'Brien
Canada
flag msg tools
My point is that logically when you make a statement using the word 'or' such as 'A if B or C' this means that A is true if either B or C is true. This rule says that ships can not be mustered if the castle/stronghold area has no port or the adjacent sea areas are enemy occupied. Because the writer used the word 'or' they are (probably) inadvertently banning mustering ships without ports, and they are banning mustering if adjacent sea areas are occupied.

I think this is against the intent of the rule, but the rule itself clearly prohibits mustering ships without ports.

This rule is then contradicted later in the rule-book with regards to adjacent sea areas:

"A player may muster Ship units into a connected Port, even if
the connected sea area is occupied by one or more Enemy Ship
units. (In fact, the ability to muster ships in a port, even if the
connected sea area is occupied by enemy units, is the single most
powerful feature of Ports.)"

But the mustering restriction was never corrected. I think I agree with you that the game should be played with mustering without ports allowed, but the rule states the opposite in a logical sense.

Edit: A more clear rule would state: If a friendly Castle/Stronghold area does not have a port AND the adjacent sea areas are enemy occupied no ships may be mustered there.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Burgess
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
SportBrotha wrote:
My point is that logically when you make a statement using the word 'or' such as 'A if B or C' this means that A is true if either B or C is true.


No - I'm afraid you've made this into a logic-free zone. In programming, or pure Boolean logic, you might have a point - i.e. "if (A or B) then do C" - in this case, C happens when either A or B are true - but we're not talking Boolean logic or programming, we're talking about the English language.

SportBrotha wrote:
I think this is against the intent of the rule, but the rule itself clearly prohibits mustering ships without ports.


Nope. Not clearly. Not even a little bit.

In short, you've got your precedence wrong. Read the rule as follows:

"If a Castle or Stronghold area has (no port OR eligible adjacent sea areas), no Ship units can be mustered there."

If just one of the conditions is true, you can muster.

To be honest, you have to work pretty hard to find any other interpretation.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark O'Brien
Canada
flag msg tools
I think that is a valid interpretation as well, and I did think of that. Nice job being a smug asshole though

My point still stands: using the word 'and' even under your phrasing makes the rule clearer and less open to dispute.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kārlis Jēriņš
Latvia
Riga
flag msg tools
I'm a sheep.
badge
A lovely, fluffy sheep.
mbmbmbmbmb
SportBrotha wrote:
I think that is a valid interpretation as well, and I did think of that. Nice job being a smug asshole though

My point still stands: using the word 'and' even under your phrasing makes the rule clearer and less open to dispute.


Nice job insulting someone who's trying to help. There was nothing smug or assholey about Andy's response.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alexander Steinbach
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
After reading through these posts half a dozen times I think I finally grasp what you mean. And I believe that you are really overthinking this. But if you want to state this in formal logic then MercifulBiscuit has the correct answer in that you should place brackets like he did. But that is not the way things usually work in the English language.

Long story short: You can muster ships from a stronghold or castle both in an adjacent port and in an adjacent sea area without enemy ships. This the rule. No more, no less.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark O'Brien
Canada
flag msg tools
"No - I'm afraid you've made this into a logic-free zone."

The implication here is obvious and it sets the tone for the rest of his comment.

I appreciate your help, but I get the feeling biscuit is just dying to shit on someone.

Also I lost my game because I was forced to follow this erroneous interpretation.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark O'Brien
Canada
flag msg tools
I've also found additional evidence in the rule-book of the consensus interpretation.

In addition to the passage which allows musters into ports even while adjacent sea areas are enemy occupied there is a muster example of a castle/stronghold without a port mustering a ship:

"3. Since he already has an army of three Knights at Riverrun,
he uses one of his mustering points at Riverrun to place another
Ship in the Golden Sound (which is adjacent to Riverrun)..."

Could be useful for anyone who gets into any disputes about the rule in the future.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Randolph
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Mark - I have been in your situation before in regards to a particular rule ("Battles of Westeros" was the game in question for me); if a rule is unclear to a person, then you have every right to persist in clarifying it for yourself.

Anyway, an attached port is not required for a controlled Castle or Stronghold area to muster a ship into any legal (ie, unoccupied by enemy ship units) adjacent sea area.

Good luck!...Cheers!
(SFRR)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Burgess
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
SportBrotha wrote:
"No - I'm afraid you've made this into a logic-free zone."

The implication here is obvious and it sets the tone for the rest of his comment.

I appreciate your help, but I get the feeling biscuit is just dying to shit on someone.

Also I lost my game because I was forced to follow this erroneous interpretation.


Not trying to be smug. Not trying to be an asshole. Not trying to "shit on someone". But you bought up logic as if it was an empirical, undeniable fact, and just.... No. In my opinion, if you must, but no.

Thanks, Kārlis. - appreciated.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Lodge
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't forget ports were added to fix a game braking problem in the 1st edition. There were no ports. If your surrounding sea areas were all blocked, contained enemy ships, there was no way to muster a ship, something was needed to fix this issue.

Logically speaking the rules are wrote correctly as Andy explains.

They are like an added expansion, similar to the ToB cards but added to the newer base set. That's why they contain so many unique extra rules for 1 simple thing, like gaining power tokens (representing trade) during the Game of Thrones Westeros card (even though it's not wrote on the card).

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Narasimha Arvind
msg tools
correct
 
 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.