$5.00
$15.00
$30.00
$20.00
Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
37 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

War of the Ring (second edition)» Forums » Variants

Subject: Fellowship Position Rules Discussion rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Have played this game now a couple of times, and there are a few key issues which seems to be a problem with us when we play, all related to the "position of the fellowship" - I believe that the rules are the "last known position of the fellowship" is the position of the fellowship for game purposes however we have run in to a few issues with that from our own perspective.

So here goes:

Item #1): It seems to us a bit odd that when separating companions, and using the "fellowship progress" counter to move companions a "bonus" region - that the fellowship isn't then declared automatically. Essentially, the companions can move the "fellowship progress" counter to move plus their own movement, but then the fellowship can in fact move along a different path altogether on a future move (or even other companions can move along a different track). My current thinking is to institute a house rule as follows: "When separating companions, and using the fellowship progress to move them, the fellowship shall be declared. If the fellowship progress is not used in the companion movement count, then the fellowship is not required to be declared"

Item #2): It seems to us a bit odd that the free peoples player can essentially move the fellowship upon any path he wishes as a future action, pending the results of his fellowship progress. This is partially addressed in item #1, however it seems odd that the FP player can avoid certain issues by essentially declaring the fellowship where ever he wants it (and even decide that it didn't move at all). One solution comes to mind: That the FP player writes down where the fellowship progressed to on a small piece of paper and is placed in another "opaque bag" so that he can't change the path to suit his needs. This is akin to the game "letters from whitechapel" for those of you who are familiar with it. This introduces some interesting game dynamics where by the shadow player now has the ability to "guess" where the fellowship is if he so chooses. We had the specific issues come up as follows: "Orc Patrol" and "Nazgul Strike" event cards. "Nazgul strike" which states you can move the Nazgul, then "if" the nazgul is in the region of the fellowship, certain events happen ... but the fellowship counter must be 1 or more. Well the argument ensued about where the fellowship REALLY was at that moment in time. The same goes for "orc patrol" - the fellowship last known position was in Rivendell, and thus the card couldn't be used ... BUT the fellowship progress was at 3!!!! It just doesn't make sense to us that the fellowship can essentially warp itself across the board to avoid / change / time travel.

Item #3): Finally, the fellowship itself. It seems to us there is no major advantage to keeping the fellowship together, especially the characters who can move 3 spaces. The battle benefits and such make it much more attractive for them to leave the fellowship. I mean, why keep them in the fellowship at all? You are never going to sacrifice them for corruption I don't think???? I don't have a proposed solution for this yet, other than perhaps to introduce some kind of a custom rule that gives the FP player an additional incentive to keep the companions in the fellowship, or have "mini battles" where the fellowship can fend off attacks on the corruption without "sacrificing" themselves, or they provide some benefit to a roll of the die to defend against the hunt. Another idea was that the fellowship can only be "broken up" at a FP settlement / city / stronghold. Thematically this would be "the character got the news that they are needed in another area" for example and decided to go elsewhere. Just "abandoning the fellowship" suddenly seems a bit odd.

OK ... well that's it for now I think. I won't mention the "why aren't the figures different colors" annoyance. Everybody knows that I think.

DISCUSSION PLEASE! - RULES AS THEY ARE, RULES AS THEY SHOULD BE, ETC ... LOOKING FOR ANY AND ALL IDEAS ON CURRENT RULES VS. NEW PROPOSED SOLUTIONS. THANKS!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Dexter
msg tools
mbmbmb
I will just comment on item 3 for now. Sacrificing companions to limit corruption happens all the time in the games I play. The companions that start off with the fellowship can take a total of 14 corruption. That is two more than is required to corrupt Frodo. Basically the companions make it more than twice as likely that Frodo will make it all the way (assuming none are split off) than if they all leave. This doesn't even take into account various cards that companions can use like Gandalf's card which can deflect one hunt tile, Strider's ability to use Athelas to reduce corruption by up to the three, and Ax and Bow. If you add in those cards, the companions can take 21 corruption.

Companions are often very useful in battle, especially Gandalf the White. And Gandalf the White and Aragorn can both provide an extra die so there is incentive in splitting them off. But they also both have really useful guide abilities. I find that the current balance makes it a tension filled question as to whether or not a certain companion should be split off. I often ask myself, "Will companion X provide more benefit in the fellowship or separating?" The answer is not clear a lot of times and depends a lot on the situation. To me that is the mark of a good balance. The right move is not "always split them off" or "always keep them in the fellowship."
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Chapman
United States
Powhatan
Virginia
flag msg tools
Axis & Allies Developer and Playtester; War of the Ring Editor and Playtester
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
I would urge you to play the game several more times before considering any rules changes. As you do so, the elegance of the design and reasons for many design decisions will become apparent. I have been involved with many games over the years, and been exposed to many house rules. This game probably has the lowest tendency of any to be house-ruled once players understand it.
12 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Van Deusen
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
My first thoughts are that I don't see any reason to change the rules you've highlighted. Trying to guess where the ring is would be a perfectly valid game, it's just not this game (though you may have a chance to play that game soon enough: hunt for the Ring pic).

The Uncertainty for everyone around the position of the Fellowship (I mean, nobody knows where it's been until it's observed, right?) definitely takes some getting used to, but it's one of the things that makes WotR what it is, and it seems that changing that would simultaneously make the game less elegant and balanced and more complicated.

Finally, you should probably almost always (how's that for equivocation?) be sacrificing at least some companions to the hunt. Otherwise, you'll never get to Mordor.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
To my mind what works about these mechanics is that they capture the element of Providence in Tolkien's work. A player might not know which path the Fellowship should take, but when the Fellowship is revealed or declared, he or she can choose the optimal route with the benefit of the information available at that precise point in the game. The same goes for separating Companions. The Fellowship sets out unrevealed for six or seven moves, then with a Will of the West rolled, the FP player decides to separate Strider to Dol Amroth and upgrade him to Aragorn. The game's abstractions allow this to work and create a beautiful tension of uncertainty, opportunity and surprise.
15 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
michael edwards
United States
South Carolina
flag msg tools
I think you are just overthinking it. The fellowship player has enough stacked against him, the one advantage they do have is dictating where the ring goes when it is time to do so.

I taught a friend of mine this game a few weekends ago, the only complaint he had was that the he believed that the fellowship player should have to write down where the ring is at/where he plans to go with it (he was shadow). I just lol'd.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Genestealer Patriarch
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I think of the Fellowship's position like an eigenstate from quantum physics, it can exist simultaneously everywhere and nowhere within range until it is declared or revealed. This means that the companions can take advantage of this diffused position.

If in the game the Fellowship is declared somewhere "impossible", just assume Sauron's agents got it completely wrong and Aragorn (or whoever) led them astray when he bolted for Minas Tirith.

The only thing that bugs me slightly is that the Fellowship never actually appears in Moria. There is never any point declaring before Lorien, and if the Fellowship is revealed before then, the FP player isn't going to put them in there, unless I have missed a mechanic which forces him to do so.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
michael edwards
United States
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Theres a card that plays on the table to let the shadow player draw a tile if the fsp declares a postion and traces the path through Moria. But your right, itd be crazy for the most part to declare in any shadow stronghold.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Dexter
msg tools
mbmbmb
Patriarchxyz wrote:
I think of the Fellowship's position like an eigenstate from quantum physics, it can exist simultaneously everywhere and nowhere within range until it is declared or revealed. This means that the companions can take advantage of this diffused position.

If in the game the Fellowship is declared somewhere "impossible", just assume Sauron's agents got it completely wrong and Aragorn (or whoever) led them astray when he bolted for Minas Tirith.

The only thing that bugs me slightly is that the Fellowship never actually appears in Moria. There is never any point declaring before Lorien, and if the Fellowship is revealed before then, the FP player isn't going to put them in there, unless I have missed a mechanic which forces him to do so.


You wouldn't declare in Moria, but you can be revealed in Moria. In the books they don't announce their presence in Moria either, but are accidentally discovered.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
michael edwards
United States
South Carolina
flag msg tools
I thought you could not reveal in a stronghold.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Van Deusen
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bouvond wrote:
I thought you could not reveal in a stronghold.

You may not declare be revealed in a friendly stronghold.

You should not declare be revealed in an enemy strongholds unless, possibly, you're entering Mordor. laugh
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant Johnson
United States
Cedar Park
Texas
flag msg tools
Well me known for eating cookie when me don't they shout
badge
Look! He try to throw loyal fans a curve!
mbmbmbmbmb
I see two circumstances where the reveal in a Shadow stronghold occurs:

1. As you mentioned, trying to enter Mordor the following turn. Sometimes it is worth the hit.
2. In Moria, making the route to Mordor shorter and potentially taking Gandalf the Grey out of play as well. Usually Gandalf is sacrificed both to remove a large tile from the hunt pool (hopefully a 3) and allow him to re-enter as Gandalf the White. Bonus if Strider can also use his guide ability on an otherwise unhelpful action die afterward.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
OK wow ... many replies within 24 hours ... so I have read all of your comments ... thank you for the discussion. As a side note, I've won each time we have played, but by military victory (free peoples and shadow). So, I guess the fellowship progress wasn't really an issue for me because it wasn't really the relevant play.

I should clarify that our main complaint was thematically, the items 1/2/3 don't make a whole lot of sense.

I did enjoy the idea and post about "Tolkien Providence" - it was by far the best response and if I could give it some kind of award, I would - so I gave you some geekgold and a thumbs up. This, thematically, does hold some water (although a stretch). I mean, if we are going to go there, this means the FP player ALWAYS WINS!

I believe there is some thematic value to my above points, and I don't believe this game to be "perfect" as it is, as some of you have implied. Still lots of improvements to be made, especially for some of the unclear rules, event cards, etc. This is, after all, the second edition. I suppose some thought it was perfect the first time too?

Least ways, I believe there are some ways to counterbalance making the theme work better for the fellowship position, and addressing items#1-3 as to not make it any harder. When I come up with those, I will let everyone know and post them to the appropriate "variants" area.

I'm not going to mention the various event cards which have errors, unclear rules, etc.. ... that might cause some of you to blow a fuse! LOL

Cheers
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff K
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ericschneider007 wrote:
Have played this game now a couple of times, and there are a few key issues which seems to be a problem with us when we play, all related to the "position of the fellowship" - I believe that the rules are the "last known position of the fellowship" is the position of the fellowship for game purposes however we have run in to a few issues with that from our own perspective.

So here goes:

Item #1): It seems to us a bit odd that when separating companions, and using the "fellowship progress" counter to move companions a "bonus" region - that the fellowship isn't then declared automatically. Essentially, the companions can move the "fellowship progress" counter to move plus their own movement, but then the fellowship can in fact move along a different path altogether on a future move (or even other companions can move along a different track). My current thinking is to institute a house rule as follows: "When separating companions, and using the fellowship progress to move them, the fellowship shall be declared. If the fellowship progress is not used in the companion movement count, then the fellowship is not required to be declared"


No I don't see this at all. If you take it as a temporal thing, you really, from a game perspective, have no idea when the Companions have separated from the Fellowship. Why in game terms, would they not benefit from the forward spatial progress made by the Fellowship? Why, in turn, would that have any bearing on where the Fellowship is currently? Indeed, they probably should be allowed to move even farther than they do, given their decreased need for stealth. This makes no sense, thematically or mechanically.

ericschneider007 wrote:
Item #2): It seems to us a bit odd that the free peoples player can essentially move the fellowship upon any path he wishes as a future action, pending the results of his fellowship progress. This is partially addressed in item #1, however it seems odd that the FP player can avoid certain issues by essentially declaring the fellowship where ever he wants it (and even decide that it didn't move at all). One solution comes to mind: That the FP player writes down where the fellowship progressed to on a small piece of paper and is placed in another "opaque bag" so that he can't change the path to suit his needs. This is akin to the game "letters from whitechapel" for those of you who are familiar with it. This introduces some interesting game dynamics where by the shadow player now has the ability to "guess" where the fellowship is if he so chooses. We had the specific issues come up as follows: "Orc Patrol" and "Nazgul Strike" event cards. "Nazgul strike" which states you can move the Nazgul, then "if" the nazgul is in the region of the fellowship, certain events happen ... but the fellowship counter must be 1 or more. Well the argument ensued about where the fellowship REALLY was at that moment in time. The same goes for "orc patrol" - the fellowship last known position was in Rivendell, and thus the card couldn't be used ... BUT the fellowship progress was at 3!!!! It just doesn't make sense to us that the fellowship can essentially warp itself across the board to avoid / change / time travel.


Again, not following the logic here. This idea that neither side knows the position of the Ring is central to the game. It is also quite in keeping with the theme. After the "Breaking of the Fellowship," neither side indeed had any clue where the Ring might be. So thematic, as well as allowing for great game mechanics exploiting this. How would the game be more interesting if it were explicit and could be "guessed?" Answer: it wouldn't. Not by an incredibly long shot. And it can't "warp" itself across the board, that is nonsensical. It is all temporal in terms of game time. One move equals one action.


ericschneider007 wrote:
Item #3): Finally, the fellowship itself. It seems to us there is no major advantage to keeping the fellowship together, especially the characters who can move 3 spaces. The battle benefits and such make it much more attractive for them to leave the fellowship. I mean, why keep them in the fellowship at all? You are never going to sacrifice them for corruption I don't think???? I don't have a proposed solution for this yet, other than perhaps to introduce some kind of a custom rule that gives the FP player an additional incentive to keep the companions in the fellowship, or have "mini battles" where the fellowship can fend off attacks on the corruption without "sacrificing" themselves, or they provide some benefit to a roll of the die to defend against the hunt. Another idea was that the fellowship can only be "broken up" at a FP settlement / city / stronghold. Thematically this would be "the character got the news that they are needed in another area" for example and decided to go elsewhere. Just "abandoning the fellowship" suddenly seems a bit odd.


Yes. True. You have discovered the term "meat shield." This is how the game has been played for over 12 years.

ericschneider007 wrote:
I believe there is some thematic value to my above points, and I don't believe this game to be "perfect" as it is, as some of you have implied. Still lots of improvements to be made, especially for some of the unclear rules, event cards, etc.

To be blunt, this game has been around for over 12 years and a simply enormous amount of play and players have come and gone and commented in that time. It should be rather obvious that if nothing has come up in that time period that is substantial, I have the deepest skepticism about anything new that I read. Any ground has been covered and re-covered dozens of times. Might as well try to re-write the rules to Puerto Rico.


ericschneider007 wrote:
This is, after all, the second edition.
I suppose some thought it was perfect the first time too?

Just to be clear, there were no real fundamental changes between first and second editions, actually very little at all in the past 12 years. So this comment simply does not apply. See my earlier comments on "history." Again, with all due respect, "a couple of times" does not really afford the insight to make these kids of proclamations.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Richbourg
United States
Arlington
Texas
flag msg tools
This is Kyoshi, our adopted Shiba Inu.
mbmbmbmbmb
Why is this in the Rules folder instead of Variants?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Xookliba wrote:


No I don't see this at all. If you take it as a temporal thing, you really, from a game perspective, have no idea when the Companions have separated from the Fellowship. Why in game terms, would they not benefit from the forward spatial progress made by the Fellowship? Why, in turn, would that have any bearing on where the Fellowship is currently? Indeed, they probably should be allowed to move even farther than they do, given their decreased need for stealth. This makes no sense, thematically or mechanically.


Xookliba -- Just answering your questions.

Sorry, but we do know when they seperate. On the previous turn, any member "in the fellowship" is with the fellowship. How do we know? Because they can "take hunt damage" or "be protected" or "use their ability - IE Strider to help"

I never said that they shouldn't benefit from forward spatial progress, I simply said that they shouldn't be able to benefit "differently" from forward spatial progress. So - for example, if fellowship counter reads "12" and each member decides they are suddenly, at one given point 12 regions away from one another (in 8 different directions) - (That's 12 regions North / South / East / West / Southeast / Southwest / Northwest / Northeast / one that never moved, and One somewhere in between all of that. For a maximum of 24 regions which a member could magically be apart from another (whereas on the previous turn they could "absorb hunt damage" or "cure hunt damage" or "use abilities to help the fellowship" or what have you. If they moved even further, let's say they use their regular move ... that's 3X for Strider and Gandalf --- 72 REGIONS!

This makes no sense ... although I suppose I can just say "it's temporal" and anything goes.


Xookliba wrote:

Again, not following the logic here. This idea that neither side knows the position of the Ring is central to the game. It is also quite in keeping with the theme. After the "Breaking of the Fellowship," neither side indeed had any clue where the Ring might be. So thematic, as well as allowing for great game mechanics exploiting this. How would the game be more interesting if it were explicit and could be "guessed?" Answer: it wouldn't. Not by an incredibly long shot. And it can't "warp" itself across the board, that is nonsensical. It is all temporal in terms of game time. One move equals one action.


Right, you're not following the logic. I get the point about "either side not knowing where the fellowship truly is" - and is fine thematically and works. This is fine except for when someone uses "Nazgul strike card" and you need to move the Nazgul to where the fellowship is in order to use its ability. "But wait, nobody knows where the fellowship is" I would proclaim in the game to stop the play of that card ... and then we go to an obscure discussion board (not in the rulebook) and find that the position of the fellowship is always where the little figurine is, even though nobody knows truly where it is and it is "temporal" ... ? "Well then I suppose we can just move our little Nazgul to where ever we want then and use the special ability" - I would proclaim this to actually use the card, "but wait - that's not where they really are" the other player would say - and then now you see it. The position of the fellowship is a paradox which really makes the rules a little confusing /unclear. Your "one move equals one action" comment is not valid ... see my point above about how each member can be 24 regions away from another member within one turn!


Xookliba wrote:



Yes. True. You have discovered the term "meat shield." This is how the game has been played for over 12 years.


To be blunt, this game has been around for over 12 years and a simply enormous amount of play and players have come and gone and commented in that time. It should be rather obvious that if nothing has come up in that time period that is substantial, I have the deepest skepticism about anything new that I read. Any ground has been covered and re-covered dozens of times. Might as well try to re-write the rules to Puerto Rico.


Just to be clear, there were no real fundamental changes between first and second editions, actually very little at all in the past 12 years. So this comment simply does not apply. See my earlier comments on "history." Again, with all due respect, "a couple of times" does not really afford the insight to make these kids of proclamations.


Xookilba / Jeff K - Very petty Jeff. I feel sorry for you. I can only say that if I had played the game for 12 years and invested so much of my life in to it like you have, it would be a shock to my system too to discover a new idea that didn't enter my brain until someone else thought of it after only playing a few times, no matter how valid or invalid. I'm not sure I would be so bold as to go on a discussion board to vent my frustration at the defense of my ego and expose myself, due to jealousy, due to attachment to an inanimate object, or whatever insecurity it is that you possess and try to insult someone in the process. But I'll keep you in my prayers. But remember those are just a "temporal" move by me and you need to do the rest.

Finally, I have found on page 3 of the second edition rulebook a list of items which have changed. To imply that nothing has changed would be absolutely ridiculous. To imply that the rules and event cards have absolutely no errors in them is literally like taking your head and putting it up Frodo's butt, in a "temporal" sense of course.





 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Dexter
msg tools
mbmbmb
ericschneider007 wrote:
Xookliba wrote:


No I don't see this at all. If you take it as a temporal thing, you really, from a game perspective, have no idea when the Companions have separated from the Fellowship. Why in game terms, would they not benefit from the forward spatial progress made by the Fellowship? Why, in turn, would that have any bearing on where the Fellowship is currently? Indeed, they probably should be allowed to move even farther than they do, given their decreased need for stealth. This makes no sense, thematically or mechanically.


Xookliba -- Just answering your questions.

Sorry, but we do know when they seperate. On the previous turn, any member "in the fellowship" is with the fellowship. How do we know? Because they can "take hunt damage" or "be protected" or "use their ability - IE Strider to help"

I never said that they shouldn't benefit from forward spatial progress, I simply said that they shouldn't be able to benefit "differently" from forward spatial progress. So - for example, if fellowship counter reads "12" and each member decides they are suddenly, at one given point 12 regions away from one another (in 8 different directions) - (That's 12 regions North / South / East / West / Southeast / Southwest / Northwest / Northeast / one that never moved, and One somewhere in between all of that. For a maximum of 24 regions which a member could magically be apart from another (whereas on the previous turn they could "absorb hunt damage" or "cure hunt damage" or "use abilities to help the fellowship" or what have you. If they moved even further, let's say they use their regular move ... that's 3X for Strider and Gandalf --- 72 REGIONS!

This makes no sense ... although I suppose I can just say "it's temporal" and anything goes.


Xookliba wrote:

Again, not following the logic here. This idea that neither side knows the position of the Ring is central to the game. It is also quite in keeping with the theme. After the "Breaking of the Fellowship," neither side indeed had any clue where the Ring might be. So thematic, as well as allowing for great game mechanics exploiting this. How would the game be more interesting if it were explicit and could be "guessed?" Answer: it wouldn't. Not by an incredibly long shot. And it can't "warp" itself across the board, that is nonsensical. It is all temporal in terms of game time. One move equals one action.


Right, you're not following the logic. I get the point about "either side not knowing where the fellowship truly is" - and is fine thematically and works. This is fine except for when someone uses "Nazgul strike card" and you need to move the Nazgul to where the fellowship is in order to use its ability. "But wait, nobody knows where the fellowship is" I would proclaim in the game to stop the play of that card ... and then we go to an obscure discussion board (not in the rulebook) and find that the position of the fellowship is always where the little figurine is, even though nobody knows truly where it is and it is "temporal" ... ? "Well then I suppose we can just move our little Nazgul to where ever we want then and use the special ability" - I would proclaim this to actually use the card, "but wait - that's not where they really are" the other player would say - and then now you see it. The position of the fellowship is a paradox which really makes the rules a little confusing /unclear. Your "one move equals one action" comment is not valid ... see my point above about how each member can be 24 regions away from another member within one turn!


Xookliba wrote:



Yes. True. You have discovered the term "meat shield." This is how the game has been played for over 12 years.


To be blunt, this game has been around for over 12 years and a simply enormous amount of play and players have come and gone and commented in that time. It should be rather obvious that if nothing has come up in that time period that is substantial, I have the deepest skepticism about anything new that I read. Any ground has been covered and re-covered dozens of times. Might as well try to re-write the rules to Puerto Rico.


Just to be clear, there were no real fundamental changes between first and second editions, actually very little at all in the past 12 years. So this comment simply does not apply. See my earlier comments on "history." Again, with all due respect, "a couple of times" does not really afford the insight to make these kids of proclamations.


Xookilba / Jeff K - Very petty Jeff. I feel sorry for you. I can only say that if I had played the game for 12 years and invested so much of my life in to it like you have, it would be a shock to my system too to discover a new idea that didn't enter my brain until someone else thought of it after only playing a few times, no matter how valid or invalid. I'm not sure I would be so bold as to go on a discussion board to vent my frustration at the defense of my ego and expose myself, due to jealousy, due to attachment to an inanimate object, or whatever insecurity it is that you possess and try to insult someone in the process. But I'll keep you in my prayers. But remember those are just a "temporal" move by me and you need to do the rest.

Finally, I have found on page 3 of the second edition rulebook a list of items which have changed. To imply that nothing has changed would be absolutely ridiculous. To imply that the rules and event cards have absolutely no errors in them is literally like taking your head and putting it up Frodo's butt, in a "temporal" sense of course.







When separating companions from the fellowship, you have to move them in a group. You can not move one north and one south. They have to all end in the same region. In the future when using a character die you can move each companion (that is not in the fellowship) individually.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Tis true. It would take one extra turn to get them 25, not 24 positions apart assuming you used 2 moves to separate them. Good catch, but it still doesn't make much sense to me, whether it be 12 regions in one move, or 25 regions in 2 moves.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
King in Green
Japan
flag msg tools
mb
The quantum location of the Fellowship is quite an interesting mechanic which I don't think has been much used in other designs. In this game I think it is rather thematic as it simulates the foresight of the guide of the fellowship. If you'd like to experiment with different rules then that would hardly be a crime against gaming though . Just bear in mind that to compensate you will have to adjust the FP movement and companions, for example you may have to decide how to spend dice or cards to separate them and move them secretly without the Shadow player being informed of their exact location. Or just rule that X card (e.g. There and Back Again) means that you can instantly relocate x character to x location. You may have more fun this way, more power to you, but bear in mind that game balance for this game is rather good (if favouring the Shadow slightly) and you'll likely have to invest a lot of time to get it right again with any house rules.

Nazgul Strike just goes where the figure of the fellowship presently is, and represents the Nazgul picking up the trail.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff K
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ericschneider007 wrote:
Sorry, but we do know when they seperate. On the previous turn, any member "in the fellowship" is with the fellowship. How do we know? Because they can "take hunt damage" or "be protected" or "use their ability - IE Strider to help"

I never said that they shouldn't benefit from forward spatial progress, I simply said that they shouldn't be able to benefit "differently" from forward spatial progress. So - for example, if fellowship counter reads "12" and each member decides they are suddenly, at one given point 12 regions away from one another (in 8 different directions) - (That's 12 regions North / South / East / West / Southeast / Southwest / Northwest / Northeast / one that never moved, and One somewhere in between all of that. For a maximum of 24 regions which a member could magically be apart from another (whereas on the previous turn they could "absorb hunt damage" or "cure hunt damage" or "use abilities to help the fellowship" or what have you. If they moved even further, let's say they use their regular move ... that's 3X for Strider and Gandalf --- 72 REGIONS!

This makes no sense ... although I suppose I can just say "it's temporal" and anything goes.


You seem to be confused. This is not possible from one die. Companions are separated in a group. One group per die, not "up to 8 directions" at once. If you want up to 8 directions, then you spend 8 dice. In which case, it should now be obvious how you obtained that much movement.

Also, you are taking this, as well as a great many things in the game apparently, too literally. Move the Fellowship" is tracked in "Progress" for a reason. Think of it as Kinetic Energy of movement. So: NO we do not know exactly when during the current "progress of movement" cycle they separated. It is an abstraction that you are taking too literally. And guess what? If they died, they didn't ever separate.

The separating die takes advantage of all of those spent dice. If it didn't, it would be unfairly penalizing the separating Companions, who would now be treated as if they never had a single move die played on them. For example, if the fifth die separates them, why should they not get the benefit of the other 4 dice you previously spent to move them? Again, it makes zero sense, what you are saying.


ericschneider007 wrote:
Right, you're not following the logic. I get the point about "either side not knowing where the fellowship truly is" - and is fine thematically and works. This is fine except for when someone uses "Nazgul strike card" and you need to move the Nazgul to where the fellowship is in order to use its ability. "But wait, nobody knows where the fellowship is" I would proclaim in the game to stop the play of that card ... and then we go to an obscure discussion board (not in the rulebook) and find that the position of the fellowship is always where the little figurine is, even though nobody knows truly where it is and it is "temporal" ... ? "Well then I suppose we can just move our little Nazgul to where ever we want then and use the special ability" - I would proclaim this to actually use the card, "but wait - that's not where they really are" the other player would say - and then now you see it. The position of the fellowship is a paradox which really makes the rules a little confusing /unclear. Your "one move equals one action" comment is not valid ... see my point above about how each member can be 24 regions away from another member within one turn!


Again, we have seen this is not possible due to your misunderstanding of the rule. However, the "Last known position" is a perfectly valid concept. They do NOT go to where the Fellowship "are," they go to the last place they knew the Fellowship was and Hunt them. The Huntsmen in question are the Nazgul. Thematically, they are tracking the Fellowship and picking up the scent. As I said before, you are a bit too literal in your thinking. Thematically, the Nazgul are merely puppets, not capable of too much independent thought and action. This is well known from the books. But they are very good at following the Ring. They did this over and over in the story.

You are free to play the game any way you see fit. Make all these changes if it pleases you, of course you are free to do so.

But please do not tell the rest of us that we are deluded for playing the game as it stands. I might suggest to you that a great many people indeed find the game perfect as it is. The fact that so few people do not should tell you something.


ericschneider007 wrote:
Xookilba / Jeff K - Very petty Jeff. I feel sorry for you. I can only say that if I had played the game for 12 years and invested so much of my life in to it like you have, it would be a shock to my system too to discover a new idea that didn't enter my brain until someone else thought of it after only playing a few times, no matter how valid or invalid. I'm not sure I would be so bold as to go on a discussion board to vent my frustration at the defense of my ego and expose myself, due to jealousy, due to attachment to an inanimate object, or whatever insecurity it is that you possess and try to insult someone in the process. But I'll keep you in my prayers. But remember those are just a "temporal" move by me and you need to do the rest.

Finally, I have found on page 3 of the second edition rulebook a list of items which have changed. To imply that nothing has changed would be absolutely ridiculous. To imply that the rules and event cards have absolutely no errors in them is literally like taking your head and putting it up Frodo's butt, in a "temporal" sense of course.


Ha, nice try. You can stick to your delusions, I suppose. I'm not sure how you expected to be received well with the introduction that you made of this topic, and the lack of understanding upon which it was based. but it is obvious you simply want to troll people over liking a highly popular game and tell people what to think, and mock them for something you have a poor understanding of instead of discuss. Your words have made this clear. I'm done with this. Bye!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Van Deusen
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
But it doesn't make any sense for knights to be limited to moving two squares in one direction and one square in another. We all know horsies can move in any direction at all and can stop at any point. For that matter, there's no way that a bishop moving ON FOOT should be able to advance farther than a CAVALRY UNIT in the same amount of time.

This game plainly has some rules that need updating, and you fools and fanboys are too blind to see it!
5 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Xookliba wrote:



You seem to be confused. This is not possible from one die. Companions are separated in a group. One group per die, not "up to 8 directions" at once. If you want up to 8 directions, then you spend 8 dice. In which case, it should now be obvious how you obtained that much movement.



Yes, this was already covered in discussion from another on the forum. Try to keep up! Picking out this point, ignoring the follow up conversation which already occurred, and using this to further your agenda (that this is a perfect game and any recommendation on changing it is foolhardy) - just furthers the appearance that you are only here to argue about things rather than discuss them (title of this post was "discussion").

Xookliba wrote:

Also, you are taking this, as well as a great many things in the game apparently, too literally. Move the Fellowship" is tracked in "Progress" for a reason. Think of it as Kinetic Energy of movement. So: NO we do not know exactly when during the current "progress of movement" cycle they separated. It is an abstraction that you are taking too literally. And guess what? If they died, they didn't ever separate.

The separating die takes advantage of all of those spent dice. If it didn't, it would be unfairly penalizing the separating Companions, who would now be treated as if they never had a single move die played on them. For example, if the fifth die separates them, why should they not get the benefit of the other 4 dice you previously spent to move them? Again, it makes zero sense, what you are saying.



You keep repeating yourself and building up straw men arguments that I haven't made (twice now) to somehow make it seem like you are right. Please re-read the posts by me and others before blurting out your opinions. I already addressed this issue on the previous post. On one turn the fellowship is together, and on the next turn they can be 12+ regions apart. You still haven't said how that can be. It only makes zero sense to you because you are either choosing to not follow the conversation or you just don't like being wrong. I don't want to argue a point which was already lost, and which didn't exist in the first place (because you invented it).


Xookliba wrote:

Again, we have seen this is not possible due to your misunderstanding of the rule. However, the "Last known position" is a perfectly valid concept. They do NOT go to where the Fellowship "are," they go to the last place they knew the Fellowship was and Hunt them. The Huntsmen in question are the Nazgul. Thematically, they are tracking the Fellowship and picking up the scent. As I said before, you are a bit too literal in your thinking. Thematically, the Nazgul are merely puppets, not capable of too much independent thought and action. This is well known from the books. But they are very good at following the Ring. They did this over and over in the story.


This is a fine point and makes perfect sense. The wording on the card is not clear at making this obvious, however. It took a little research from several forums and discussion boards to figure this out as it was not clear in the provided rules and cards. This served to not only bring up some of the ideas which I had already stated which you obviously are not open to thinking about or discussing, but also to point out that the rules are not clear enough for people who haven't invested 12 years of their lives in playing this game.

Xookliba wrote:

You are free to play the game any way you see fit. Make all these changes if it pleases you, of course you are free to do so.


Really? That hadn't occurred to me. Thank you for your permission oh Master of the Precious!

Xookliba wrote:

But please do not tell the rest of us that we are deluded for playing the game as it stands. I might suggest to you that a great many people indeed find the game perfect as it is. The fact that so few people do not should tell you something.


You came on to this discussion forum about a rule and a possible variant, which normally means (meaning for most normal people) one needs to be open to discussing the rules and a variant. Why you are choosing to be the representative and defender of everyone who ever played the game and doesn't want to change the rules is beyond my thought process ... but don't try to act like I'm attacking the game. If you ever took the time to see my rating on it, it is very high. In fact I like it a lot. I wouldn't be taking the time on a discussion board and with you to talk about it if I didn't like it. If I didn't like the game, it would be in the trash or on ebay. There wouldn't be any discussion about it. The point of the discussion was one, to further try to understand the rule and two - to think about how the game MIGHT be better. Just saying the game is perfect as it is, is certainly plausible - but I didn't think that was the point to these types of forums?

Xookliba wrote:

Ha, nice try. You can stick to your delusions, I suppose. I'm not sure how you expected to be received well with the introduction that you made of this topic, and the lack of understanding upon which it was based. but it is obvious you simply want to troll people over liking a highly popular game and tell people what to think, and mock them for something you have a poor understanding of instead of discuss. Your words have made this clear. I'm done with this. Bye!


Again, you keep trying to make me look bad ... I already admitted I have only played the game a few times. I only responded to your smug post. And for what reason did you decide to come here? To make yourself feel better or important? I think discussions were going fine about the game until you arrived to tried to crap on this forum. Really - you are calling me the TROLL? That's crazy. YOU ARE THE ONE THAT ENTERED THE FORUM!!! TALK ABOUT DELUSIONS!

If you are truly done, I am relieved - now we can get back to more fruitful discussion with other rational beings.

I apologize for thrashing you - but in essence, you deserve it.

Now, please go back to your "hobbit hole" and don't come back. You're only making matters worse for yourself.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Paul Harding wrote:
The quantum location of the Fellowship is quite an interesting mechanic which I don't think has been much used in other designs. In this game I think it is rather thematic as it simulates the foresight of the guide of the fellowship. If you'd like to experiment with different rules then that would hardly be a crime against gaming though . Just bear in mind that to compensate you will have to adjust the FP movement and companions, for example you may have to decide how to spend dice or cards to separate them and move them secretly without the Shadow player being informed of their exact location. Or just rule that X card (e.g. There and Back Again) means that you can instantly relocate x character to x location. You may have more fun this way, more power to you, but bear in mind that game balance for this game is rather good (if favouring the Shadow slightly) and you'll likely have to invest a lot of time to get it right again with any house rules.

Nazgul Strike just goes where the figure of the fellowship presently is, and represents the Nazgul picking up the trail.


Thanks .. point well taken.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Schneider
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Rafamir wrote:
To my mind what works about these mechanics is that they capture the element of Providence in Tolkien's work. A player might not know which path the Fellowship should take, but when the Fellowship is revealed or declared, he or she can choose the optimal route with the benefit of the information available at that precise point in the game. The same goes for separating Companions. The Fellowship sets out unrevealed for six or seven moves, then with a Will of the West rolled, the FP player decides to separate Strider to Dol Amroth and upgrade him to Aragorn. The game's abstractions allow this to work and create a beautiful tension of uncertainty, opportunity and surprise.


Excellent post - I gave you geek gold .. whatever the heck that is good for.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
ericschneider007 wrote:
Rafamir wrote:
To my mind what works about these mechanics is that they capture the element of Providence in Tolkien's work. A player might not know which path the Fellowship should take, but when the Fellowship is revealed or declared, he or she can choose the optimal route with the benefit of the information available at that precise point in the game. The same goes for separating Companions. The Fellowship sets out unrevealed for six or seven moves, then with a Will of the West rolled, the FP player decides to separate Strider to Dol Amroth and upgrade him to Aragorn. The game's abstractions allow this to work and create a beautiful tension of uncertainty, opportunity and surprise.


Excellent post - I gave you geek gold .. whatever the heck that is good for.

I'm glad it resonated. The designers' adherence to thematic considerations - and success in implementing them - is what truly won me over to this game.

Have you ever played the old 1977 War of the Ring by Berg? It had lousy but precise hidden movement for the Fellowship and Companions. Like Krieghund above, I recommend getting deeper into this game and you may find the theme/drama potential outweighs the desire for more precise or less abstract position rules.
 
 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.