Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

Pendragon: The Fall of Roman Britain» Forums » Rules

Subject: Entreat Question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
John Hatch
United States
California
flag msg tools
Entreat allows the Scotti player to convert up to 1 Hillfort and 2 Militia with a Scotti settlement and up to 2 Scotti Warbands in a hills region with an already existing Scotti Warband.

Suppose the Scotti has an available settlement but only a single Warband in the Available box.

My read of the voluntary removal callout box below rule 1.4.1 allows the Scotti to remove the 2nd Warband from the board to place in Available to be able to convert two Militia to two Warbands, but it does not require it, and suppose further in this situation the Scotti player does not wish to remove one of the Warbands off the board into the Available box to get the second Militia conversion.

Rule 1.4.1 also states that "A piece to be replaced by a piece that is not Available is simply removed".

If the Scotti player execute Entreat, is the intent that the Scotti convert the Hillfort and one of the Militia to the one available Scotti Warband, leaving one Militia in the region, forcing the Scotti player to remove a Warband from the board into Available to replace the second Militia, or can they remove both Militia and choose to replace it with their single available Warband, leaving the other Warbands where they are?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Kassel
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
"up to two" means zero, one or two at the player's option.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgane Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jkhatch wrote:
Entreat allows the Scotti player to convert up to 1 Hillfort and 2 Militia with a Scotti settlement and up to 2 Scotti Warbands in a hills region with an already existing Scotti Warband.

Suppose the Scotti has an available settlement but only a single Warband in the Available box.

My read of the voluntary removal callout box below rule 1.4.1 allows the Scotti to remove the 2nd Warband from the board to place in Available to be able to convert two Militia to two Warbands, but it does not require it, and suppose further in this situation the Scotti player does not wish to remove one of the Warbands off the board into the Available box to get the second Militia conversion.

Rule 1.4.1 also states that "A piece to be replaced by a piece that is not Available is simply removed".

If the Scotti player execute Entreat, is the intent that the Scotti convert the Hillfort and one of the Militia to the one available Scotti Warband, leaving one Militia in the region, forcing the Scotti player to remove a Warband from the board into Available to replace the second Militia, or can they remove both Militia and choose to replace it with their single available Warband, leaving the other Warbands where they are?
The Entreat Feat allows to replace up to 1 Hillfort and up to 2 Militia, so this means:
1/ if you don't have that number of pieces available (or simply do not wish to replace that many), you don't have to (note that you are right that you can take a Warband (or two) from elsewhere on the map if your Available box is empty as per 1.4.1, though not a Settlement, as 1.4.1 only applies to Units)
2/ if you elect (or can't) place all the Scotti pieces, the corresponding Civitates pieces are not removed, since the Feat allows to REPLACE them. For instance, let's say there is 1 Hillfort with 2 Militia; Entreat would allow you to replace all of these with 1 Settlement and 2 Warbands; let's assume you can - or wish - only to place 1 Warband there, you would replace the Hillfort by a Settlement and 1 of the Militia by the Warband, but the 2nd Militia would remain in the Region
Hope this helps.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I hate to disagree with the designer but 1.4.1 says
Quote:

A piece to be replaced by a piece that is not Available
is simply removed.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
drmark64 wrote:
I hate to disagree with the designer but 1.4.1 says
Quote:

A piece to be replaced by a piece that is not Available
is simply removed.


You cannot voluntarily choose to replace a piece with nothing. Entreat replaces "up to" a certain number of pieces, so all Entreat replacements are voluntary.

There are however Events that specify the number of pieces to be replaced. In those cases you have to remove the specified number of pieces of the required type (or all such pieces present, if less than the specified number) regardless of how many pieces you have to replace them with.

Regards,
Oerjan
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am pretty sure you are both wrong. Based on the wording of the rule and the history of the system. But I expect I will never gain traction going against the designer and the bot guru. So unless this forum gets a surprise visit from Volko I suppose I will have to be wrong.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgane Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Oerjan's explanation is right, or at least is aligned with my (the designer's) way of playing this. Volko indeed historically had a strict view on this (the sentence you mention is a stock COIN rule), but this is why we added "up to" in the Event's text.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Hatch
United States
California
flag msg tools
Yes it does. Thanks for the quick reply to this and my other questions.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks Marc and Oerjan for going through all that. I might suggest an exception in 1.4.1 to clarify this.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgane Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've added a clarification item for this in the upcoming Errata & Clarifications sheet. Thanks for pointing the possible ambiguity out :-)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Evans
United States
Berlin
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Happy to contribute. Enjoying the game thus far. Maybe I'll invite myself up to Laval sometime.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgane Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drmark64 wrote:
Happy to contribute. Enjoying the game thus far. Maybe I'll invite myself up to Laval sometime.
Happy to read that. And you are welcome to visit us in Montreal, maybe for one of our semi-periodic Stack events?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Joslyn
United States
Lynchburg
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Sorry I'm so late to the party here... But, given the clarification offered by the designer for 1.4.1 as of 03/06/18, am I to understand now that:

1) Removal of pieces that cannot be replaced (both voluntarily and/or via unwillingness to relocate Units, and involuntarily, due to unavailability of Strongholds) now takes place only through the play of the following events:

--O6 Uther (shaded)
--12 Romanitas (both)
--47 Cerdic (both)
--62 Dyfed (unshaded)
--65 Acculturation (both)

2) Consequently, the non-player Scotti directive (8.5.1) that specifies the robot player, when considering Entreat, "would at least remove a Hillfort (even if no settlement is available to replace it)" is no longer in force.

3) The general directive for non-players under 8.4.1 ("Remove pieces to be replaced even if no pieces are available to replace them") is likewise modified/disregarded in harmony with the clarification of 1.4.1.

Thanks!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgane Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Petrus Aleator wrote:
Sorry I'm so late to the party here... But, given the clarification offered by the designer for 1.4.1 as of 03/06/18, am I to understand now that:

1) Removal of pieces that cannot be replaced (both voluntarily and/or via unwillingness to relocate Units, and involuntarily, due to unavailability of Strongholds) now takes place only through the play of the following events:

--O6 Uther (shaded)
--12 Romanitas (both)
--47 Cerdic (both)
--62 Dyfed (unshaded)
--65 Acculturation (both)

2) Consequently, the non-player Scotti directive (8.5.1) that specifies the robot player, when considering Entreat, "would at least remove a Hillfort (even if no settlement is available to replace it)" is no longer in force.

3) The general directive for non-players under 8.4.1 ("Remove pieces to be replaced even if no pieces are available to replace them") is likewise modified/disregarded in harmony with the clarification of 1.4.1.

Thanks!
No, this is not what the clarification means: what it means is that, if the text leaves room for choice (such as "up to"), then the executing faction has the choice not to replace (by something or nothing is none available). But this does not preclude choosing to replace all, possibly by nothing if no appropriate piece is available, as instructed in the non player guidelines.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Joslyn
United States
Lynchburg
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.