Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
23 Posts

Pendragon: The Fall of Roman Britain» Forums » Rules

Subject: Dux Train rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Patrick Barry
United States
Williamsburg
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Resource Conversion Is My Trigger Word!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is the base 3 Resource cost compulsory?

As in, say, the Dux just wanted to add some Prosperity and could not add any Cavalry, or would rather not move any Cavalry around?

Or maybe the Dux just wanted to Invite some Foederati or Build a Fort, could they execute a null Train command to take the Feat?

May the Dux continue to place Militia via Train under Fragmentation, or replace Civitates pieces with a Town as part of the Build command? I see that the Non-Player instructions tell not to do so, but is that an actual rule, or just a strategy?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
To quote rule 3.2.1 Train:
Quote:
PROCEDURE: In each selected space, pay 3 Resources (1.8.1)
per space to place up to 1 Cavalry per Fort and/or, if there is a
Town or Hillfort, up to 2 Militia.
(emphasis added)

The way this rule is phrased - "In each selected space", with no exceptions mentioned later in the text - leaves no way to avoid paying the 3 Resources per space.


Neither 3.2.1 Train and 4.2.1 Build mention any particular restrictions under Fragmentation, so as far as I can see the Dux is free to place Militia and Towns under Fragmentation. Whether or not it is wise to do so is another question entirely!

The bot instructions in chapter 8 merely tell you what the bots will do within the framework provided by the game rules in chapters 1-7. Under Fragmentation, the Dux bot will not use its own Resources to place enemy force even though it would be legal for it to do so.

Regards,
Oerjan
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Keane
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
I didn't respond because I didn't know the answer, but Oerjan's response doesn't really clarify what I thought the first set of questions were asking.

The Command rules are pretty clear that you must select and pay for at least one space if you can. So for example, you have to pay 3 to train 1 cavalry in 1 space before you can then pay to add prosperity. Or if you do a Feat first, you then must pay to do the Command in at least one space.

But it's not clear if you are still allowed to do this if you won't have enough to pay for all of a Command or for both the Command and the Feat. E.g. "Darn, I can't afford to Train, but I'll still spend my last 2 to add prosperity in one area." Not that that's a very effective move, but when you're broke, you're broke. I think the "then" is meant to imply that you must pay 3+ to train before you're allowed to pay 2-4 for prosperity.

You are allowed to use a Feat immediately before the associated Command, so it seems you could do a Feat first knowing you won't be able to pay for the Command.

Are any of these legal?
1) You have 0-1 resources - you choose Train+Invite or March+Invite, Invite for free Foederati, but then don't have enough resources for Train or March. Or even, can you spend several resources to convert a bunch of Foederati in one space and then not have enough to Train or March?

2) You have 3-4 resources - you choose Train+Build or March+Build, Build for 3 in one area, but then don't have enough resources for Train or March.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Ryan Keane wrote:
I didn't respond because I didn't know the answer, but Oerjan's response doesn't really clarify what I thought the first set of questions were asking.

The Command rules are pretty clear that you must select and pay for at least one space if you can. So for example, you have to pay 3 to train 1 cavalry in 1 space before you can then pay to add prosperity. Or if you do a Feat first, you then must pay to do the Command in at least one space.

But it's not clear if you are still allowed to do this if you won't have enough to pay for all of a Command or for both the Command and the Feat. E.g. "Darn, I can't afford to Train, but I'll still spend my last 2 to add prosperity in one area."

Quite the opposite. Rule 3.2.1 as written is very clear on this: you must pay 3 Resources for each space you have selected for your Train Command. "Each" means "every member of the specified group", and in this case the group being specified consists of the selected spaces.

Note that once you have paid for the spaces selected, the placing of Troops in those spaces is effectively optional: paying the 3 Resources allows you to place "up to 1 Cavalry per Fort and/or, if there is a Town or Hillfort, up to 2 Militia" there, and "up to" includes zero. The Resource payment itself however is not optional; if you select a space, you have to pay for it.

If the intent had been to allow you to pay 3 Resources to place Troops in only some of the selected Train spaces, the rule would have said something like the "in those selected spaces desired" used in the FitL Train rule instead of the "in each selected space" used in Pendragon.


The "then" by itself carries no implication either way regarding the 3-Resource payment; all it means is that you have to execute the parts of the Procedure described after the "then" after you have finished all the bits described before the "then". The 3-Resource-per-space payment is fully covered by the part of the Procedure that comes before the "then" in the Train Procedure.

Quote:
You are allowed to use a Feat immediately before the associated Command, so it seems you could do a Feat first knowing you won't be able to pay for the Command.

No, you couldn't. Per rule 4.1 you may only execute the Feat if you also execute the accompanying Command, so if it turns out that you can't afford the accompanying Command after all your Feat is illegal and must be rolled back.

Quote:
Are any of these legal?
1) You have 0-1 resources - you choose Train+Invite or March+Invite, Invite for free Foederati, but then don't have enough resources for Train or March.

No.

Quote:
Or even, can you spend several resources to convert a bunch of Foederati in one space and then not have enough to Train or March?

No.

Quote:
2) You have 3-4 resources - you choose Train+Build or March+Build, Build for 3 in one area, but then don't have enough resources for Train or March.

No.

Regards,
Oerjan
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Very exceptionally, I'm going to disagree with Oerjan here: the rule doesn't say "Pay 3 Resources to select a space" or "Select a space, pay 3 Resources per space." but "In each selected space [which means selecting a space precedes, and hence is not contingent on paying], pay 3 resources per space to place up to [so you're paying the 3 Resources so that you can place troops] (...). Then in each of up to two selected spaces [not "in two spaces you paid 3 Resources"], (...) pay 2 Resources to ...".

So, in other words, you can select as many spaces as you wish as long as they have a Fort or Friendly Control, and each of them you may:
- either pay 3 Resources to place Troops (only effective if you have a Fort, or, for Militia, if there is a Civ Stronghold)
- or pay 2 Resources to add Prosperity cubes (needs Friendly Control and a Fort or Cavalry)
- or pay 5 Resources and do both
- or pay nothing and do nothing except, presumably, a Feat
Note that none of the 3 Feats that can be associated with Train requires taking place in a space selected for Train (or March)

So because of the above, all the examples given by Ryan are legal.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
GouyonRety wrote:
Very exceptionally, I'm going to disagree with Oerjan here: the rule doesn't say "Pay 3 Resources to select a space" or "Select a space, pay 3 Resources per space." but "In each selected space [which means selecting a space precedes, and hence is not contingent on paying], pay 3 resources per space to place up to [so you're paying the 3 Resources so that you can place troops] (...). Then in each of up to two selected spaces [not "in two spaces you paid 3 Resources"], (...) pay 2 Resources to ...".

So, in other words, you can select as many spaces as you wish as long as they have a Fort or Friendly Control, and each of them you may:
- either pay 3 Resources to place Troops (only effective if you have a Fort, or, for Militia, if there is a Civ Stronghold)

You are entirely correct that selection preceeds payment, but no-one has argued otherwise. However, rule 3.1 explicitly states that "the executing Faction must pay those costs up front, upon selection", so it is quite clear that you are only allowed to select a space in the first place if you're also able to pay for it immediately.

But that's irrelevant for the issue at hand. Due to the way Oxford's and the other dictionaries define the meaning of the word "each", i.e., "used to refer to every one of two or more people or things, regarded and identified separately", the phrase "in each selected space" literally means "in every single one of the spaces currently selected".

And because "each" has that specific meaning, once you you select a space for Train the "in each selected space, pay ..." forces you to pay that cost for it. The way this rule is currently phrased leaves no wiggle room in that respect.

If that's not what you intended the rules to mean, you need to issue another errata changing 3.2.1's "in each selected space," into "in those selected spaces desired," to make that 3-Resource payment voluntary

Quote:
- or pay 2 Resources to add Prosperity cubes (needs Friendly Control and a Fort or Cavalry)
- or pay 5 Resources and do both
- or pay nothing and do nothing except, presumably, a Feat
Note that none of the 3 Feats that can be associated with Train requires taking place in a space selected for Train (or March)

So because of the above, all the examples given by Ryan are legal.

Once you errata the Train rule to say what you intended, then all three examples will be legal with zero-cost Train Commands, yes

None of them would be legal with March Commands though, since March has no zero-cost option: if the March moves any cubes you have to pay Resources, and if it doesn't move anything it is a Pass, not a Command.

Regards,
Oerjan
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick Barry
United States
Williamsburg
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Resource Conversion Is My Trigger Word!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Let me try and talk my way through a gamey piece of strategy here involving the Dux under Fragmentation.

Assuming a Region that has both a Fort and a Hillfort and at least 4 Dux pieces to give them Control, at least one of said pieces being Cavalry, and preferably one or no Militia.

If 0 Militia, the Dux Train to place a Militia and then Build to replace the Militia and the Hillfort with a Town for a cost of 6 Resources. If 1 Militia, then they just Build in that space and they don't even need to Train in that space to replace the Militia and the Hillfort with a Town for a cost of 3 Resources. In both cases they get a bonus of 2 Prestige to boot.

On a subsequent turn, the Dux Battle in said space and lose 2 troops in assaulting the undefended Town, assuming the aforementioned Cavalry takes part in the assault, paired with the Retaliate Feat

The consequences:
They lose 1 Prestige for the Cavalry fighting in a Battle in which more Dux pieces were eliminated
They are eligible to receive 3 Plunder
They receive 1 Prestige for eliminating an enemy Stronghold
They receive 3 further Prestige from the Retaliate for the same reason
They reduce Civitates Wealth by 5 also

For a total of 3 Plunder, 5 Prestige, and -5 Wealth for a cost of 2 pieces and 3/6 Resources

This would be a really cool trick to pull off, but it is subject to some further caveats beyond the original, perhaps unlikely conditions:
You cannot stop the Civtates from Mustering a Militia in this space, which will cost you one more Troop
If they have Troops in Marching range, then this will probably be too costly to be worthwhile, although maybe tying them down for a lengthy Siege could be strategically useful, it would not be very profitable
You do need to be aware that you are creating a profitable target for a barbarian Raid, so pick a location that would require a Deep Raid or be in Clear terrain, or both preferably!
I suspect this is only worth doing if you can lose Foederati in the Assault instead of Cavalry, or if it can put you over your Victory threshold near the end of an Epoch

On the other hand, the Civitates need to be aware of the danger of having Militia and Hillforts cohabitating with the Dux leading up to Fragmentation.

You know, in general, I am very sympathetic to the Dux in this game. I think alone of all the factions, the Dux player can behave in an honorable manner without losing utterly. But after Fragmentation, I am not sure that he can afford to resist the siren call of sacking all Towns that he can reach, which makes him at least as bad as the barbarians, and cedes the Civitates the moral high ground. That the Dux Pivotal Event requires Fragmentation just rubs it in. I guess nice guys really do finish last in COIN...

>edited to fix some calculations
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Curt Sellmer
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools

Don't forget that the Dux would also have earned +2 prestige for building the town.

And the build cost is 3, not 2.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick Barry
United States
Williamsburg
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Resource Conversion Is My Trigger Word!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sellmerfud wrote:

Don't forget that the Dux would also have earned +2 prestige for building the town.

And the build cost is 3, not 2.




Good catch, I will fix it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bald Terror wrote:
Let me try and talk my way through a gamey piece of strategy here involving the Dux under Fragmentation.

Assuming a Region that has both a Fort and a Hillfort and at least 4 Dux pieces to give them Control, at least one of said pieces being Cavalry, and preferably one or no Militia.

If 0 Militia, the Dux Train to place a Militia and then Build to replace the Militia and the Hillfort with a Town for a cost of 6 Resources. If 1 Militia, then they just Build in that space and they don't even need to Train in that space to replace the Militia and the Hillfort with a Town for a cost of 3 Resources. In both cases they get a bonus of 2 Prestige to boot.

On a subsequent turn, the Dux Battle in said space and lose 2 troops in assaulting the undefended Town, assuming the aforementioned Cavalry takes part in the assault, paired with the Retaliate Feat

The consequences:
They lose 1 Prestige for the Cavalry fighting in a Battle in which more Dux pieces were eliminated
They are eligible to receive 3 Plunder
They receive 1 Prestige for eliminating an enemy Stronghold
They receive 3 further Prestige from the Retaliate for the same reason
They reduce Civitates Wealth by 5 also

For a total of 3 Plunder, 5 Prestige, and -5 Wealth for a cost of 2 pieces and 3/6 Resources

This would be a really cool trick to pull off, but it is subject to some further caveats beyond the original, perhaps unlikely conditions:
You cannot stop the Civtates from Mustering a Militia in this space, which will cost you one more Troop
If they have Troops in Marching range, then this will probably be too costly to be worthwhile, although maybe tying them down for a lengthy Siege could be strategically useful, it would not be very profitable
You do need to be aware that you are creating a profitable target for a barbarian Raid, so pick a location that would require a Deep Raid or be in Clear terrain, or both preferably!
I suspect this is only worth doing if you can lose Foederati in the Assault instead of Cavalry, or if it can put you over your Victory threshold near the end of an Epoch

On the other hand, the Civitates need to be aware of the danger of having Militia and Hillforts cohabitating with the Dux leading up to Fragmentation.

You know, in general, I am very sympathetic to the Dux in this game. I think alone of all the factions, the Dux player can behave in an honorable manner without losing utterly. But after Fragmentation, I am not sure that he can afford to resist the siren call of sacking all Towns that he can reach, which makes him at least as bad as the barbarians, and cedes the Civitates the moral high ground. That the Dux Pivotal Event requires Fragmentation just rubs it in. I guess nice guys really do finish last in COIN...

>edited to fix some calculations
You're right, it could work, and it is indeed very gamey. One thing you forgot in your evaluation is that this would require the Dux to spend TWO full turns (Command + Feat) to pull this off, but it may still prove impactful. We could rule that the Dux is not allowed to turn Civ pieces into Towns under Fragmentation, but 1/ this is part and parcel of modelling that deep down the Civitates are very fragmented with nowhere near the level of central control a single Faction entails, 2/ this means some more rule overhead for a situation that should be very rare (I can't recall one instance of it happening in play testing) and is both costly and far from bulletproof. So unless this proves to become a major issue, I would rather not legislate on this... :-)

Now, it is true that it is very tempting for the Dux to go after Towns under Fragmentation, not necessarily because of the above (defended Towns can be quite costly to capture) but because any Civ Stronghold in a Dux Region creates a Control liability, with loss of Control to the Civ essentially one cheap Muster Command away. But in my experience, when Fragmentation comes, such mixed situations are not that common, as the Civ has typically shifted to hillier Regions defended by Hillforts...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Oerjan wrote:
GouyonRety wrote:
Very exceptionally, I'm going to disagree with Oerjan here: the rule doesn't say "Pay 3 Resources to select a space" or "Select a space, pay 3 Resources per space." but "In each selected space [which means selecting a space precedes, and hence is not contingent on paying], pay 3 resources per space to place up to [so you're paying the 3 Resources so that you can place troops] (...). Then in each of up to two selected spaces [not "in two spaces you paid 3 Resources"], (...) pay 2 Resources to ...".

So, in other words, you can select as many spaces as you wish as long as they have a Fort or Friendly Control, and each of them you may:
- either pay 3 Resources to place Troops (only effective if you have a Fort, or, for Militia, if there is a Civ Stronghold)

You are entirely correct that selection preceeds payment, but no-one has argued otherwise. However, rule 3.1 explicitly states that "the executing Faction must pay those costs up front, upon selection", so it is quite clear that you are only allowed to select a space in the first place if you're also able to pay for it immediately.

But that's irrelevant for the issue at hand. Due to the way Oxford's and the other dictionaries define the meaning of the word "each", i.e., "used to refer to every one of two or more people or things, regarded and identified separately", the phrase "in each selected space" literally means "in every single one of the spaces currently selected".

And because "each" has that specific meaning, once you you select a space for Train the "in each selected space, pay ..." forces you to pay that cost for it. The way this rule is currently phrased leaves no wiggle room in that respect.
This is where I disagree: the key is in what is written after these 3 dots: what is said is "pay to place", not just "pay", which means you only need to pay if you want to place troops.

Oerjan wrote:
If that's not what you intended the rules to mean, you need to issue another errata changing 3.2.1's "in each selected space," into "in those selected spaces desired," to make that 3-Resource payment voluntary
I indeed intended it to be possible to just pay 2 Resources to place Prosperity without having to pay 5 Resources total every time, or also to just pay to Build. For the reason outlined above, I don't think this would be an errata, but this looks like this warrants a clarification :-)

Oerjan wrote:
Quote:
- or pay 2 Resources to add Prosperity cubes (needs Friendly Control and a Fort or Cavalry)
- or pay 5 Resources and do both
- or pay nothing and do nothing except, presumably, a Feat
Note that none of the 3 Feats that can be associated with Train requires taking place in a space selected for Train (or March)

So because of the above, all the examples given by Ryan are legal.

Once you errata the Train rule to say what you intended, then all three examples will be legal with zero-cost Train Commands, yes

None of them would be legal with March Commands though, since March has no zero-cost option: if the March moves any cubes you have to pay Resources, and if it doesn't move anything it is a Pass, not a Command.
Correct
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
GouyonRety wrote:
Oerjan wrote:
GouyonRety wrote:
Very exceptionally, I'm going to disagree with Oerjan here: the rule doesn't say "Pay 3 Resources to select a space" or "Select a space, pay 3 Resources per space." but "In each selected space [which means selecting a space precedes, and hence is not contingent on paying], pay 3 resources per space to place up to [so you're paying the 3 Resources so that you can place troops] (...). Then in each of up to two selected spaces [not "in two spaces you paid 3 Resources"], (...) pay 2 Resources to ...".

So, in other words, you can select as many spaces as you wish as long as they have a Fort or Friendly Control, and each of them you may:
- either pay 3 Resources to place Troops (only effective if you have a Fort, or, for Militia, if there is a Civ Stronghold)

You are entirely correct that selection preceeds payment, but no-one has argued otherwise. However, rule 3.1 explicitly states that "the executing Faction must pay those costs up front, upon selection", so it is quite clear that you are only allowed to select a space in the first place if you're also able to pay for it immediately.

But that's irrelevant for the issue at hand. Due to the way Oxford's and the other dictionaries define the meaning of the word "each", i.e., "used to refer to every one of two or more people or things, regarded and identified separately", the phrase "in each selected space" literally means "in every single one of the spaces currently selected".

And because "each" has that specific meaning, once you you select a space for Train the "in each selected space, pay ..." forces you to pay that cost for it. The way this rule is currently phrased leaves no wiggle room in that respect.
This is where I disagree: the key is in what is written after these 3 dots: what is said is "pay to place", not just "pay", which means you only need to pay if you want to place troops.

Sorry, no. With the highly procedural way the COIN series rules are written, the exact order of the words matters.
Making it optional to place Troops in a space that you've already paid for does not carry back to an earlier part of the rule to make the payment itself optional. Let's take a closer look:

In order to have the meaning you want, the rule would have to place the option either on the choice of spaces for which the payment is made:
"... in those selected spaces desired, pay..."
or on the payment itself:
"...in each selected space, you may pay..."

But as currently written, PDG's Train rule doesn't say either of those. Instead it says "...in each space selected, pay...": there is no "desired", "may" or even "any" here to give any option other than paying for each space selected. Where it does give an option is in the number of Troops you're allowed to place in a space after you've paid for it:
"...to place up to 1 Cavalry (...) or (...) up to 2 Militia".

The reason I keep harping on this is that all of these three different rules constructs are already used in previous games in the COIN series, and there they consistently have the distinct effects described above.

We do not want to have a rules construct mean one thing in PDG when it already has been used to mean something else in other games in the series. Therefore, I strongly suggest that you issue an errata to give PDG's Train rule a phrasing that both means what you intended and at the same time is consistent with how that meaning is expressed in the rest of the series.

Regards,
Oerjan
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Oerjan, we can rewrite this section if that helps remove possible ambiguity, but I continue to disagree with your interpretation of the English here. The punctuation and the "to" clearly ties the "pay" to the placing of troops. You may be right in saying earlier COIN rulebooks worked that way (though was it the exact same sentence structure?), but from a syntax point of view, your interpretation is wrong.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Keane
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Fwiw, as a native English speaker and one with no preconceptions of how other COIN rules are written, I don’t see any point arguing what “each” implies or does not imply. If the designer’s intent is not clear to every reader, then add clarity. I interpreted 3.1 as you must pay upon selection if you can. Since many Commands involve several options, I interpreted it as you need to select each area, indicate which options you are paying for, and pay, all basically simultaneously before you do the execution procedures of placing cubes, moving cubes, rolling for raiders, etc.

If Marc intended that you have the option of selecting 1 area but not paying anything, even if you can afford it, I consider that an errata. Basically I would indicate that you can choose a Command but select no areas (namely to do a feat only).

The confusion that generated my questions was with the 4.1 red box and 4.1.1. There needs to be clarification about whether you can declare a Command+Feat, select a Feat area, pay for it, and execute it, before you proceed with selecting and paying for the Command area(s). This would allow you to do a Feat even if you won’t be able to afterwards afford the Command (but not require the errata above - if you can afford the Commamd you must pay 1 area). Or do you have to select Command and Feat areas and options and pay for them all at the same time before you execute any of them, in which case I would agree with Oerjan that you have to backtrack when you realize you can’t afford it, and that should instead be added to the red box or 4.1.1.


On a different issue discussed above, 3.2.1 needs clarification if you are allowed to only pay for prosperity and not troops (the use of “then” implies “if you pay 3 for troops, then you can pay 2 for prosperity”). Also, to me “in each of 2 selected spaces” implies you must pay 2 for each area, not 2 total for both areas. I assumed a Limited Command Train allowed you to only select one area, which you could pay 3, 2, or 5, to add cubes and/or prosperity to that single area. I personally would reword that sentence something to the effect of:
“Alternatively or in addition, in up to 2 selected spaces (not necessarily the same space(s) where you may have paid to place cavalry and/or militia), pay 2 resources total to add a number of Prosperity cubes equal to each area’s current Population (fill lower row first, 1.7.1).”

5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
GouyonRety wrote:
Oerjan, we can rewrite this section if that helps remove possible ambiguity, but I continue to disagree with your interpretation of the English here. The punctuation and the "to" clearly ties the "pay" to the placing of troops. You may be right in saying earlier COIN rulebooks worked that way (though was it the exact same sentence structure?), but from a syntax point of view, your interpretation is wrong.

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. Syntactically the "to" is clearly tied to the "pay": paying is what allows you to place the 0-3 Troops; but it is not tied to the "each" that determines what spaces you have to pay for in the first place. This is further reinforce by the fact that you don't need to place any Troops even after you've paid the 3 Resources.

But regardless of who is right, Ryan's point is very well made: if the rule is written in such a way that the game designer and one of the most experienced playtesters of the entire COIN series can't agree on what it actually means (as opposed to what it was supposed to mean), then there is clearly enough potential for confusion in it to warrant an errata

Regards,
Oerjan
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Ryan Keane wrote:
The confusion that generated my questions was with the 4.1 red box and 4.1.1. There needs to be clarification about whether you can declare a Command+Feat, select a Feat area, pay for it, and execute it, before you proceed with selecting and paying for the Command area(s). This would allow you to do a Feat even if you won’t be able to afterwards afford the Command

Well, no. It forces you to hold back enough Resources or equivalent while executing the Feat that you can then afford to execute the appropriate accompanying Command, but since you know how many Resources etc. the Command will cost that's pretty easy to plan for.

Regards,
Oerjan
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Keane
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Oerjan wrote:
Ryan Keane wrote:
The confusion that generated my questions was with the 4.1 red box and 4.1.1. There needs to be clarification about whether you can declare a Command+Feat, select a Feat area, pay for it, and execute it, before you proceed with selecting and paying for the Command area(s). This would allow you to do a Feat even if you won’t be able to afterwards afford the Command

Well, no. It forces you to hold back enough Resources or equivalent while executing the Feat that you can then afford to execute the appropriate accompanying Command, but since you know how many Resources etc. the Command will cost that's pretty easy to plan for.

Regards,
Oerjan


If the rules allow me to pay and execute something before I need to pay and execute the next thing, then if there is no further clarification I would assume that I can do the first thing knowing I will not be able to afford to do the second thing. You are assuming you have to hold back. Yes, it's easy to plan for, but that doesn't change the fact that the rules don't say I have to hold back enough Resources (or have enough in the first place) to pay for future parts of my turn, and if that is the intent IMO it is better that the rules explicitly say that or better, make me pay for everything at the same time. But it may be a case of "agree to disagree."
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Grossman
United States
Grand Junction
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I understand and agree with Oerjan's reading. It's something of a COIN canon that a special activity (feat) must accompany a operation (command).

If this case changes that then it needs to be re-written and noted. If there is a zero cost option, it should be clearly stated.

Not being able to afford the cost of a required operation (command) is clearly illegal play.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oerjan Ariander
Sweden
HUDDINGE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Ryan Keane wrote:
Oerjan wrote:
Ryan Keane wrote:
The confusion that generated my questions was with the 4.1 red box and 4.1.1. There needs to be clarification about whether you can declare a Command+Feat, select a Feat area, pay for it, and execute it, before you proceed with selecting and paying for the Command area(s). This would allow you to do a Feat even if you won’t be able to afterwards afford the Command

Well, no. It forces you to hold back enough Resources or equivalent while executing the Feat that you can then afford to execute the appropriate accompanying Command, but since you know how many Resources etc. the Command will cost that's pretty easy to plan for.

Regards,
Oerjan


If the rules allow me to pay and execute something before I need to pay and execute the next thing, then if there is no further clarification

But there is "further clarification". It is explicitly stated as the very first sentence of rule 4.1.1:
Quote:
When a Faction per the Event Card sequence of play (2.3) executes
a Command in at least one space
(3.0), it may also execute
one type of its Feats ...
(emphasis added)

The red box does not contradict or cancel this first sentence in any way.

Edited to add: The red box is itself a clarification expaining what that initial "When" at the start of 4.1.1 means.

Regards,
Oerjan
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Abe Delnore
United States
Pittsburgh
PA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Some really sophisticated approaches to text have emerged in this thread. I feel like I'm either back in a grad school literature seminar ("Authorial intent is nothing!") or else arguing a contracts case ("Even if the parties meant X, their contract unambiguously says Y, which is the controlling meaning!").
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
At this point, pending the release of appropriate errata and/or clarifications :-), I can confirm that the design intent is that the Dux may Train and pay 2 Resources per Region to add Prosperity in up to 2 Regions without necessarily having to pay 3 more Resources per such Region to place ghost Troops.
Now, regarding whether an "empty" Train (no Resources paid for either placing Troops or adding Prosperity) Command in order to allow to Build in a given Space can be OK, bearing in mind the grand ole traditions of the COIN series, I am currently discussing with Pendragon's developer and COIN Series father, Volko. We will issue an official ruling on this ASAP. Thank you for your patience, and sorry for the potential confusion...
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Gouyon-Rety
Canada
Montreal
QC
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alright, so Volko confirmed that we are aligned on the interpretation, and he also is fine with allowing an "empty" Train to Build. We are going to issue a proper clarification (not erratum... :-) ) but in the meantime, consider that, when you Train, you can in each selected space, either:
- spend 3 Resources to place Troops only
- spend 2 Resources to place Prosperity only (limited to a maximum of 2 spaces, can be 0 spaces since "up to")
- spend 5 Resources to place Troops and Prosperity (subject to the above-mentioned 2 spaces limit)

Also, it is entirely legal to select Train and select 0 space for placing Troops, and 0 space to place Prosperity ("empty Train"). Such an empty "Train" still counts as a full Command, and allows to select an associated Feat such as Build (note however that a Feat cannot be empty).

Cheers, Marc
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eddy del Rio
United States
San Antonio
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
<deep sigh>
 
 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.