Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

India Rails» Forums » Rules

Subject: Sandstorm question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
GMOFreePortland.com
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
ii desu. It is good.
badge
No, I have no idea.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just had this come up in a game with the sandstorm, card 146. I was drawn into Quetta, which is just North of a small, unnamed, three milepost desert, outlined in yellow. The text of the card specifically mentions the Thar Desert, outlined in orange here. It also says that all track connected to any desert milepost is destroyed. So my question is: should my track connected to Quetta have been removed because it is a desert milepost? Or should it have been safe since it wasn't a part of the Thar desert?



Here is the event card in question.



If it makes any difference, we were playing the first edition.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Smith
United States
Jackson
MS
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would do exactly what the card says and destroy any track connected to a desert milepost.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Foy
United States
Ellicott City
Maryland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Parsing the information on the card, I've come to the conclusion that the first sentence 'No train may cross the Thar desert' is fluff. If you follow the instructions on the rest of the card, no trains are crossing the Thar desert. Therefore ignore the first sentence and obey the instructions in sentences 2 and 3. So to answer your question: Yes, you destroy track connected to any desert milepost (even mileposts outside the Thar desert).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Shipley
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
badge
the liberal unsavory type
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Looking at Australian Rails that has multiple deserts, the Sandstorm cards are worded the same way. The first sentence states which desert is affected and the rest of the card still refers to the same desert.

So that little desert in the corner would not be affected.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Smith
United States
Jackson
MS
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rshipley wrote:
Looking at Australian Rails that has multiple deserts, the Sandstorm cards are worded the same way. The first sentence states which desert is affected and the rest of the card still refers to the same desert.

So that little desert in the corner would not be affected.

The Australian Rails sandstorm cards do not refer to any desert by name. They very clearly refer to every desert milepost in the named territory. In each of the three territories for which there are cards, there are multiple, non-contiguous areas of desert. If you apply this similarly to India, you would apply it to every desert milepost, even those that are non-contiguous.

For the record, in Iron Dragon, the sandstorm card refers to all desert mileposts, which happen to be in multiple non-contiguous areas.

In China Rails, the cards specifically state all mileposts in a specific desert. There are no non-contiguous areas in China Rails.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Shipley
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
badge
the liberal unsavory type
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
seppo21 wrote:
rshipley wrote:
Looking at Australian Rails that has multiple deserts, the Sandstorm cards are worded the same way. The first sentence states which desert is affected and the rest of the card still refers to the same desert.

So that little desert in the corner would not be affected.

The Australian Rails sandstorm cards do not refer to any desert by name. They very clearly refer to every desert milepost in the named territory. In each of the three territories for which there are cards, there are multiple, non-contiguous areas of desert. If you apply this similarly to India, you would apply it to every desert milepost, even those that are non-contiguous.


So the first sentence on an Australian rails card is:

"No Train may cross the desert in Northern Territory."

so this covers any desert milepost in the territory as you say.

The second sentence is:

"All track connected to desert mileposts is destroyed, but may be rebuilt."

but you argue this sentence in Australian Rails only applies to the named territory, but in India rails it applies to the whole board and not just the named area?

I guess the question is, what is the purpose of the desert mileposts up there? If this does not apply, then they are the same as clear mileposts since they will never be destroyed. So saying that they should be destroyed is a reasonable ruling, but the wording isn't very clear on the point.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Okonski
United States
Unspecified
flag msg tools
From Wikipedia: "The Thar Desert ... is a large, arid region in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent and forms a natural boundary running along the border between India and Pakistan." Since Quetta and the three desert mps near it are fairly distant from the area described as Thar, IMO those three desert mps are not impacted by the event in question. FWIW, that is also how EB Pronto handles the event.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
GMOFreePortland.com
United States
Milwaukie
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
ii desu. It is good.
badge
No, I have no idea.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for all the input everyone. I emailed Mayfair games and posed the same question to them. The answer I received was that the sandstorm does not affect the little, three milepost desert. Only the Thar Desert has the sandstorm.

For all intents and purposes, that little desert is the same as clear mileposts.
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.