Streamlined rules

[mrweasely]

In all the talk about the revised rules, there was strong temptation to change rules to make them less FAQ-bait. This would change the balance of the game, but not significantly, say change less than 1% of outcomes.

Here are rules that I think are overly baroque or useless:


Rearguards Only very rarely useful. Complicated. Change to: either attack or no attack, there is no "kinda attack".

Hunt Sequence First resolve all damage. The guide abilities of any and all guides during the hunt may be used. Finally, if the fellowship is still revealed, reveal it. (Gollum gets better, slightly).

[mrweasely]

Attacks and Battles: An attack targets an army. By far the most common type of attack is a battle, usually started with an army or character die. However, certain cards initiate special non-battle attacks. Examples include "Ents Awake", "Dreadful Spells", and "Faramir's Rangers". Casualties, Political Effects, and Character Death are common to all types of Attacks, but are detailed in the Battle section below to maintain narrative flow.

Battles
I. To battle, one must be at War
II. Playing combat cards
III. Combat Rolls and Leader ReRolls.
IV. Removing casulties & leader death.
V. Advance after combat.
VI. Political effects of attacks.

[Krieghund]

A simple rule of thumb is that if only one side rolls dice, it is an attack; if both sides roll dice, it is a battle. Of course, there are exceptions. The Ents Awake and Dead Men cards are examples. The fact that these "attacks" are treated as "battles" is reflected in the language on the cards and the FAQ. They could be thought of thematically as one-sided battles where, in effect, the defenders don't actually need to roll because it's impossible for them to do any damage.

[mrweasely]

Right, but then the game designers go puck it up and say that the WK isn't killed by Ents.

[Krieghund]

That doesn't invalidate the model. Using the model, the Ent cards would normally not eliminate any Minions, since the cards invoke an attack (only one side rolls dice), not a battle. The exception, as stated on the cards, is that Saruman is eliminated if all of the defenders are. The fact that this exception must be stated at all proves the rule, and the absence of other exceptions doesn't change this.

[magicgeek]

The only war to explain the difference between the two is to say if the politics chart moves when each of the weird stuff occurs.

When Ents attack Moria, does Sauron move?
When Power rangers attack Dew North in Northern Rovanion, does Sauron move?

When Return to Valinor resolves, do the Elves move?
Does Storm Crow move the poltical track down?
(this one REALLY bites. Just coz Stormcrow states back one, then it moves again, right? No?)
Does Spirit of Mordor move all involved armies?
Does Deadly Spells?

If the justification is "they didn't roll dice", when I kill all of the shadow defenders with a sudden strike, that would not change the politics chart because "they didn't roll dice".

Do nazgul or the WK die when any of those things wipe out their army?


The bit that obviously bites is when the Trees attack Orthanc.
Rohan has already besieged Orthanc, and The Trees wipe out everyone.
Everyone except the WK and the Nazgul.


Deadly Spells is ridiculously wrong for exactly the same reasons.
The difference is that Deadly spells will have this problem maybe 1 game in 15, instead of never.


Dead Men is actually irrelevent, Units cannot be in pelagir unless they are from Gondor, or at war.

[mrweasely]

Yes to all, except Stormcow of course.

[Krieghund]

The difference between an attack and a battle is irrelevent for political purposes, since either will move a Nation on the Political Track. The FAQ states which cards count as attacks for political purposes. The real impact of attack vs battle is whether or not an action may result in the elimination of Characters and/or Nazgul. Battles do. Attacks do not, unless the card (or the FAQ) specifically notes an exception.

[mrweasely]

Casulaties are counted the same way in each case. Leader elimination is a natural part of casualty elimination. Hence streamlining the rules. My 2c.

Hey, so if Grond is going badly, can the WK feed his last three hit-points to an Onslaught on the last round, to avoid getting killed himself?

[Krieghund]

magicgeek said:

If the justification is "they didn't roll dice", when I kill all of the shadow defenders with a sudden strike, that would not change the politics chart because "they didn't roll dice".

Perhaps I should have said "have the potential to roll dice". True, Sudden Strike, or any other pre-combat roll combat card, could wipe out an Army before it can roll. But, this occurred in combat, so if the Army had survived it would have rolled dice. The key is whether both sides have the potential to roll at any point during a combat sequence that is triggered by the playing of an Action Die.

mrweasely said:

Hey, so if Grond is going badly, can the WK feed his last three hit-points to an Onslaught on the last round, to avoid getting killed himself?

No, this still occurs as part of a normal combat round, so both sides had the potential to roll dice at some point during the action (see above).

magicgeek said:

When do Hillmen take double hits?

In battles (Dunlend vs Rivendell for example) they take double damage.
In Ent attack, dothey take double damage?
How about spirit of Mordor?

"one hit eliminates two Dunlendings"

Not sure , and I think I might need to check some wordings, but, are casualties = hits?

Look I know this seems stupid. But, well, does ent attack kill 2 dunledings per casualty?

Yes, casualties equal hits. One hit always kills two Dunlendings. However, for the purposes of combat cards that require the SP to remove his/her own units, such as Onslaught, each Dunlending counts as a full unit.

[mrweasely]

I was confused on Dunlending hits when they first came out too. Can they tamp down a No Quarter? The answer came back that Dunlendings only take non-double damage to Onslaught and Relentless Assault. More generally, these are obviously in the category of Shadow combat cards which eliminate shadow units.

[mrweasely]

magicgeek said:

Deadly Spells is ridiculously wrong for exactly the same reasons.
The difference is that Deadly spells will have this problem maybe 1 game in 15, instead of never.

1 in 15 huh? For me its more like 1 in 200. Since they don't get to shoot back, its best to use Deadly Spells when you're fighting a force you actually fear. If my own force is just two orcs, I suppose I could fear a force small enough to be eliminated by Deadly Spells. Its more common for me, though, to use it at the start of a big important siege, say against [5/0/0].

You never attack strength, so you don't have this problem, I suppose.

[magicgeek]

Yes, deadly spells should be used on hard targets most of the time.

1/200 games means you have seen this ONCE, if you have 200 games.

If you have seen this ONCE, perhaps you should not rubbish a very useful strategy you do not use.

EG,
Shadow must win this turn,
Free are next to Mt Doom,
Shadow has a Palantir and an Army.
Deadly Spells on Dale/Shire/Pelagir/Edoras, Army move into Dale+ & Somewhere for the win.


Or how about
Free have 1 or 2 Regulars in a Stronghold besieged by 1 or 2 Orcs, Deadly spells for the win.


Now I know that both of those is unlikely, I also know that both of those have happened.
If they haven't happened in your games, fine, the thing is that Deadly spells has the capability to be very widely used in many interesting ways, that is why it is such a problem for the rules.


If I never attacked into strength, Deadly spells would be used in creative ways 15/15.


One of the best uses I have seen for this type of sillyness is Power Rangers on Dew North in Northern Rovanion, then Muster Galadriel. But I suppose that is rare, maybe 1/2000 since very few people are smart enough to think of it.
(I didn't)

[mrweasely]

Right, really 0/100 for me, I was rounding up.
Kris or Sean hit me with Rangers for the Galadriel in, like, the 2nd expansion game I played. Now I steer well the heck back from ranger-equipped armies during Galadriel-denial: South Downs, Rhovinnion, Ithiliien.

[Krieghund]

magicgeek said:

And Kreighound, in your games: -
When ents or a card wipes out an army, do your Nazgul die? Does the WK?

If the event (all action stemming from the playing of an Action Die) is an attack (only one side may roll dice), Characters and Nazgul are safe. If it is a battle (both sides have the potential to roll dice), Characters and Nazgul are eliminated. I follow this formula unless the rules, card or FAQ specifically states otherwise.