Subject: Fw: Dune Rule Clarifications (very long) Gilbert Benoît wrote in message <39463569.E7DCA479@home.com>... Having recently discovered Brad Johnson's compendium of Dune rule clarifications on the Grognards Web site, I read it with great interest. Since I have myself devoted careful thought to this topic over the years, I thought that I should contribute... I understand that many of the rulings below resulted from player votes, and that Brad himself disagrees with some of them. Since I never play with allies (and do not see why anyone ever would, as it utterly wrecks the game), I have deleted all references to alliances in order to keep this to a reasonable size. Gilbert Benoit Ottawa ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) What is the latest time a Karama can be played to cancel the Bene Gesserit Voice in battle? a) Before the Voice command is known. *b) After the Voice command is known. 2) What is the latest time a Karama can be played to cancel the Atreides Prescience in battle? a) Before the Prescience question is asked. *b) After the Prescience question is asked. Comment: while I have always played the other way, I have no strong feelings about these two 3) When must elements of a player's battle plan that are not Voiced or Prescienced be finally committed? *a) Only immediately before the battle plan is revealed. b) Before the Bene Gesserit Voice (if applicable). c) After the Bene Gessiert Voice, but before the Atreides Prescience (if applicable). Agreed. Actually, I thought the rules were clear about this!? 4) What is the latest time a Karama can be played to cancel the capture of a leader by the Harkonnen? a) Before the captured leader is revealed. *b) After the captured leader is revealed. Same comment as 1) and 2) above. 5) Who is entitled to see the identity of a leader captured by the Harkonnen? *a) Only the Harkonnen and the victim. b) All players. Agreed. 6) Regarding the shipment of Fremen tokens, which may be placed within two spaces of the Great Flat: Exactly which spaces does this include? a) Only the spaces within 2 of the Great Flat that also border the equator (i.e. edge of the board). *b) Any space on the board within 2 of the Great Flat. Agreed. 7) During the Shipment and Movement Round, what is the order of events? a) All players take revival, then all players ship, then all players move. b) The first player takes revival, then ships, then moves, followed by each player in sequence. *c) All players take revival, then the first player ships and moves, followed by each player in sequence. Agreed. 8) When must the Bene Gesserit declare non-coexistence of its tokens on the board? *a) At the beginning of the Shipment and Movement Round, before revival is taken. b) At the beginning of the Shipment and Movement Round, after revival is taken. c) Preceding/during the Bene Gesserit's turn to move. d) At the end of the Shipment and Movement Round. Comment: I have always played b), but a) is fine too. 13) After a player passes during the bid for treachery card, may that player later bid again on the same card? *a) Yes. b) No. Comment: I personally agree, but this issue was hotly debated in my group of players. The dissenters made an analogy to bidding in poker, but I believe this is really an auction, hence a). 14) What is the latest time a Karama can be played by the Atreides to force an opponent to reveal an entire battle plan? a) Before the Bene Gesserit Voice (if applicable). *b) After the Bene Gessiert Voice (if applicable). Comment: Agreed. Q&A B.6 in the rules makes it clear that Voice comes before prescience, so this is a logical extension 15) On whom can a Karama be played by the Atreides to force the entire battle plan to be revealed? *a) Any player in any battle. b) Only an opponent in a battle in which the Atreides is actually participating. c) Only an opponent in a battle in which the Atreides or an ally of the Atreides is actually participating. No way! Here is the actual wording from the Atreides player shield: "you may force your opponent to show you...". The alliance wording is also clear, so there is no ambiguity about "basic" prescience. The logical intent of the Karama power is simply to amplify prescience, so I see no reason to break it wide open. c) is clearly correct. 16) Can a group of non-coexisting Bene Gesserit tokens change to coexisting when ending their move in a new space? a) Yes. *b) Yes, but the Bene Gesserit need not make such a declaration unless or until another faction's tokens are present in that space. c) No, not until the next Shipment and Movement Round. 17) Can a group of coexisting Bene Gesserit tokens change to non-coexisting when ending their move in a new space? a) Yes. b) Yes, but the Bene Gesserit need not make such a declaration unless or until another faction's tokens are present in that space. c) Yes, but only if no tokens have ever coexisted in that space during the current turn. *d) Yes, but only if no tokens have ever coexisted in that space during the current turn, and the Bene Gesserit need not make such a declaration unless or until another faction's tokens are present in that space. e) No, not until the next Shipment and Movement Round. 18) When must the Bene Gesserit declare whether new tokens shipped down to the planet are coexisting or non-coexisting? a) Immediately upon shipping the tokens. b) At the end of the current Shipment and Movement Round. *c) Not until another faction enters the same space as those tokens, or the beginning of the next Shipment and Movement Round, whichever comes first. Comment: I agree with 16, 17 & 18, but I would be happier with 17 b) (although I have never seen a case where the difference would matter) 19) Where may Bene Gesserit spiritual advisors be shipped, if using optional rule XV? a) To the territory into which another player ships. b) To the Polar Sink. *c) Either a) or b), as the Bene Gesserit desires. Disagree. If you send "advisors", then they must be with the people they are advising! The Polar Sink rule only makes sense in the basic game, when coexistence is not an option. 20) May the Bene Gesserit opt to *not* ship a spiritual advisor, if using optional rule XV? *a) Yes. b) No. Agreed. Seems obvious: the rules say "may ship". 21) What is the latest time that a Karama can be played by the Guild to cancel another faction's shipment? a) Before the shipment is declared. *b) After the shipment is declared, but before that faction's movement is declared. c) After that faction's shipment and movement is declared. Agreed. I would also be willing to play a) 22) When can a Karama be played by the Fremen to cause a worm to appear? a) Any time. b) Any time during the Spice Round. c) Only at the beginning the the Spice Round. d) Only at the end of the Spice Round. *e) Only just before drawing a spice blow card during the Spice Round. f) Only just after drawing a spice blow card during the Spice Round. Disagree. This must be the only case where I favor the more liberal interpretation! I have always played a), and this was never a point of contention in any game I played. 23) What is the latest time that the Bene Gesserit's prediction can be made? *a) Immediately after factions are assigned. b) After traitors are drawn. c) After tokens are placed on the board. d) After initial treachery cards are dealt. Comment: a careful reading of the rules actually reveals that there is no ambiguity. a) is correct, and the complete start up sequence is as follows: - Bene Gesserit prediction - Traitor selection - Fremen placement - Bene Gesserit placement - Treachery card distribution This is *not* open to interpretation. 24) What is the latest time that a Karama can be played to cancel the Emperor's or Fremen's starred token advantage? a) Before battle plans are revealed. *b) After battle plans are revealed. 25) If answering b) to question 24), what happens to the number dialed by the Fremen or Emperor if it now exceeds the maximum valid number? a) Nothing. The number dialed may still be used as the battle value, but each starred tokens sent to the tanks now counts the same as only one regular token. *b) The number dialed must be adjusted downward to the maximum valid number. (If using advanced combat rule XXII, the spice originally paid to supply tokens may *not* be changed in any way.) Comment: I believe that 24 a) is correct, for two reasons - The rules make it clear that, after Voice or Prescience, the opponent can alter the rest of the plan. By extension I prefer allowing the same opportunity in this case. - The mess described in 25! 26) Is the Atreides entitled to see the identity of the 2nd free card drawn by the Harkonnen when purchasing a treachery card? a) Yes. *b) No. (Note that in this case it seems unlikely that anyone would ever bother playing a Karama to cancel taking a card of which no one knows the identity.) Agreed. Was this ever unclear?! 27) If a player intends to play a Karama to avoid paying for a treachery card, does that allow him to bid higher than the amount of spice he current holds? *a) Yes. (Note that this implies that a bid of "infinity" must be allowed in order to ensure that bidding will end.) b) No. 28) If answering a) to question 27), in the case that two or more players are intending to play a Karama to buy the same treachery card, would it be true that the first bidder to bid "infinity" during his proper turn to bid and play a Karama wins the bid? *a) Yes. b) No. I strongly disagree with 27 a), for three reasons: - Competing Karama cards. The "infinity" bid is highly unsatisfactory. - What if Bene Gesserit used a worthless card to bid more spice than she has, and the Emperor plays a Karama to cancel the BG Karama? Then you are stuck! - Consider this scenario: you hold a Karama card, and intend to use it to buy the next card. You start pushing up the bidding, but you notice that the Emperor is following you, so you decide to let him have the card at a high price. By rights, you should play your Karama card in this case, otherwise you have cheated! 29) When the Harkonnen capture a leader, it says he may immediately send that leader to the tanks for 2 spice. What exactly does this mean? a) Harkonnen must *pay* 2 spice for the privelege of killing the leader. *b) Harkonnen *receives* 2 spice for the water from killing the leader. Agreed. Duh! 30) If the Harkonnen has captured a leader that is one of the traitors in his pay, what happens if that leader is played in battle against the original owner? *a) The original owner may call traitor, as usual. b) The original owner may *not* call traitor. Agreed. I thought this rule was clear!? 31) When does the Emperor actually receive payments for treachery cards? *a) Immediately upon purchase of each card. The Emperor immediately has that money available for use. b) All payments are held "in escrow" until the end of the current Treachery Round. 32) When does the Guild actually receive payments for shipments made by other factions (excluding the Fremen)? *a) Immediately upon shipment. The Guild immediately has that money available for use. b) All payments are held "in escrow" until the end of the current Shipment and Movement Round. Agree with 31 & 32 37) If answering c) to question 34), what sorts of deals may be made by players for the purpose of exchanging spice? *a) Any kind of deal is allowed, even including the gift of spice from one player to another. b) Any kind of deal is allowed, but outright gifts are excluded, even though this would be exceedingly difficult to rule on objectively. c) Only deals that involve providing all or some of the cost of another faction's shipment and/or treachery card purchases (as described in rules XII.E.3-4). Comment: I deleted most items in this series, but kept 37 as an example. Even though the rules are clear about allowing deals, as this whole discussion shows, they easily get out of hand (we had a game where the Emperor paid Atreides every turn during the bidding round for information about the cards! This was highly unpopular (understatement). I would tend to quietly downplay the whole "deal" business... 39) Is it true that Weather Control must be played *before* the distance the storm is supposed to move is revealed? a) Yes. *b) No. Comment: I could live with either. 41) When the Harkonnen plays a Karama to steal treachery cards from another player, it is clear that he may *not* look at the cards taken in order to choose which ones to take. However, once the Harkonnen has taken all of the cards that he is going to take, may he look at them before deciding which of his own cards to given back in return? *a) Yes. b) No. Comment: I have always played b) 42) When does the Atreides get to use the Kwisatz Haderach? a) In *all* turns after the first turn in which he loses 7 or more tokens during that turn. b) In *all* turns after *and including* the first turn in which he loses 7 or more tokens during that turn. *c) In *all* turns after the first turn in which he has lost a total of 7 or more tokens during the entire game. d) In *all* turns after *and including* the first turn in which he has lost a total of 7 or more tokens during the entire game. e) Only during *each* turn in which he loses 7 or more tokens during that turn. Comment: it is clearly c) or d)! I have always played d) myself... 43) Many of the Karama powers listed on the Player Aid sheet explicitly include the word "once" in the description. (For example, "Prevents Atreides from seeing the future, once".) What exactly does this mean? *a) Once per Karama card. b) Once per game. Agreed. 44) A Karama may be played to "prevent Atreides from seeing the future". Exactly which instances of Atreides prescience may be preventing using this power? (Indicate all that apply.) *a) Prescience during battle. *b) Seeing the spice blow card for the next turn. *c) Seeing the next treachery card up for bid. Comment: agreed, but c) is actually too weak. Q&A A.4 in the rules makes it ckear that ATreides is prevented from looking at *any* card that bidding round. 45) Where can the Fremen send additional worms beyond the first drawn for a given spice blow? *a) To any territory on the board. b) To any other *sand* territory on the board. Agreed. This is actually clear from the player aid sheets. 46) According to the rules, the Fremen can ship off-planet tokens into the storm, taking half losses as normal. Since the Fremen shipment is essentially just a move from off-board, does this imply that the Fremen can also *move* tokens already on the board into or through the storm, taking half losses as normal? *a) Yes. b) No. Disagree. Strongly. This is reading a lot into the rules. Interested in a seat on the Supreme Court? 47) Which players, if any, are allowed to keep written notes of who holds which treachery cards during the game? a) None. *b) Only the Atreides. c) All players. Comment: we used to play b), but I later changed my mind, and I now favor a). My original preference for b) stemmed from a belief that Atreides were at a disadvantage, but I now think that we just did not know how to play them right. Even without notes, seeing the treachery cards during the bidding round is a huge advantage! 48) May any player keep written notes of players' spice treasuries during the game? a) Yes. *b) No. Agreed. 49) According to the rules, the Guild may play a Karama to stop the shipment of any player. Does this include the ability to stop a shipment made by the Fremen, even though the Fremen's "shipments" are by "walking" from the southern hemisphere of the planet, and not really via Guild ships from off-planet? a) Yes. *b) No. 50) According to the rules, the Bene Gesserit may send a spiritual advisor to accompany the shipment of any player. Does this include shipments made by the Fremen, even though the Fremen's "shipments" are by "walking" from the southern hemisphere of the planet, and not really via Guild ships from off-planet? a) Yes. *b) No. Agreed (49&50). Duh! 51) Who may play a Karama to cancel the Atreides Prescience in battle? a) Only the Atreides' opponent in that battle. b) Only the Atreides' opponent in that battle and allies of that opponent. *c) Anyone. 52) Who may play a Karama to cancel the Bene Gesserit Voice in battle? a) Only the Bene Gesserit's opponent in that battle. b) Only the Bene Gesserit's opponent in that battle and allies of that opponent. *c) Anyone. Agreed (51&52) (but not 100% crazy about it, though). 53) In what order are the Guild's battles resolved? a) Strictly according to the position of the storm relative to the Guild's player dot. (For example, if the Guild *should* have moved first, the Guild's battles will be resolved first, regardless of when the Guild actually took its move.) *b) According to when the Guild actually took its move. (For example, if the Guild chose to move last, its battles will be resolved last, regardless of the Guild's player dot position.) 54) If the position of the storm relative to the Guild's player dot indicates that the Guild *should* move first, but the Guild elects to defer its movement until last, does the Guild win ties in battle that turn? a) Yes. *b) No. Comment: an interesting topic. I have always played the other way myself (i.e. strictly by the dots). It comes out even, I think, since the two work in opposite direction any way (i.e. attacking last is an advantage - usually - but losing the ties is a drawback). Whichever choice you make, you end up with both a positive and a negative. 55) Is the capture of a leader by the Harkonnen optional? *a) Yes. b) No. Agreed. 56) Is the one Bene Gesserit token placed at the beginning of the game required to begin in coexistence? a) Yes. *b) No. AGreed. 57) Is the Atreides use of Prescience optional? *a) Yes. b) No. 58) Is the Bene Gesserit use of Voice optional? *a) Yes. b) No. Agreed (57&58), but why would one ever not use the power?! 59) When the Harkonnen plays a Karama to steal treachery cards from another player, it is clear that he is *not* allowed to return the exact cards stolen to the victim. However, if a Snooper or Shield is stolen, may another card of the same type (which happens to be indistinguishable from the card stolen) be returned? *a) Yes. b) No. Agreed (seams clear enough). 60) If a faction ships tokens into Carthag or Arrakeen, is that faction considered to have access to ornithopters for the purposes of movement that same turn? a) Yes, unconditionally. b) Yes, but only if no other faction already occupies that city. *c) No. Agreed. 61) If the Bene Gesserit begin the Shipment and Movement Round with coexisting tokens in Carthag and/or Arrakeen, are the Bene Gesserit considered to have access to ornithopters for the purposes of movement that same turn? a) Yes, unconditionally. b) Yes, but only if no other faction also occupies that city. c) Yes, but only if the coexisting tokens in Carthag and/or Arrakeen are changed to non-coexisting at the very beginning of the Shipment and Movement Round (clarifying rule IX.C.2.1). d) Yes, but only if the coexisting tokens in Carthag and/or Arrakeen are changed to non-coexisting at the very beginning of the Shipment and Movement Round (clarifying rule IX.C.2.1) *and* no other faction also occupies that city. *e) No, a faction must begin the Shipment and Movement Round with *sole possession* of Carthag and/or Arrakeen in order to have ornithopter movement (seeming to contravene rule IX.C.2.1). Agreed. 62) If the Fremen use their special worm-riding ability to move tokens into Carthag and/or Arrakeen during the Spice Round, are the Fremen considered to have access to ornithopters for the purposes of movement that same turn? a) Yes, unconditionally. b) Yes, but only if no other faction already occupies that city. *c) No. Comment: I like the spirit of c), but I find it hard to defend anything other than b) (i.e. at the beginning of their turn, they are indeed in sole possession of the city). 63) May tokens be moved in the same turn that they are first shipped to the planet? (E.g. If the Harkonnen ships 2 tokens to Carthag, may they then immediately be moved as the Harkonnen's one on-planet move?) *a) Yes. b) No. Agreed. What a huge advantage this gives to city dwellers! 64) Is the state of coexistence or non-coexistence attached to Bene Gesserit tokens or spaces occupied by Bene Gesserit tokens? (E.g. Say there are 2 tokens in Arrakeen declared to be coexisting, which then move to Carthag where there are 3 tokens declared to be not coexisting. If coexistence is attached to tokens, then Carthag should contain 3 non-coexisting tokens and 2 coexisting tokens. If coexistence is instead attached to spaces, then Carthag should contain 5 non-coexisting tokens, and any tokens later moved into Arrakeen should become coexisting.) a) Coexistence is attached to Bene Gesserit tokens. *b) Coexistence is attached to spaces occupied by Bene Gesserit tokens. Comment: I agree, but would add that co-existence is voided as soon as BG find themselves alone (either as a result of the other side moving away, or two other sides annihilating themselves in battle). This is important: with this interpretation, I saw BG win a game this way! 65) When drawing traitors at the beginning of the game, which leaders are eligible to be drawn? a) All leaders of all factions, regardless of the number of players. *b) Only the leaders of the factions currently involved in the game, if less than 6 players. Agreed. Duh! From: Alan Poulter To: "'grognard'" Subject: Fw: Dune Rule Clarifications (very long) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 07:09:41 +0100 Christian Beijner wrote in message <8i6dug$r$1@news.kth.se>... In article <39463569.E7DCA479@home.com> Gilbert =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= writes: > >Having recently discovered Brad Johnson's compendium of Dune rule >clarifications on the Grognards Web site, I read it with great interest. >Since I have myself devoted careful thought to this topic over the >years, I thought that I should contribute. > >22) When can a Karama be played by the Fremen to cause a worm to appear? >> a) Any time. >> b) Any time during the Spice Round. >> c) Only at the beginning the the Spice Round. >> d) Only at the end of the Spice Round. >> *e) Only just before drawing a spice blow card during the Spice Round. >> f) Only just after drawing a spice blow card during the Spice Round. > >Disagree. This must be the only case where I favor the more liberal >interpretation! I have always played a), and this was never a point >of contention in any game I played. Well the player aid pad, where the Karama rule is written says Òin the spice phaseÓ so a) is in fact the only interpretation that obviously wrong. >> 24) What is the latest time that a Karama can be played to cancel >> the Emperor's or Fremen's starred token advantage? >> a) Before battle plans are revealed. >> *b) After battle plans are revealed. > >> 25) If answering b) to question 24), what happens to the number dialed >> by the Fremen or Emperor if it now exceeds the maximum valid number? >> a) Nothing. The number dialed may still be used as the battle >> value, >> but each starred tokens sent to the tanks now counts the same as >> only one regular token. >> *b) The number dialed must be adjusted downward to the maximum valid >> number. (If using advanced combat rule XXII, the spice originally >> paid to supply tokens may *not* be changed in any way.) > >Comment: I believe that 24 a) is correct, for two reasons > > - The rules make it clear that, after Voice or Prescience, > the opponent can alter the rest of the plan. By extension > I prefer allowing the same opportunity in this case. > > - The mess described in 25! Agreed, with you on 24 a). IÕll add 2 more reasons. - This could be an instant battle-winner against Freemen or Emperor, play the card if the strength change insures a win. Save the card if it does not. Very powerful compared to the other uses of Karama card, like stopping Atreides prescience, where playing the Karama only improves your chances of winning, and never in hindsight. -Ok this is just me, but when one rule interpretation works pretty much flawlessly, and another interpretation requires additional fixes and interpretations, go with the former interpretation rather than the latter. >>27) If a player intends to play a Karama to avoid paying for a treachery >>card, does that allow him to bid higher than the amount of spice he >> current holds? >> *a) Yes. (Note that this implies that a bid of "infinity" must be >> allowed in order to ensure that bidding will end.) >> b) No. > >> 28) If answering a) to question 27), in the case that two or more >> players >> are intending to play a Karama to buy the same treachery card, would it >> be true that the first bidder to bid "infinity" during his proper turn >> to bid and play a Karama wins the bid? >> *a) Yes. >> b) No. > > I strongly disagree with 27 a), for three reasons: > > - Competing Karama cards. The "infinity" bid is highly > unsatisfactory. > > - What if Bene Gesserit used a worthless card to bid more > spice than she has, and the Emperor plays a Karama to cancel > the BG Karama? Then you are stuck! > > - Consider this scenario: you hold a Karama card, and intend to > use it to buy the next card. You start pushing up the bidding, > but you notice that the Emperor is following you, so you decide > to let him have the card at a high price. By rights, you should > play your Karama card in this case, otherwise you have cheated! Agree with the given interpretation, even if your points bring up valid points. I think that anytime someone bids more than he obviously has he has flagged his Karama. If anyone misses this, like the Emperor who bids over an already inflated bid, he deserves what is coming to him. Another important point is that the Karama allows a poor player to get a card, without waiting for the rich duo (Emperor and Guild) to fill up their hands. >Competing Karama I think the interpretation works nicely. The first ÒinfinityÓ bidder realised first that he was up against another Karama. Now everyone knows the second player has a Karama. What if Bene Gesserit used a worthless card to bid more Discard both cards (XXV. 7), and start a new round. Not covered in the rules, but how else to handle it. > By rights, you should play your Karama card in this case, otherwise you > have cheated! No, interesting point though. A better fix - IMO, of course - would be to force any Karama used for bidding to be played and the effects implemented immediately, ie ÒI play a Karama card to outbid you all and take the cardÓ. And if anyone one wants to stop the BG from using a worthless card in this way, they can/must immediately play a Karama card to cancel it and have the bidding continue as usual. The problem is not so much the bidding more than you have, but implementing the powers of a Karama card in part (ÒbiddingÓ) w/o actually playing the card. >>29) When the Harkonnen capture a leader, it says he may immediately send >>that leader to the tanks for 2 spice. What exactly does this mean? >> a) Harkonnen must *pay* 2 spice for the privelege of killing the >> leader. >> *b) Harkonnen *receives* 2 spice for the water from killing the >>leader. > >Agreed. Duh! Strangely enough this question have come up in just about any game I have played. I fail to see how it could be anything but b), but I know others think it could be a). >>62) If the Fremen use their special worm-riding ability to move >>tokens into Carthag and/or Arrakeen during the Spice Round, are the >>Fremen >>considered to have access to ornithopters for the purposes of movement >>that same turn? >> a) Yes, unconditionally. >> b) Yes, but only if no other faction already occupies that city. >> *c) No. > >Comment: I like the spirit of c), but I find it hard to defend > anything other than b) (i.e. at the beginning of their > turn, they are indeed in sole possession of the city). I agree with you, but...seems like they changed the rule to say a player who controlled Arakeen or Carthag in the beginning of the turn instead of beginning of the move. Anyone seen such an errata? >>64) Is the state of coexistence or non-coexistence attached to Bene >> Gesserit tokens or spaces occupied by Bene Gesserit tokens? (E.g. Say >> there are 2 tokens in Arrakeen declared to be coexisting, which then >> move to Carthag where there are 3 tokens declared to be not coexisting. >> If coexistence is attached to tokens, then Carthag should contain 3 >> non-coexisting tokens and 2 coexisting tokens. If coexistence is instead >> attached to spaces, then Carthag should contain 5 non-coexisting tokens, >> and any tokens later >> moved into Arrakeen should become coexisting.) >> a) Coexistence is attached to Bene Gesserit tokens. >> *b) Coexistence is attached to spaces occupied by Bene Gesserit >> tokens. > >Comment: I agree, but would add that co-existence is voided as soon > as BG find themselves alone (either as a result of the other side > moving away, or two other sides annihilating themselves in battle). > This is important: with this interpretation, I saw BG win a game > this way! Agree with interpretation as is. Strongly disagree with your addition Òis voided as soon as BG find themselves aloneÓ. Coexistance works like a kind of invisibility for a turn, it is an advantage, but also has the side effect that it cannot be turned off just because it happens to be advantageous. It is still an