Neil Randall - Dec 29, 2006 9:14 am (#722 Total: 724) Set my compass north, I got winter in my blood ... Onward Clarification/Addition - "Draw Event Card" cards Please note that the change here, while official, doesn't have a major effect on play. The game is fully playable without it (and indeed was tested without it). But here it is: 4.5: Change the third bullet to read "2 Draw Event cards (see 12.0)". Then, add the following sentence to the paragraph following the bulleted list: "After he plays or holds this card, the player on the other side whose Leader Activation Card was last drawn (Crusaders and Muslims are the two sides, remember) draws one of his own side’s Event cards. See 12.0 for details." 12.0: Add the following paragraph below the first bulleted list: "Immediately after his play or hold of the card, the player on the other side whose Leader Activation Card was last drawn (Crusaders and Muslims are the two sides, remember) draws one of his own side’s Event cards and performs one of the three actions above. Note that in a two-player game, this simply means that each player draws an Event card whenever a “Draw Event Card” standard activation card is played." NOTE: The rule as published (with only the player who pulls the "Draw Event Card" card able to draw from his Events deck) remains as an optional rule for those who wish to minimize the effects of random events. Explanation Through most of the game's development, we playtested using four cards labelled "Draw Event Card". However, some playtests were done using only two such cards, as we experimented with the proper mix. The resulting reports suggested that four cards were generally preferred, but some liked using only two. But for those who used four cards, one point that kept being raised was that the Activation Deck draws somehow always seemed to come out so that one Event deck (Crusader or Muslim) was depleted quite a bit more quickly than the other. We decided, late in development, to remove two "Draw Event Cards" standard cards from the Activation Deck and implement the rule added above. There were actually two reasons for this change. First, we wanted to add two specific event cards to the mix, and with a total of 110 cards to work with, this change allowed it. Second, we wanted the two Events decks to deplete more evenly. I ran some face-to-face tests and discovered that the change worked well. But I added the rule to the wrong rules file, hence the omission in the published rules. Fascinating House Rule There are actually other ways that playtesters suggested for using the Events decks, the most dramatic of which was having all players pull an Event card whenever a "Draw Event" card was played. I haven't been able to try this yet, but it would certainly make for a very different game when you get 4-7 players involved. Neil Neil Randall - Dec 30, 2006 11:55 am (#739 Total: 744) Set my compass north, I got winter in my blood ... The first activation card was the Mosul Turks and the second was "Draw an Event Card". Since there was no previous Crusader activation this turn, I assume that either (i) the last activated Crusader leader from the prior turn would pick the Crusader event card, or (ii) no Crusader event card would be selected. If it is the former, than it will be necessary to record the last selected leaders each turn. Excellent question. The answer is to determine the Crusader player randomly (each rolls a die, high roller gets the card - or they can negotiate who gets it). I'll add this to the clarification. As far as the two Syrian players, other than using the Leader in Command to recruit, it wasn't obvious to me what else to do, except maybe move closer together to eventually combine their forces. Recruitment is very much a worthy strategy in Turn 1, but you can also use the Muslim forces to get in the Crusaders' way. Because you can autmoatically withdraw before combat, and because it forces the active leader to roll for continuation after you withdraw, you can force the Crusader to stop and (in many cases) fail continuation. And remember that fighting a battle is never a really bad idea if you have a chance to inflict any losses at all to the Crusader forces. Bob Kasabian - Dec 30, 2006 12:44 pm (#740 Total: 744) Recruitment is very much a worthy strategy in Turn 1, but you can also use the Muslim forces to get in the Crusaders' way. Because you can autmoatically withdraw before combat, and because it forces the active leader to roll for continuation after you withdraw, you can force the Crusader to stop and (in many cases) fail continuation. And remember that fighting a battle is never a really bad idea if you have a chance to inflict any losses at all to the Crusader forces. Thanks for the advice, Neil, and also for the prompt answers to my questions. Neil Randall - Dec 30, 2006 1:00 pm (#741 Total: 744) Set my compass north, I got winter in my blood ... Good questions from Dean Zadiraka: 1st Crusade rule book, 6.2, page 9 – The paragraph of actions which constitute a stop lists destroying a city. The paragraph of actions which automatically end the activation does not include destroying a city. But 8.3.H, page 22, the first paragraph says you can’t continue after destroying a city. So shouldn’t this be listed amongst those items which automatically end the activation? Yes - destroying a city, as noted in 8.3H, means no continuation roll. Add this to the list at the end of 6.2. Same thing as above for rebuilding a city. No, because you may in fact roll continuation after rebuilding a city. See 8.3H "Rebuilding". Question – the overall leader for a faction is struck ill. If one of that same factions subordinate leader moves to the place of the overall leader, can the subordinate leader on his second activation that turn take control of the overall leaders army and move them off? No. The only time ASPs can be transferred from one leader to another is during the Army Assignment Phase. See 5.21, bullet #4 (and the rest of 5.21, for that matter). My guess is yes, that the overall gets treated as a subordinate at that point. No, the overall leader never gets treated as a subordinate. Politics of the time and all that. I’m confused as to whether a high ranked leader of one faction can activate a lower ranked leader of a different friendly faction (Crusade/Muslim). Yes he can - see 5.3, "Activating Subordinate Leaders". As long as a leader is superior and the other leader's force is friendly, and as long as the subordinate leader has not already activated as an Independent (or has activated twice already), the higher-ranked leader may command that subordinate. In multiplayer games, the same rules apply, except that the player owning the lower-ranked leader has to agree to the higher-ranked leader taking control. I’m guessing no, but can’t find where that’s specified. Wouldn’t the paragraph labeled “Activating Subordinate Leaders” in 5.3, page 7, be the perfect place to add another bullet item saying of the same faction, or of any friendly faction? Yes, but since it's universal, we decided it wasn't needed. Possibly a misjudgment. On “The Battle Results Table”, it list a DRM for the defender in a town as being -1 for the 1st Crusade. But in the first Crusade rule book, 7.2.G.d, the second bullet point, page 15 says this is -2. I assume the -1 is the correct one? It's -1. Note that the number in parentheses is wrong; the text number ("one") is correct. You'd think after checking this about 14 times I would have seen that one, but ... Neil Neil Randall - Dec 30, 2006 1:44 pm (#742 Total: 744) Set my compass north, I got winter in my blood ... More good questions from Dean: 1st Crusade rule book, 7.2.D, first example paragraph, page 14 – In the example it mentions a formation “I”. I assume this is supposed to be “IC”. Correct. 1st Crusade rule book, boxed combat example on page 17 – In item 2, it says the ratio is 15:24, which simplifies to 1-1. Shouldn’t that be 1-1.5? Yes. Somewhere along the line I corrected the DRM but didn't manage to correct the listed ratio. The example is correct except for the stated ratio (i.e., the DRM is right, which is the only thing that actually affects anything). It goes on to say this ratio produces a -1 DRM, and that matches what is on the “comparative strength chart” for a 1-1.5 ratio. Also, the example there does call it the “combat ratio chart”. Shouldn’t it say “battle ratio calculation table”? Yep - I decided to change the name of that table late in the game and did a search for every possible combination of terms for it I could think of - obviously I missed this one. (: Examples of play just suck - when you're writing them, at least. ). 1st Crusade rule book, 8.1, fifth paragraph, page 18 – This is saying that forces from a faction can be inside a town, while forces from another faction can be outside it. It talks about how for a force to attack the town, the enemy force outside the town must leave for the force in the town to be attacked. Right. How does this work? When attacking, do the defenders first say who is where, in the town or outside? Then does the attacker get to choose which he attacks, forces inside the town or those outside? When you enter an unoccupied Town space, you decide if you want to be inside or outside the town. If inside, you put a control marker on top of the army; if outside, you put the army on top of the control marker. When an enemy enters the Town space and you're outside the Town, you may withdraw inside before battle or retreat inside after battle. If you start inside the Town, then your only option is to fight or withdraw. If you attack those outside the town, do those inside get to sit there while the battle goes on? If the owning player wants them to, yes.