Effects played during the organization phase, and depend on the site or site path of a moving company

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

There is only ever 1 chain of effect happening at once. This is a basic design decision of the game.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4433
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:45 am There is only ever 1 chain of effect happening at once. This is a basic design decision of the game.
Someone may infer from that that a situation where "there may be two chain of effects at the start of M/H phase, each competing to be first" is problematic.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:20 am
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:45 am There is only ever 1 chain of effect happening at once. This is a basic design decision of the game.
Someone may infer from that that a situation where "there may be two chain of effects at the start of M/H phase, each competing to be first" is problematic.
Then maybe they should post a gameplay example of the supposed issue instead of just describing a concept.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4433
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 5:26 pm
Konrad Klar wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:20 am
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:45 am There is only ever 1 chain of effect happening at once. This is a basic design decision of the game.
Someone may infer from that that a situation where "there may be two chain of effects at the start of M/H phase, each competing to be first" is problematic.
Then maybe they should post a gameplay example of the supposed issue instead of just describing a concept.
No.
There was many posts describing issues.
If for someone a mere fact that "there may be two chain of effects at the start of M/H phase, each competing to be first" is NOT problematic, I do not want to convince him that it is a problem.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Konrad Klar wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 6:40 pm No.
There was many posts describing issues.
If for someone a mere fact that "there may be two chain of effects at the start of M/H phase, each competing to be first" is NOT problematic, I do not want to convince him that it is a problem.
There is no such thing as "two chain of effects at the start of a M/H phase" let alone a situation where "each is competing to be first." There is only ever 1 chain of effects at the same time.

The original proposal was describing multiple effects competing to be first in the same chain of effect. Not two chains of effects competing to be the first (whatever that is supposed to mean).
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4433
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:48 pm The original proposal was describing multiple effects competing to be first in the same chain of effect.
Because this is a goal.
CDavis7M wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:48 pm Not two chains of effects competing to be the first (whatever that is supposed to mean).
This is current state of things.
Effects played during the organization phase, and depend on the site or site path of a moving company
are declared at start of M/H phase.
Actions caused by passive conditions met at start of M/H phase
are declared at the same time.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”