Question arose in our last game that I felt might be worth asking for clarification from FFG.

What precisely defines Domination of a region? Is it beating the other players by having the highest Domination Value in a region - or is it actually scoring the points for a region? Between the four of us we couldnt actually nail the answer down because the text for the Domination Phase never actually says when Domination occurs - its 'calculate DV', and then the 'highest checks to score'. This was most relevant for Nurgle players who have cards that allow them to place corruption when they Dominate.

Ended up playing that it was the actual scoring that was required but still felt it might be wrong and just be the winning the Highest Score point.

Page 19, column 1, penultimate paragraph: "If two or more players tie for the highest domination value in a region, none of them dominate it, and none score victory points, even if all tied players exceeded the regions's Resistance."

It appears to me one must actually score the points in order to "dominate".

TK

Domination Value is determined under the Domination Step of the Corruption Phase. If you have the highest Domination Value among all gods (no ties) in a region AND your Domination Value is higher than the Resisitance Value of the region, you scopre and you "Dominate." That would trigger any effects looking for you to "Dominate." As mentioned, all on page 19.

I would agree that scoring the points and dominating are one and the same - you need to out-total everyone else in the region AND beat the resistance of the region to dominate it

Tim Kelly said:

Actually, this was the sentence that caused us the single biggest problem - because its one that specifically separates scoring and the act of domination. Everythig else is either talking about scoring or domination values. More importantly, that sentence ties dominating to getting the highest domination value, not scoring which is separated from domination and bound up to exceeding the resistance value. This is the only place where the action of 'dominating' is explicitly mentioned other than the section title....the paragraph that is just before the one you quote is the main rules detail and reads

' Once domination values have been calculated, the player whose domination value is highest compares his domination value to the Resistance of the region. If the player’s domination value exceeds the region’s Resistance (equalling it is not sufficient), that player immediately scores victory points equal to that region’s Conquest Value.'

So no actual explicit mention of what is domination in the main description - and normally that wouldn't have been a problem but then you have cards to to the act of dominating. The title of the section 'Calculating Domination' is the only other mention and while you can chain everything back to that (and indeed we did) its tortuous logically, relies on implicity and could be cleared by inserting 4 words a bit later

We ended up sitting down on the side of the fence everyone is coming down on but the rules writing did seem to do its best to obscure the point and while we felt we were going with common sense in assuming an unwritten phrase 'dominates the region and' before 'immediately scores victory points' we did wonder if the wording had been deliberate, to separate Domination and scoring, or if everyone else was thinking the same as us.

Thus far its 3 on the same side as our decision....but it would be nice to see this one in the FAQ when it comes out - if only so I do not have to go through arguing the point with another player who has a different view because I would be hard pressed and end up having to rely on a complex series of implicit lineages back to the title 'Calculating Domination' itself.

Read the rest of the rulebook.

The very next sentance you keep referencing.:

If two or more players tie for the highest domination
value in a region, none of them dominate it, and none
score victory points, even if all tied players exceeded the
region’s Resistance.

Implies that the highest value is the one that scores and dominates. They define the concept in the negative, which I admit is not the best way to do things. Furthermore, everyone seems to forget there is a Glossary in the back.

Conquest Value: The characteristic that represents how
rewarding it is to dominate a particular region.

domination step : The first step of the corruption phase, in
which the players determine which Power – if any – scores
each region’s Conquest Value as victory points.

domination value: The sum calculated by each player in
each region during the domination step of the corruption
phase to determine if he dominates that region.

Resistance: The characteristic that represents how difficult it
is to dominate a particular region.

In the beginning of the rulebook, describing the object of the game:

All four Powers are rewarded f or corrupting and
dominating the regions of the Old World with their
followers and activities. These rewards are recorded
on the victory point (VP) track.

In the beginning of this section on how to resolve this step:

In the domination step, which takes place first, players score conquest
points for dominating the board regions.

So the rulebook never comes out directly and says Domination = Score Points. But there is enough pieces of it that so heavily imply it there is no room for interpretation. You can't Dominate unless you have the single highest Domination Value and the Domination Value is higher than the Resistance as well. You only Score if you have the single highest Domination Value and the Domination Value is higher than the Resistance as well. Since scoring and Domination have teh same definition, they are the same thing.

Therefore, cards like Nurgle's The Stench of Death (which is the ONLY card that references "Dominate" by the way) are only activated if Nurgle score.

ColtsFan76 said:

He's on the money with this ruling as well.

The very next sentance you keep referencing.:

If two or more players tie for the highest domination value in a region, none of them dominate it, and none score victory points, even if all tied players exceeded the region’s Resistance.

Implies that the highest value is the one that scores and dominates .

The grammar there separates domination from scoring as two separate consequences of highest domination value - that why that sentence is such a royal pain - if it said 'and then', 'and so' or 'and hence' it would tie them but it doesn't and I was disregarding it because it was so stand out different to the rest of the implications I felt it had to be a missing word or two - but I've been bit in the butt before by doing that with other rules where such statements were deliberate (and thats without having to go into games written in Barkerese)

However, you have quoted the bits that I need to wave at people below that do nail it.....

Conquest Value: The characteristic that represents how
rewarding it is to dominate a particular region.

Resistance: The characteristic that represents how difficult it is to dominate a particular region.[ /QUOTE]

Those are the two bits of text are exactly what I was looking for....both link scoring to domination explicitly. OK, can now go show something solid. Typical, I completely missed the glossary.

S o the rulebook never comes out directly and says Domination = Score Points.

I think you've shown me where it does now though....

*Quoting not working for me, hope the tagging makes it obvious.*

Glad I could help direct you to the places you feel will help you win the argument!

And yes, the formating and code on these replies is atrocious!