The Multiplayer solution - I believe I may have found it.

By Wytefang, in Warhammer Invasion Rules Questions

Posted at

mateooo said:

yup, but id bet...

b) leave them as they are (since its hard to reprint cards and remember lots of errata), and disregard the impending fan outrage when someone with shrine of nurgle first plays nurgles pestilence during a battle in a large multiplayer game, corrupting EVERY UNIT simultaneously, and then maybe that player has Melekh in power, and gets a 20 power unit.. Maybe that Melekh is in the kingdom or quest area, and that player gets to draw 20 cards or get 20 resource.

And then moan in dismay when I move said 20 power Melekh using Forced March to his Quest area and cause him to lose by deck finish. Or I can Pilgrimage him. Or use Twin Tailed Comet and simply finish him off at that point...

I'm not saying the designers will rule one way or another, but a certain combo being powerful does not mean it was overlooked for multiplayer. There are many combos that are as devastating, if not more. For every hypothetical combo, there is a hypothetical counter.

Posted at

I don't know how many of Eric Lang and Nate French's games you've played, but they design cards like this on purpose. In playtest I know this thing has been brought up in AGoT before and it was confirmed that it was done purposefully. I find it hard to believe they worded this card with MP in mind and then just somehow completely forgot how the effect would resolve in MP.

Posted at

dormouse said:

Any card that does damage, regardless of who gets to decide where the damage goes, would use the controller of the card's damage counters.

For example, Orc got Doom Diver in his Battlefield. He had no development to sacrifice.
He deal his own damage counters to each of his zone. But it doesn't make any sense when playing unique damage variant whereby every player account for their own damage.

Posted at

Sure it does, you just have to figure out how you want to play it. You could have someone doing damage and eventually burning out one of their own zones in which case no one gets credit for it, or you can count that damage as neutral damage in which case everyone gets credit for it. I'd tend to go for the latter.

Posted at

a couple considerations when playing multiplayer

All players but the last player should get the 1st player penalty, round 1. If there are 3 players, the 1st and 2nd players should get the 1st player penalty (no quest or battle phase).

also, if you have more players, using the victory condition "you must burn x number of territories, where x is the number of players in the game" would not work. This rule only for 3 players. With 4 players there are a total of 12 zones to burn. it is possible for 4 players to each get 3 burns (consuming all 12 zones), and then victory is impossible if 4 burning zones are needed to win.

Posted at

Honest question... what is the likelihood that that happens? It was also the reason why I suggested that if you ran out of cards when you recycled there was some sort of penalty. I think adding 1 neutral damage to all of your zones (counts as every players) is a way of accelerating it and vastly decreasing the chance of this happening.