Hey all. Just finished playing my first game of Runewars and a few queries popped up during the game.

1. Can friendly units move through a friendly area that has 8 units in it or would this affect the stacking limit?

2. When you have the Captains of the Heroes League title card can you discard 3 reward cards from any of your heroes or do they all have to be discarded from one specific hero?

3. If you defeat an enemy hero in a duel and you have more than one hero in the area the rules state you can allocate all rewards to any hero. Do all rewards go to one hero or can you split them between multiple heroes?

4. The Uthuk warlord special ability states your opponent must destroy either 2 triangle units or one square unit. What if your opponent has only one triangle unit and one square unit or if he has two routed triangles and one square unit or one standing triangle, one routed triangle and a square unit. Can your opponent decide which option to choose or is there a set way of dealing with this situation?

Any help would be much appreciated.

dushty said:

In general for board games it's accepted wisdom that you should complete the requirements of an ability like this as best you can. Unless there's something I missed in the RW rulebook that says otherwise, I'd say it goes like this:

a) one triangle and one rectangle: the player should sacrifice the rectangle since that is within his ability and meets the requirement better than sacking the one triangle and saying "oh drat, only have 1."

b) two routed triangles and one rectangle: unless the ability specifies standing units, I'd say sacking the two routed units is okay. If it does specify standing units, same as (a). I don't remember the exact wording of the ability or if there's some caveat in the rulebook about standing units in this case.

c) one routed triangle, etc: same as (b).

dushty said:

Yes, as long as they don't end there.

dushty said:

I have to look at the card, but I think they have to be from the same Hero.

dushty said:

I think technically the hero who killed the other gets them, but you can reallocate your rewards between heroes during your quest phase anyway, so I think you could just apply them wherever.

dushty said:

I agree with Steve-O on this - generally you have to fulfil a card or effect as much as possible in FFG's games (and most other games, too). Thus, if you can't do 2 triangles, but CAN do a rectangle, you must do the latter; you could only do the 1 triangle if you had no rectangles.

I believe the League of Heroes card just says to discard three rewards to receive. It doesn't specify that it all has to come from the same hero.

All the other responses above sound right to me.

When a player is forced to damage or destroy one of his units, he must
always choose a standing unit if able (as opposed to a routed one).

I agree with Broken on this one. I would say that calualties should follow the standard damage flow chart. I know this is not explicitly damage, since that is the wound tokens, but I think that it's prescedent is the best way to try and reason this out.

If you had two triangles standing and one square standing, you choose.

If you have one triangle standing and one routed and one box standing, I would say that it is ambiguous. I personally would lean towards the box since it best fits the damage being dealt to the standing unit(s) entirely, but I think either one is probably ok.

If you have two routed triangles and one standing box, I would say you have to destroy the standing box. Standing takes prescedent over routed.

One standing triangle, one routed triangle, one routed box. I would say again you have to kill the standing triangle, which forces you to kill the routed triangle also.

I am not going to cover all permutations, but you get the idea as to how I would apply the effect.

Just my 2 cents!

I was only referring to routed vs. unrouted. You have to choose unrouted, if possible, when you choose to "destroy" something as well. Also, the new FAQ answers this question.

sigmazero13 said:

What's your reasoning for that? The rules say "if a player moves units into an area causing it to contain more than 8 units, he must destroy units", it doesn't say if he ends his movement there.

ioticus said:

My reasoning is, admittedly, based on other similar games by FFG, like Twilight Imperium, where you can move through your other hexes without worrying about stacking. I suppose a question to Corey wouldn't hurt, but I'm 99.9% sure he'd say the same thing applies to this game.

This argument is exactly the same as the one for moving through activation tokens (it was ruled you can). It was pedantic then, it is pedantic now.

broken said:

No need to get snippy. From dictionary.com, pedantic is "overly concerned with minute details or formalisms, esp. in teaching". One person's detail is another's important foundation for rules and/or strategy.

The above post would have been just fine left at "This argument is exactly the same as the one for moving through activation tokens (it was ruled you can). "

Just fine for you, perhaps, but for me that wouldn't have conveyed the sense of frustration I was feeling regarding the issue.

I understand that rational discourse can be frustrating at times, but I am just trying to keep the posts from degenerating into flame wars and personal attacks. To me, the prevous post clearly intonated that the OP was "overly concerned" with details that you thought were minutea, and you also included me in that when you drectly referred back to my previous question regarding activation markers. Maybe you did not mean for the post to come across as such.

Let's keep the posts about game content :+)

broken said:

I hadn't thought of that; that even more confirms my 99.9% suspicion on how it works

Not to derail the thread, but just because the conclusions of an argument and that of the designer's ruling are the same does not necessitate that the logic to get there was valid.

I could have said that reanimates could not be destroyed from on the game board when summoned with a necromancer's orb ability because the color purple contains the letters for the word pure, and it would be impure to kill one's own troops to create them somewhere else. The ruling would have been correct, but clearly the argument is not validated by the fact that the designer came to the same ruling. Also, the pure in purple assertion should not then be extended to other rules questions and be taken as true.

I am not saying that the previous argument is wrong either, just cautioning people from taking a decision by Corey and turning it into a validation of an that he did not make.

Asylur said:

The difference being, the "purple" argument has nothing to do with anything, and thus would be arbitrary. Using the FAQ ruling that you can move through activated systems IS related somewhat to the question. Since you cannot move out of activated areas, one could argue that if you move into an activated area to go through it, you can't move further; the FAQ clarifies that is not the case. The same logic used to justify that ruling is the same to justify the overstacking - in that an area moved THROUGH does not affect the armies that are moving.

If someone wants to ask Corey, they certainly can. I will be very surprised if he rules other than the conclusion that broken and I have reached.

Honestly, I think you are being a little stubborn here, Asylur. Do you need to be reintroduced to dice each time you play a new game as well? The rules for activation counters and unit limits work exactly the same in Runewars as they do in TI3 (with slightly different mechanics governing max units in a hex).

sigmazero13 said:

I agree that Corey will come to the same ruling, though I am not sure about the logic he will use to get there. I am not specifically talking about the activation marker case either, just pointing out a general concept on logic and rhetoric. The decision by Corey does not necessarily posit that the logic someone else used to get there is sound unless the logic (on top of the decision) is responded to.

There is no need to rehash the debate over moved into, through and out of again, it will only degenerate. The decision for moving through activation markers was made. We are also in agreement as to what Corey's response for this tpoic is likely to be :+)

I have not played Twilight Imperium in so many years I do not remember the rules. At all.

THAT is why the activation markers question came up in teh first place. Some people were familiar with rules to a game thatI was not. I did not make assumptions about the Runewars rules based on a ruleset I did not know.

Some people drew an analogy, I was not able to and posted a question.