Does the OL get conquest tokens each week, for the island locations with binding tokens he razed?

svarun said:

To the best of my knowledge no. I think the line in that plot about the binding tokens being like cities with a defense rating of three is simply there so they could use the siege mechanic to remove them from the board. Plus, one you do raze it, the token is removed from the board so it wouldn't be able to generate CT anyways, whereas a city even when razed still exists on the board to generate CT.

I agree with Remy. "The binding tokens may be sieged and razed as though they were cities", (plot card) but still they are no cities. And the OL only gets conquest tokens "for each city he has razed" (SoB p. 14), not for each thing he has razed as if it were a city.

Subtle rules difference I admit, it could be bent and interpreted to include the bindings as cities. However, this would have to mean that the other effects would necessarily be inherited from cities to bindings as well, and thus the OL would win after sundering five bindings (because he has thus razed five cities, and "if five or more cities are razed, the overlord immediately wins the campaign" (SoB p. 14)), without playing the final plot card. Consequently the Leviathan plot would make no sense.

So, the rules support the bindings being no cities but only city-like when it comes to sieging and razing, and interpreting the rules another way would make the Leviathan plot inconsistent as well.

It is fairly obvious that the token are NOT cities and cannot gather CT from them or benefit from "-1 defense to cities" , they just can be sieged and razed like cities so they won't explain the rules again. The purpose is in plot and nothing more and it's enough. I played once and managed to raze them all, quite a nice campaign , you kind of force the heroes to stay nearby cause the tokens are pretty close togheter.

well haslo i agree with you... as for Slapuls post... that it is obvious... its not really obvious (for me at least), one thing that speaks against it is that it says: the defense of the "binding tokens" can not be reduced ( why would its say so, if that was not meant for the avatar upgrade that reduces cities defense by 1) it is not an explenation but an extra rule about the binding tokens, so in a way they must be cities ( it even says as thought they were cities - that means they act as cities).

well whatever , thank you all for answering, it helped me, and i agree that they should not generate CT.

Yet again the rules could be a bit more clear

Besides, you should be generating extra conquest tokens each time the heroes foolishly attempt to stop the Siren from her siege.

Well read the text carefully the tokens can be siegged and razed like cities, but they are NOT cities they are islands that you can even explore , no cities there.

So no no other city rules applies

I even played once as OL and won easily without extra CT or defense reduction witch i bough from the begining without knowing i won't have time to raze other cities