Weird question. The temple city it says that you gain no extra conguest from raging it. I know it is kinda weird but was that intended for the 1 extra CT or does it include the +5 from the ascension plot or the +5 from the LT of Demon Prince. I think the answer will be non extra token but i can't help feeling that they wanted you not to gain the extra 1 just per turn. Anyway not a big deal but kinda weird.

Drglord said:

What's weird about it? Why wouldn't anyone know?

Ascension - Dreams of Power
...Each time a city is razed, the overlord gains five extra conquest tokens

Kar-Amog-Atoth
Whenever Kar-Amag-Atoth razes a city, the overlord gains five conquest tokens

Vynevale
Cathedral. Even if this city is razed, the overlord gains no extra conquest tokens from it , as the rest of Terrinoth is outraged.

Its pretty clear. The OL doesn't get extra CT if Vynevale is razed . I don't see anything that restricts that to weekly CT.

It was kinda of a longshot joke hehe

Anyway thanks for indulging me mate

Corbon, I have to disagree with you. The way I read the ability of the city is that the Overlord does not get the extra conquest token while the city has been razed.

In the RtL rules, it states that the Overlord gains one conquest token plus one additional token for every razed city. Based on that, and the wording on Vynevale I see that the city will not provide the extra conquest token each week, but WILL grant the +5 from either of the other two abilities you mentioned as those are a static ability in play (the plot card and LT)

From a flavor point of view, The people become outraged that their cathedral has been destroyed, and will not provide any resource to anyone, good or bad on a weekly basis.

Well, you can view it this way. If conquest tokens are equivalent to taxes collected from the enslaved townsfok, then Vynevale is probably not a city per se. I.e. there's no population to collect taxes from. So all instances of conquest gain from Vynevale are negated.

Jonny WS said:

I quoted the rules. You have to be basing your interpretation on something not actually written...
What part of any of the rules say that static abilities in play are different? Why is not the Vynevale rule a static ability in play?
In the case of the Ascension plot it is exactly the same wording. In the case of KAA it is slightly different wording with the same meaning, so still basically the same rule. It is not different enough to say "this other rule does not apply" - it is the same situation exactly as Ascension, only described slightly differently.

I requote:
Vynevale - ...if this city is razed, the overlord gains no extra conquest tokens
Ascension - ... each time a city is razed, the overlord gains five extra conquest tokens
KAA - Whenever Kar-Amag-Atoth razes a city, the overlord gains five (which are 'extra' from normal) conquest tokens

In order of specificity
i) General rules for razed cities
ii) Specific rules for KAA and Ascension for generally razing cities
iii) Specifc rule when razing Vynevale.

Specific trumps general, and in this case the most applicably specific is the Vynevale rule.

Edit: You are also making up your flavour description. The text flavour is that the rest of Terrinoth is enraged. That would apply, flavour wise, even more to immediate gains than to long term ongoing gains. Nothing is said about providing resources.

All of my friends who play and myself are on the boat with you get the extra +5 but do not get the benefit of the weekly +1.

zealot12 said:

Why would Vynelvale not have a population to tax, but all the other Free Cities do? The RtL rulebook says quite clearly you don't get the conquest because the citizens of Terrinoth are outraged. Razing any other city terrifies the citizens and cows resistance efforts, thus the OL gains CT as terror and oppression are his goals. Razing Vynelvale just pisses people off (because it's the home of the Order of Kellos - defile the church and you incite rebellion rather than cowing it.)

As far as rules go, I agree with Corbon. "Specific rule trumps general rule" is a common board game truism, and Vynelvale's special rule is the most specific of all those mentioned in the thread. Thus the OL gets nothing from razing Vynelvale other than denying them the resources of the city (including whatever skills are trained there - I'm guessing Divine Intervention is one of them, based on fluff, so doing this isn't necessarily a waste of time, either.)

Kain_Dragoon said:

Thats nice.
What do the rules say?

You can play house rules all you like, but the question was, by default, asking what the rules say. It is not a popularity conquest.

Two things Corbon.

First, I was basing the flavor off of memory, I didn't have the game with me, but this morning I found a resource site to provide the correct wording.

Second, the point I was trying to make was based on the assumption of something else, in which I was wrong.

I still believe though if the Overlord razes Vynelvale with the plot card, (or KAA) he still gets the +5 conquest. In my opinion that is how I read it, and how it is worded with all the cards.

Each time a city is razed, the overlord gains five extra conquest tokens. I read this as whenever a city is destroyed, he will gain +5 conquest tokens, regardless of the city. In theory, if Tamalir is razed, the Overlord still gets the bonus from the plot card, but as the game ends, it wont matter.

Cathedral. Even if this city is razed, the overlord gains no extra conquest tokens from it, as the rest of Terrinoth is outraged. I read this as there is no weekly bonus for the Overlord.

Again, this is how I read them because of the way they are worded. The problem is the word "Razed" It can be used as a past-tense and as a verb.

I am not trying to be an arrogant prick here Corbon, I am just explaining how I see and read these abilities when put side by side. In all honesty, the argument can go either way. I don't really care who is right either, so long as we find the correct ruling.

Corbon said:

Wow. Sorry mom. Let me rephrase, "Yeah, it seems like it can be read by some that you should get no conquest tokens from any source when you raze Vynevale. However, when my friends and I play our games, we have played that you get the +5 and not the weekly +1. I know that some don't play that way and I don't judge them for that. And who knows, we're probably tehnically playing wrong."

Is that spotlight back on you now? Extraneous remarks that serve no purpose other than to put down other people who are just trying to participate in "the community discussion" aren't necessary or warranted.

Jonny WS said:

Umm, may I point out that I specifically provided the appropriate rules/card quotes in the first reply?

Jonny WS said:

That is what it says.

Jonny WS said:

So you are deliberately assuming it is badly written, rather than properly written? For it to be only 'past tense' razed, then it should be written 'has been' razed or some other similar past tense indication. If it was only 'current tense' meaning, then it would be written with an only current tense structure, something like " when this city is razed..."
But since it uses an ambiguous tense structure, that covers both situations, then both situations are covered by the rule.

Jonny WS said:

Neither am I, though I realise it can seem like that due to the joys of electronic communications.
And I will happily be proved wrong, and reverse my position - as I did after 10 pages of the Rapid Fire/Guard discussion.
But at the moment, choosing to assume that the rule is not what the sentence structure indicates isn't a working argument in my mind.

Kain_Dragoon said:

I'm sorry for offending you.

Participating in a discussion means, in a rules discussion, supplying a rules based reasoning, not just throwing out an unreasoned vote. In a balance discussion, or ideas discussion then a 'vote' might be appropriate. So as far as I could see you weren't participating, just trying to change the thread from a discussion about what the rules say to a random-democratic method of playing. That just confuses people who are asking about the rules.

Corbon said:

+1 Corbon