If a Consolidate Power order token in a sea area is removed by a raid order, does the raiding player receive a power token from the power pool?

You can not place Consolidate Power orders on sea areas. You can place them on ports though and if another player raids CP order in port he does receive a power token from his power pool.

In 2nd edition this was changed. Now you can place consolidate power orders at sea, but according to the rules they "have no effect". (You would only do this if you have run out of other legal orders to place).

My opinion is that "no effect" includes that you cannot pillage them with a raid order, but the argument could be made that it just means when they are resolved.

Anyone else backing dypaca's opinion?

Mylo said:

I agree with dypaca. Page 14 of the rule book states "Consolidate Power Orders placed on sea areas have no effect, but may still be placed." In my opinion, "no effect" covers the effect of pillaging when the order is raided. Earlier on page 14, the rule book states, "Consolidate Power Orders represent the garnering of local favor, the collection of tax income, and the harvesting of resources from areas under a player’s control." In sea regions, there is no local favor, income tax, or resource to harvest. That's why you don't get any power tokens for consolidating power there. Therefore, there are no power tokens to pillage from a sea region by using a raid token.

Right. The whole idea of pillaging is that you are stealing something that they would have gotten. But, the consolidate power order on a sea area has no effect by its very nature (the controller would not have gotten anything out of it), thus you do not get anything when raiding it.

I asked FFG directly. The response:

A consolidate power token on a sea area is removed (without effect) at the same time all the other consolidate power tokens are removed.

When a consolidate power token on a sea area is raided, the attacker still gets to "pillage" the defender.

Jason

Jason Walden
Game Producer
Fantasy Flight Games
www.fantasyflightgames.com
[email protected]

kauai1964 said:

I am quite surprised by that response. I wonder how Mr. Walden would respond to my above arguments regarding the phrases "no effect" and the thematic role of consolidate power orders. I would be very interested to know what kind of reasoning is behind that ruling. I wonder if allowing a pillage at sea is intended to penalize players for playing consolidate power orders just to hold the spot of an order. I suppose that opening yourself up to pillage with that kind of play makes it more of a risk. After all, that kind of play is, essentially, a bluff. I suppose there has to be some kind of mechanism for calling a bluff and a reward for successfully doing so. I think that this rule makes the planning phase even more complex. I'm discovering that there are very few "no-brainer" plays in this game. I don't know if it needs an extra touch of complexity (I second-guess myself at least twice every planning phase), but I understand why a game designer would make this ruling. From a game-design perspective, it makes a lot of sense, but from a thematic perspective, it is a little confusing. How can you steal something (a power token) that isn't there in the first place? I hope this ruling makes it into the next FAQ.

Monsterberger said:

The pillaging is part of the raid's effect, not the CP's. I agree that thematically this makes no sense, but sometimes it's better to keep the rules simple and streamlined rather than bog the game down with exceptions. This is certainly FAQ worthy, though!