[OTL] Brushfire =Historia Rodentia= & =Journey to the East= Second Edition | Playtesting Ended

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**WhiteRoo**

Alfndrate wrote:
WhiteRoo wrote:
That's not the point here. The book says some places that you "activate a model", which is something you can't do. You may activate a squad that is only consist of one model, but you can only activate a squad, not a model. It might be nitpicking, but I would like you guys to be aware of it.

Then note the pages where this happens, we can discuss it but like I've already said a model may be a single man squad. You also have to take into account when it says things along the lines of a "model may activate" or "activate a model" is specifically refers to a model being activated as part of a squad (even if it's a single man squad). If I have 10 Red Wu with Crossbows, and I get charged in such a way that only 3 of my models are affected, I can choose to activate those models only, get my charge reaction (they won't move) and fire into the charging squad. Now on my activation, I can activate the other 7 as a squad, but I cannot activate those 3, even though they're within cohesion. That's when it means when it says things like "activate a model" or a "model may activate", etc...

As to making sure we're aware of it, you obviously are as we don't see as much of an issue with it as you're making it out to be.

I agree it's a miniscule thing, but the MTG rule changes are also miniscule things that have big consquences.

anyway, the first two:

On Page 6:
-Activation - The collective actions of one Model or one Squad...
-Activate Immediately - An Activation of a Model or Squad
that interrupts a current Activation...

I'll post if I find any more later.

**miskatonicalum**

Also note with that ability that you're opponent is getting an activation in between each individual model. Allowing them to focus fire on your hero if you're activating him alone, or knocking your ranged units out. They can just as easily activate single models or small groups to take out your individual squads.

(I've also got a post on the previous page, in case you missed it.)

**WhiteRoo**

miskatonicalum wrote:
Copied from the newest PDF on WGV:
"Additional Effect: Target Friendly Squad causes Shock with their Ranged Attacks on their next Activation."

Its still a very specific strategy you have to build for, and if your Hero gets into melee, he no longer provides his HM to anyone outside his squad.

Mercs cost more and are usually more limited than the original version, so that is also a drawback there.

We'll discuss if it should be successful attacks instead of just attacking.

The Hero doesn't have to be anywhere near. He just have to be able to use The Jade Seal on that target squad. The 4th rank grants the heroism bonus even if the hero dies right after he used this ability. I think.

**miskatonicalum**

Yes you are correct, if you're investing in Rank 4 just for this strategy.

Again though, we'll look at it.

**WhiteRoo**

Silence...

What's happening?

**Cyporiean**

WhiteRoo wrote:
Silence...

What's happening?

You haven't asked any more questions.

Also we've been focusing on getting EFT taken care of:

**WhiteRoo**

Challenge Accepted.

What's up with that box?

**Cyporiean**

WhiteRoo wrote:
Challenge Accepted.

What's up with that box?

Its yesterday's batch of EFT castings, waiting to get cleaned/sorted/bagged.

**WhiteRoo**

When will be the next revision gets released?

**Cyporiean**

WhiteRoo wrote:
When will be the next revision gets released?

Probably Sunday/Monday, we're focusing on EFT this week.

**WhiteRoo**

Let's say there is a structure, like a building. All of it's walls are in blocking hight and they form a ring around it. There is a door in this wall. Can a model move into this structure if it's base is wider than the hole/door in the wall?

Can a model move trough a low wall if other models are hiding in the other side? What if their bases would not block the model moving trough?

**Lockark**

WhiteRoo wrote:
Let's say there is a structure, like a building. All of it's walls are in blocking hight and they form a ring around it. There is a door in this wall. Can a model move into this structure if it's base is wider than the hole/door in the wall?

Can a model move trough a low wall if other models are hiding in the other side? What if their bases would not block the model moving trough?

For terrain like your describing, you really just need rules for whole buildings that models can garrison IMHO. Some sort of variation off the Castle Tower, were Enemy squads can charge the building with out the need for a seige tower. Bassicly for stuff like Watch Towers that aren't part of a castle wall system.

more rules for "ruins" that are placed after castle walls, Buildings, ect are destroyed might be nice also.

**WhiteRoo**

I think you misunderstand. It's not about garrisons. Maybe I overcomplicate this.

What I'm asking is if there are two pieces of impassible terrain that are close to each other, can that stop models from moving trough between them if their bases are wider than the gap between the terrain pieces?

**Alfndrate**

Doors are "representative" in so much that if there is a door its feasible that a model can move through that space and into the space beyond, assuming there is space for the actual base to fit without overlapping onto anything else, same thing goes for the over the wall question. If there's space you can move through it.

**WhiteRoo**

So then there is a game entity called a "door"?

**miskatonicalum**

No, he just means if there is an opening wide enough for the model's base to pass through, it can move through it. A model cannot pass through an Obscuring terrain piece.

Currently, with the RAW, you cannot move through a low wall when someone is hiding behind it. Obviously, this is not intentional, and in the next update, this will get changed. Play it as RAI, the low wall doesnt become Obscuring, the models hiding behind it treat it as Obscuring.

**Galen**

WhiteRoo wrote:
Silence...

What's happening?

SSSSSHHHHHHHHH......

Let them work. I think I see one of my Summoners in that pile

Actually I think I had at least one of every figure that was taking a bit longer, so I'm not building any expectations. We'll see which I get first, EFT or my Reaper Bones.

I made that pile of EFT the background on my phone. I'm starting to get excited!

**RiTides**

I'd bet on Reaper Bones, since I believe they have everything in-hand and are just working through the shipping queue.

I agree that it's good for OTL to focus on getting the kickstarter campaign for EFT fulfilled! But it does illustrate that with the limited folks they have working on things, having 2 games is forcing them to divert attention from one or the other at times.

**WhiteRoo**

So, is it time for the next revision yet?

**miskatonicalum**

It's being worked on. With the ramp up to Gencon, EFT has taken a front seat. Especially with a focus on casting and shipping out orders.

**Cyporiean**

Additionally, the next revision is just including the few things that you got answers for in this thread, no new surprises and no unit changes.

**WhiteRoo**

I want to talk about the Mission Types. Do you guys work on that currently?

Or what part should I focus on?

**miskatonicalum**

All topics are open, what about missions did you want to cover?

**WhiteRoo**

I have a long list somewhere here that I'll dig up sometime.

The main points are:
-The descriptions of the missions are hard to follow.
-resource amounts are not scaling.
-Some mission types should account living/dead heroes while determining victory points.

**miskatonicalum**

I will say we have not touched them since 1.0, We'll give them a thorough going over at some point.

TBH, I feel comfortable believing that players can invent their own objectives and scenarios. Obviously for competitions it is more important that we write them up.

**WhiteRoo**

I don't believe players will do that. You can invent scenarios and objectives, but the hard part is doing so as the two sides start with equal chance to win. I would not believe anyone if he would tell me that the scenario he just invented five minutes ago is totally balanced.

Players want to play and not playtest.

**miskatonicalum**

I wasn't suggesting that a scenario invented 5 minutes ago was a 'fair' scenario. But, depending on how you play, balance doesnt matter. In some games, players will play each other, say one as a attacker, one as defender, and then reverse roles, before comparing victory points over the two games.

I was suggesting, that the community as a whole would come up with interesting or fun scenarios. Every player has a bit of GM in them, Its why players create background, color schemes, and strategies for their personal army. They're creating a part of the universe of the game for themselves.

Again though, for tourneys, they would likely use scenarios deemed 'official'. Most often ones ripped straight from the book. Which is why we will review the ones we have and make sure they're agreeable.

**WhiteRoo**

I wait with my comments on the scenarios until after that revisit then.

**miskatonicalum**

Well, feel free to share them now. When I have some free time, I'll review them and see what needs changing.

**WhiteRoo**

Okay

For every mission type, there should be a few lines of description for what that mission is about. Currently you have to read trough the whole scenario to figure out what it is about.

The description should separate what the attacker and the defender gets and how they deploy into it's own paragraph so it's easier to find. Like: Attacker bonus resources, Defender bonus resources, Attacker's deployment, Defender's deployment.

Heroes worth no resource points however they are half of the power of your army. I think Heroes should worth resource points based on their level when you calculate your slain resource total, where this is relevant. Like in Killpoint mission.

I think giving free resources for assault stuff stops players to enlist these things otherwise. If you play a mission like attack/defense, you get those for free. Why would you list those in the first place?