View Full Version : Rule change?
Kevin O'Keefe
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
A while ago (it seems such a long time ago now), Clint asked about
changes/improvements to ME scenarios.
One thing I'd like changing, if possible, (apart from changing the word
'Fall' to 'Autumn' on the turn report) is randomising the unclaimed game
artifact numbers in 1650?
The ROW becomes number 98 for example?
How difficult would it be for you guys to do this? It makes it a bit more
interesting I think, and stops the ROW being in Elrond's hands by turn 4!
just a thought
Kev
Michael Peters
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
>
>From: Kevin O'Keefe <kevin@...>
>
>A while ago (it seems such a long time ago now), Clint asked about
>changes/improvements to ME scenarios.
>
>One thing I'd like changing, if possible, (apart from changing the word
>'Fall' to 'Autumn' on the turn report) is randomising the
>unclaimed game
>artifact numbers in 1650?
>
>The ROW becomes number 98 for example?
>
>How difficult would it be for you guys to do this? It makes
>it a bit more
>interesting I think, and stops the ROW being in Elrond's hands
>by turn 4!
I think this will cause huge changes in how the game is played. Both nations
(free and dark) spend the early turns looking (and getting) those wonderful
items. In the two 4th age game that i've played in, neither side showed the
same focus on locating items (since they didn't know if the item was worth
the effort). In 4th age, it was basically move over emissaries to found
camps, and if an encounter was there we send over a good character (normally
a mage or commander) to pick it up.
If the items numbers are made random, then people will not be able to locate
and pick them up.
That then means that characters have to rely on their natural abilities to
perform actions. In 4th age the natural ability wasn't that critical since
you designed your natural ability, but in 1650 (and especially 1650), your
natural ability is fixed (just look at the harad in 1650).
I think the rapid pickup of the items add an extra surprise to the game (in
a recent 2950 we loaded a few good agent items to a crappy startup agent,
and really surprised the enemy who actually said 'so and so can't kill
people before turn 10, and then got shot between the eyes by that agent').
And the fixed item numbers favour the team that works together to locate
true and pick them up.
In your case elrond might locate the item, but it might be anywhere in the
map. The free need to work as a team to get the nearest player to pick it
up. And since the DS are doing the same thing, it becomes a race to see
which side can organise with their allies the best. And I'm all for things
that favour a side that works together.
So while random items numbers in 4th age are great, i'm against it when the
character stats are fixed (since basically I need the items to provide some
suprises in the characters abilities).
thanks
m
p.s actually i'm my 1650 and 2950 games the DS get the ROI more often than
not.
>
>just a thought
>
>Kev
>
>
>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor
>----------------------------
>
>Get what you deserve with NextCard Visa. ZERO. Rates as low as 0.0
>percent Intro APR, online balance transfers, Rewards Points, no hidden
>fees, and much more. Get NextCard today and get the credit you deserve.
>Apply now! Get your NextCard Visa at
><a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/NextcardCreative6
>">Click Here</a>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>
>Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
>To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
>http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm
>
>
Harlequin Games
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
Um program changes are very difficult to arrange I am afraid - basically the
licensors don't like fixing what ain't broken. (Undestandable). My
preference is to set up a
FA scenario whereby such a mechanism does exist say with Elrond like
characters around.
I can but ask...
your humbler servant....
(Well maybe I need a little more humility)
Clint
>A while ago (it seems such a long time ago now), Clint asked about
>changes/improvements to ME scenarios.
>
>One thing I'd like changing, if possible, (apart from changing the word
>'Fall' to 'Autumn' on the turn report) is randomising the unclaimed game
>artifact numbers in 1650?
>
>The ROW becomes number 98 for example?
>
>How difficult would it be for you guys to do this? It makes it a bit more
>interesting I think, and stops the ROW being in Elrond's hands by turn 4!
>
>just a thought
>
>Kev
ColinForbes
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
Hi,
Kevin O'Keefe wrote:
> One thing I'd like changing, if possible, (apart from changing the word
> 'Fall' to 'Autumn' on the turn report) is randomising the unclaimed game
> artifact numbers in 1650?
A few of us discussed the Artifact randomisation thing with both
Allsorts (and indeed with GSI themselves) several years ago now. They
said no.
I doubt anything has changed. IF we want to play a game like that
there's always Fourth Age.
Colin.
Harlequin Games
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
Here's the reply I got. I could do a FA game like this with a few
guidelines and would not charge for the pleasure other than normal games
totals.
Clint
>>This is a BIG problem in 1650/2950. This is why we did it for FA 1000, but
>>not the others. There are also 'Middle-earth accuracy' reasons why we did
>>not scramble them in the first two scenarios.
>>
>>Bill
>>
>>>>
>>>>Um program changes are very difficult to arrange I am afraid - basically
the
>>>>licensors don't like fixing what ain't broken. (Undestandable). My
>>>>preference is to set up a
>>>>FA scenario whereby such a mechanism does exist say with Elrond like
>>>>characters around.
>>>>
>>>>I can but ask...
>>>>
>>>>your humbler servant....
>>>>
>>>>(Well maybe I need a little more humility)
>>>>
>>>>Clint
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>A while ago (it seems such a long time ago now), Clint asked about
>>>>>changes/improvements to ME scenarios.
>>>>>
>>>>>One thing I'd like changing, if possible, (apart from changing the word
>>>>>'Fall' to 'Autumn' on the turn report) is randomising the unclaimed
game
>>>>>artifact numbers in 1650?
>>>>>
>>>>>The ROW becomes number 98 for example?
>>>>>
>>>>>How difficult would it be for you guys to do this? It makes it a bit
more
>>>>>interesting I think, and stops the ROW being in Elrond's hands by turn
4!
>>>>>
>>>>>just a thought
>>>>>
>>>>>Kev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
Michael Peters
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
greetings.
I still feel that having fixed items numbers (in 1650/2950) are the best way
to go in a game where the characters and SNA's are fixed.
You are rewarded by working as a team to get the good items, and then adding
them to characters of your choosing to improve their abilites.
Add ROW, ROI, and a few stealth items to your startup 30 point agent who
started with a stealth bonus, and you have a killer agent that the enemy
will never expect.
thanks
m
p.s middle earth accuracy ? I'm still trying to find out where the LoTR has
curses being cast from a distance, I've only found it being cast by person
(nazgul) to person (victim).
>
>Here's the reply I got. I could do a FA game like this with a few
>guidelines and would not charge for the pleasure other than
>normal games
>totals.
>
>Clint
>
>
>>>This is a BIG problem in 1650/2950. This is why we did it
>for FA 1000, but
>>>not the others. There are also 'Middle-earth accuracy'
>reasons why we did
>>>not scramble them in the first two scenarios.
>>>
>>>Bill
>>>
>
>>>>>
>>>>>Um program changes are very difficult to arrange I am
>afraid - basically
>the
>>>>>licensors don't like fixing what ain't broken. (Undestandable). My
>>>>>preference is to set up a
>>>>>FA scenario whereby such a mechanism does exist say with
>Elrond like
>>>>>characters around.
>>>>>
>>>>>I can but ask...
>>>>>
>>>>>your humbler servant....
>>>>>
>>>>>(Well maybe I need a little more humility)
>>>>>
>>>>>Clint
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>A while ago (it seems such a long time ago now), Clint asked about
>>>>>>changes/improvements to ME scenarios.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>One thing I'd like changing, if possible, (apart from
>changing the word
>>>>>>'Fall' to 'Autumn' on the turn report) is randomising the
>unclaimed
>game
>>>>>>artifact numbers in 1650?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The ROW becomes number 98 for example?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How difficult would it be for you guys to do this? It
>makes it a bit
>more
>>>>>>interesting I think, and stops the ROW being in Elrond's
>hands by turn
>4!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>just a thought
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Kev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
JShushan@...
2nd February 2008, 11:24 AM
In a message dated 2/2/00 7:13:34 PM Central Standard Time,
MPeters@... writes:
<< p.s middle earth accuracy ? I'm still trying to find out where the LoTR has
curses being cast from a distance, I've only found it being cast by person
(nazgul) to person (victim).
>>
MIght this not be an abstraction for how risky it is to cast? i.e., "in the
room touching him" vs. "outside in alley behind the palace."? Such an
abstraction would seem to be within the "canon"? Thoughts? (perhaps not
only this as such an "abstraction"?)
Jonathan Shushan
(usually a lurker on this list. usually just a player.)
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.