...And WHY do glyphs stop ANY figures?

[rdhight]

I'm continuing this thread in a new post so people can see the subject has changed. I searched a little, but couldn't find another thread on this question.

So, why do figures have to stop on a glyph in the first place? And are you for or against it? Here are all the explanations I can think of, along with how good of a reason I think each one is.

1. It punishes two-hex figures. I always find myself having to contort my maps to help two-hexers, not hurt them. I already like ladders, which they can't use, and rugged ground, which makes them waste movement when climbing. Yet more terrain features that punish players for drafting two-hex figures is the last thing I want. This is a terrible justification.

2. It helps offset the advantages of the good glyphs. Most glyphs help the player who steps on them, so the possibility that you might have to sacrifice some of your movement to claim the benefit helps balance it out. Reasonable, right? To me, this is a poor excuse. I always use glyphs on low ground to discourage "race to the top of the hill" gameplay and create more things to fight over. While I can see the value of face-down pit traps, Brandars as duds, and so on in certain situations, I don't want to punishing players further for stepping on glyphs. It's completely antagonistic to the role glyphs play in my maps, which is to be valuable objectives.

3. It represents the glyph holder having to do work. I always imagine my figure just casually standing on the glyph like a runner on base, but you could picture the glyph holder having to cast a spell or something to activate the glyph. It's reasonable in itself, but it doesn't offset my objections to No. 2. Poor.

4. It's a rules requirement to avoid two figures ever stepping on the same glyph at the same time. As we all know, because a figure can't end its move on the same space as another figure, ghostwalking (or just passing through an unengaged friendly) can't get you onto an occupied glyph, even mid-move for one step. Maybe this avoids some terrible rules loophole that could hurt the fun of the game, but I can't think of what it could be. I'm going to say this is another poor excuse in kill-all games. Still, maybe in scenario games where glyphs have who knows what properties, ghostwalking onto a glyph could hurt something?

5. The movement-stopping itself is useful. I've never seen this done, but you could build a map with face-up Brandars or something scattered around as movement blockers. They would work something like barricades or brambles: Slither-proof, two-hex-proof water. Whether it's good for anything is unknown unless someone can show me an example.

6. It takes away some choice in what figure holds a glyph. There have been times when I would like to walk the leading figures in a squad over the top of a glyph that's in their path, then hold it with the rearmost one. But since the first one who reaches it has to stop, holding the glyph with the last guy in line sometimes requires a little detouring. You can't always get maximum movement and hold the glyph with exactly the optimum figure. This strikes me as good, but very small. Some confusion in battle adds to the fun, and lots of people like to discourage squadscape, but the number of times this effect comes up and actually means anything has got to be miniscule.

7. It prevents snatching up temporary glyphs on the run. This is the strongest I could find. Again, I try to separate roads, glyphs, and height in my maps to make players' decisions harder. If you could race down into the valley, grab a Kelda, and run back up the hillside, that effect would be weakened. Preventing this en passant tactic makes temporary glyphs better at doing what I want them to do. Good.

I guess I was expecting to come up with bigger, more definitive reasons for the stop-on-glyph rule. After doing some reading, I can't say I really know why it's there. My best guess is that it's for the good of scenario players who are moving glyphs around and thinking up new, unfamiliar uses for them. No ghostwalking onto occupied glyphs might mean something for them.

[AmishBurrito]

I hate the rule that figures have to stop on glyphs... Back when I was playing in college, we never played that rule. Normally we would stop on them anyway to get the power, but sometimes we would keep going.

[Jexik]

My friend and I were just talking about this tonight actually. It's silly and annoying, although I think the temporary glyph excuse might be the best one there is. We hadn't thought of that.

[Codeman]

Originally Posted by AmishBurrito

I hate the rule that figures have to stop on glyphs... Back when I was playing in college, we never played that rule. Normally we would stop on them anyway to get the power, but sometimes we would keep going.

I cringe when I read that, as it could change the whole movement pattern of the map.

The person who created the map may have good reason for that glyph placement as it pertains to stopping a figure of diverting it around. Many times the placement of the glyphs can also add to the strategy of a map and how one chooses to navigate thru or around the glyphs. I know I give it a lot of thought when I making a map.

I am afaid you may be missing something if you don't play by all the rules.

[ninthdoc]

I agree with Codeman. This is a basic and fundamental rule of the game. It's like Order Markers/No Order Markers Conversation V2.0.

Don't play with the glyphs if you want a quick game. The glyphs are there to add to the need for strategy and to make you think and plan your moves.

[jcb231]

Agreed that this is a pretty basic rule, but there's no reason that you can't house rule a no-stopping game sometimes.

Glyphs lend themselves pretty easily to a variety of house rule options....Brandars, for example, have no other purpose really except scenario-specific actions, so once you run out of official maps you are always house-ruling what you want those to do. If you have an idea for a map and/or scenario that would be better served by not stopping on glyphs, go for it.

[rdhight]

Originally Posted by Codeman

I am afaid you may be missing something if you don't play by all the rules.

Originally Posted by ninthdoc

I agree with Codeman. This is a basic and fundamental rule of the game. It's like Order Markers/No Order Markers Conversation V2.0.

Don't play with the glyphs if you want a quick game. The glyphs are there to add to the need for strategy and to make you think and plan your moves.

I agree with what you're saying, but the question still remains: why did the designers choose this particular rule out of all the possibilities? They could have made glyphs cost 2-3 movement points. They could have ruled that you must begin your move adjacent to a glyph to step onto it. They could have made glyphs count as road. They could have made them hurt the glyph holder, like lava. They could have made them little pedestals that increase height. They could have left them with no movement powers at all. Every one of those choices would have made us build maps differently. The question isn't "Does it matter whether or not you play a map with the glyph rules its designers intended?" (that's no question at all), but "Why did the designers intend these particular glyph rules and no others?" I think I understand a lot about why order markers are the way they are. Stop on glyph, not so much.

[DarkBladeCB]

The rule, to me, feels very much like one that when initially designed was designed to have the glyphs normally turned over, to result in a sort of "you have to stop and activate this glyph" sort of surprise. That's the first thing that comes to mind... and makes a bit of sense.

[Codeman]

Originally Posted by rdhight

I agree with what you're saying, but the question still remains: why did the designers choose this particular rule out of all the possibilities? They could have made glyphs cost 2-3 movement points. They could have ruled that you must begin your move adjacent to a glyph to step onto it. They could have made glyphs count as road. They could have made them hurt the glyph holder, like lava. They could have made them little pedestals that increase height. They could have left them with no movement powers at all. Every one of those choices would have made us build maps differently. The question isn't "Does it matter whether or not you play a map with the glyph rules its designers intended?" (that's no question at all), but "Why did the designers intend these particular glyph rules and no others?" I think I understand a lot about why order markers are the way they are. Stop on glyph, not so much.

I think they could have made the game mechanics simple .....OH! .. THEY DID !

I'm sorry, but I don't see in any of your examples above how they would have fit into HS as well as their current method of play. DarkBladeCB said it well "the glyphs normally turned over, to result in a sort of "you have to stop and activate this glyph" sort of surprise. That's the first thing that comes to mind... and makes a bit of sense."

This all seems very intuitive or a normal action one would take - stop and uncover it or take a bypass it to be able to keep going. Basically simple rules same as the rest of the game - One of the reasons that make HS a Great game.

[Onacara]

I don't use the glyphs..but I would venture to guess that a glyph works kind of like a land mine...you step on it and it triggers.

If it is some sort of enhancement the power needs to surround the figure with some cheesy 80's sci-fi movie lighting effect...so you can't move.

[rdhight]

Originally Posted by Codeman

I think they could have made the game mechanics simple .....OH! .. THEY DID !

I'm sorry, but I don't see in any of your examples above how they would have fit into HS as well as their current method of play. DarkBladeCB said it well "the glyphs normally turned over, to result in a sort of "you have to stop and activate this glyph" sort of surprise. That's the first thing that comes to mind... and makes a bit of sense."

This all seems very intuitive or a normal action one would take - stop and uncover it or take a bypass it to be able to keep going. Basically simple rules same as the rest of the game - One of the reasons that make HS a Great game.

I agree that it's good that they made the mechanics simple. I agree that Heroscape is a great game. But I still think there's value in trying to figure out why they chose the simple option they did choose out of all the other simple options they could have chosen. Giving glyphs the snow/ice movement penalty instead of the water movement penalty wouldn't exactly have been a brain-burner. Giving them no movement penalty would have been simpler still. It may be intuitive to you why they went the way they did, or something that's not worth talking about, but not to me.

[NecroBlade]

I, too, always thought of them in terms of representing something that physically must be activated by the figure. I don't see what's so hard about that.