|
Other Customization & HS Additions Everything from new ways to play to modded figures |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
This is closely related to my other suggested house rule where zombies (and Roman Archers) can use their collective attack when not on even ground.
Anyway, the current Trample Stomp language is as follows: At any point while moving, Tor-Kul-Na may choose a small or medium figure that is adjacent, on the same level, and on a space where Tor-Kul-Na may end his movement. Roll the 20-sided die. If you roll 1 - 7, the figure is safe and Tor-Kul-Na's movement ends. If you roll 8-20, the chosen figure receives 1 wound. If the wound destroys the figure, move Tor-Kul-Na onto the space that the figure occupied, and you may continue Tor-Kul-Na's movement. If the chosen figure is not destroyed, Tor-Kul-Na's movement ends. Tor-Kul-Na must be on a space where he can end movement each time he uses this power.The issue is that TKN can't stomp a figure on a single-hex perch. He also can't stomp a figure standing in the middle of a 3-hex ridge. If you have two figures standing together on a 3-hex triangle, they are both immune to trample stomp. And so on. Trample denial is part of playing against TKN, but it's so map dependent that it's hard to argue that it's really built into his cost. The question is, can I write a version of Trample Stomp that isn't any more confusing than the original, but avoids this effect? I think I can: At any point while moving, Tor-Kul-Na may choose a small or medium adjacent figure that is adjacent, on the same level, and on a space where Tor-Kul-Na may end his movement. Expend the move necessary to move onto the space the figure occupies, and roll the 20-sided die. If you roll 1 - 7, the figure is safe and Tor-Kul-Na's movement ends. If you roll 8-20, the chosen figure receives 1 wound. If the wound destroys the figure, expend the move necessary to move onto the space, and you may move Tor-Kul-Na onto the space that the figure occupied, and you may continue Tor-Kul-Na's movement. If the chosen figure is not destroyed, Tor-Kul-Na's movement ends. Tor-Kul-Na must be on a space where he can end movement each time he uses this power.Implicit in the new wording is that you must have enough move left to make the move. So if TKN only has 1 move left, he can't trample a figure a level higher than him. Also implicit is that the move onto the space must be part of a legal move. So if TKN has 2 move left and tramples a figure a level higher than him, he cannot move up because that would leave him on uneven ground with zero movement remaining. Last edited by dok; May 5th, 2010 at 05:10 PM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
Question:
Answer: Quote:
I think dok is probably correct here. Since the Wave 1 re-print, I've finally acquired Roman Archers, and I agree a similar house-rule would go a long way to making them playable. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
I would if I knew what "accordingly" was.
I think you can make a legitimate argument either way as to whether trample denial is built into the cost or not. On some maps, it's extremely difficult - there might only be a few spots where you can stash figures to avoid stompage. I am pretty confident that "onslaught denial" is not built into the zombie's cost, but I'm less sure about this one. Still, on the balance I don't think he's taking a discount for this. He does cost 220 points, after all. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
dok,
You're buying the ability not to enter that space though. It means you don't have to leave engagement with any figures or enter any new engagements. It seems to me that the only way to "fix" trample denial would be to use the forward looking concept of making sure that if he succeeds in his trample roll he can reach a legal stopping point by moving through that hex before he runs out of movement. In the case of a figure in the middle of a three ridge, he'd need one movement point more than what he expends to attempt the trample in order to finish moving onto the ridge. In the case of a single hex above, he'd need at least two more move to get past and down to level ground again. ~Aldin, who honestly doesn't think this fix is needed He either fears his fate too much or his desserts are small That dares not put it to the touch to gain or lose it all ~James Graham |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
from Dictionary.com
ac⋅cord⋅ing⋅ly –adverb 1.therefore; so; in due course. 2.in accordance; correspondingly. from Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary ac·cord·ing·ly Pronunciation:\ə-ˈkȯr-diŋ-lē\ Function:adverb Date:14th century 1 : in accordance : correspondingly 2 : consequently, so I also don't think this particular fix is needed. If you can't trample stomp, you can't trample stomp. Often, his normal attack is perfectly fine for taking out the stubborn units you discuss, and I think he is costed pretty well. I play maps with lots of elevation, and even in those cases Tor-Kul-Na is able to use his Trample Stomp to great effect with even a little thought to his movement. "While there is a lower class, I am in it, while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." - Eugene V Debs Last edited by Fencerjared; June 10th, 2009 at 02:17 PM. Reason: Posted instead of previewed, had to add my actual thoughts... |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
Quote:
Quote:
At any point while moving, Tor-Kul-Na may choose a small or medium adjacent figure that is adjacent, on the same level, and on a space where Tor-Kul-Na may end his movement that Tor-Kul-Na can move into as part of his move. Roll the 20-sided die. If you roll 1 - 7, the figure is safe and Tor-Kul-Na's movement ends. If you roll 8-20, the chosen figure receives 1 wound. If the wound destroys the figure, move Tor-Kul-Na must move onto the space that the figure occupied, and you may continue Tor-Kul-Na's movement. If the chosen figure is not destroyed, Tor-Kul-Na's movement ends. Tor-Kul-Na must be on a space where he can end movement each time he uses this power.Looks pretty good to me. Well, TKN is certainly playable either way. So are zombies, for that matter. It's those same questions about whether the terrain-based attack denials were intended or not. I tend to think they were not, and I find onslaught/trample denial a bit distasteful, which is why I like these sorts of house rules. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
Every figure has a "flaw" that built into them and I would assume is part of the costing of the unit. I am pretty sure Trample "denial" is factored in otherwise he would be worth 250 at least.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
Quote:
This terrain denial stuff is a bit subtle and highly map-dependent, and I could easily see it not really coming up or getting considered when the costs were determined. Do you think that if zombies had been designed and released after the Ashigaru, they would have still used the "same level" language, in stead of the "consider the lowest of the three figures" language? I certainly don't. 250 is the number I came up with as well when musing about how many points I would be willing to pay to get the figure with the language changed. I think you could make an argument for anything between 220 and 250 for the revised language. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
Quote:
Remeber how Taelord and Spartacus used to get picked on? |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
dok, I think the current wording is actually pretty elegant in how it avoids scenarios that "break" the game, given that:
1. Tor-Kul-Na must move onto the hex he stomped onto, when the figure is destoryed 2. Tor-Kul-Na is a 2-hex figure, meaning that he can't end his movement on a number of terrain configurations (i.e. uneven terrain). At first, I saw the wording of Tor-Kul-Na's card as arbitrary, but then I realized that it was phrased that way to avoid illegal moves by TKN (and the confusion that would occur if TKN could use Trample Stomp but without being able to legally move onto the destination hex and given that TKN must move onto the destination hex when he successfully stomps and kills). Based on your current wording, scenarios could come up in game where Tor-Kul-Na could make illegal moves and "break" the game. For example, suppose that TKN is on a space where he could end his turn, but he just stomped a different-level-figure on a single hex space, destroying it. By virtue of your rules, TKN *must* move onto that space, but a 2-hex figure can't end it's turn on uneven terrain levels (for obvious reasons). the "that Tor-Kul-Na can move into as part of his move." clause doesn't cover the technicality I point out... b/c TKN can move over uneven single-hex terrain, he just can't end his move there. The takeaway message is that TKN's Trample Stomp wording is so complicated, because they designed it so that he must move onto the space that he stomps. If they didn't introduce the same-level restriction clause, then TKN *could* get himself into stomping situations where he would be making illegal moves and "breaking" the game. Alternatively, if TKN didn't have to move onto the destination stomp hex by virtue of the Trample Stomp power, then there would be greater liberty in the situations that Trample Stomp could be applied to. That is, the same-level restriction would be meaningless. However, considerable thematic "flavour" would also be lost. PS. - I apologize in advance if my "rules lawyering" isn't clear at this point. Last edited by mccombju; June 11th, 2009 at 02:20 AM. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Re-wording Trample Stomp to eliminate trample denial
Quote:
You could re-word things to say something like "in the course of a legal complete move" to make this more explicit, but it's not necessary IMO. Last edited by dok; June 11th, 2009 at 11:42 AM. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trample Stomp Problem | NecroBlade | Official Rules & FAQ's | 33 | February 4th, 2009 08:40 AM |
Tur-Kul-Na trample stomp minutiae | dok | Official Rules & FAQ's | 10 | December 10th, 2008 12:48 PM |
Tur-Kul-Na's Trample Stomp | shai4589 | Official Rules & FAQ's | 10 | October 13th, 2008 10:03 AM |
Tor-Kul-Na Trample Stomp "leaving engagement" ques | Blue Dane | Official Rules & FAQ's | 15 | September 10th, 2007 09:18 AM |
How to Eliminate 4th Mass? | Metaknight | Competitive Armies Discussion | 24 | August 29th, 2007 03:40 PM |