Even Though I still like this idea quite a bit (and will likely adopt
it as a 'House Rule') I think Stephane's analysis that it makes Chaos
excessively random for some Players are spot-on: I think personally
that is exactly how Chaos should be (and moreover believe that a Good
Tactician should be able to beat any army: at least in Theory) but I
do recognize that , all other things being equal (player ability, army
composition, blood-sugar levels) this rule has the potential to Decide
a Game at set-up, before any other dice are rolled: that can't be
right! I think we all may be overestimating the 'broken-ness' of the
Tzeentch-Khorne alliance: if an Army is Very Good at Ranged Combat
and Very Good at close combat (like...uhm...Eldar for instance) that
still doesn't guarantee a Win, does it? The wild-card in this is of
course (IMO) the addition of Chaos Cards. They might prove
unbalancing in making Chaos' survivability too High.
I think Stephane's idea concerning Chaos Reward Card penalties is an
excellent avenue to explore!!!
--- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, "Toma Diener" <peyoterattle_at_y...> wrote:
>
>
> I like this compromise quite a bit: It seems to deal with the 2
> issues in a unified manner....I think. Now I'm confused!!!
>
> --- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, Peter Ramos <primarch_at_c...> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > As I read the messages and thought about the subject, I had this
idea I
> > wanted to share regarding animosity.
> >
> > The goal is to give ONE rule that covers animosity and eliminate the
> > need to restrictions to allies.
> >
> > I thought we could use the existing animosity rule, but instead of
ally
> > restriction we introduce a small table of "animosity check" modifiers.
> >
> > They would be simple:
> >
> > Weak animosity, simply put it works with the rule as written, no
> > modifiers. This implies the baseline animosity that all demons have
> > against each other.
> >
> > Strong animosity, this implies a greater hatred and thus much more
> > difficult to control. This provokes the standard check, but with a -2
> > modifier (making checks successful on a roll of 6).
> >
> > This also sidesteps the arguments on who hates who more since we can
> > just lump catergories in the "strong" category.
> >
> > Example:
> >
> > Using Tzeentch, most would say that either Khorne or Nurgle are the
> > mainly hated powers. So we put those under "strong animosity" and
> > slaanesh under "weak"
> >
> > Using Khorne, Tzeentch and slaanesh would be strong and nurgle weak.
> >
> > ..and so forth.
> >
> > The strong animosity modifier makes cooperation between those that
hate
> > each other more strongly harder to obtain. If the roll penalty is too
> > much in the opinion of some tthen we could increase the animosity
> radius
> > and leave die rolls the same (a higher radius provokes more
checks) and
> > it obtains the same result.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Peter
Received on Wed Apr 06 2005 - 13:49:48 UTC