|
Title: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 15, 2008, 01:12:47 am What it adds
16 tiles with watchtower outpost on a forest or field (8 each). When played, a player may play a follower (big or small only) to the outpost. If any one of their other meeples is removed by the tower or the dragon, they may remove the follower on the outpost instead of the original target. If the follower removed by the dragon is on a field or forest that is connected to the outpost with a follower, the player may choose to move the original follower to the market in the City of Carcassonne instead of returning to hand. Expansions required Of course this expansion will only be used when playing with either P&D or The Tower or both. CoC is optional, but when played with, it will enhance the outposts. Comments anyone? Edit: Sample tile below... Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Scott on November 15, 2008, 10:54:48 pm Might run into a problem if the dragon's final move is to a tile with a meeple on it. Technically the meeple cannot occupy this tile with the dragon at the end of the turn.
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 15, 2008, 11:06:13 pm I guess then it can't be used on the dragon's last turn then...
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 25, 2008, 02:10:48 am Well, the tiles (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outposts1.pdf) are rather boring, but here they are. These are the "plain Jane" versions to be used with "vanilla" Carc. They can also be used as normal tiles without the special rules.
A Forest version is forthcoming and so are the rules. There will not be a Fishermen/Rivers version. The Cities version will probably be a separate expansion in the future... maybe. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 26, 2008, 08:34:39 pm Here are the forest outpost tiles (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outposts1.pdf). These are on a separate sheet from the other tiles so that one doesn't have to print these out if they are not playing with the Forests expansion. They can be used without the special rules.
The rules are almost complete, but I want to add in an example which means there needs to be an image, which means it will take time, and I won't have the time until this weekend (and maybe not even then!). I have made a few changes... text below: Quote OUTPOSTS A Carcassonne Central expansion by Novelty Tales of dragons harassing the countryside has been told since time immemorial. The nobles of Carcassonne has garrisoned a number troops in outposts dotting the countryside in the hopes that the soldiers will protect the countryside against the rampaging dragons. EXTRA PIECES · 16 new tiles, including 8 with Forests ADDITIONAL RULES Preparation This expansion is designed to be played with the dragon from the Princess and Dragon expansion (1). The 8 tiles with forest segments are designed to be played with the fan-made Forests expansion. Remove these tiles if the fanmade Forests expansion is not being used. Shuffle the new tiles with the other tiles. 1. Place a tile The tiles are placed in accordance to the normal rules. Forest segments are placed in accordance with the fan-made Forests expansion rules. 2. Deploy a guard When an outpost is played, a player may deploy a small follower or a big follower to the outpost as a guard (2). The follower is placed standing up on the outpost. The Dragon When the dragon moves to a square with a follower (3) (but not the barn, pig or builder), before the follower is removed, a player may elect to return one of his or her guard from any outpost back to his or her supply to move one of his or her follower on the same square as a dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile (4). Alternatively, if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion, the guard may be moved to the castle in the City of Carcassonne instead of returning to a player’s supply, to allow a player to move one of their followers on the same square as the dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile (5). {Example goes here} (1) It can also be played with the fan-made Dual Dragon expansion. (2) Only the small follower and the big follower may be deployed as a guard to the outpost. (3) This includes the small follower, the big follower, the mayor and the wagon. (4) This means that only followers on cities, roads, farms, forests (if playing with the Forests fan-made expansion), rivers (if playing with the Fisherman fan-made expansion) or any feature that is connected by the edge of a tile to an adjacent tile can be moved. Followers on a cloister, outpost, tower or any feature that is not connected by the edge of a tile to an adjacent tile cannot be moved. If the Dragon enters a tile with a guard on the outpost, the guard is return back to a player's supply. (5) Only one follower may be moved per player for each move the dragon makes. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 28, 2008, 10:40:09 am Rules in PDF (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules01.pdf). Please let me know if the rules are clear and whether I need to specify anything else. Thanks.
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 30, 2008, 09:09:15 am I'm guessing no one is interested in this or with any comments, so here's the final rules in PDF (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules10.pdf), and the zip file with tiles (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/theoutpost.zip). I'll call this complete, but if there are any further comments, it may still be modified.
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on November 30, 2008, 12:48:33 pm Sorry Nov. I had downloaded it, but had not had the chance to go through it.
Anyway, introductory blurb: "The nobles of Carcassonne has garrisoned a number troops in the outposts dotting the countryside..." should read, "The nobles of Carcassonne has garrisoned a number of troops in the outposts dotting the countryside..." Also the repeated word 'garrisoned' looks strange. I have no idea what you are trying to say here: "When the dragon moves to a square with a follower (but not the barn, pig or builder), before the follower is removed, a player may elect to return one of his or her guards from any outpost back to his or her supply to move one of his or her followers on the same square as a dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile." I do think that the 'his or her' should be replaced. Either with the standard English rules of just 'his' or by the use of the words 'the player's'. Example text: "Red has a follower on an outpost as a guard (shown on the tile to the left) and another follower on a field as a farmer. When the dragon moves to the tile that Red has a Red monk (shown on the right tile), red may choose to return the guard to his or her supply (or to the castle in the City of Carcassonne if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion) to move the farmer to a farm that is connected to the existing farm. The outpost that the guard is on does not have to be connected to the tile that the dragon is on. The dragon may, of course, move to the adjacent tile during its next move, if this is allowed by the rules for the dragon from the Princess and the Dragon expansion." Again, this confuses me. Let me explain: "Red has a follower on an outpost as a guard (shown on the tile to the left)... No problems. "...and another follower on a field as a farmer." Where is the farmer in the example? At first glance, I actually thought that was a farmer on the tile that the Dragon is on in the example, because I cannot see a cloister (I know the follower is standing up!!). "When the dragon moves to the tile that Red has a Red monk (shown on the right tile),..." the repeated word Red is not needed. "...red may choose to return the guard to his or her supply (or to the castle in the City of Carcassonne if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion)..." No problem but I do not see the point in this. "...to move the farmer to a farm that is connected to the existing farm. What??? A comma is required before the word 'to', however. The outpost that the guard is on does not have to be connected to the tile that the dragon is on. what happens to the Monk??? The dragon may, of course, move to the adjacent tile during its next move, if this is allowed by the rules for the dragon from the Princess and the Dragon expansion." No problem. I fail to see the point of the Outpost at all. If I can deploy a follower to the outpost but can't score with it, what is it's actual use? I am playing devil's advocate here ;) (I know what you are trying to achieve), but the rules do not convey what the Outpost is supposed to actually do. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 30, 2008, 08:44:25 pm Heh, that example was really badly written. Rewrote it and I hope it's better. The outpost guard is just suppose to save a follower by sacrificing itself.
I've also added the footnote that one can use the magic portal to deploy a follower into an empty outpost. Here's the updated rules (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules11.pdf). Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Lardarse on November 30, 2008, 09:51:29 pm 2 questions.
1: Does the guard on the outpost have to be adjacent to the followers that he can sacrifice himself for? 2: Have you thought about letting the outposts interact with towers? Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 30, 2008, 10:05:31 pm My apologies, I had the wrong link in the previous post. I have corrected it.
1. No. It's stated in the last sentence of the first paragraph of the example. 2. Yes, but I decided it could go into a separate expansion (perhaps known as the garrison?). After all, one might not wish to play with those (e.g. when not playing with the Tower). Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Lardarse on November 30, 2008, 10:38:30 pm I have some ideas about how to do it, which I am creating a separate thread for.
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on November 30, 2008, 11:50:59 pm I have some ideas about how to do it, which I am creating a separate thread for. That's what the Variants forum is for. It's always nice when someone takes your idea and run further with it.Edit: Just a couple of footnotes in the rules (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules12.pdf) for clarification of questions brought up by Lardarse in another thread. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 01, 2008, 08:33:02 am Sorry Novelty, I do not understand.
"When the dragon moves to a square with a follower (but not the barn, pig or builder), before the follower is removed, a player may elect to return one of their own guards from any outpost back to their supply to move one of their followers on the same square as a dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile and thus prevent the follower from being removed by the dragon." This paragraph does not make sense. The statement: 'before the follower is removed' implies that the follower is removed whether you decide to move a guard or not. Reading on I am still confused about what happens. I see that the follower that is on the tile that the dragon lands on can be moved to a feature by the sacrificing of the outpost guard. I think that is what you're trying to get across. "Alternatively, if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion, the guard may be moved to the castle in the City of Carcassonne instead of returning to a player’s supply, to allow a player to move one of their followers on the same square as the dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile." Perhaps better written: ""Alternatively, if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion, the guard may be moved to the castle in the City of Carcassonne instead of returning to a player’s supply, allowing the player to move one of their followers on the same square as the dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile." The offending word in both paragraphs is 'to'. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 01, 2008, 08:43:24 am The statement: 'before the follower is removed' implies that the follower is removed whether you decide to move a guard or not. Erm... no. "Before the follower is removed", you may move him out of the way."Before you get hit by a car, you could step off the road." doesn't mean you'll get hit by a car. I do agree that the sentence is way too long. Edit: How about: "When the dragon moves to a square with a follower (but not the barn, pig or builder), before the follower is removed, a player may elect to return one of their own guards from any outpost back to their supply. If a player returns one of their guards from any outpost back to their supply, they may move one of their followers on the same square as a dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile and thus prevent the follower from being removed by the dragon as it will no longer be on the same tile as the dragon." That's a lot verbose then I'm used to. A background with CCGs have hardwired me to the phrase "Do action A to do Action B" (e.g. If an opponent plays a card to discard your creature card, before your creature card is discarded by the opponent, you may play a card from hand to prevent your creature from being discarded, and thus cancel out your opponent's card). Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 01, 2008, 08:47:26 am I absolutely disagree. The statement tells you that you may do something before the follower is removed. However, the offending word is 'of'.
Edit: "Before you get hit by a car, you could step off the road." doesn't mean you'll get hit by a car. The problem is that the paragraph does not actually state (or make sense of) that you are doing something instead of another. Quote Edit: How about: "When the dragon moves to a square with a follower (but not the barn, pig or builder), before the follower is removed, a player may elect to return one of their own guards from any outpost back to their supply. If a player returns one of their guards from any outpost back to their supply, they may move one of their followers on the same square as a dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile and thus prevent the follower from being removed by the dragon as it will no longer be on the same tile as the dragon." All that is necessary is to make the sentence say that you are doing something instead of something else. Quote That's a lot verbose then I'm used to. A background with CCGs have hardwired me to the phrase "Do action A to do Action B" (e.g. If an opponent plays a card to discard your creature card, before your creature card is discarded by the opponent, you may play a card from hand to prevent your creature from being discarded, and thus cancel out your opponent's card). You hit the nail on the head. The paragraph does not tell you that you are doing something to avoid another situation. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Lardarse on December 01, 2008, 09:45:41 am You hit the nail on the head. The paragraph does not tell you that you are doing something to avoid another situation. Let me have a go."Whenever the dragon moves onto a tile occupied by one of your followers, you may remove one of your guards from the board and return it to your supply instead of removing the follower on the dragon's tile. If you do, then you may move that follower to the same feature on an adjacent tile (including diagonally)." Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 01, 2008, 11:22:51 am That's better.
Just out of curiosity (and my apologies if I have missed it), what happens if you have a Monk/Heretic deployed and the Dragon lands on the cloistre/shrine and you have an Outpost occupied? Would it not be better just to allow the sacrificing of the Outpost guard without having to move the follower from the tile that the Dragon is on? Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Lardarse on December 01, 2008, 12:37:02 pm I think that the idea was that they have nowhere to run to and are dragon food. However, I do have a crazy idea that works around this, Instead of sacrificing the guard to let the follower escape, how about sacrificing the guard to move the dragon off the tile, respecting the usual dragon movement rules?
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 01, 2008, 03:27:01 pm Thanks Lardarse for the suggestion.
Would it not be better just to allow the sacrificing of the Outpost guard without having to move the follower from the tile that the Dragon is on? That's because, as Scott pointed out in this thread, the dragon can't be on the same tile as a follower. Rather than make a special case for the final move of the dragon, I thought it would be more elegant to just ensure that for every move of the dragon, the action is the same.I think that the idea was that they have nowhere to run to and are dragon food. However, I do have a crazy idea that works around this, Instead of sacrificing the guard to let the follower escape, how about sacrificing the guard to move the dragon off the tile, respecting the usual dragon movement rules? That could potentially allow you to move the dragon more than once which might not be a good thing. By your suggestion, one player could potentially and theoritically move the dragon all 6 tiles if they have 5 guards, and thus "lead" the dragon into a direction without letting any other player have a say in how the dragon moves.Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 02, 2008, 03:08:28 am New Rules (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules13.pdf).
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 02, 2008, 02:15:05 pm Would it not be better just to allow the sacrificing of the Outpost guard without having to move the follower from the tile that the Dragon is on? That's because, as Scott pointed out in this thread, the dragon can't be on the same tile as a follower. Rather than make a special case for the final move of the dragon, I thought it would be more elegant to just ensure that for every move of the dragon, the action is the same.I think that this is actually quite clumsy. It over complicates the situation. It, IMO, is far better to simply allow the follower on the tile to be spared and remain on the same tile. I realise that the rules of P&D do not allow a follower on the same tile as the dragon, but this is the rules for Outposts and not P&D. It also solves the cloister/shrine issue. However, this still is rather confusing: "When the dragon moves to a tile with a follower (but not the barn, pig or builder), a player may elect to return one of their own guards from any outpost back to their supply instead of removing one of the follower on the same square as the dragon and instead move one of their followers on the same square as a dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile to prevent the follower from being removed by the dragon. Alternatively, if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion, the guard may be moved to the castle in the City of Carcassonne instead of returning to a player’s supply, to allow a player to move one of their followers on the same square as the dragon to the connected feature on an adjacent tile." How about something like this: "When the dragon moves to a tile containing a follower, the owner of the follower may elect to return one of their guards from any outpost back to their supply to spare the 'life' of his follower on the tile that the dragon is on. This follower must then be moved to the same feature but on an adjacent tile. This provides a way to prevent the capture and removal by the dragon of a follower. Alternatively, if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion, the guard may be moved to the castle area in the City of Carcassonne instead of being returned to the player’s supply, allowing the player to spare the 'life' of his follower on the same tile that the dragon is on. This follower must then be moved to the same feature but on an adjacent tile." The '(but not the barn, pig or builder)' is not required, as these are not followers, but perhaps should be added to footnote 4: "This includes the small follower, the big follower, the mayor and the wagon, but does not include the builder, pig or barn." Another way for using the Outpost guard with a cloister/shrine is to allow the cloister/shrine to be scored at its current score when you use an outpost guard to 'save' your Monk/Heretic (i.e. should the dragon land on a cloister containing a monk, and that player has an outpost guard, he may sacrifice his outpost guard, returning the guard to his supply, score the cloister at it's current score (2-9 points) and then remove the monk from the cloister and back to his supply). Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Lardarse on December 02, 2008, 03:39:11 pm What's even simpler is probably this:
Whenever the dragon moves onto a tile containing one of your followers, you may choose to have the dragon eat one of your guards instead of the follower on that tile. That way you don't have 2 different ways to protect followers, with different rules for each one. The dragon movement rules don't allow backtracking within a movement sequence, so the monk/heretic/etc is going to be protected for at least that turn. Much simpler rules for pretty much the same effect, and easier to explain clearly as well. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 03, 2008, 01:03:03 am Whenever the dragon moves onto a tile containing one of your followers, you may choose to have the dragon eat one of your guards instead of the follower on that tile. You would need to define "eat" though since that is not a Carcassonne defination.Joff, I'll add your recommendations verbatim to the new rules document and post it up later. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 03, 2008, 06:39:49 am but this is the rules for Outposts and not P&D. Words of wisdom there. Updated to v2.0! (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules20.pdf)Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 03, 2008, 11:02:54 am That's better :)
This is far less complicated and is the way that I would prefer. The cloister/shrine difficulty is solved. It also solves a problem of what would happen if a follower was deployed on a tile onto which the dragon moves: i.e, after sacrificing his outpost guard, the player would have to move the follower on the dragon occupied tile to an adjacent tile of the same feature, which could mean the possibility that on the next move/s the dragon could have him for lunch again! A sacrifice of an outpost guard for nothing. That would not really be fair. "...the owner of the follower may elect to return one of their own guards from any outpost back to their supply to allow one of their follower to remain on the same square as the dragon." Written this way it requires 'follower' to become 'followers'. Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 03, 2008, 05:06:43 pm Corrected (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules21.pdf)! Thanks Joff.
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 04, 2008, 08:29:27 am Broken link, Novelty
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Whaleyland on December 04, 2008, 09:47:36 am Yup, it downloads but the file says it is corrupt on my computer (MacOS 10.5).
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 04, 2008, 04:33:32 pm Sorry, fixed!
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Joff on December 05, 2008, 08:40:42 am "...the owner of the follower may elect to return one of their own guards from any outpost back to their supply to allow one of their follower to remain on the same square as the dragon." Sorry Nov. Just spotted another :)Written this way it requires 'follower' to become 'followers'. "Alternatively, if playing with the Count of Carcassonne expansion, the guard may be moved to the castle in the City of Carcassonne instead of returning to a player’s supply, to allow one of their follower to remain on the same square as the dragon." Written this way it requires 'follower' to become 'followers'. But I do feel that this is a much better expansion. I like it :) Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on December 05, 2008, 09:42:54 am OK, here are the rules (http://www.dukenostalgia.com/junk/outpostrules22.pdf) updated again. Thanks for the proofread, Joff!
Title: Re: The Outpost Post by: Novelty on January 12, 2009, 09:30:00 am Updated the rules to version 2.3 (Thanks wicke!) It's on the Public downloads page.
|