|
2 years ago ::
Jan 17, 2011 - 11:44PM
#11
|
|
|
They just say "Monsters are controlled" (or words to that effect
No. They don't. I just looked again and you're still operating from a false premise.
We've gotten away from my original question, which was whether Treasure and Experience are awarded for defeating Villains. I think it's apparent that they should be (based, again, on the assumption that Villains are Monsters); the only real question is how much, and that question is only pertinent to Experience since only one Treasure card is awarded at any time.
The rules are crystal clear on this point: "Each Monster Card lists the Experience Points it provides."
At this point there are two possibilities:
(1) "Villain Cards" are a type of "Monster Card". (Note: The rules don't say this and there's no reason for it to be true.) If so, go ahead and put the Villain Card into the Heroes' Experience Pile. It's worth the number of XP printed on the Villain Card. Since no XP is listed, villains are worth 0 XP.
(2) "Villain Cards" are not a type of "Monster Card". If so, you don't put a Villain Card into the Heroes' Experience Pile. Which means that villains are worth 0 XP.
Either way, villains are worth 0 XP.
Not much else to say about the matter at this point.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 08, 2011 - 9:02AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2010
|
Gentlemen, I too was irked by the holes/inconsistancies in the rules. I read as a rules lawyer would, and found much ambiguity in certain areas. I believe the rules are designed lightweight as it sends us to the forums, threads and chats. Yes it seems like an inventive way to market a product, but it actually brings players closer together, it gets us talking.
My background is original DnD so I apply that logic when I can't find a comprehensive rule. Example, I award exp for villans as thats the reward for defeating an adversary. level 5 villan=5exp. I haven't played enough yet to say for sure, but the hard games seem unwinnable playing any other way.
The rules are much more clear in Conquest of Nerath, but boardgamers don't agree that Dnd rules should apply because it adds complexity.
What reason should you not get exp for a villan, other than the text isnt found ? Are the hard games winnable without the reward? Thats what I want to know.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 12, 2011 - 11:06AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2011
|
Gentlemen, I too was irked by the holes/inconsistancies in the rules. I read as a rules lawyer would, and found much ambiguity in certain areas. I believe the rules are designed lightweight as it sends us to the forums, threads and chats. Yes it seems like an inventive way to market a product, but it actually brings players closer together, it gets us talking.
My background is original DnD so I apply that logic when I can't find a comprehensive rule. Example, I award exp for villans as thats the reward for defeating an adversary. level 5 villan=5exp. I haven't played enough yet to say for sure, but the hard games seem unwinnable playing any other way.
The rules are much more clear in Conquest of Nerath, but boardgamers don't agree that Dnd rules should apply because it adds complexity.
What reason should you not get exp for a villan, other than the text isnt found ? Are the hard games winnable without the reward? Thats what I want to know.
For what it's worth, I went ahead and adapted my games to get experience points from villians, equal to their level. I mean come on! You earn that **** for slaying something like a Dracolich!
But yeah, the rules have some errors. I think there is a bad typo in one section where it says EXPERIENCE, but the word was supposed to be ENCOUNTER..
|
|
|
