Since Conquest will be for the Unrestricted format, this would already be true.

Like DBlizzard, I would be 100% against this. Conquest should NOT replace Unrestricted, as there are things you can do with a normal Unrestricted that you couldn't do with a Conquest event; because of the sheer scope and size of Conquest tournaments, I would likely run them only occasionally, as most of my players would not have time to commit to a Conquest-length tournament.

I'm all for Conquest being reintroduced, but not at the expense of the regular game :)

And overall, I think the rules are pretty good! I would be strongly opposed to Conquest being a completely different game, as some versions of "homemade" Conquest rules have done. And as such, one thing to consider is this - as stated, Conquest will be UNRESTRICTED. If certain relics, etc, become a problem, it can be dealt with locally. That's not to say that we shouldn't be giving our feedback to make amore universal set of fun and fair rules, but being Unrestricted and non-official at this time, I think that will allow it to be used, yet not something that will divert resources away from the core game.

Just my opinion, as always :)

Sigma, have you just read my previous suggestions on the Conquest rules? (before the actual all figs/dump unrestricted thing)...

seriosuly, you need to cover stuff like BoL of Necromantic Bonestaff or else, even with relic restrictions, you will end up with only a couple of viable archetypes, and 90% of all relics will simply be unplayable.

I'd like to recommend that players actually playtest the rules before making comments about what would be unplayable.

You might be right about BoL and Necromantic Bonestaff. However, one thing to remember, is the last version of the Conquest rules specificied you set up along the long side of the board (the current rules don't specify). In that case, you aren't necessarily further away from the BoL & Necromantic Bonestaff than you would be a normal game.

Secondly, I'm not sure exactly how "overpowering" they'd be in that level of a game. For example, several people were complaining about the Death domain in Conquest. In my experience, you don't get very many more turns in a Conquest game than a normal game, even with the extended time limit. However, with a presumbed increase in the number of figures on the board, the Death domain will have less of an impact in a Conquest game. (You might consider making sure you have a "Death buffer" of a few cheap figures to absorb the 2 or 3 rolls you expect to come up...unless, of course, you're playing it).

Did you actually played a game of Conquest with those relics? I know I did, way before WK even bothered trying to post 2.0 Coqnuest rules, by the way, my stack of styrene higher then a flight stand is yet undefeated in Conquest games... Heck, if you dig a bit in those forums, you will see just how game altering those specific relics are.

Besides, let me ask you this : why did WK even bother specify there was a range limit on some glyphs if not for the fact that they are way too strong when you just count them throughout the board? What makes those glyphs any different then relics?

Note I wasn't saying they didn't need adjustment. I was just saying playtest them before making an assumption. It really wasn't intended to be directed at you, it was just a comment that built off of your comments.

Now, here's a question. Did you play set up alongside the long board or alongside the short board? I think that makes a big difference (which doesn't mean it mitigates their power). Setting up along the short board significantly increases the power of these relics, since the wielders are likely to be in the starting areas, out of reach of the opponent (without similiar "range ignoring" relics, such as Mask of Mysteries).

However, set up along the long side, I don't see how it's that much different from their use in a standard Mage Knight game. The only issue I could see is that masses of figures on the battlefield make the wielders harder to reach.

If one way is bad and the other isn't, then perhaps the solution is to stick to the way that isn't bad (with this theory, it would mean make sure players set up along the long side).

As for glyphs, I"m not sure what the exact intent of the glyphs are. The only glyph's that seem to be affected are Death Throes (a very likely target for the rule), Neutralize Magestone, Rite of the Bleak Horn & Taste of Blood.

The main difference seems to be masses of figures being affected, rather than individual figures (such as Book of Lightning and Necromantic Bonestaff). If it were to transfer to relics, I think the main target would be Storm Maul (which can deal 1 damage to all figures if the board is all water).

Mask of Mysteries worries me. I think it's actually very risky, since you're potentially leaving yourself open in the middle of your opponent's area. However, when added with Titans and Multi-dials, things start seeming less risky.

Then again, I've suggested that perhaps a good rule would be that Titans and Multi-dials should be immune to spells and relic abilities unless specifically mentioned on the card, or unless they are normal abilities (Venom, Counterattack). I'm not sure it's balanced or desirable. However, I think it's worth playing with to see how it works.

We also need some suggestions on an updating of the castle rules. They updated titans and multi-dials with 2.0 but not the castles...Most of us have patched together our own rules already, but something official would be nice.

Where can the new Titan/MDF rules be found? Werent they in the FAQ or something? I need a refresher.

YES!!! The rules have come I am so happy I can hardly contain myself. I just read over them and think there needs to be something said about domains. But, I really appreciate the limitations on glyphs and think they are really reasonable.

BEEWRE DA ORKIE HORDES HAF RETEERNED!!!!;)

DBlizz, on a 3 by 6 board, the problem of those relics is still the same, even if you start on the longest sides of the board as you can simply hide your relic wielders at the far end of the board with a cheap bodyguard thus forcing your opponent to either split his army or just play through it.

The basic principle at stake here is teh same that guided how to use the * Brass Commanders in 1.0 Conquest : put them at the fartest possible edge of the actual battle, and enjoy the benifits unscratched. Did you see a lot of * Brass Commanders die in Conquest? Trust me, thsoe guys had one of the best survival rate in Conquest, simply because they never got into a fight, and the same will happen with those relic weilders if nothign is done.

I haven't posted since the announcement of 2.0 (not because of the game, I love it and still play it) but because of some of the sheer idiocy that was contained within some of the posts.

Since no-one else has brought this to light yet, I think I will.

From our good buddy Olan.

Hmm.... I was intrigued by this comment, so I went and checked myself. It takes approximatly 41 styrene cards to equal the height of one flight stand. Oh my, that would be a horrid thing to face, 41 relics? Or about 15 uniques beefed up to insane proportions? Pssh, I'm gonna go play "Watching Grass Grow"... set to be released by WK in late 2006.

But wait! Whats this?

If I read this correctly, for a standard 2,000 point game, that means you can have up to 5 relics and 5 items. That would be 10 cards total. Now lets assume that those 5 relics were spellbooks, and you somehow manage to fit 31 spells in those books. I know it can be done, but frankly the thought of going against 31 copies of Archers Aim is none too intimidating.

This rule, by far, is the most important one in the whole rule-set, at this point in time.

So please Olan, before the whining, check the rules. Yes, you can still fit a BoL, Bonestaff, MoM, Spirit Armor, and Threadcutter in your army. But thats all you can fit. Now you've got no spellbooks to disbelieve my Mechanoid or disenchant my many many copies of Psychic Reflection.

Conquest rules were a needed thing. I have been waiting patiently for them for a long time. 2.0 rules, relics, and figures will add a new twist to the environment that was previously unseen in old conquest formats. Give it a chance.


-method527


P.S. I do agree with the no-Domains idea though, I hate 'em even in standard games. :p

No. Then again, they didn't see much play after WizKids changed the Conquest tournament rules to have players set up along the long side of the board.

(It wasn't a cause and effect situation. I think Brass Commanders were reduced in play before that).

The WizKids site has the 2.0 Titan/MDF rules. However, they aren't quite up-to-date as a few things are in the FAQ (notably, the they can't have enchantments cast on them).

I expect the most up-to-date version were released with the Apocolypse Dragon, but I haven't really heard anyone discuss that. They'll probably appear online when the Conquest rules are updated.

Yes, the Dragon's rulesheet comes with an up-to-date MDW rules.

Proposed concept for an adjustment to address demoralized figures for those Imperial Legion/Krang/Podo lovers.
Instead of:
Quote: "Warriors (except castle sections) are eliminated when they gain Demoralized as a result of taking damage."

Change to:
"At the beginning of each player's end phase, FRIENDLY Warriors (except castle sections) are eliminated FROM THE GAME when they have Demoralized SA as a result of taking damage from opposing warriors/spell effects."
This change allows you:
1. a chance to heal your demoralized warriors before they're goners - if you wanna 'waste' the action...
2. push to enter demoralized for those self healing Imperials
3. addresses the 'evil' concepts of revenant, necromancy, call familiar, i.e. if you can demo the opposing warriors, their controller will have to waste orders to push to eliminate specific figures, in order to reanimate (still a pretty good deal for a necromancer to bring back a nasty Gate Lord/Kossak...)

Sigma, are they going to post those rules on the main site? Otherwise a lot of people won't know the current rules.