Complete Annotated Rules v. 7.0, 2nd printing

[obervet]

Based on feedback from the v. 7.0 thread, I have made a few minimal changes to the CAR. There have been no content changes, so I kept the version number the same. (Okay, I call it 7.0.1 myself, but you won't see that anywhere in the document itself.) Thus, don't feel obligated to download this one if you already have the original v. 7.0. (But I know you will anyway.)

Changes are:
Added version number and date to title page
Corrected image errors in the Glossary
Corrected a few duplicate word typos

You can get it here:

http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=251

Linkback: https://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=809.0

[Whaleyland]

I love the new material. Very well done! I've already given you a merit for it on the other thread.

I have one suggestion regarding "The German Monasteries." I think the expansion should be more literally translated as "The Monasteries in Germany" because I believe there will be other expansions with similar titles through the coming years (e.g., "The Monasteries in France", "The Monasteries in Spain," etc.). It would make more sense to keep the title "The Monasteries [in place]" so that as future expansions based on the same rules come out, they can be added to this section. Just a thought, but I think it would make more sense in the long run and show greater consistency. It also sticks to the original German translation of the name better. (Officially, the expansion name is only "Die Kloester" in all promotional material except the actual rules, which adds "in Deutschland".)

[Carcking]

Excellent point whaley! Good catch!

[kettlefish]

The correct German name is:
"Kloester in Deutschland" = "Monasteries in Germany"

[obervet]

For the upcoming version of the CAR (seems a little depressing to already be thinking about that), I have changed the name of the expansion to "Monasteries in Germany". The features themselves are still referred to as German Monasteries (as in "I put a follower on the German Monastery").

[Whaleyland]

Why don't the figures simply go on the "Monastery" (rather than the "German Monastery")? That would anticipate future problems. Assuming you still use the term "Cloister" for the earlier iterations of the feature, I don't see any conflict with the term "Monastery" here.

[rfielder]

For the upcoming version of the CAR (seems a little depressing to already be thinking about that), I have changed the name of the expansion to "Monasteries in Germany". The features themselves are still referred to as German Monasteries (as in "I put a follower on the German Monastery").

That does make more sense than "I put a follower on the Monastery in Germany", which can be misinterpreted in a couple of ways. 

Not that I would object to an opportunity to play a game in Germany, but.....

[Carcking]

Not that I would object to an opportunity to play a game in Germany, but.....

   

[Paul]

Small errata in S-CAR v7.0.pdf found. 

On page 111, second unordered list that starts with "As a town which is converted..."

The second sentence has "a when" on it: "In this case, a when one of the castles..."

 

[obervet]

Why don't the figures simply go on the "Monastery" (rather than the "German Monastery")? That would anticipate future problems. Assuming you still use the term "Cloister" for the earlier iterations of the feature, I don't see any conflict with the term "Monastery" here.

Because the CAR is internally consistent (I think), you are absolutely right -- use of the "German" part is redundant. The reason I kept it in there is because the ZMG version of the rules refers to all cloisters as monasteries, so it might be confusing to newer users who call the base version of the feature a monastery, as they wouldn't necessarily understand the historical context.

If/when we get monasteries from other countries, I'll have to go back and figure out what I want to do with those mentions.

[obervet]

Small errata in S-CAR v7.0.pdf found. 

On page 111, second unordered list that starts with "As a town which is converted..."

The second sentence has "a when" on it: "In this case, a when one of the castles..."

 

Corrected. Thanks!

[Scott]

If I recall correctly, in German both features are called klosteren (plural form of kloster). The only difference is that the "klosteren in Deutschland" have the added ability to place a follower as an abbot. Theoretically you could house rule place abbots on regular cloisters too. That being said, I like the distinction of cloisters referring to the ones we've known and loved since 2000 and monasteries referring to what will hopefully become a series of regional mini-expansions.

[Joaquim00]

Two little comments:

A:
page 16 footnote 12:
'features are considered to be complete as soon as the tile is placed' [before follower placement and scoring]

page 56:
'[using the magic portal,] the follower may not be deployed to a[...] completed feature]'
footnote 148:
'whether it was scored or not'

Therefore
page 84 footnote 272 (repeated in page 89 as footnote 289) is wrong:

"Question: Imagine I have an unoccupied cloister next to an occupied cult place. I place a tile
with a magic portal which completes both buildings, and choose to use the magic portal to deploy a
monk to the cloister. Does this declare a challenge, and if so, who wins?"

The newly completed cloister cannot be occupied using a magic portal, given the interpretation that features are extended/completed at the moment of tile-placement.

B:
page 18 footnote 27: '1 point per road segment'
perhaps change this to something like '1 point per tile that the road occupies', as more than 1 segment of a road can be on the same tile. (Maximally 4 segments on a 4-way-junction tile, with a Catapult 4-way road.)

[obervet]

A:
page 16 footnote 12:
'features are considered to be complete as soon as the tile is placed' [before follower placement and scoring]

page 56:
'[using the magic portal,] the follower may not be deployed to a[...] completed feature]'
footnote 148:
'whether it was scored or not'

Therefore
page 84 footnote 272 (repeated in page 89 as footnote 289) is wrong:

"Question: Imagine I have an unoccupied cloister next to an occupied cult place. I place a tile
with a magic portal which completes both buildings, and choose to use the magic portal to deploy a
monk to the cloister. Does this declare a challenge, and if so, who wins?"

The newly completed cloister cannot be occupied using a magic portal, given the interpretation that features are extended/completed at the moment of tile-placement.

That's a good point. All of these are official rules or official clarifications, but there is definitely an internal inconsistency here. One way that it could be cleared up is if the intent of the "already completed" statement is really "completed on a previous turn". That would allow placement of the follower into a feature that was just completed and was just about to be scored, analogous to putting a follower onto a city or road that you just completed on this turn (and then getting the follower right back). Of course, I don't know if that's the actual intent, so I'll have to punt this one to kettlefish to see if she can come up with the final call.

B:
page 18 footnote 27: '1 point per road segment'
perhaps change this to something like '1 point per tile that the road occupies', as more than 1 segment of a road can be on the same tile. (Maximally 4 segments on a 4-way-junction tile, with a Catapult 4-way road.)

Consider it changed. Interesting that that statement has been part of the CAR for 3 days less than forever, but no one has spotted it until now.

[kettlefish]

I think that Matt Harper didn't saw the problem of the just finished features and the magic portal: cloister and cult place.

No - the follower can't be placed on that finished cloister.