Ok. So I guess we can generalize this also for Double sized tiles and Halflings - point is for space not for tile
This is what we want to get (re)clarified... But we have two options: tile-oriented scorings and space/grid-oriented scorings. We will have to discuss each case...
1. Monastery
This was explained in the rules and re-confirmed on Discord yesterday.
2. German Castles
This was assumed as a conclusion after the rules for Halflings. A tile-oriented approach would not make sense at this point. It would be great to confirm it officially.
3. German Monasteries / Japanese Buildings + Dutch/Belgian monasteries (when plaing C2 rules ) - when figure is Monk
Same as for regular monasteries. Consider also abbeys, shrines and Darmstadt churches in the same lot.
4. Baba Yaga's Hut
It always considered empty (square) spaces, so there will be no change. So tile geometries never had an impact on them. If any clarification would be required, we should contact Hobby World, but I don't think there is any doubt in this case as per the definition of the rules in this case.
Check the rules here:
https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Russian_Promos_(1st_edition)#Baba_Yaga.E2.80.99s_HutThis also opens question about adjacent tiles for
1. Release of trapped meeple on Barber Surgeons tile
The rules indicate the bathhouse has to be completely the same as a monastery... So bathhouses follow a grid-oriented apporach too: you need to occupy the adjacent spaces only. Check here:
https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/The_Barber-Surgeons#1._Completing_a_bathhouseIf a player places the last Land tile surrounding a bathhouse (the same way you complete monasteries), the Meeple placed in the bathhouse can be taken back immediately and for free.
This also open question about coungin double sided tiles
1. German Monasteries / etc. - when figure is placed as Abbot
Extrapolating from monasteries, these features had followed different approaches:
- Rules from 2014: Grid-oriented scoring
- Clarifications from 10/2015: Tile-oriented approach
- Rules from 2020: Back to grid-oriented scoring? You only count a stretch of occupied spaces. However, here the reference is how tower ranges are considered... We certainly need to clarify this.
anybody can name another unsolved interactions ;-D
I'm adding to the equation both halflings and double-sized tiles:
*
Regular scoring for cities and roads (Base game): Validate that each tile counts individually (tile-oriented scoring for halflings). It is assumed from the wording, but it will never hurt to be sure 100%.
https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Halflings#3._Scoring_a_featureIf you complete a feature with half-sized tiles, it is scored according to the normal rules.
*
Connectivity in fields (Base game): Is a triangular gap defining field borders? I would assume yes... My current is that the read meeples are in different fields in the following example:
The underlying question here is how triangular gaps are considered: they are not a proper gap for some scorings (grid-oriented approach) but they work as gaps for some others (tile-oriented approach). Getting too philosophical here?
*
The movement of the dragon+placement of the fairy (Exp. 3) and the plague (The Plague): They should be also tile-oriented unless there is a new rules change after the clarifications from 10/2015.
*
Tower ranges (Exp. 4) and flier ranges (Mini #1) - how ranges are computed: It should also be tile oriented scoring for halflings and double-sized tiles. Are we going to consider two halves in a German castle tile or in a road on a Market of Leipzig tile? I would say no. There are very interesting cases here:
*
Placing an abbey (Exp. 5): There should be no change after the rules for monasteries. We are considering occupied spaces.
*
The barn and field connectivity (Exp. 5): - A barn can be placed on any tile intersection where the for corners are occupied (by square tiles, haflings or a double-sized tile) as per the clarification from 10/2015. Is this still valid. I would say yes for the sake of simplicity and common sense.
- Depending how triangular gas are considered for field connectivity, barns can have different effects on field continuity. Example: Here you may consider an intersection with two separate fields. If you place a barn there, does it connect the fields or should be consider the barn is placed in two fields at the same time?
My suggestion in WICA was that the barn should connect the fields since the rules always assume a barn is placed in one field... This requires a clarification for sure.
*
Bridges (Exp. 8 ) and halflings: There is an issue with bridges and halflings: If the road connected to the bridge loops back and passes under the same bridge, the road underneath would count as two tiles and the one passing over the bridge should have the same number of tiles too. In a tile-oriented approach, the bridge should count as 2 tiles but in a grid-oriented tile, it should count as one tile? This also affects the position of a meeple on the bridge. We certainly need a clarification for this... And this affects how roads and cities are scored too.
Maybe tiles should not be allowed across halflings...
*
Little buildings (Little Buildings): - In a tile-oriented approach little buildings affect only the tile they are on. This would make sense with halflings and double-sized iles.
- If for some reason we turn back to a grid-oriented approach, little buildings would affect a whole square (thinking of halflings) in the same way as hills. Would would happen in this case with double-sized tiles?
So just a few ideas...
EDIT: Added the fairy.