1
Official Rules / The Tower - Prisoner's Ransom
« on: November 09, 2020, 01:29:39 AM »
Hi,
I have this doubt about how paying the ransom works with towers: does the player holding the prisoner have to accept it?
On one hand, if you have captured, it makes sense to retain for as long as you want (or until the other player captures one of your followers), and reducing the follower's available amount can give an advantage that is more noticeable than a 6-point difference.
But what confuses me is the rules' phrasing (I have also checked clarifiations on WikiCarpedia): it is clear that the follower exchange is mandatory, and clarifications say that there cannot be negotiation. I understand that, what I dont get is if accepting the ransom is mandatory. While the exchange is stated to be immediate, the ransom is not, so it suggests (at least what I first thought) that you can reject it. However, the rules dont really tell that you can do that, in either case, it would be indicated by omission, which I find confusing: either accepting is not mandatory, because they did not say that is mandatory; or you do have to accept it, because there is no "legal framework" that allows for rejection.
In any case, if you want to tell your house ruling and interpretations, Id like to hear those too (I think we all come to the Carcassonne forum for hearing about Carcassonne, after all ).
I have this doubt about how paying the ransom works with towers: does the player holding the prisoner have to accept it?
On one hand, if you have captured, it makes sense to retain for as long as you want (or until the other player captures one of your followers), and reducing the follower's available amount can give an advantage that is more noticeable than a 6-point difference.
But what confuses me is the rules' phrasing (I have also checked clarifiations on WikiCarpedia): it is clear that the follower exchange is mandatory, and clarifications say that there cannot be negotiation. I understand that, what I dont get is if accepting the ransom is mandatory. While the exchange is stated to be immediate, the ransom is not, so it suggests (at least what I first thought) that you can reject it. However, the rules dont really tell that you can do that, in either case, it would be indicated by omission, which I find confusing: either accepting is not mandatory, because they did not say that is mandatory; or you do have to accept it, because there is no "legal framework" that allows for rejection.
In any case, if you want to tell your house ruling and interpretations, Id like to hear those too (I think we all come to the Carcassonne forum for hearing about Carcassonne, after all ).