Messages

3676

Official Rules / Re: Abbey Questions

« on: July 13, 2020, 03:50:40 PM »

Hi rbanks88,

Welcome to the forum. Hope you enjoy its contents and all the info available.

I just wanted to add some more info to the previous responses. I know for sure sometimes findind an answer online is a bit tough if you don't use the right words that may have been used in the answer.

So here we go...

1. Does an abbey separate parts of a city?
If an abbey is placed in an incomplete city, so that it separates a player's builder from the rest of the city, when that player adds a tile to that separated part of the city, does he/she get to draw a second tile?

Or is the builder isolated? Does an abbey separate features so that it could split one city into two cities, with different "winners" in each when the cities are completed?

2. If you place an abbey in a city and put a meeple on it, does that meeple count in determining who wins the city when it's completed?

Thanks,
Russell

P.S. I imagine these questions have been already asked and answered, but I tried searching for these topics and gave up after 20 minutes. We need a search that would find two words within 5 or 10 words of each other!

Not sure how scenario 1 could happen.

The abbey completes features it is adjacent to.

The builder could only have been placed onto a city tile connected to another city tile. So even if the abbey was placed into a suitable gap in a city the builder and the knight was still share at least one city edge and would still be in the same city (so could not have been separated from the knight)

For question two the answer is no. A meeple placed in a abbey is a monk and the abbey is scored as a monastery. (ie. it is not in the city)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally agree... 

The scenario described in question #1 cannot happen. Check the following image a an abbey placed in the middle of a city (I took it from the Advent Calendar Quiz MMXIX, question #16).



The abbey tile fills the gap and completes 4 separate cities, two of which are occupied and will be scored by (a 5-tile city with a coat of arms and a cathedral)  and (a 1-tile city). The abbey is a different feature than the city so it is not scored as part of it. As you can see the abbey is a separate feature from the cities and is still incomplete, so won't score points.

Getting back to your scenario, the city occupied by in the image is the only one where a builder could have been place (in this case by  ). The placement of the abbey would not be able to separate the knight and the builder, following what Snowmax said.

http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Abbey_and_the_Mayor#Footnotes

The previous link provided by Carcassonne93 contains several clarifications. Please check clarification #7, that reads:

"Abbeys can close cities and roads but they are not part of the feature itself. Bear this in mind when scoring cities completed by abbeys and also when scoring fields."

This would also help response question #2. Abbeys are separate feature, so as Snowmax indicated, the answer would be no.

Additionally, check this other clarification here about abbeys and builder that may be of interest:

"If a player completes a feature with an abbey tile and his or her builder is on the feature, the feature does not get “extended” by the abbey (as the abbey is a separate feature), so the player does not get another tile (i.e. no double turn)."

3677

The Marketplace / Re: WTS multiple C1 & C2 expansions, mini-expansions, meeple sets

« on: July 13, 2020, 06:46:35 AM »

At least, the scoreboard seems to be BB5...

3678

JCloisterZone FAQ, Suggestions & Bug Reports / Re: Problem with online games

« on: July 13, 2020, 06:02:17 AM »

It happened to me twice last Friday. It was my turn and after the glitch I could continue after the reconnection. I had never failed before until that day. We had a third reconnection without major issues.

Workaround we used: I saved the game, then I reloaded the game as a local game and continued the game qhile sharing my screen over Skype.

The only glitch we notoced is that players swapped color and names: the first player was playing purple and the second green. After realing the game, the first player was green with Purple's name and scoring, and the second player was purple with Green's name and scoring.

3679

News and Events / Re: Cundco news: Teachers in 13 different colours!

« on: July 12, 2020, 11:11:52 AM »

You may find beige (light brown) here:

https://www.spielematerial.de/en/games/carcassonne/transparent-meeples.html

It seems brown and grey are sold out. 

3680

News and Events / Re: New official Carcassonne Hunters and Gatherers (2020)

« on: July 12, 2020, 08:04:23 AM »

Vanilla tiles are always welcome! 

3681

Official Rules / Re: Question about Bogatyr tile (Russian Promo)

« on: July 12, 2020, 12:50:18 AM »

Does the stone work to end one of the 4 roads? Or all 4? Or none?

Only one.

The rules for this tile indicate the following:

This tile contains 2 distinct roads. One road is a continuous road with 3 branches and no junctions. The other road terminates in a junction at the stone. This tile contains 4 field segments.

For more info on this tile, you can visit this page:
http://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Russian_Promos_(1st_edition)#The_Choice_of_Bogatyr

3682

News and Events / Re: New official Carcassonne Hunters and Gatherers (2020)

« on: July 11, 2020, 01:03:25 PM »

Some members of CarcF are very fond of the Winter Edition and created tons of fan conversions of C1 expansions back in the day... Mostly for the Download Version if I remember correctly. 

3683

News and Events / Re: New official Carcassonne Hunters and Gatherers (2020)

« on: July 11, 2020, 11:32:51 AM »

Maybe they add the equivalent mechanism to the abbot in the shape of a witch doctor or a chaman. Who knows?

3684

Official Rules / Re: Question about Bogatyr tile (Russian Promo)

« on: July 11, 2020, 11:26:05 AM »

My guts tell me the wagon shouldn't have any problem in moving (around?) to the other side of the stone. But it is not for me to tell. You saw you could argue in favor or against the Solovei Razboynik's tree splitting the road.

3685

Official Rules / Re: Moving the wagon in C1 and C2...

« on: July 11, 2020, 11:06:28 AM »

In the topics from 2017 you can find a discussion about whether the original intent was misinterpreted but Kettlefish insisted on the fact the C2 rules have actually been changed as per her conversations with HiG.

3686

Official Rules / Re: Question about Bogatyr tile (Russian Promo)

« on: July 11, 2020, 11:03:39 AM »

Ha ha ha! I already asked Murphy013 for help 

3687

Official Rules / Re: Russian Solovei Razboynik (Tree) question.

« on: July 11, 2020, 09:41:31 AM »

Yes that is right. I personally don't like C2 wagon rules at all. I get that they are easier to understand, but it can severely hinder wagon's reach and thematically it doesn't make as much sense.

I also like the C1 rules better, but all the limitations about new features ending a road a wagon could not cross were a bit awkward... Why could't a wagon cross a fair (Exp. 7) or an bazaar (Exp. or a circus/acrobat space (Ex. 10) or...?

Here you can find a topic I created covering the C1 rules and a FAQ from 2014 that contradicts partially the clarifications provided in 2013 

http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=4725.0

3688

Official Rules / Moving the wagon in C1 and C2...

« on: July 11, 2020, 09:39:27 AM »

If you come from the classical edition (C1 for short), you may probably know that the new edition (C2 for short) modified the rules for the wagon.

The C1 rules indicated that the wagon could move from a completed feature to an adjacent one but didn't specify what "adjacent" meant for them.

The definition of "adjacent" was painstakingly clarified by Kettlefish through a number of conversations with Hig back in 2013, that can be found here:

http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=214.0

Here you can find a summary of the clarified rules for C1 (link to WICA):
* Adjacency: The wagon could only move to an unoccupied, incomplete feature connected by a road or sharing a surface/edge/wall:
  o Cases allowed:
    - Road to road through a crossing
    - Road to any claimable feature and vice versa: city (through a gate), monastery (or equivalent feature such as an abbey), etc.
    - A city to an adjacent abbey and vice versa
    - A city to a monastery within and vice versa
  o Cases not allowed:
    - Two cities with touching walls or tips on the same or on different tiles.
    - Two cities connected by "small roads" where meeples cannot be placed.
    - Two cities crossing via bridges but no connected via roads.
    - Two roads separated by a feature (any area on a tile that can be claimed by a meeple or that triggers a function)
    - A road touching a city wall with no gate
    - A road running through a city via a tunnel or passing over via a bridge
* Placement: the wagon could be placed on any tile of the chosen unoccupied, incomplete feature.

Because of these limitations HiG decided to change the definition of "adjacent" for the wagon in C2, so now the wagon can move to any unoccupied incomplete feature on the same tile or an adjacent one.

So the thematic coherence that wagons followed roads to move from feature to feature is gone in C2. It was cool in my opinion and the addition of those many limitations is disconnected packets of information made them difficult to trace.

This said, a few days ago, I was revisiting the archived HiG pages in web.archive.org and came across this Exp. 5 FAQ archived between 2014 and 2017...

http://web.archive.org/web/20170728123659/http://www.hans-im-glueck.de/carcassonne/erweiterungen/abtei-und-buergermeister/

Wohin darf der Wagen?/ Was ist ein angrenzendes Gebiet?

Der Wagen darf in ein angrenzendes Gebiet.
Ein angrenzendes Gebiet ist ein Gebiet (Straße, Stadt, Kloster) welches visuell an ein anderes Gebiet angrenzt.
Dies beinhaltet unter anderem Straßen, die Stadtmauern berühren, Brücken, die andere Gebiete überlagern und Städte, deren Stadtmauern sich berühren.

...that means the following in English...

Where can the wagon go?/ What is an adjacent area?

The wagon is allowed to move to an adjacent feature.
An adjacent feature is a feature (road, city, cloister/monastery) which is visually adjacent to another feature.
This includes, but is not limited to, roads that touch city walls, bridges that span over other features areas and cities whose walls touch each other.

Look at the parts in red. What the heck...?!? What happened here? Are the automatic translators I'm using failing miserably?

This seems a tweaked version of the C1 clarifications in 2014. Some points get closer to C2: They allow you to jump between cities touching their walls or between features overlapping due to a bridge... Was this the original intent by HiG? Is this an afterthought?

After this finding, I happened to stumble upon a couple of posts in threads from 2017 mentioning this same FAQ but the discussion focused on other aspects of the rules changes, therefore omitting the red part and its implications for C1...

* CarcF (2/2017): https://www.carcassonne-forum.de/viewtopic.php?f=292&t=3662#p46509

* CarcC (5/2017): http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=3321.msg49363#msg49363

Any thoughts?

3689

Official Rules / Re: Controversial Interactions #02 - Castles and fairies

« on: July 11, 2020, 03:09:06 AM »

This is a interesting interaction! It’s a tough scenario because there are arguments either way. I’d look at each of the three fairy’s benefits in turn

He he he! 

For the purpose of the bonus 1 point or the bonus 3, it makes no difference which of 4a or 4b you use does it not? Am I correct in saying that, even though the fairy protects other meeple on a tile, the bonus points are only scored by the meeple it is “assigned” to? (With the exception of the bonus 1!point for acrobats?). So whether or not it is moved is irrelevant here.

There is a slight difference between 4a and 4b in this regard as I commented earlier:

The fairy would provide points to the meeple it is assigned to.

The previous two options work differently in this case:
4a. If the fairy stays on the tile, it would be "detached" from the the meeple in the castle, so no bonus points for the meeple.
4b. If the fairy moves along with the meeple into the castle, the meeple would get the bonus points as usual when scoring the castle.

EDIT: Added explicit reference to the given example.

So, if the fairy stays on the tile, the assignment is released and  will not receive any fairy bonus points unless the fairy is re-assigned to the meeple and moved to the castle.

Protection from the dragon is where it gets interesting I suppose... the meeple in the castle is already protected from the dragon by dint of it being in the castle. However does the fairy being “in” the castle prevent the dragon from entering either of the two tiles involved? (E.g. to protect a phantom or wagon or other figure placed on another feature by portal or flier). Thematically I suppose the answer to this would be no. (The fairy is assigned to the follower, who then becomes a lord/ lady and it follow them there. The dragon cannot penetrate the castle walls but equally the fairy’s magic cannot either?).

The protection works as follows:
* 4a. The fairy would protect the tile where it stays from the dragon except the castle portion. The castle is protected by itself, since it is not located on a particular tile.
* 4b. The fairy protection is removed from the tile. Both tiles overlapped by the castle are unprotected from the dragon. The protected are is now limited to the castle, where it is actually not needed, as the castle it protected from the dragon by definition.

I’d lean towards the fairy moving with the lord in the scenario you describe as that’s where it would be if you’d assigned the fairy after placing your castle?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good! Didn't you participate in the poll?

3690

Official Rules / Re: Controversial Interactions #02 - Castles and fairies

« on: July 11, 2020, 12:09:16 AM »

If the fairy is placed in a castle, it does not protect any tiles (the fairy is not an any particular tile at this point). The castle needs no protection from the dragon either.

The fairy would provide points to the meeple it is assigned to.

The previous two options work differently in this case:
4a. If the fairy stays on the tile, it would be "detached" from the the meeple in the castle, so no bonus points for the meeple.
4b. If the fairy moves along with the meeple into the castle, the meeple would get the bonus points as usual when scoring the castle.

EDIT: Added explicit reference to the given example.