[Official] 1635 rules and cards

[Nutzoide]

One thing to keep in mind is that as the game evolves new abilities/keywords are likely to be introduced. So it's important to make sure that terms chosen today are not too likely to interfere with future translations.

Haha, very true. I hadn't thought of that. But then, my latter examples were more for the sake of thematic amusement than rules clarity to begin with.

I would still go with some variation of "continuous" rather than "residual" though, just so there is less room for odd interpretations. I just chose "Perpetual" because it sounds nicer (and a bit more thematic) to me. But "Residual" works okay, especially since it is a close translation, I guess. Or if you want something closer to "Remnant" you could use a word as simple as "Remaining" for absolute clarity. Unless someone would then expect the spell to 'remain' after the lemure dies, but that would be stretching the boundaries of interpretation a little!

As for "dissipé", that's trickier, since "Dissipating" in English implies a slow disappearance rather than the instant removal of something. Again, the most simple would just be "Disappearing", but that's specific to the lemure and not the spell. Then again, isn't that what the French also refers to? (My French is all but non-existant by the way, so I'm also not the best person to be answering I guess!) If you wanted something more thematic, I'd be looking at more variations on comparing the lemure/spell to a bullet since that is easy to understand, hence something like "Triggered". You trigger the spell whichever way it requires, and it goes off right then and there, and not before. But then you're getting away from the original French, as you mentioned.

Maybe simple is best, so Remaining and Disappearing? And for more flavour it isn't a big step from them to Residual and Vanishing, which is what Darth-Swen originally proposed! (Though as a side note Vanishing sounds a lot more natural as a rules keyword than Vanished)

My reason for preferring something else over "Remnant" would be that most native English speakers will immediately understand something like Residual or Continuous, while they might have to assume that Remnant means "remaining" in the rules. They would be right, but they wouldn't have to flip through the rulebook to double check! In colloquial usage the English word Remnant means "The little or few that remains" or "The surviving trace", so that would not be an intuitive description of what the lemure or spell is. Unless that's identical to the French, in which case use it since it's supposed to be unintuitive for the sake of flavour.

For some reason I kept thinking of Remnants as some sort of undead minions for some reason while writing most of that! And that was a lot more than I intended to write, so sorry for muddying the water with excess wordage. 

[AndrewGPaul]

That's one reason I suggested "remains in play" and "destroys" - it's fairly straightforward as to what the effect is.

[AndrewGPaul]

Can you explain what the "initial total of Command Points" is? Is this just for calculating Domination at the beginning of the game, or what? If I have a Saracen army of 200 points, with 70 points of Mercenaries and the  Saracen Officer and Independents add 6 Command, and a Mercenary adds 2 CMD, these rules seem to imply that I don't count the Mercenary's 2 CMD, and reduce the Saracen total by 1, for a total of 6 CMD. Does this apply throughout the game? Seems a little harsh.

3.4. Mixing rules
- If every single model in a company belong to the same faction as the company Officer, the
initial total of Command points is increased by 1. In addition, the Officer is able to be activated
in reaction as if he benefited from the Accelerated state (but without the +2 MOV bonus).
- If the total cost of models belonging to another faction than the faction of the company's
Officer is equal to or less than 35AP, nothing happens.
- If the total cost of models belonging to another faction than the faction of the company's
Officer is between 36AP and 50AP, these models are not included in the initial total of
Command points (they are considered to have CMD 0 for this purpose).
- If the total cost of models belonging to another faction than the faction of the company's
Officer is more than 50AP, these models are not included in the initial total of Command points
(they are considered to have CMD 0 for this purpose). In addition, for each model not belong
to the faction of the Officer, the player removes 1 to the initial total of Command points.

[Darth-Swen]

Can you explain what the "initial total of Command Points" is? Is this just for calculating Domination at the beginning of the game, or what? If I have a Saracen army of 200 points, with 70 points of Mercenaries and the  Saracen Officer and Independents add 6 Command, and a Mercenary adds 2 CMD, these rules seem to imply that I don't count the Mercenary's 2 CMD, and reduce the Saracen total by 1, for a total of 6 CMD. Does this apply throughout the game? Seems a little harsh.

The initial total of Command points is the number of CMD points you start the game with. (Called " basic Command score" into the english rules - page 25 of the pdf document)

In your exemple you will start the game with only 5 CMD points (6-1 from the saracen units and none from the mercenaries)

From my point of view it is a good way to discourage the metagaming so popular in tournaments... It also helps to give a real iddentity to the factions...

[AndrewGPaul]

So that reduced Command score applies to my Total Command Points for the entire game? Just as well I didn't buy many mercenaries, I suppose.

[Darth-Swen]

So that reduced Command score applies to my Total Command Points for the entire game?

Yes indeed

[Night Hunter]

Do these mixed totals rules apply to Mercenary groups using Prestige to bring in other factions to a Merc Company?
Lots of reasons to run a "pure" company now, but seems a bit against the Mercs philosophy of taking from others.....

[AndrewGPaul]

One other thing; there's a bit of confusion, at least in my mind, as to what 1634 vs 1635 means.

For the Voyager, the difference between the 1634 and 1635 editions is that the character has matured, in-story (through the events of the Chronicles of Zaebas campaign?), and has gone from a lone fighter to a leader of men. The 1635 stats don't mean that retroactively she's always been an Officer.

However, looking at these rules amendments, it seems like these are errata, not changes due to story progression. the "1635" changes look to be intended to be applied retroactively - Prince Tarik has always had the Elusive ability, and has always been immune to his eagle's Aura of Distraction - it's not something he's recently learned.

Is this the case? Am I babbling nonsense again?

I'm thinking in the case of the Chronicles of Zaebas campaign, for instance. It seems like it should be appropriatye to play through that using the 1634 Voyager, until such point as she 'matures' into the 1635 version. However,it looks like I should use 1635 versions of the other troop types all the time. Correct? No?

[lapiaz]

The first version of the voyager  was an independent  not an officer . and Tarik was indeed  affected by the aura of distraction. ..
 making the voyager an officer  was  ,I think, a necesity  as she was quite powerfull as an independent . Tarik on the other hand   has now another trick  when  fighting  officer and  strong independents .  and also make you worry less to were to place the bloody  eagle to get the benefit ....

[Lemminkäinen]

A couple of things missed:

Sha Ren Zhe lost Penetrating Strike 2

Charon's orders changed into Passive and Active (this is rather huge)

[mathieu]

At this point, the problem I have is that some of the things I missed are actually things that got modified again in the final cards. And we won't get a set of nifty 'temporary' 1635 cards until the actual official ones are available for download.

I fixed the mistakes for the sake of sticking to the information currently available, but be aware that some of these changes will change again fairly shortly.

[Lemminkäinen]

At this point, the problem I have is that some of the things I missed are actually things that got modified again in the final cards. And we won't get a set of nifty 'temporary' 1635 cards until the actual official ones are available for download.

I fixed the mistakes for the sake of sticking to the information currently available, but be aware that some of these changes will change again fairly shortly.

Ah, okay. Thank you for the heads up!

I will be very disappointed if Charon's orders turn into exhaustive ones again.

[Darth-Swen]

I will be very disappointed if Charon's orders turn into exhaustive ones again

You won't... This order will remain Active 

[themailedfist]

So...for those of us lazy and such, when are we getting actual finished and pretty English PDFs for the 1635 changes?

--Robert

[Darth-Swen]

Some guys are proofreading the translation I producted with Mathieu great support.

When it will be finalised Asmodee should use it to manufacture proper solid cards.

Will keep you in touch for details.