Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 22:43:31 -0800 From: Moloch To: mammon@iago.net, belial@thepentagon.com Subject: The Log of Belial & Moloch plotting WAR! [Here is the log the discussion between the High Commanders of the war effort. In sum, there are three battlefields with the following setup and modifications: Battlefield #1: Mammon, Thamus, & Asmaveth + 3000 troops (+1 adv.) vs. Beelzebub & Mulciber + 3000 troop (no adv.) Battlefield #2: Behemoth, Ysadar, Slagg, & Falsadun + 3500 troop (+2 adv.) vs. Samuel, Rael, & Voln + 3000 (no adv.) Battlefield #3: Baal, Penumue, & Fenris + 2500 troops (+2 adv.) vs. Vetis & Raum + 1500 (+1 Highland's adv.) We still both have 2 gambits which we can allocate to our troops. Otherwise, I think we are read to go. :) ] THE LOG: >From afar, Belial takes a moment to catch up on +mail and +bb and then we can chat and then I want to go eat the lasagna I made for dinner. :) Long distance to Belial: Moloch grins. Well, since we're both the high commanders, I think I should share some scuttlbutt I got from Fate. This is basically seen from the wiz angle as a practice war and a plot device, and I'm pretty sure Lucifer is going to act at some point to prevent too much chaos. So in the end, there won't be any decisive winners. I don't normally share gossip, but I thought you of all people have a 'right' to know. :) >From afar, Belial nodnods, and had gotten hints that something like that might happen. You paged Belial with 'So we can just concentrate on the blood and guts and not have to worry about the consequences of winning or losing. Woo hoo. :)'. Belial pages: Anyway, what set of stuff do we need to resolve tonight? (*grin* Yes, well.) Belial pages: And can you log convo and email to Mammon? It's not convenient for me to do so from here, though I can if I have to. You paged Belial with 'Basically... we can determine how many battlefields we're going to have.. and who is going to be where. And who is going to have gambit opportunities. We can also do our global gambits if we want. :)'. You paged Belial with 'Sure, I'll figure how to do it. :)'. >From afar, Belial nods. 'Kay. Lemme bring up the current update to the page. Long distance to Belial: Moloch doesn't know about the peoples in the {[}'s. They haven't given their yey or neigh. >From afar, Belial hmms. Belial pages: Should we assume that they're in and work from there? Long distance to Belial: Moloch hmms. I don't think Mephistopheles has ever really been a contender for this RP, though I think Mulciber might be. How's this. Let's say that Mulciber is in it and Meph is not for the now? >From afar, Belial nods. 'Kay. What about Thamuz? (Mammon's ambassador.) Long distance to Belial: Moloch hmms. No clue. But he's only a knight. Want to let Mammon decide if he is in or not and which battlefield he's on (providing the choice doe not create a knight imbalance)? >From afar, Belial nods. Fine with that. Belial pages: So it looks like we have three battlefields: Mammon, Baal and Behemoth on your side, Vetis, Samael and Beelz+Mulciber on my side (not necessarily in that order). You paged Belial with 'We'll have to do a SGY test to see if you can get Mulciber to join up with Beelzebub or whether he stuck in an uncontested battlefield for a half-victory.'. You paged Belial with 'But you get decide which Dukes get Baal and Behemoth.'. >From afar, Belial hmms. Why? Or is that an 'opposed placement' by the rules? Long distance to Belial: Moloch thinks it falls under an opposed placement. >From afar, Belial checks the rules, and thinks you're right. Belial pages: Second bullet under 'macro/strategy phase'. Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. Yup. That is it. Belial pages: And given that I haven't had a chance to talk to Geryon ICly, I won't commit quite as many troops as I'd like. I've got 4500 committed - a little thin elsewhere, but only a little. Beelz is bringing in his 3000, I assume. >From afar, Belial will work on those assumptions. Mammon has 3000, and I assume you're bringing in at least 3000? Belial pages: So, three battlefields: Mammon-Beelz at Kerr'epytha, Baal-Samael in the Heart of Urdurgh (that is where you're sending Baal, right?), and Behemoth-Vetis in the Highlands. Long distance to Belial: Moloch shakes his head. While I have not been able to drag Geryon in to this, I have been able to secure my border with him. And Gehenna has never been an invasion threat. Moloch began this all before he was able to talk with Baal, so he is bringing in about 6000 to add to Mammon's 3000 for a total of about 9000. Unless something goes heavily awary, however, I do not see any 'overwhelming' forces advantages. >From afar, Belial sighs. I haven't seen Geryon on or gotten him to respond to +mail since the start of this. Belial pages: And I can't justify matching you (which is what I wanted to do) ICly without having at least talked to Geryon. >From afar, Belial notes that with an extra 500 per battlefield you can pick up an advantage of numbers on all three. You paged Belial with 'No again. Mammon's idea. Not really mine. (Jumping ahead... my gambit will be to make you think I'm attacking your innerlands. To confuse you from where I'm coming). For now, I'd like to keep things pretty much consolidated for abstract purposes. We can fill in the terrain and locations to match the gambits played.'. You paged Belial with 'I will? I thought the numbers had to be overwhelming... let me read it real quick.'. Belial pages: It just says 'unbalanced'. You paged Belial with 'How about this, I'll only make 2 of the battlefields thus unbalanced. And one of them can be in the Highlands so that the natural negative modifier is mooted to an even battle?'. >From afar, Belial hmms and notes that while Leadership can be used in certain ways in gambits, strategy is actually a stronger skill in a couple of ways the way the rules are written. :) Long distance to Belial: Moloch nodnods. >From afar, Belial ponders. Do you think it likely that Belial would have been able to similarly secure his borders with Geryon had I actually been able to find him online? Long distance to Belial: Moloch thinks if Geryon was online, he would currently be engaged in the war against you. ;) >From afar, Belial doubts it. :) >From afar, Belial has things to offer that would have given him more than he could get by going against me. Belial pages: But ah well. Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. You paged Belial with 'Who really knows? All I hope is that his son heals up.'. >From afar, Belial nods and will let you distribute your troops as you see fit. Belial cannot ICly justify spreading himself much thinner than committing 4500 IMHO, so he gets to pay the price for that. And yeah, 'bout his son. Belial pages: Anyway. I need to do a WAR+SGY test to place Mulciber with Beelz, unless that's where you want him anyway. You don't get to put him in his own battlefield the way I read the rules - you just get to pick which battlefield he's at. Long distance to Belial: Moloch won't give any of my troops to Mammon's command. That makes sense... and it keep Beelz and Mammon's fight basically even. You paged Belial with 'You're right. Hmm. Let me think.'. You paged Belial with 'Who do you want to place against Baal and Behemoth?'. >From afar, Belial wants to put Samael in the Heart of Urdugh and Vetis in the highlands, because it's the only thing that makes sense ICly. I prefer having Samael vs. Baal, mostly because while Vetis is in he's still just getting up to speed and I'd rather have Samael for the Duke-Duke conflict. Long distance to Belial: Moloch is allocating the war with Belial. >From afar, Belial assumes that was a mav? Long distance to Belial: Moloch hows this. Irrespective of location (I haven't decided the RP backdrop that I'll push for... I don't like isolating my armies in the heart of your territories)...Baal/Samuel and Behemoth/Vetis is fine with me. >From afar, Belial nodnods. 'Kay. You paged Belial with 'And yup, Mulciber can go with his boss against Mammon.'. >From afar, Belial nods. 'Kay, and Belial won't put troops there either, so Beelz vs Mammon is an even match in troops. Now, the other two. Because you're doing some amount of feint-and-thrust in any case, it feels like a test (non-gambit) to determine how much I know about your thrusts so that I can distribute my troops accordingly? Belial pages: And then we have the gambit tests themselves. Belial pages: Are you considering going for a gambit of Significance, or are you shooting for an overall gambit? (Potentially part of that first test I mentioned, btw, as to whether I know that.) You paged Belial with 'How about we both distribute our forces equally among the battlefields? And I'm not going for a gambit of significance. Hmm. Total, we each have 3 gambits to use. So if we do gambits, one commander each will not have one.'. >From afar, Belial is going to try for an overall gambit. And would split up forces somewhat unbalanced to try to only give you a numbers advantage in one battlefield. Willing to +test on that one, as he might fuck it up ICly, but that's what he would try for. You paged Belial with 'Ok. Go for a SGY test. You win, you get to know my distributions in advance. I win, I get to know your distribution in advance. We'll confine this just to our two battlefields for now. (Though I am kinda reluctant, I think this would fall under a gambit?)'. You paged Belial with 'Meaning... your gambit would be to know my placements ahead of time thus to give all your forces a +1?'. Belial pages: This is not a gambit. Gambits are just for +1/-1 advantage/disadvantage. This is a 'know what your opponent is doing during division of troops to the battlefield' thing. Mammon can look at the log of the convo later and disagree with me. >From afar, Belial is not trying for a gambit. He's trying to distribute troops to give you advantage of numbers on only one battlefield rather than two. It's not covered well in the rules (hint hint, Mammon) but a WAR+SGY test makes the most sense to me...Make more sense now? You paged Belial with 'OK. Works fo me.'. Belial tests his Warfare and Strategy against you. To counter, type '+test Belial=' or '+test Belial=+'. Use the three-letter codes. Belial tests his Warfare and Strategy against Moloch, who counters with his Warfare and Strategy. Belial has slight chance of losing this test. Belial pages: 'Kay, so you win this round and I have to go on nothing. :0 Belial pages: He'll gamble that you're splitting half-and-half and put 3000 with Vetis and 1500 with Samael. You paged Belial with 'Since I won the test, I get to know this, right?'. Belial pages: Yes, you get to know this in time to distribute knowing that, since I pushed. :) Belial pages: So you can do, say, 3500 at Vetis and 2500 at Samael and get advantage of numbers on both fields. Or whatever. You paged Belial with 'That works with me. We'll phrase it that since you knew Vetis was going against only a Count, you were expecting a smaller army. But my spies learned of this and turned the tables on ya.'. >From afar, Belial nods. Something like that. Belial pages: 'Kay, so...gambits. Belial will do an overall LDR gambit, whipping the troops into a frenzy over it all, of course. Up to you if you want to do yours or leave them all for your battlefield commanders. You paged Belial with 'OK. Sum up this far. Beel/Mulc (3000) vs Mammon (3000), Samuel (1500) vs. Baal (2500), & Vetis (3000) vs. Behemoth (3500). Before we do gambits, want to allocate Knights?'. >From afar, Belial nods. Sure. >From afar, Belial nods and agrees. Belial pages: Valefor goes with Beelz, Raum goes with Samael, Rael and Voln go with Vetis, on my side, which goes with the uneven troops as well. You paged Belial with 'Fine with me. My side. Azmaveth & Thamuz with Mammon. Penemue & Fenris with Baal. Ysadar, Slagg, & Falsadun with Behemoth. How's that?'. Belial pages: Makes sense. You paged Belial with 'OK. You want to do your Leadership gambit, now?'. Belial pages: So: Mammon, Azmaveth, Thamus vs. Beelz, Mulciber. Baal, Penemue, Fenris vs. Samael, Raum. Behemoth, Ysadar, Slagg vs. Vetis, Rael, Voln. Right? You paged Belial with 'Falsadun with Behemoth, too.'. Belial tests his Warfare and Leadership against you. To counter, type '+test Belial=' or '+test Belial=+'. Use the three-letter codes. >From afar, Belial nods. Long distance to Belial: Moloch replies with strategic propoganda.. Belial tests his Warfare and Leadership against Moloch, who counters with his Warfare and Strategy. Belial has an even chance of winning or losing this test. You paged Belial with 'OK. Nada there.'. Belial pages: And, nothing happens. Sigh. Belial pages: Are you going to do one? Belial pages: Or are you going to leave them for your commanders? You paged Belial with 'OK. My huge gambit. I make to look like I am going to attack throughou Urdurgh such as in its innards and the highlands and to your city in Urdurgh all at the same time, but then I move early and we all push from the southeast. If you win, you find out about it and communication all goes to hell.'. You paged Belial with ''s ok?'. Belial pages: I take it I have to defend this one with SGY? Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. You paged Belial with 'Pure SGY.'. Belial pages: And makes sense. Though I want to talk to Mammon about being able to force a defense with SGY. :) It looks like a hole in the system to me. :) Belial pages: Shoot. Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. It might be. But that is what this war is for... to test it and find its balances and imbalances. :) You test your Warfare and Strategy against Belial. Wait for Belial to counter. Moloch tests his Warfare and Strategy against Belial, who counters with his Warfare and Strategy. Moloch has slight chance of winning this test. Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. The random chance seems to be too small in this. >From afar, Belial assumes your WAR is Imposing? My SGY is Jman, yours is Master, no? Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. Yup. Belial pages: That gives you a pretty good chance at beating me, random chance or no. Belial pages: Anything else we need to determine tonight? You paged Belial with 'So in the end, +2 for Behemoth/Vetis and +2 for Baal/Samuel and +1 for Mammon/Beelz'. >From afar, Belial nods, and I have a +1 for Behemoth/Vetis. And we each have two battlefield-level gambits our commanders can choose to use. Long distance to Belial: Moloch isn't having Behemoth attack in the Highlands. Hmm. You paged Belial with 'There may be needing some balancing anyway. So let us do it anyway.'. Belial pages: It's what makes the most sense ICly, anyway. Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. Very true. You paged Belial with 'So I'll log this and edit it and send it to Mammon. Work with you?'. >From afar, Belial nodnods. Works with me. You paged Belial with 'However...'. >From afar, Belial ? >From afar, Belial ohs, please cc me on the log. Long distance to Belial: Moloch has never said if Behemoth or Baal was attacking the Highlands. Belial pages: That's true. Vetis is in the Highlands, though - I'm willing to trade the two on your side if you really want that, though. Belial pages: Because Vetis would not be anywhere but in the highlands, ICly. You paged Belial with 'OK. So switch Vetis and Samuel and keep everyone else the same?'. You paged Belial with 'Wait, wait...'. >From afar, Belial ? Belial pages: Now what? >From afar, Belial grins. You paged Belial with 'Nevermind. I got confused... so the final tally is...'. You paged Belial with '... Mammon, Thamus, and Asmaveth vs Mulciber & Beelz (3000 vs 3000).... Baal, Penemue, Fenris vs. Vetis, Raum (2500 vs 1500).... Behemoth, Ysadar, Slagg vs. Samuel, Rael, and Voln (3500 vs 3000)'. You paged Belial with '+1/0.... +1/0.... +2/0...'. Long distance to Belial: Moloch whews. Belial pages: (Well, Baal-Vetis is really +2/+1, but...) Long distance to Belial: Moloch reduces to make it sensible to implementing. Belial pages: Wrap it. Send it. CC me. :) You paged Belial with 'Email?'. Belial pages: belial@thepentagon.com You paged Belial with 'G'night. :)'. Belial pages: G'night. Long distance to Belial: Moloch eeks. >From afar, Belial ? You paged Belial with 'Do we need to apportion where our gambits are going? Hmm. That isn't testable, so I dunno.'. >From afar, Belial thinks we and our battlefield commanders have to decide where we want them between us. Long distance to Belial: Moloch thinks that makes sense... and it gives us some RP! :) You paged Belial with 'Perhaps.'. From iago@iago.net Mon Mar 8 12:47:54 1999 Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 12:28:38 -0500 From: Fred Hicks To: Moloch Cc: mammon@iago.net, belial@thepentagon.com Subject: Re: The Log of Belial & Moloch plotting WAR! On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Bert wrote: > > [Here is the log the discussion between the High Commanders of the war > effort. In sum, there are three battlefields with the following setup > and modifications: > > Battlefield #1: Mammon, Thamus, & Asmaveth + 3000 troops (+1 adv.) > vs. Beelzebub & Mulciber + 3000 troop (no adv.) > > Battlefield #2: Behemoth, Ysadar, Slagg, & Falsadun + 3500 troop (+2 > adv.) > vs. Samuel, Rael, & Voln + 3000 (no adv.) > > Battlefield #3: Baal, Penumue, & Fenris + 2500 troops (+2 adv.) > vs. Vetis & Raum + 1500 (+1 Highland's adv.) Aside from the incorrectly spelled names in some cases, this all looks fine. > Belial pages: It just says 'unbalanced'. When you're talking about 3000 vs 3500, that's a 6:7 ratio -- which seems big enough to be called unbalanced. 500 is a full 16% more forces than the other guy. > You paged Belial with 'How about this, I'll only make 2 of the > battlefields thus unbalanced. And one of them can be in the Highlands so > that the natural negative modifier is mooted to an even battle?'. > > >From afar, Belial hmms and notes that while Leadership can be used in > certain ways in gambits, strategy is actually a stronger skill in a > couple of ways the way the rules are written. :) Strategy is stronger at the gambit level, that's correct; note, however, that Strategy *cannot* be used at the *battlefield* level, while Leadership can. Leadership's relative weakness on the gambit level is countered, I believe, by the fact that it's applicable at all levels of a conflict. Strategy drops away completely, going to Tactics instead, on the battlefield. But the force of personality persists on all levels. > >From afar, Belial is going to try for an overall gambit. And would split > up forces somewhat unbalanced to try to only give you a numbers > advantage in one battlefield. Willing to +test on that one, as he might > fuck it up ICly, but that's what he would try for. > > You paged Belial with 'Ok. Go for a SGY test. You win, you get to know > my distributions in advance. I win, I get to know your distribution in > advance. We'll confine this just to our two battlefields for now. > (Though I am kinda reluctant, I think this would fall under a gambit?)'. > > >From afar, Belial is not trying for a gambit. He's trying to distribute > troops to give you advantage of numbers on only one battlefield rather > than two. It's not covered well in the rules (hint hint, Mammon) but a > WAR+SGY test makes the most sense to me...Make more sense now? > > You paged Belial with 'OK. Works fo me.'. This is a correct interpretation, I think. It shouldn't count as a gambit. > You paged Belial with 'OK. You want to do your Leadership gambit, now?'. > > Belial tests his Warfare and Leadership against you. To counter, > type '+test Belial=' or '+test > Belial=+'. Use the three-letter codes. > > Long distance to Belial: Moloch replies with strategic propoganda.. > > Belial tests his Warfare and Leadership against Moloch, who > counters with his Warfare and Strategy. Belial has an even chance of > winning or losing this test. This appears to have gone out correctly, though a case might be make-able that replying to a leadership gambit with propaganda is a test of LDR vs LDR, not LDR vs SGY. If you guys want to discuss and renegotiate this portion, log it and let me know after you do. :) Keep in mind SGY is an ability to see the overall picture and take actions to steer how it shapes up; LDR directly addresses how you influence the minds of men. Propaganda influences the minds of men, so it could step outside the SGY big picture and into LDR land. On the other hand, at least Belial didn't come out with a disadvantage from this. As I said, up to you guys. > Belial pages: Or are you going to leave them for your commanders? > > You paged Belial with 'OK. My huge gambit. I make to look like I am > going to attack throughou Urdurgh such as in its innards and the > highlands and to your city in Urdurgh all at the same time, but then I > move early and we all push from the southeast. If you win, you find out > about it and communication all goes to hell.'. > > You paged Belial with ''s ok?'. > > Belial pages: I take it I have to defend this one with SGY? > > Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. > > You paged Belial with 'Pure SGY.'. > > Belial pages: And makes sense. Though I want to talk to Mammon about > being able to force a defense with SGY. :) It looks like a hole in the > system to me. :) See my above comment about the scope of SGY. If you can come up with a counter to the elements of the SGY gambit Moloch proposes that is couched in 'minds of men' terms, then LDR could be a reasonable defence. I think, however, that the way Moloch is explaining this particular gambit, the only logical defence one can mount is SGY based. > Belial pages: Shoot. > > Long distance to Belial: Moloch nods. It might be. But that is what this > war is for... to test it and find its balances and imbalances. :) > > You test your Warfare and Strategy against Belial. Wait for Belial > to counter. > > Moloch tests his Warfare and Strategy against Belial, who counters > with his Warfare and Strategy. Moloch has slight chance of winning this > test. This looks fine. > You paged Belial with '... Mammon, Thamus, and Asmaveth vs Mulciber & > Beelz (3000 vs 3000).... Baal, Penemue, Fenris vs. Vetis, Raum (2500 vs > 1500).... Behemoth, Ysadar, Slagg vs. Samuel, Rael, and Voln (3500 vs > 3000)'. > > You paged Belial with '+1/0.... +1/0.... +2/0...'. Correct evaluations, all-around. > You paged Belial with 'Do we need to apportion where our gambits are > going? Hmm. That isn't testable, so I dunno.'. > > >From afar, Belial thinks we and our battlefield commanders have to > decide where we want them between us. True. Each side gets to decide what to do with the two gambits remaining to each sid... Hang on, let me think for a moment. There are two ways to interpret the rules. One, is to say that the High Command pair-off is a 'virtual battlefield' in the sense that each side gets one high command gambit... The other is to say that the High Command pair-off doesn't give you an extra gambit, and it's just the battlefield number which matters. I'm inclined to go with the first interpretation because it allows more people to play gambits, rather than slighting one battlefield by its commander not getting a gambit of his own. So, in that interpretation, not counting Semyaza, each side has 4 gambits. You each spent one tonight, which allows the head commander of each side of each battlefield one of his own prior to the battle commencing. Beelzebub is probably going to hit me with a Surprise gambit, as an FYI. Here's my interpretation in an IC sense of what you guys discussed tonight: *At this point IC*, the only things which have actually happened is the 'know distribution numbers' non-gambit and the 'whipping troops into a frenzy' gambit. Beelzebub's presence in the war isn't, yet, and Moloch is only beginning to make it look like he's going to attack in the heart of Urdurgh (his High Command gambit). The rest, including how the fields play out, is not something that people would ICly know just yet, though it is inevitable at this point due to the negotiations which you guys logged and sent to me. At the very least, there should still be no knowledge that Beelzebub is actually coming into the war, IC; Moloch has concerned himself with distributing his troops among the places he expects Belial to be apportioning his troops, and is leaving Mammon to fend for himself at Kerrepytha, basically-- makes perfect sense. So Beelzebub will be flying in out of the sun at that location, and we have what we have. If this interpretation seems completely wrong, let me know. :) I'll incorporate what I can onto the wardoc webpage soon. Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 10:36:20 -0800 From: Moloch To: iago@iago.net Cc: mammon@iago.net, belial@thepentagon.com Subject: Re: The Log of Belial & Moloch plotting WAR! > > > > You paged Belial with 'Do we need to apportion where our gambits are > > going? Hmm. That isn't testable, so I dunno.'. > > > > >From afar, Belial thinks we and our battlefield commanders have to > > decide where we want them between us. > > True. Each side gets to decide what to do with the two gambits > remaining to each sid... Hang on, let me think for a moment. > > There are two ways to interpret the rules. One, is to say that the > High Command pair-off is a 'virtual battlefield' in the sense that > each side gets one high command gambit... The other is to say that > the High Command pair-off doesn't give you an extra gambit, and it's > just the battlefield number which matters. > > I'm inclined to go with the first interpretation because it allows > more people to play gambits, rather than slighting one battlefield > by its commander not getting a gambit of his own. > > So, in that interpretation, not counting Semyaza, each side has > 4 gambits. You each spent one tonight, which allows the head commander > of each side of each battlefield one of his own prior to the battle > commencing. Well, the first bullet explaining the gambit phase says, "Each side gets to attempt a number of gambits equal to the number of battlefields in the war effort. However, each commander may only attempt up to one gambit, successful or not, so choose carefully who does what." This really has less of a meaning if there is one gambit equal to the number of battlefields AND a severable High Command gambit. Personally, I think limiting the number of gambits to the number of battlefields creates a nice level of uncertainty. Where we allocate our gambits can affect the war effort. This makes the whole war thing somewhat less of a strict number crunching excersise. Belial and I were not of a disagreement about this point, either. We both read and interpreted this limitation of gambits the same. Getting all the field commanders together for some RP that will apportion gambits should be fun... and give the High Commanders some actual and consequential war RP. As for Semyaza's gambits, as they are High Command gambits, the High Commanders get to counter, correct? If not, I believe Semyaza should apportion himself to a battlefield of his choice subject to the placement counters of Belial and Moloch. What say you? :) From iago@iago.net Mon Mar 8 15:12:18 1999 Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 15:05:57 -0500 From: Fred Hicks To: Moloch Cc: mammon@iago.net, belial@thepentagon.com Subject: Re: The Log of Belial & Moloch plotting WAR! On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Bert wrote: > Well, the first bullet explaining the gambit phase says, "Each side gets to > attempt a number of gambits equal to the number of battlefields in the war > effort. However, each commander may only attempt up to one gambit, > successful or not, so choose carefully who does what." > >This really has less of a meaning if there is one gambit equal to the number of >battlefields AND a severable High Command gambit. Personally, I think limiting > the number of gambits to the number of battlefields creates a nice level of > uncertainty. Where we allocate our gambits can affect the war effort. This > makes the whole war thing somewhat less of a strict number crunching excersise. > >Belial and I were not of a disagreement about this point, either. We both read >and interpreted this limitation of gambits the same. > >Getting all the field commanders together for some RP that will apportion gambits >should be fun... and give the High Commanders some actual and consequential war > RP. Fair enough. In order for Beelzebub's attack to have an advantage of surprise, he'll need to take one of those Gambits, of course. As Mammon, I'd like one myself, but I can do without if needs be. >As for Semyaza's gambits, as they are High Command gambits, the High Commanders >get to counter, correct? If not, I believe Semyaza should apportion himself to a > battlefield of his choice subject to the placement counters of Belial and Moloch. High Command gives you the option to 'gambit to affect all battlefields' or 'gambit against the battlefield of your choice'. I think we can take it as given that Semyaza, as a somewhat external factor, should have 1 gambit per side solely of his own, regardless of the above interpretations. I think he should also be able to target as he sees fit, though it's clear he should be +testing against the high commanders opposite him. > What say you? :) I'll say, go with the above, and I'll clarify a statement I made in +mail to people on-MUSH.