HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kcc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Ken Cox)
Subject: Suggestion for FAQ, Reincarnator, Pacifist/Judge
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 02:05:02 GMT

danm@cpqhou.compaq.com writes:
> The question is what exactly do the allies get in
> a challange where one side plays a compromise card but the
> other side plays an attack card?

Others have responded.  I just want to note, it seems this really
should be in the FAQ.  Perhaps it should also include answers to:

	When do I get to draw a new hand?
	Can I play cards when there is a lien on my hand?
	Can I Cosmic Zap someone if they aren't using their power?

(DON'T post replies.  I know the answers to these questions.)


njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer) writes:

>I would have to disagree with Phil Hill about the Reincarnator with the
>Changeling as his current incarnation issue.  The second to last sentance
[ i.e., The Reincarnator power stays with you while you use the others ]
>seems to imply pretty strongly to me that only the Changeling power goes.

We always treated it like this:  Your power is ALWAYS Reincarnator,
it's just that usually your power ACTS like some other power.  This
approach fits with the behavior when someone copies Reincarnator;
they get to act like Reincarnator's current power, since that's how
Reincarnator is behaving, but they are REALLY copying Reincarnator
and must reincarnate if they lose the challenge.

With this approach, when Reincarnator is acting like Changeling the
Reincarnator card (with Changeling card) gets traded.  I can see
your point, but I suspect that "The Reincarnator power stays with
you while you use the others" was meant to indicate that you don't
discard the Reincarnator card when you draw your new power.

In the Mayfair edition, we treat the Pentaform in the same way; his
power is Pentaform, always, but acts like some other power.  If he
has Changeling in the stack, he swaps the Pentaform and stack.  If
Insect copies him, Insect becomes a Pentaform with the same stack,
and the power that Insect uses is determined by the number of bases
that Insect has.


trent@mailhost.hsas.washington.edu writes:
> [Pacifist/Judge] is quite a deadly combo if I remember correctly.
> Although I dont remember exactly why.
> It turned out that no matter what happened this player would get a bace.

?? I wouldn't think so.  After all, if both players play Compromise
cards the Judge's fiat doesn't apply, so at least in that case he
wouldn't be guaranteed a base.  And if he doesn't play a Compromise,
Pacifist doesn't help so he has no better chance of winning (or losing,
depending on the wording of the fiat) than usual.

(For Eon-deprived people, as a main player Judge can describe extra
gains for either the winner or loser (not both) of the challenge,
limited to what can be gained in a deal.  For example, Judge could
say, "The loser gets all the winner's Edicts, Flares, and Attack
cards above 15, and a base in the winner's system."  If either
player plays an Attack card, the additional terms are included in
the outcome.)


Ken Cox
kcc@wucs1.wustl.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Guaranteed Losses
From: cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:28:32 GMT
Organization: Dept of CompSci, U of Auckland

In article <1992Aug17.134758.70@gems.vcu.edu> porterg@gems.vcu.edu writes:
>
>To slightly alter the subject, what about guaranteed losses?  That is, power
>combinations that hose the owner despite best efforts.
>
>Macron-Antimatter - Kiss those home systems goodbye.

What's wrong with this combo. Typically 4 tokens on a home system (at
least early in the game) = 16 tokens on your side. Because you're
antimatter that's -16 to begin with - tough for the other side to
beat!

-- 
Oh, why didn't I listen when they said "Never do a   |  cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz 
 masters and try to have a life at the same time"?   |  clare west
                 BigSis to Chris, Eric and Kristiina
                    Official Welcomer of the RFA
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: dmccart@gomez.intel.com (D. J. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Insect vs Changeling
Organization: Architecture & Software Technology Group, Intel, Santa Clara CA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 00:13:52 GMT

George Harris (George.Harris@bbs.oit.unc.edu) wrote:
> dmccart@gomez.intel.com (D. J. McCarthy) writes:

>> I would say that Gambler told the truth *at the time he declared
>> the card*, and therefore since that's the only time he made a statement
>> regarding his card, that's the only time the truth of his statement can
>> be determined.

> 	But the thing is, Gambler doesn't declare until his opponent has 
> revealed his card, ie, until Empath has revealed his Compromise.  By this time,
> Gambler's card *has* been turned into a Compromise, so if he says it's a
> 5, he's lying.


	Drat!  You're right!  I missed that entirely.

	By the time Gam declares what his card is, Emp has turned it into
a Compromise.  That's how Emp is worded.  So if Gam says it's anything but
a C, then he's lying, and Emp should call the bluff, and Gam would lose
the extra tokens.

	I sit corrected.


>> D. J. McCarthy <dmccart@gomez.intel.com>
> George.Harris@bbs.oit.unc.edu

--
D. J. McCarthy <dmccart@gomez.intel.com>
And this is artificial moonlight...
                                                         ...and artificial sky.

Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: praxis@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Laura L Perkinson)
Subject: Re: More Tough Combos
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:41:35 GMT

	I've just logged into this group (Hi, evil Dougmaster. EVIL!), so
I'm sure this killer combo's been pointed out sometime, but...
	Worm/Terrorist makes you, barring lotsa cosmic zaps, the least
tempting target imaginable. (Well, one of them.)
	Also, in the old Eon version, I seem to recall a power called
Negator, where you could cancel any one action by someone/turn. (ie, you
can't play that card, you can't ally with him, can't agree to that deal.
It couldn't interfere with the use of someone's powers.) It was a real
bitch w. Gambler.
	"This card is an 89."
	"I don't believe that!"
	"Yes, you do!"
		or
	"This is an 8."
	"OK, I'll believe you."
	"No, you won't. But it was an 8. Seeya!"

		Eagerly awaiting MCE,
		Praxis, a naturtal for Visionary
From: cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Reincarnator queries
Date: 19 Aug 92 08:33:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Aug19.083325.25543
Organization: Dept of CompSci, U of Auckland

Two things I wanted to ask the group about the use of the
Reincarnator:

1. Reincarnator was an ally on a challenge that ended up with an
unsuccessful deal. Does this count as a loss for him? The exact
wording on the card is:

"When you fail to make a deal or loose a challenge as a main player or
ally, you must reincarnate..."

I thought this didn't let him reincarnate but he thought it did.
Opinions anyone?

2. If the Reincarnator draws a power like Changeling, when he uses
that power does he swap both Reincarnator and Changeling or just
Changeling? We played just Changeling (which managed to get Filth out
of the game entirely, when he next reincarnated) but this seems at
odds with the (confusing) sentence on the card:

"...If you face a player who can copy your power, he copies only your
current incarnation and must reincarnate himself if he mimics you and
loses the challenge."

that sentence seems to contradict itself - is the player copying the
Reincarnator only (obviously not), the current incarnation only (well
yes) or the combination of Reincarnator and current incarnation (well
yes)?

Again I'd like to hear your opinions,

-- 
Oh, why didn't I listen when they said "Never do a   |  cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz 
 masters and try to have a life at the same time"?   |  clare west
                 BigSis to Chris, Eric and Kristiina
                    Official Welcomer of the RFA
From: trent@mailhost.hsas.washington.edu (Sigfried Trent)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Judge/Peacafist
Date: 20 Aug 92 22:02:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: 128.trent-200892150234
Followup-To: rec.games.board.ce
Organization: Academic Services, UW

I think this is quite a deadly combo if I remember correctly.
Although I dont remember exactly why.
It turned out that no matter what happened this player would get a bace.

"We live in an age when lemonaid is made with artificial flavoring and
dishwashing soap is made with real lemons"    Alfred E Newman
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer)
Subject: Re: More Tough Combos
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 14:24:34 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.155422.3431@ll.mit.edu>, mikem@ll.mit.edu writes:
>
>[here we go again, another NEGATOR discussion.]
>
>I would say that this does NOT give the NEGATOR the ability to stop a
>player from saying whatever he/she chooses.  A player can still ask for
>allies without being negated.  It's only the physical action that can
>be negated.  

Well, Jack Kittredge said otherwise several times in the first
volume of Encounter magazine.  According to Kittredge wording is
everything with the Negator.  Using your ally invitation example
above, if the player said "I will accept allies from everyone"
the Negator could respond by negating this decision.  However, the
negated player could then say "I will only take allies from Red".
The Negator can also negate negative decisions like "I will not 
accept any allies this challenge".  The only thing that Kittredge
said would not fly is saying something to the effect of "I negate
your decision not to play a Compromise" after cards are played.  He
could, however, say "I negate your decision to play that challenge
card" thus, forcing the player to play another challenge card. 

To summarize, you have to be very careful how exactly you say things
(in particular with respect to ally invites) when the Negator power is
in the game.  The Negator does not just "stop physical game actions" according
to Jack Kittredge.  You can play the power that way but, that was not the
design intent.

Finally, as many other have pointed out, the Negator cannot effect the
Gambler as Gambler's power takes effect after cards are revealed, which
is when the Negator can no longer use his power.

Nick Sauer

P.S. Mike I love your .sig!
From: lopez@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Chris &)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Insect vs Changeling
Date: 13 Aug 92 21:13:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: ils.1992Aug13.211310.17187
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

kcc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Ken Cox) writes:
: [insect vs changeling deleted]
: 
: And while I'm costing the net billions of dollars and depressing
: the world's GNP, a hypothetical situation:  Gambler faces Empath,
: Empath plays a Compromise, Gambler plays a Five and announces
: that it's a Five, and Empath calls the bluff.  Gambler now says
: Empath loses the extra tokens, since his card was indeed a Five.
: Empath argues that Gambler's card was actually a Compromise,
: since Empath's power changed it into one, and Gambler loses the
: extra tokens.  Who is right?
: 
: Ken Cox
: kcc@wucs1.wustl.edu

I would argue that Gambler loses the tokens.  The Empath power says:

"Whenever you are one of the two players in a challenge, if you play a 
Compromise Card, it changes your opponent's card into a Compromise Card."

This is different from:

"Whenever you are one of the two players in a challenge, if you play a
Compromise Card, conclude the challenge as if your opponent had also played
a Compromise Card."

Intentional?  Probably not, but the hidden perks are part of what makes CE
great.

Chris Lopez
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: woodhams@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Michael Woodhams)
Subject: Re: Dual Power games
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University Observatory
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:31:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.150238.22289@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bl375@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian G. Greenberg) writes:
>Ok now for some real questions.  This weekend we played our first
>game with multiple powers.  We found that the games took longer.
>Is this normal with two power games?  Also if you use Cosmic Zap
I dunno. I only play 4 or occasionally 3 power games.

>does it effect both powers or just one.  With the Changling or
>Sorceror flare do you change one power or both and who decides if
>it only on power?

We've always played it only ever zaps one power. Probably you should
increase the number of zaps (now, if only Mayfair would get my blank
cards too me...)

>
>Now a question about some edicts and such.  If the Vulch plays
>Plague on me and I only have one edict (Cosmic Zap) may I play it
>on him so he can't pick it up or must I discard it?

No. You can play something that prevents the plague from operating
only. If it had been mesmer who played a different edict as a plague,
you could zap mesmer.

>
>Last question:  We have a player who feels that Finder is too
>powerful of an edict since it says something like this:  Name a
>card.  Now "look through" that person's hand if he has it take 
>it.  He argues that looking through the hand is way too powerful.
>What do you think and how do you usually play it?

Not at all. Looking at somebody's hand is the primary use of the
finder. It is not much more than a single turn use of the Mind power. 

Michael W.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: More Tough Combos
From: cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:25:36 GMT
Organization: Dept of CompSci, U of Auckland

praxis@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Laura L Perkinson) writes:
>	Worm/Terrorist makes you, barring lotsa cosmic zaps, the least
>tempting target imaginable. (Well, one of them.)

Yep it's a good power combo - I had it in a game last week and it
makes it very difficult for anyone to get a base in your system or
deprive you of your powers.

-- 
Oh, why didn't I listen when they said "Never do a   |  cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz 
 masters and try to have a life at the same time"?   |  clare west
                 BigSis to Chris, Eric and Kristiina
                    Official Welcomer of the RFA
From: cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Dual Power games
Date: 19 Aug 92 08:16:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Aug19.081658.25265
Organization: Dept of CompSci, U of Auckland

might as well add my reply to the no doubt hundreds out there:

bl375@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brian G. Greenberg) writes:
>
>Ok now for some real questions.  This weekend we played our first
>game with multiple powers.  We found that the games took longer.
>Is this normal with two power games?  Also if you use Cosmic Zap
>does it effect both powers or just one.  With the Changling or
>Sorceror flare do you change one power or both and who decides if
>it only on power?

We find the games take longer. Today, we played our first game of
"deal eight chose four" (This is my prefered power chosing scheme but
this is a new group so I've been slowly increasing the powers) and the
game took nearly two hours. We play that a cosmic zap zaps just one
power. Changling/etc swap just one power - choice of Changling/etc

>Now a question about some edicts and such.  If the Vulch plays
>Plague on me and I only have one edict (Cosmic Zap) may I play it
>on him so he can't pick it up or must I discard it?

Nope, your discard of the edit (due to plague) happens before his
vulch.

>Last question:  We have a player who feels that Finder is too
>powerful of an edict since it says something like this:  Name a
>card.  Now "look through" that person's hand if he has it take 
>it.  He argues that looking through the hand is way too powerful.
>What do you think and how do you usually play it?

Looking through the hand is the whole point! Finding the card is an
added bonus but usually I use finder as a 1 turn Mind.

clare

-- 
Oh, why didn't I listen when they said "Never do a   |  cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz 
 masters and try to have a life at the same time"?   |  clare west
                 BigSis to Chris, Eric and Kristiina
                    Official Welcomer of the RFA
From: mrizzo@mpd.tandem.com (Mike Rizzo)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Encounter Vol 2, No. 3 Variants
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:17:50 GMT
Reply-To: mrizzo@allwedo.UUCP (Mike Rizzo)
Organization: Tandem Computers

Encounter Volume 2, No. 3 has an expansion for bad powers. 

The intent is to play a game with only bad powers and thereby balance the game 
since everyone has terrible handicaps. However, some of these are so bad, that
victory becomes impossible. For example, The Bick takes its tokens out of the 
game whenever it loses a challenge or fails to make a deal. Fairly quickly you 
will be out of the game with no tokens to play with. Another example, the 
Beggar allows other players to give it cards whenever it needs them. After 
your hand gets stuffed with everyone else's Compromise Cards, all you could do 
would be to wait around to lose every challenge. But the idea has merit if it
can be integrated with the regular game in a way that will add to the game and 
not dominate it.

I propose to add "bad powers" as an edict which allows you to give a bad power 
(which I call a mutation) to another player and an edict which allows you to 
discard the mutation:


3 [ ( MUTATION ) ] (MUTATE OTHER PLAYER)
( Randomly select a Mutation from the Mutation Pile and place it face up in 
front of another player. The Mutation takes effect immediately and continues 
even while power is lost and until able to discard it. Play at any time.)
{ 0 0 moveto 0 0  13 30 90 arc closepath fill }
Edict

2 [ ( DIE  ) ( MUTANT )] (KILLS MUTATIONS)
( Play at any time to discard Mutations.) 
{ 0 0 moveto 0 0  13 30 90 arc closepath fill }
Edict


Add three Mutation Edicts and 2 Die Mutant Edicts to the deck. Now all I
need are some decent "bad powers" that can be used in a game with regular 
powers. Any ideas on new "bad powers" or fixing the Encounter "bad powers"

The same issue of Encounter has a related expansion for Disadvantages. For 
example, one Disadvantage may be that you must always refuse to deal. I propose
the same approach of using Edicts to add Disadvantages (which I call Genetic
Flaws):


3 [ ( GENETIC ) ( FLAW )] (FLAW OTHER PLAYER)
(Randomly select a Flaw and put it on an Alien of another player. The Flaw 
continues unless power is lost, or the Alien or Flaw can be discarded. If the 
Alien goes to another player the Flaw goes with it. Play at any time.)
{ 0 0 moveto 0 0  13 30 90 arc closepath fill }
Edict

2 [ ( GENE ) ( THERAPY )] (CURES FLAWS)
( Play at any time to discard Flaws.) 
{ 0 0 moveto 0 0  13 30 90 arc closepath fill }
Edict


Note, I have changed the variant so that a Flaw is associated with a Alien
power card and goes with it, if the power is discarded or transferred. This
allows more options to the play of Flaws.

Comments?





Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: mikem@ll.mit.edu
Subject: Negator (was: Re: More Tough Combos)
Summary: traditional Negator generates ambiguities
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 20:07:42 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.142434.2396@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com writes:

[regarding the ability of the Negator power to negate statements]
>
>Well, Jack Kittredge said otherwise several times in the first
>volume of Encounter magazine.

Well, OK, I'll [somewhat reluctantly] bow to the "authoritative" word on the
subject...it just doesn't sit right with me that the means a player chooses
to express his/her intentions should be relevant.

A particularly annoying (to me) example is:

[case 1]
	Red says to Blue: "Do you want any allies?"
	Blue replies: "No."
	Negator says: "I negate that decision."

[case 2]
	Red says to Blue "Are you asking for allies?"
	Blue does not answer; announces "I am ready to play cards."
	Negator has nothing to negate.

In either case, it's clear that Blue doesn't want allies.  In the first
case, Blue says so.  In the second, Blue ignores the question and moves
on with the next phase of the challenge.

Case 2 is certainly a legitimate course of action; Blue need not respond to
Red's question.  So, by Jack Kittredge's argument, the same intent (i.e. that
Blue doesn't want allies) can result in two very different outcomes, simply
because Negator is allowed to negate an optional statement made by Blue.

In essence, blue is penalized for being polite enough to answer a question
that was put to him.  This offends me deeply.  It imposes too much formality
on the game; it makes it impossible to engage in casual conversation when
you have to stop and think about each and every word you say!

If one were to adopt the interpretation that only a physical action could
be negated, then there would be no ambiguity.  Blue could respond however
he/she chose without fear.

>The Negator does not just "stop physical game actions" according to Jack
>Kittredge.  You can play the power that way but, that was not the design
>intent.

Duly noted.  I don't have to like it, but I'll accept it.  I'll still argue
the merits of my "physical actions" interpretation, and try to bring others
around to my side.  :-)

>Nick Sauer
>
>P.S. Mike I love your .sig!

Thanks!  I've got a whole bunch of 'em.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Maciolek - mikem@ll.mit.edu --- VOICE (617)981-3174 - FAX (617)981-0189
Network Engineer - MIT Lincoln Laboratory - Computer Telecommunications Systems
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Next to being shot at and missed, nothing is really quite as satisfying
                  as an income tax refund."  -- F. J. Raymond
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Reincarnator queries
From: cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 01:15:59 GMT
Organization: Dept of CompSci, U of Auckland

njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer) writes:
>cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West) writes:
>>
>>"...If you face a player who can copy your power, he copies only your
>>current incarnation and must reincarnate himself if he mimics you and
>>loses the challenge."
>>
>First, lets quote the Reincarnator text from Eon (real) CE:
>
>they may copy your current incarnation, but if they lose they must
>reincarnate and the Plant or Insect power is out of the game.

OK so who's going to shoot the person who added the word 'only' to the
Mayfair version?

>       I'll ask Jack Kittredge about
>this one the next time I talk to him.  I'll see if we can even print
>the answer in the next issue of Encounter.

Could you post the answer to the newsgroup too, please.

thanks

-- 
Oh, why didn't I listen when they said "Never do a   |  cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz 
 masters and try to have a life at the same time"?   |  clare west
                 BigSis to Chris, Eric and Kristiina
                    Official Welcomer of the RFA
From: cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Clare West)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Terrorist/worm
Date: 19 Aug 92 08:19:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Aug19.081943.25376
Organization: Dept of CompSci, U of Auckland

colorado@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov (Martin Snow) writes:
>Terrorist/Worm isn't all that great of a combination.  As worm, you can
>only reposition the cone to another planet where you have a base.  If you
>get attacked where you have no tokens, you can't use worm at all.

I read this and thought - nah, surely he's got it wrong - but then I
got out the power and indeed it says:

"...as defensive player, you may move the cone from one of your home
bases to another of your home bases..."

Am I going to point this out to my group? Is this how Worm was worded
in the Eon version?

-- 
Oh, why didn't I listen when they said "Never do a   |  cwes1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz 
 masters and try to have a life at the same time"?   |  clare west
                 BigSis to Chris, Eric and Kristiina
                    Official Welcomer of the RFA
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce