You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If players' setup depend on each other, they should set up in turn order, even if they don't involve decisions
This matters in the case of Peacekeeper vs Admiral Act III. If PK is the First Regent and sets up first, they will place Ceasefire toksns on the peace side for clusters with Empire-controlled systems. But if the Admiral sets up first, then Martial Law will cancel that priviledge for the First Regent.
This would require a slight extension to p.22
If you have a tie and its tiebreaker is not specified, break the tie in turn order. Likewise, if players must make a decision resolve an action in an unclear order, resolve it in turn order. (Start with the player with initiative and go clockwise.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
https://discord.com/channels/476234833572397056/963112189802201108/1298412890587533365
is this correct?
If players' setup depend on each other, they should set up in turn order, even if they don't involve decisions
This matters in the case of Peacekeeper vs Admiral Act III. If PK is the First Regent and sets up first, they will place Ceasefire toksns on the peace side for clusters with Empire-controlled systems. But if the Admiral sets up first, then Martial Law will cancel that priviledge for the First Regent.
This would require a slight extension to p.22
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: