Jump to content

al_lan_mandragoran

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    323

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by al_lan_mandragoran

  1. al_lan_mandragoran
    I think I'll take Honor. Tarsh-Eamon is a dragon. I'm not sure he'd be a mercenary. I'll think of a personality tomorrow. In my time-zone, it's ten to 10 at night, and I'd like to get a bit of reading in (A Darkness At Sethanon by Raymon Feist)
  2. al_lan_mandragoran
    I just read the whole thread from start to finish Boy is it long I'll take Honor, if it's still free. Or Odium. Either one is fine. My character is called Tarsh-Eamon He's a dragon from Yolen, and is one of the original 16. Pronouns of he/him Um... what else is needed? And what exactly is going to happen in this RP?
  3. al_lan_mandragoran
    Zavodilla and The Black Piper are people who have done their own spin on cosmere music, just like Aleziea
  4. al_lan_mandragoran
    I have recently just found Stormlyte on spotify, but for a while now I've been listening to Zavodilla and The Black Piper
  5. al_lan_mandragoran
  6. al_lan_mandragoran
    I will work to improve so that I can improve how I work (This is not an oath I've sworn yet, but the one I'm aiming at)
  7. al_lan_mandragoran
    Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination. But these words are not enough. They are just the first oath. To truly become a member of any order, you must speak the Second Ideal. And so, to begin my journey as an Elsecaller, I speak this oath: I will reach my potential.
  8. al_lan_mandragoran
    Hi I agree that a lot of people are no longer on there. I also agree that it was very convoluted and getting too complicated. I want to say thank you for speaking up, and deciding to strike off on your own, because the other thread was not getting anywhere. I think that you have too many units. Half shards are most likely not part of the original game - maybe have them as a variant? From the books, we learn very little about swordsmen squads Shardbearer support squads? Bridge crews are only really relevant for the Shattered Plains - again, maybe use it in a different variant Also: Someone else has created a card game like towers. I still think that Towers could be a bit more complicated, but here is a simple card game for any who wants it I think this thread will be good for the discussion
  9. al_lan_mandragoran
    it would be great if @stormlyte could add lyrics to spotify though Apart from that, I love your music
  10. al_lan_mandragoran
    I like the idea, but when I was actually going through WaT the other day, I found a lot of things that could make the game needlessly complicated, so I ended up not doing it. And now I don't have WaT on my shelf anymore, so I can't check over it anymore. Basically, though, the rules in WaT said vague stuff like "the abilities of each card change based on what they're next to," and "when you're surrounded, you can't rest your troops as effectively, so they get tired quicker." Both of these sound a bit too complicated. Remember, we're trying to make a game that is quick and easy, so that it can be played by even those who don't know about it. I know we want it to be accurate, but as a writer myself, I know that Brandon wasn't exactly planning an actual game. He just dropped enough hints about it to seem like a realistic game. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, just that the game we're making doesn't have to line up exactly with everything that Brandon has said. Otherwise, it will end up not being something you can play with a standard deck of cards, which is what we originally set out to do
  11. al_lan_mandragoran
    @I am Adonalsium, can you please give me access to the google doc that you put up, so that I can look at your take on the rules of Towers?
  12. al_lan_mandragoran
    I know how you feel. The game itself is great, but some of the rules are unclear. I've read the entire discussion, and it seems that the rules for cavalry flanking are based off the previous idea that all the cards would have orientations. i.e. you can turn them 90 degrees as your move action. That idea was discarded, but I believe that is where the cavalry rules come from. If you're using playing cards, the long edge is the flank. Archers are also not explained properly, like you said, so according to the current rules, they have unlimited range. The tabletop being an indefinite size is probably also something that needs changing - perhaps make it 10 by 16 (holy numbers) so that it is long but not too long? I know, that goes against what Adolin says about how the location of the battle can change, but that is sort of what happens at the end of a round? I don't know. In WaT, it also mentions that different troops change based on who they're next to, troops can 'rest on back lines,' have energy, and can heal. Is this viable? Or is it making it too complicated. I know, I'm the one who was saying its already too difficult to teach, but I still personally would like a genuine Towers experience.
  13. al_lan_mandragoran
    yeah, i kinda hate all of the ones i did, except the knight, and the shardbearers are ok. oh, and the high ground is ok, but I toatally get where you're all coming from. They're really horrible, aren't they? I was flicking through WaT just now, looking for towers references, and I saw the fact that they use glyphs. I agree - that would be a whole lot better. @jan_Komawi, your glyphs are cool, but some of them i don't get. also, your "here are some more" post doesn't have any images on it. or at least, i can't see them.
  14. al_lan_mandragoran
    There is one big issue that I've found playing this with other people: due to it's abstractness, people find it confusing, and hard to understand what is going on. What I mean by that, is that it isn't visual enough. I found it hard to explain the game to one of my non-cosmere friends, and they found it very difficult to understand what was going on. In response to this problem, I have decided to make a deck of cards. Half will be black and whit vector images, the other half will be white and black images (the first ones, just inverted) So, tell me what you think. Some of the images have multiple, and just tell me which one is the best of them. Oh, and just to clarify, I got Chatgpt to make them
  15. al_lan_mandragoran
    I have been reading this thread for a while, and I've played the game as per the current rules. I'd like to as a few questions. When cavalry attacks, is it like the Shardbearer in that it is occupying the same spot as the enemy piece, or is it the next piece in the straight line that it attacked on? Can the Shardbearer go through friendly pieces? Can he end in another piece? Do archers on high ground still have a bonus against other units on a different high ground? (i.e firing from one hill to another - is in any difference than firing from level ground? How exactly does the whole "Shardbearer capturing another Shardbearer" work? Can a Shardbearer alone hold a battlefield - the win conditions says that you have to be the only one on the battlefield with troops, but remember, Adolin says several times that "Shardbearers can't hold ground" (I think he says it in RoW when they are trying to retake Kholinar and... well, it doesn't matter. you get the point). And... I think that's it. apart from that, it's a great game. Oh, and it would be nice if @I am Adonalsium let me view his google doc.
×
×
  • Create New...