Twoy wrote:Note: I am okay with commanders and chieftains having their own initiative to accomplish general goals. However, they cannot report what they are seeing or react to events that occur in a different location if you do not have some means of communication between the ruler and the various commanders and chieftains.
I've ranted at great length about this in a PM, so I'll try to be briefer here for the benefit of the public.
1) That rule is unenforceable. Suppose I, the player, want to make two of my Warlords meet next turn. They start far from each other, I don't have any Thinkamancy, and no way of communicating between them is used. What's to stop both of these warlords deciding, each on their own, to move to the same hex on the map?
Think that's too blatant? Well, presented with a specific situation, I could cook up an excuse as to why both warlords happened to want to go there at once.
2) That rule, for a TBS, is bonkers. The fact is that behind the actions of the troops there is one coordinated, human mind, which cannot be expected to also keep track of who knows what, nor do roleplay in a game that is about strategic advantage, and not roleplay!
3) That rule adds a layer of complication that is unnecessary in a TBS setting.
4) I do not propose to change the rule, as changing rules midgame is rubbish. I'd like to point out that whenever said rule will inconvenience me, I'll look for loopholes around it. And I guarantee you, it is swiss cheese.