New Erfworld Campaign - "Darkness Rising" - Rules

[BLANDCorporatio]

Apart from kill stealing being made a matter of taste, random allocation of XPs removes the need for "casting gives XP" kinds of patch-ups (which incidentally do not distinguish, apparently, between "offensive" and "defensive" spells). It also allows tanks to tank.

Finally, it has a good pedigree. The Disciples 1 and 2, games in which small stacks fought each other in pitched battles, used the system that at the end of the battle, XP would be shared among the survivors. That way, everyone, including healer units and the front row meatshields, got some benefit, even though most of the heavy lifting, damage-wise, was done by wizard type units.

[MarbitChow]

Ultimately, the game is for the players. If you're not having fun, there's no point to the game. I had tried to intentionally design the system to mimic Erfworld as much as possible, and it has been established in Erfworld, the killing blow gets the XP. Jillian's underlings even resent her for kill-stealing in one issue...

There are units that have long-term survivability: heavy tank units and healers are near the top of that list. In my mind, it's ok that those units level more slowly, because they're more likely to live to keep their levels.
I'm of the opinion that rapid damage-dealers, on the other hand, should level more quickly, since they are more likely to die, and if the player chooses to play another artillery class, they'll need to level up again pretty quickly.

For the present, I'd like to keep the XP system in the Erfworld style - kill-steals and all. XP for a kill is not simply 2 per unit, except for this scenario, since all enemy units were just 2 AP units. This starting scenario gives a disproportionately high benefit to Leadership, but when units start being worth 5, 10, or 20 xp per kill, the 1 xp Leadership bonus won't make as much difference. The leadership XP bonus is designed to offset the limitation that a 3 AP ability only grants the leader +1 / +1 initially, so while it's almost required that a stack have a leader, the leader unit is gimped somewhat significantly because of that. As the unit levels, that bonus increases, though, which is why I'll be nerfing Leadership to a max +3 / +3 bonus and introducing additional Leadership ranks that cost AP and raise the cap.

I will almost certainly eliminate the XP for offensive spells and increase the XP for defensive / support spells as of the next scenario. I'm also going to reduce the Juice cost of Reanimator to 4, so that it can be used more frequently. I may also allow them to decay normally instead of dusting at the end of combat, and reserve the "decay in 1 turn" for Trioxin. Since uncroaked will grant their XP to their creator, unit-creation spells will also not be granting XP going forward.

-----

I'd like this game to run for a long time, and I'd also like it to be fleshed-out enough that others might feel like running it as well, while still trying to capture the Erfworld feel as much as possible. Please continue to provide as much feedback as possible - what you like, what you don't, what makes sense, what can be abused - and I'll try to build this into as enjoyable an experience as possible.

[MarbitChow]

As written, the rules state that everyone has the Attack ability. Does that still apply now that the attack ability is a prerequisite to other abilities?

Thanks for pointing that out. When I revise the rules, each 'class' will only have one of Attack, Strike, or Fire.

[MarbitChow]

Having twice so far had my opponent taken after doing the major damage AND TAKING DAMAGE in THE PROCESS I can see where you're coming from with this.
I'm not sure it's the answer though it does have it's merits. However there may be IC repercusions for kill stealing that you've not considered.

Each of the Heavy melee units have taken a number of hits, any one of which would have dropped the shockamancer. In addition, Cupid drew the Archer's first volley - if it weren't for him, you would almost certainly have seen a caster die the moment they entered the field.

But as for IC repercussions, you may just want to have a chat with your kill-stealers and let them know that, if some accommodations can't be made, you might just "run to protect the healer" and leave the other casters exposed...

[BLANDCorporatio]

There are units that have long-term survivability: heavy tank units and healers are near the top of that list.

Healers are notoriously first in line to die. Shoot the Medic first is THE viable tactic in any game where Medics exist. As for meaty tanks, okay, they're hard to kill ... for level 1 units. The fact that Mr Meatloaf doesn't spend time on offensive abilities, hoping instead to be a good shield for the glass cannons behind, is self-gimping because Meatloaf won't deliver the killing blow. And hence stagnate. And hence, become a less effective unit as the scenario increases in complexity.

The leadership XP bonus is designed to offset the limitation that a 3 AP ability only grants the leader +1 / +1 initially, so while it's almost required that a stack have a leader, the leader unit is gimped somewhat significantly because of that.

That's one way to look at it. Here's another. Every player who took Warrior, and to a much lesser extent Archer, did this self-lessly. Because it was clear, early on, that Caster would be more interesting to play from a power gaming perspective as well as development variety. I speak of the original system, not any changes since then. We signed up, with our roles, on that system. Whoever signed up as a Warrior signed up because casters could not exist alone at early levels. I would have taken Leadership not for the 1XP from other people's kills, which wasn't even written anywhere, but because that +1/+1 bonus benefitted 8 units. A very selfless thing to do, kudos to Swodaems.

PS:

Erfworld flavour is boop-boop. Erfworld, to the extent that it ever was anything, was a haphazard system that does not deserve emulation ever, but that's another rage filled rant and I don't want the weekend to start too rustled.

[MarbitChow]

Healers are notoriously first in line to die. Shoot the Medic first is THE viable tactic in any game where Medics exist.

Players will also go to great lengths to protect their own healers. And, because of Erfworld flavor, enemy sides will be attempting to capture healers whenever remotely possible, due to their value to a side. The next scenario also includes orders to capture a healer. So, it's safe to say for this campaign at least, while it may be a viable tactic in other games, the reality is that in this one, they're not the primary targets.

As for meaty tanks, okay, they're hard to kill ... for level 1 units. The fact that Mr Meatloaf doesn't spend time on offensive abilities, hoping instead to be a good shield for the glass cannons behind, is self-gimping because Meatloaf won't deliver the killing blow. And hence stagnate. And hence, become a less effective unit as the scenario increases in complexity.

With the Counter-Attack options, it seems like it's quite plausible to build a tank death machine that's really tough to kill. I don't think the situation is bad for the heavy units at all; they started off one-shot killing a unit, after all. Heck, all they need to do is both concentrate on one target at a time, dropping each in 2 hits and alternating who gets the kills, and they're in just as good shape as the archers & shockamancers for racking up the XP.

That's one way to look at it. Here's another. Every player who took Warrior, and to a much lesser extent Archer, did this self-lessly... I would have taken Leadership not for the 1XP from other people's kills, which wasn't even written anywhere, but because that +1/+1 bonus benefitted 8 units. A very selfless thing to do, kudos to Swodaems.

So, it's a bad thing that a selfless action had an unannounced and unasked-for benefit? It's unfair that a player who made a selfless act was rewarded for it?

As to Erfworld flavor, the campaign is running on an Erfworld forum, and was advertised as an Erfworld campaign. We can fine-tune rules and mechanics to make the game more fun (& fair), but that is one point that isn't open for discussion. I'm going to do my best to capture the Erfworld feel, period.

[BLANDCorporatio]

So, it's a bad thing that a selfless action had an unannounced and unasked-for benefit? It's unfair that a player who made a selfless act was rewarded for it?

If you'd have been honest that this was your intention all along, sure.

As to Erfworld flavor, the campaign is running on an Erfworld forum, and was advertised as an Erfworld campaign. We can fine-tune rules and mechanics to make the game more fun (& fair), but that is one point that isn't open for discussion. I'm going to do my best to capture the Erfworld feel, period.

Purposefully ignoring objectively better design approaches in the name of keeping flavour is always a bad idea. Whether this has occurred with your game now is debatable, but if you think like that, then the occurrence is a certainty.

And I would add, several games run on this forum have been very abstracted away from Erf flavour. To their benefit.

[ETheBoyce]

All of our non-caster units have the ability to get exp, either through high combat or leadership (except Cupid but he can fly); I mean Yuri and I are tied for kills, and of the 7 dead enemies casters have killed 3. Unless someone invests their level up bonuses purely on defense and Block/Guard abilities I don't see any reason our non-casters won't be able to keep up with our casters.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Players will also go to great lengths to protect their own healers.

As well they should. Healers are the first targeted by any sane opponent. That may not apply when a GM purposefully injects NPCs with stupid, of course. But even then, capture, presumably, requires bringing to 0H and functional removal from the battle. So Healers should be always in fear of their lives, and in need of levelling.

With the Counter-Attack options, it seems like it's quite plausible to build a tank death machine that's really tough to kill. I don't think the situation is bad for the heavy units at all; they started off one-shot killing a unit, after all.

What you're saying is that a Warrior build is viable, because it can kill fast. Well, duh. Is a damage soaker build viable though? One that focuses on defense and hits? Nope. Need those kills, after all.

And incidentally, that's one argument against random allocation of XPs. Maybe you want to encourage players to think about who kills who. Maybe you want to force players to think long and hard about how they'll earn their XP and coral them towards some offensive ability. All valid reasons. Flavour keeping is not.

[MarbitChow]

If you'd have been honest that this was your intention all along, sure.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I made it clear from the start that I wasn't using LTDave's XP, and that I'd be, for example, rewarding XP for casting. I had intended, from the start, to grant a small XP bonus to kills that occur under leadership as well, but did not reveal that because (a) I had not determined how much of a benefit it would grant and, more importantly, (b) I wanted it to be a reward for selflessness, not a min-max strategy.

My goals here are pretty straight-forward. (1) Everyone have fun, and (2) Everyone be able to level by playing their role. Leadership units seemed likely to level more slowly, and healing caster units even more so. Casters get Fire, so they can do SOME damage, but I want to avoid healers deciding that it's better to take a shot instead of healing the tank so that they can level, and 2 rounds into the 1st scenario, that's already been made clear.

Splitting XP at the end of the scenario evenly among the survivors is certainly one way to achieve that goal. Randomly distributing XP per kill, in my opinion, is not.

However, I'm not entertaining the idea of a 'party xp' split:

And incidentally, that's one argument against random allocation of XPs. Maybe you want to encourage players to think about who kills who. Maybe you want to force players to think long and hard about how they'll earn their XP and coral them towards some offensive ability. All valid reasons. Flavour keeping is not.

The casters in the game are due to Erfworld flavor. The Leadership effect is due to Erfworld flavor. The hex boundary rules are due to Erfworld flavor. The particular implementations of these elements are subject to discussion. Omitting them completely is not. The same is true with Experience. In my experience, there are 2 standard methods for handling XP : split evenly at the end of the conflict, and award per-kill / per-action. This campaign is going per-kill, end of discussion. The particulars of how it is gained, whether 'support' XP for damaging is a possibility, how much casters should gain for various actions, how much (if any) XP leadership should grant - all of these are issues I'm seeking your input on. Changing the fact that it is per-kill is not on the table, and for this game, my word is ultimately final.

If this XP issue is ultimately going to ruin whatever enjoyment you otherwise might have had from this game, please let me know now, so that I can reclaim all of the free time I anticipated spending on this in the coming weeks. We'll all be much happier in the end.

[Werebiscuit]

Having twice so far had my opponent taken after doing the major damage AND TAKING DAMAGE in THE PROCESS I can see where you're coming from with this.
I'm not sure it's the answer though it does have it's merits. However there may be IC repercusions for kill stealing that you've not considered.

But as for IC repercussions, you may just want to have a chat with your kill-stealers and let them know that, if some accommodations can't be made, you might just "run to protect the healer" and leave the other casters exposed...

It's not nice to read Rolf's thoughts..there may be IC repercussions for that too

[BLANDCorporatio]

The casters in the game are due to Erfworld flavor.

I eagerly await a Mathamancer class to be made available, what will we ever do without one.

The Leadership effect is due to Erfworld flavor.

Which you've made flat additive, which is not Erf flavour any more than "turn based strategy" is.

The hex boundary rules are due to Erfworld flavor.

Awesome how hex(agon)s now have 4 sides, for ease of construction and use.

You've departed from strict adherence to flavour where convenient whether you admit it or not. So don't use that as an argument.

for this game, my word is ultimately final.

Took you long enough to notice. Yes it is final. And it would be better, imo, to pick a system and stick with it, rather than get bogged down in requests for feedback. Feedback will arrive during play, naturally.

You also apparently don't grasp the meaning of loyal opposition, or else there wouldn't be that passive aggressive end to your post. I'm not interested in dropping out, and my pet peeves have nothing to do with an XP system. You'll notice I both proposed and tore down that XP allocation suggestion. I am interested to play, and I am also interested to inform you, as often as I can manage- because that's how pet peeves work- where flavour must bow down to functionality. It's your call whether you pay attention, but it's my province to speak up when I want.

[MarbitChow]

Dammit, BLAND! You should know by now I've got a compulsion to argue... you shouldn't encourage it.

The Leadership effect is due to Erfworld flavor.

Which you've made flat additive, which is not Erf flavour any more than "turn based strategy" is.

(+1 bonus to each unit) x (# of units) is a multiplicative modifier.

Awesome how hex(agon)s now have 4 sides, for ease of construction and use.

Internal locations within a hex have a cartesian coordinate system for ease and clarity of communicating location. The hexes are still hex-shaped. If Erfworld establishes that the Hexes are fractal, hexes within hexes, I'll consider making a change.

You've departed from strict adherence to flavour where convenient whether you admit it or not. So don't use that as an argument.

I departed from it right from the start, when I allowed casters to go into the field in a small, unexperienced raiding party as well. But when faced with a decision where there is an arbitrary decision to be made (and XP determination CAN go either way arbitrarily), I'll always swing towards imitating Erfworld flavor. Divergences, like the casters in the field, are allowable because there's overwhelming reason to diverge, and no compelling 'fun' reason to stick to flavor.

for this game, my word is ultimately final.

Took you long enough to notice. Yes it is final. And it would be better, imo, to pick a system and stick with it, rather than get bogged down in requests for feedback. Feedback will arrive during play, naturally.

Some of it will, certainly. But some of it can be caught in advance. Rule changes and feedback have been running in parallel to the game, so to me, it's ok, since there's no loss. But mostly the request for feedback is to make sure that all the players have at least read the changes and have a chance to voice concerns.

You also apparently don't grasp the meaning of loyal opposition, or else there wouldn't be that passive aggressive end to your post.

Sorry. I get loyal opposition. I also, it seems, get intestinal discomfort, and I'm going to write off my tantrum to stomach troubles. I'll try not to let it happen again. I've run campaigns for a number of years, but this is first game I've run where I can't see the player's faces and elicit immediate feedback, so it's harder for me to determine what's working and what's not.

I'll post the final results of this scenario tonight, and updated rules this weekend, as well as the next scenario. Due to the nature of that scenario, you'll have at least 48 hours to determine actions.

[Exate]

On the matter of Erfworld flavor: The mechanics of our current system do not support Erfworld flavor in my opinion. It has been made clear many times in Erfworld that the key to serious success in the system is to pile bonus on bonus on bonus; this means that mechanics which attempt to accurately reflect it need bonuses worth piling on. At the moment, the most important factor by far in our system is not piling on bonuses, but rather level and base statistics (which are largely determined by level). A tactical bonus of +3/-2 or a leadership bonus capped at +3/+3 means little when every single level brings +2/+1/+4. As characters level, the identical blanket leveling bonuses will result in them becoming statistically more similar to one another, and the lack of serious bonuses while the numbers overall grow larger will mean that the unit's base stats are significantly more important than those bonuses.

We also don't have stacking bonuses, and those are a fairly critical bit of flavor particularly in a small-unit tactical system, because it means that as you take casualties every unit remaining becomes weaker.

That's a side note to the real meat of my post, which is reviewing all the melee powers posted by MarbitChow a bit ago. Overall, my comments are:
*Level requirements for abilities are arbitrary and encourage putting in "level tax" abilities, which is to say abilities so good that everyone who hits the required level will immediately purchase them. There are several options for getting rid of level taxes- eliminate/weaken the abilities involved, require certain stats instead of levels, improve or introduce other abilities to make them competitive- and one or more of them should be followed.
*There are several standout abilities which, in their current form, are drastically overpowered even outside the level taxes. Dance-Fighting, Envenom Weapon, I've Got a Net!, Heavy, and Leadership are, in my opinion, wildly out of line with the balance of power per AP established by the Modified Attack abilities.
*Hits are currently not in alignment with Attack/Defense on either the leveling scale or the AP scale.
*There is no effective way to defend against casters except to kill them ASAP. This may or may not be desired.
*The ability trees are out of balance; if Modified Attacks lead into other abilities, then every available Modified Attack should lead into an equal number of abilities, because what something is a prerequisite for weighs heavily in whether people take it and internal balance should be maintained to avoid homogeneity.
*Likewise, for coherence of game design attempts should be made to unify what abilities are used as prerequisites, what abilities can be taken multiple times, and so forth and make that consistent throughout. My recommendation would be to take either each Modified Attack or each of the three basic stat booster abilities (not both unless you're in for a LOT of game design work) and build balanced ability trees out of them, while making it so that Modified Attacks and basic stat boosters can all be taken as many times as desired (or using the 1-2-4-8 motif you have going on, whichever).


Regardless, on to more minutiae. Here's a fairly exhaustive review of each ability in sequence.

Spoiler: show

Attack Modifiers
Block (Costs 1 AP): Get Defense +3 and Combat -2 for the round.
Mighty Blow (Costs 1 AP): Get Combat +3 and Defense -2 for the round.
Guard (Costs 1 AP): Get Combat -2 for the round. A single adjacent ally gains +3 Defense for the round.
Support (Costs 1 AP): Get Combat -2 for the round. A single adjacent ally targeting the same enemy as you gains +3 Combat for the round. Ally's attack will occur after your attack if ally would normally act first.

These essentially form the baseline for my tactical analysis of the worth of a 1 AP ability in this game: It should provide approximately +1 to one stat, plus a small other benefit (in this case, tactical flexibility).

The "adjacent" requirement with Guard and Support seems like something that can be pushed, to me. Anyone with Strike is sort of capable of treating enemies within two squares as adjacent for offensive purposes; why not allies as well? Consider the addition of purchasable abilities for Spearmen or ranged units which allow them to Guard and/or Support others at the full range of their Basic Attacks, with Guard or Support as a prerequisite.

It's also worth noting that the Modified Attacks seem vaguely incomplete to me- both of the aid-another abilities reduce your Combat instead of your Defense, which makes sense for each of them logically but in mechanical terms the game designer in me insists that there should be two more abilities identical to Support and Guard, but subtracting from the user's Defense instead of Combat. If there isn't going to be, then their absence should be justified.

As a final note, consider making anyone who uses one of the aid-another modified attacks entitled to a share of the XP gained by the assisted person.

Attack Modifiers can be purchased more than once, and their effects stack. A 2nd rank of a particular modified attack can be purchased at 2nd level. A 3rd rank can be purchased at 4th level, and a 4th rank at 8th level.

This is basically the key mechanic that makes these really worthwhile; stacking them can result in bonuses to a single stat larger than those available just about any other way in the game, if you're willing to pay the price.

Dance-Fighting (Costs 1 AP): All units with Dance Fighting get +1 Combat / +1 Defense for every 2 dancers in the formation, rounded down. Bonus is limited to +4 / +4, but any number of units can be in the formation.
(Decreased AP cost, increased # of units required per bonus rank. Rationale: Attack modifiers give a net +1 bonus per AP; Dance Fighting will do the same, only spreading the AP cost out over multiple characters.

This rationale is incomplete, because attack modifiers don't give only a +1 bonus per AP, they give a net +1 bonus per AP applied with tactical flexibility. Further, with 8 people in a stack this is giving a net +8 bonus per AP, since each person spent 1 AP and is gaining +4/+4. I'm not actually sure if Dance-Fighting is meant to be a "swarm" ability in flavor, since units can dance-fight on their own, but here it definitely is- and the premier swarm ability, in fact, because at a 1 AP cost for a +8 bonus I can't think of a reason to not have taking it ASAP made mandatory for the entire stack, which is usually the sign of a wildly overpowered ability.

Speedy (Costs 1 AP): Unit can move +4 squares each turn.

I still think that either the maps need to be made much larger or units need to have their movement speed in squares drastically reduced. That said, a +50% movement increase for 1 AP seems fine to me.

Well-armed (Costs 2 AP): Unit gains an additional +3 Combat
Well-protected (Costs 2 AP): Unit gains an additional +3 Defense

These stick fairly closely to the "1 AP buys something slightly better than a +1 net bonus" standard established by Modified Attacks, which I actually think is a problem in their case. A 2 AP ability should, generally, be better than a single 1 AP ability taken twice since it requires a larger chunk of investment, and I don't know whether the +0.5 net bonus over modified attacks and the lack of a downside is enough to make up for it. This is particularly true since +3 to a single stat will rapidly fade into near-irrelevance as we level, although it seems like a fair bit now, so sinking 2 AP into it seems like a big thing. For purposes of game design coherence and elegance I would also prefer to see abilities which increase one of the three base stats cost only 1 AP, so that they make for a more effective baseline.

Beefy (Costs 1 AP): Unit gains an additional +8 Hits. Cannot be taken by Fliers. A 2nd rank of beefy can be purchased at 2nd level. A 3rd rank can be purchased at 4th level, and a 4th rank at 8th level.

This ability brings up the question of "why are Hits measured on a different standard than Attack and Defense"? The standard established by Modified Attacks says that 1 AP buys 0.33 worth of a level increase in stats (Attack/Defense). The standard established by Beefy appears to say that 1 AP buys 2 level increases in stats (Hits), which would mean that it's AP expenditures rather than leveling upgrades which are meant to define the shape of your character and give character progression an altogether different tone. These should be reconciled- and, if they are to be brought into line, some major changes need to occur in scaling of several abilities.

[Requires Block, Level 2] Shield Wall (1 AP) - Friendly units behind this unit gain double their Cover Defense. Attacks that ignore defense are reduced by 2 for both this unit and units directly behind it, as the shield deflects a portion of the attack.

The rules on Cover Defense are, unless I've missed something, entirely unstated in the rules thread. Looking at the game thread, though, it's +4 to units other than the one taking it in a specific circumstance. First, that would imply that this ability is built off Guard, not Block, because the Guard ability is the obvious root for any ability which provides a bonus to others rather than yourself. Second, in terms of balance the prerequisite means that this can be slightly more powerful than a no-prerequisite ability, so something more than +1-net-and-a-bit. +4-net-sometimes seems fine to me on that basis.

Other comments on this: It's somewhat unclear exactly what "behind it" means for purposes of angled attacks; square-based movement systems can often make it somewhat difficult to work with those, and most intelligent enemies will try to flank if possible. The "attacks that ignore defense" part is so niche and largely unimportant it doesn't matter for purposes of whether people are inclined to take the ability or not, so it's just a garnish of "with this purchase, have a free [lesser item]!". That should generally be avoided, in my opinion.

[Requires Shield Wall, Level 4] Shield Mastery (1 AP) - 1/2 the Unit's base (before modifiers) defense can be applied against attacks that ignore defense. Modifiers that reduce defense will also reduce this value.

Wasn't I being criticized not so long ago for proposing abilities which targeted only a narrow slice of potential enemies? This is exactly that. Abilities which ignore defense are too thin on the ground for this to be read as anything other than "take this if you want to survive a Shockamancer; otherwise skip it". Are we doing that kind of ability or not? And this isn't even that good at letting you live through Shockamancers.

[Requires Guard, Level 4] Interpose (1 AP) - Half of the damage inflicted upon a target (rounded up), from any source, that this unit is Guarding is inflicted upon this unit instead. If two units with Interpose are guarding the same target, that target takes no damage, the Guarding units absorb the damage instead.

This moves away from clean stats so it's difficult to judge on that standard, but as a general rule the ability to move damage from your squishies to your tanks is always a good one- particularly with the double-protection-is-perfect-protection clause here. My instincts say that it's absolutely essential for any unit that wants to serve in a guard role, which means that it should cost more and/or have more prerequisites.

[Requires Attack, Strike, or Fire, Level 4] Envenom Weapon (1 AP) - If Unit inflicts damage with a non-spell action, Unit inflicts an additional +4 Hits from Venom. Does not affect constructs or uncroaked.

The "requires Attack, Strike, or Fire" part of the requirements is meaningless because everyone has one of the Basic Attacks, and should be dropped. In terms of balance, I am reluctant to apply arbitrary level requirements for abilities instead of having proper ability trees, or at least stat minimums- something that actually reflects how the character is built rather than being totally arbitrary. Anyway, as things stand this is basically a 1 AP ability with no important prerequisites since everyone will be on equal footing for getting it at level 4. Is it more powerful than the +1-net-and-some standard? Why yes, by a great deal. It effectively increases Combat by +4 on any hit that doesn't completely bounce; since any character which is attacking the enemy can expect almost all their attacks to not completely bounce, it effectively increases Combat by +4 almost all of the time. In my estimation this is at least as powerful as Well-Equipped, maybe better, and there is little or no reason for any character with a decent Combat score not to take it as soon as it becomes available unless they're fighting constructs or uncroaked constantly all the time- the sign of something overpowered.

[Requires Attack] Hold the Line (1 AP) - (Always active) Enemy units attempting to move past this unit are stopped at the first square surrounding this unit that they enter. Flying enemies are immune to this effect unless this unit also flies.

How does this actually work, in flavor? What is the unit doing to stop the enemy from moving past them? If they're attacking, shouldn't this be an attack- and if they're not attacking, how are they stopping the enemy at all? In any case, this ability is essential for denying enemies tactical mobility... but while it's highly desirable, I would say that it's competitive with other 1 AP abilities. It becomes more attractive at high levels or in larger groups, when a point or two in a stat seems comparatively unimportant but being able to effectively control the battlefield really matters.

[Requires Attack] Counter-Attack (Costs 1 AP): Unit can make a free Attack against the first Attack action performed against it from an enemy unit that this unit is not attacking. This attack occurs immediately after the enemy attack, regardless of this unit's Combat score.

If this ability stands as-is I will be taking it at level 2 unless I'm informed that virtually all of my enemies in the future will be toting spears, because I would be insane not to. I think that sums up my evaluation of its utility and balance.

[Requires Attack, Mighty Blow, Level 4] I'm Crushing Your Head (1 AP) - Any non-Venom Hits inflicted by this unit's Attack actions are doubled. Does not affect constructs.

The non-Venom thing and the no-construct thing are both pretty arbitrary, but whatever. This would be completely essential if it didn't require Mighty Blow; since it does require Mighty Blow it becomes the single strongest reason to take Mighty Blow. This is likely to give a greater effective increase in Hits dealt per AP spent than any other ability on the table.

[Requires Attack, Level 4] Blade Master (1 AP) - Unit can make a 2nd attack against the same target.

There is virtually no reason anyone who could would not take this ability, ever. That makes it a level tax, which means that it should be eliminated, weakened, made more expensive, or made free.

[Requires Attack, Counter-Attack, Level 6] Counter-Fury (Costs 1 AP): Unit can make a free Attack against the second and third Attack actions performed against it from an enemy unit that this unit is not attacking. This attack occurs immediately after the enemy attacks, regardless of this unit's Combat score.

Less essential than Counter-Attack, but for a 1 AP ability this level of potential increase in total firepower is incredibly potent. See my comments on Counter-Attack for a description of why this is ridiculously good. This is actually battlefield-shaping in that it makes it essentially impossible to swarm a high-level Warrior with Warriors, which means there should be a lot more Spearmen running around for going up against Warrior units.

Overall, the Attack-based ability tree is extremely offensive in nature. It doesn't really support a tank specialization; even those abilities which trigger on enemy attacks are about killing things rather than living through things trying to kill you. This should be remedied if possible.

[Requires Strike] Impale (1 AP) - (Always active) If an enemy units that started out-of-range of this unit this turn, any move-and-Attack upon this unit by the enemy triggers an automatic free counter-attack with a +4 Combat bonus from this unit. This counter is resolved before the enemy can attack, and if the enemy dies as a result, their attack is negated. {This means that the enemy has to start at least 2 squares away, and move through a square that this unit can attack, into a square adjacent to this unit in a single move in order to trigger this ability.}

This ability remains highly powerful, makes Spearmen the preferred counter to Warriors on the field and in fact the generally superior form of line infantry, who should always be in the front row as well as the back row. Working against an unlimited number of enemies per round makes it way better as well. For 1 AP, almost all Spearmen who aren't building themselves as dedicated second-line units will want this, which is usually a sign it's overpowered.

[Requires Strike, Level 6] Sweep (Costs 1 AP): Unit can Strike up to 3 adjacent targets at the same time.

Assuming they get full damage to all three, only a completely moronic Spearman would not take this ability upon hitting level 6. That says something severe about its balance.

[Requires Fire] Eye of the Bull (1 AP) - (Always active) Unit ignores penalties from Cover and Elevation.

I don't know enough about cover and elevation penalties to properly evaluate this, but considering that a primary purpose for archers is to hit rear-line units this seems like it's probably going to provide a +2 net bonus to their Attack at least half the time, probably more. That's enough for 1 AP for any Archer seriously interested in killing things to take it- and the fact that it bypasses that "double Cover bonus" ability is a nice freebie kicker.

[Requires Fire, Level 4] Dual Shot (1 AP) - Unit can Fire upon 2 targets who are adjacent to each other simultaneously. Cannot be at the same time as Rapid Shot.
[Requires Fire, Level 4] Rapid Shot (1 AP) - Unit can Fire twice upon the same target. Cannot be at the same time as Dual Shot.

Taking at least one of these is a level tax. By providing both, some Archers might decide not to take one of them but I think it's more likely that the utility will be too good and they'll all take both. A second shot is just way better than most of the other AP options, and the variety between killing power and XP poaching is too much to ignore.

[Requires Fire, Level 6] Boom! Head Shot (2 AP) - Any non-Venom Hits inflicted by this unit's Fire actions are doubled. Does not affect constructs.

This is strictly worse than Crushing Your Head, but still good enough that only a crazy Archer wouldn't take it upon reaching level 6. Have I mentioned that levels are terrible prerequisites for things, and that level taxes are bad? Both are true.

[Requires Fly] I've got a Net! (1 AP) - Attempt to Neutralize & Capture a single target: If target's defense (including all modifiers) is less than this unit's Combat (including all modifiers), target is captured and cannot take any further actions until this unit releases them. This unit cannot take any further actions except for Movement until it releases them.

This needs a base Capture mechanic to compare it to- presumably there is one. The restriction to units that Fly is also totally arbitrary, perhaps because it's intended to keep the ability to units with a relatively low Combat score, though this is a poor way to do that in my opinion. In any case, it lets a unit at full health be taken out of combat in one action with no ability to defend themselves whatsoever, for the comparatively low price of the attacking unit being unable to act on the next round (which is presumably as long as it will take to execute the captured unit). I can't think of any other ability in the game that does that. This should be WAY more expensive than it is.

Heavy (Costs 3 AP): Unit gains +3 Combat / +4 Defense / +10 Hits. Cannot be taken by Fliers.

This one's a doozy. First, the restriction against Fliers taking it is largely arbitrary and pointless, restricting players from attempting unusual builds for what is in my opinion no good reason, but whatever. Going away from that- this is the single most efficient way to boost your stats out there, barring Dance-Fighting in a stack that also has Dance-Fighting (far more efficient) or Leadership at high level (only somewhat more efficient and doesn't boost Hits, but increases everyone's stats at once). It's as much Combat as Well-Equipped, more Defense than Well-Protected, and more Hits than Beefy in a package that costs 2 AP less than taking all three. The only reason not to take Heavy when looking to upgrade your stats is if you're specializing in something else and desperately need all your AP for that, which makes it statistically overpowered by a fair margin.

[Requires Heavy] Taunt (1 AP) - (Always active) If Enemy units can attack this unit, they will, moving to do so if necessary. If more than one unit possesses Taunt on a side, enemies will attack the closest Taunting unit. Does not affect units under the influence of Leadership.

The prerequisite of Heavy for this seems nonsensical; sure, units with Heavy would probably want to take this ability, but there's nothing about being Heavy that makes you more inclined to be able to draw enemy fire, just better able to weather it. Also, this ability seems mostly designed to let you get by without using any proper tactics, which I disapprove of. Maybe it's just a personal dislike for some reason; I can't see how this is actually unbalanced aside from seeming niche and weak.

Leadership (Costs 3 AP): All units in the same stack get +1 Combat / +1 Defense per level of the highest level character w/ leadership. Only 1 bonus applies.

As written, this is very powerful- at level 1 it's +16 for 3 AP, and it obviously only gets better from there. This is the ONLY ability on the list which scales with level, by the way, which needs to change- either it should not scale with level and needs follow-up abilities to increase Leadership bonuses or do other useful Leader-y things, or other abilities need to scale with level as well. With the unstated bonus of gaining minimum XP equal to the number of slain enemies on the field in every engagement, this is arguably the single best ability on the field either for groups OR personally and literally every group which has at least one member with 3 AP to spend in it should have someone with this ability, possibly two or even three so that they have a backup should their Leadership character die. This needs serious scaling back; the whole "this ability makes you an arrow magnet" thing doesn't really balance it out.

[MarbitChow]

Exate, that's a very detailed and useful break-down. Thank you, that will help immensely.

Re: Erfworld flavor - I'm not trying to implement an Erfworld simulator with these rules. Overlords are the only units worth playing in a true Erfworld simulation, and that's an entirely different type of game than this. When I use "Erfworld flavor", it's a completely arbitrary justification for 'why things are'. I'm going to borrow as much as I can from the known Erfworld universe to get this game up and running quickly, but I'm not going to be a completionist about it.

Re: Level Tax - I'm using this for Casters. I fully expect most casters to take spells with level restrictions as soon as they are available. Level-restricted abilities for melee work the same way. I'm not interested in making spending AP exactly equivalent, I'm just trying to create a simple mechanism for "You've leveled, you get to pick a new thing. Oh, and here are some things that are so cool that you'll give up 2 (or 3) other things to get it." I'm not running play-GURPS-by-post. And again, this goes to Erfworld flavor for its arbitrary final justification: level 8 characters are massively more powerful than level 1, so I want to be able to introduce powers that make upper levels significantly better.

Re: Abilities (like shockamancy resistance) that players won't take. Thanks for helping me achieve a moment of clarity on that. There will be abilities that are just completely out of a player's reach - Skeletons already have one such ability in their inherent resistance to Fire actions. I realize I was trying to flesh out a system that would work for both PCs and NPCs, but the NPC abilities can be completely arbitrary based on the need of the scenario. I'll try to clean up the player rules with that in mind.

[Exate]

Re: Level Tax - I'm using this for Casters. I fully expect most casters to take spells with level restrictions as soon as they are available. Level-restricted abilities for melee work the same way.

I consider this forgivable for casters because they have discipline specialization right in their name- essentially, they chose their entire main progression from a fairly broad array of options right at the start, with the only real variation in their secondary choices. There are thus five viable builds for the Caster class, which is plenty. Combat units were presented as having multiple viable builds as well, so while you can change the game design choice involved by making it optimal for every member of any given class to be built the same it goes rather sharply contrary to expectations.

I'm not interested in making spending AP exactly equivalent, I'm just trying to create a simple mechanism for "You've leveled, you get to pick a new thing. Oh, and here are some things that are so cool that you'll give up 2 (or 3) other things to get it." I'm not running play-GURPS-by-post.

AP value doesn't have to be exactly equivalent, but it should be close enough to equivalent that there are multiple reasonable choices in every case. Otherwise the whole system is a sham, a series of false choices with only one correct option that will lead to everyone wasting time contemplating rules that only lead to some people accidentally gimping themselves while those who don't want to be gimped wind up as identical clones- which is extremely poor game design and almost never fun for those involved. Either everyone should be identical clones from the start with a simplified ruleset which supports it or the variation should allow for multiple reasonable options.

And again, this goes to Erfworld flavor for its arbitrary final justification: level 8 characters are massively more powerful than level 1, so I want to be able to introduce powers that make upper levels significantly better.

Your arbitrary final justification though "Erfworld flavor" is absurd, as even with no AP abilities at all level 8 characters could carve through piles of level 1's like cardboard thanks to massively superior Combat and Defense stats, and introducing powers which make the upper levels significantly better can be done through methods which aren't a level tax.

[MarbitChow]

You start with 4 Ability Points (AP).

Basic Attacks
Attack: Deal Combat+2d6 Hits of damage to an adjacent opponent, reduced by their Defense.
Strike: Deal Combat+2d6 Hits of damage to an opponent who is adjacent or up to 2 squares away, reduced by their Defense.
Fire: Deal Combat+2d6 Hits of damage to any opponent on screen that they have clear line-of-site* to, reduced by their Defense.
* : Ranged Line-of-site limit will be referred to as RLOS

Base Stats: 1 Combat / 1 Defense / 4 Hits
Base bonus each level: +1 Combat / +1 Defense / +4 Hits / 1 AP
Can choose +1 Combat or +1 Def each level in addition to the base level bonus.

Select one of the following:
Warrior (Costs 1 AP): Unit gains +4 Combat / +4 Defense / +10 Hits / Attack.

Rage: At 4th level, a Warrior can make one additional attack against the same target.
Fury: At 8th level, a Warrior can make one additional attack against the same target. Stacks with Rage.

Spearman (Costs 1 AP): Unit gains +4 Combat / +3 Defense / +8 Hits / Strike.

Lunge: At 4th level, a Spearman can make a Strike against a unit behind their primary target as well. Cannot be used with Sweep.
Sweep: At 8th level, a Spearman can choose to sweep 3 adjacent targets. Cannot be used with Lunge.

Archer (Costs 2 AP): Unit gains +6 Combat / +2 Defense / +6 Hits / Fire.
Flier (Costs 4 AP): Unit can fly. Unit gains +3 Combat / +3 Defense / +4 Hits / Fire.
Caster (Costs 4 AP): Unit gains +2 Combat / Fire. Gains 8 Juice per level.

Casters select a single primary discipline. Primary disciplines grant additional benefits, as follows:

Healmancy: Unit gains 0.1 XP for each Hit they heal on an ally.
Luckamancy: Unit gains 0.5 XP whenever they roll a 6. Unit loses 1 XP whenever they roll two 1s.
Hippmancy: Unit gains full XP for each unit a side captures as if it were killed, max 4 units.
Naughtymancy: Unit gains experience for any kills their Uncroaked make.
Shockamancy: When damaging an enemy with a Fire action, any single attack that deals 5 or more hits also stuns the target.
At 4th level, units with Fire gain an additional attack against any target.
At 8th level, units with Fire gain an additional attack against any target (for a total of 3 attacks).

Attack Modifiers
Attack Modifiers can be purchased more than once, and their effects stack. A single Attack Modifer can be purchased up to three (3) times. A unit can only purchase as many ranks of Attack Modifiers as he has levels. When applying multiple attack modifiers, you cannot reduce your base Combat or Defense below 1. Any ranks that would reduce a stat below 1 fails. Only one type of Attack Modifier can be used by a unit each round.

Block (1 AP): Get Defense +3 and Combat -2 for the round.
Mighty Blow (1 AP): Get Combat +3 and Defense -2 for the round.
Guard (1 AP): Get Combat -2 for the round. A single adjacent ally gains +3 Defense for the round.
Interpose (1 AP): Get Defense -2 for the round. A single adjacent ally gains +3 Defense for the round.
Support (1 AP): Get Combat -2 for the round. A single adjacent ally targeting the same enemy as you gains +3 Combat for the round. Ally's attack will occur after your attack if ally would normally act first.
Coordinate (1 AP): Get Defense -2 for the round. A single adjacent ally targeting the same enemy as you gains +3 Combat for the round. Ally's attack will occur after your attack if ally would normally act first.

Additional Abilities
Additional Abilities are unique modifiers. Each can only be purchased once.

Dance-Fighting (1 AP): All units with Dance Fighting get +1 Combat / +1 Defense for every 2 dancers in the formation, rounded down. Bonus is limited to +3 / +3, but any number of units can be in the formation.

Beefy (1 AP): Unit gains an additional +8 Hits.
[Requires Beefy, Level 4] Chunky (1 AP) : Unit gains an additional +12 Hits.
[Requires Chunky, Level 8] Thick As A Brick (1 AP) : Unit gains an additional +16 Hits.

Well-armed (2 AP): Unit gains an additional +3 Combat
Well-protected (2 AP): Unit gains an additional +3 Defense
Heavy (3 AP): Unit gains +3 Combat / +4 Defense / +10 Hits.

Leadership (3 AP): All units in the same stack get +1 Combat / +1 Defense per level of the highest level character w/ leadership. Only the highest bonus applies. Leaders gain 1 XP for every kill made by any unit using their leadership bonus (besides themselves) in their stack. Max Leadership bonus +3/+3.
[Requires Leadership] Improved Leadership (1 AP) - Increase max Leadership bonus to +6 / +6
[Requires Leadership, Support, Coordinate] Empathic Leadership (1 AP) - You can use Support and Coordinate on any single unit in your stack at any range. The unit does not need to be adjacent to you.
[Requires Improved Leadership] Commanding Leadership (1 AP) - Increase max Leadership bonus to +9 / +9

[Requires Guard, Interpose, Block] Bodyguard (1 AP) - Half of the Hits inflicted upon a target (rounded up), from any source, that this unit is Guarding is inflicted upon this unit instead. If two units with Bodyguard are guarding the same target, that target takes no damage, the Guarding units absorb the damage instead. The attack on the guarded unit is calculated as normal, but all hits inflicted are distributed to the bodyguards instead. Cannot be used with any Attack Modifiers. (Note: Since damage is rounded up, odd Hits will deal more damage to paired bodyguards. Example : 9 Hits are split as 5 Hits each to 2 bodyguards.)
[Requires Might Blow x3] Reckless Assault (1 AP) - Get Combat +5 and Defense -3 for the round. Can be combined with any Attack Modifier. This ability cannot be used if Defense would be reduced below 1.
[Requires Block x3] Shield Mastery (1 AP) - Get Defense +5 and Combat -3 for the round. Can be combined with any Attack Modifier. This ability cannot be used if Combat would be reduced below 1.

Spells
All spells are RLOS unless specified otherwise. You can purchase spells outside of your primary discipline, as long as you have more spells in your discipline than you have in any non-primary disciplines. (So, if you have 3 spells in Healmancy, you can have 1 in Shockamancy and 1 in Luckamancy, or 2 in Croakamancy.)

Clevermancy (Healmancy) Healmancy has no effect on Uncroaked unless caster's primary discipline is Croakamancy. Wards last until all granted damage has been absorbed. Only 1 Ward can be in effect on a target at a time. If target receives a ward when a ward is already in place, target chooses which ward remains.
Revitalize - Heal 8 pts to 1 target (1 Juice)
[Requires Revitalize] Renew (1 AP) - Heal 16 pts to 1 target (2 Juice)
[Requires Revitalize] Minor Ward (1 AP) - Absorbs 8 damage on 1 target. (2 Juice)
[Requires Renew] Regenerate (1 AP) - Heals 8 damage on 1 target each round for 4 rounds. (4 Juice)
[Requires Renew, Level 4] Mass Revitalize (1 AP) - Heal 8 pts to up to 3 adjacent targets (4 Juice)
[Requires Minor Ward, Level 4] Ward (1 AP) - Absorbs 16 damage on 1 target. (5 Juice)
[Requires Mass Revitalize, Level 8] Mass Renew (1 AP) - Heal 24 pts to up to 3 adjacent targets (9 Juice)
[Requires Mass Revitalize, Minor Ward, Level 8] Healing Ward (1 AP) - Target is fully healed. Absorbs 12 damage on target. (15 Juice)
[Requires Ward, Level 8] Greater Ward (1 AP) - Absorbs 28 damage on 1 target. Lasts until all 28 damage has been absorbed. Only 1 Ward can be in effect on a target at a time. (10 Juice)
[Requires Ward, Level 8] Mass Ward (1 AP) - Grants Ward to every unit in unit's Stack (35 Juice)

Clevermancy (Luckamancy) Luckamancy spells last until used, and can persist over multiple turns if not used. (This means that, if a luckamancer is in the group and the scenario allows it, all units could start w/ Roll the Bones and the Luckamancer still gets full Juice, since the spells would have been cast prior to the start of the turn.)
Roll the Bones - On their next Attack, Strike, or Fire action, all target's d6 'rolls' are treated as 6s. On the following round, for every d6 modified in this way, an enemy unit will also max a d6 roll. (Enemy rolls can apply to any melee or spell action.) (1 Juice)
[Requires Roll the Bones] Fumble (1 AP) - On their next Attack, Strike, or Fire action, all d6s rolled by the target is treated as all 1s. On the following turn, for each d6 modified in this way, one '1' on the enemy's side will be converted to a '6'. (Enemy rolls can apply to any melee or spell action.) (3 Juice)
[Requires Fumble, Level 4] Lucky Streak (1 AP) - As Roll the bones, but the effect lasts for 3 turns. (8 Juice)
[Requires Fumble, Level 4] Guardian Angel (1 AP) - The next spell cast against target is negated. (10 Juice)
[Requires Lucky Streak, Level 8] Critical Fumble (1 AP) - Target's next Attack, Strike, or Fire action is completely negated. Deals target unit's Combat + 2d6 damage to target, minus Target's base Defense (ignoring positive modifiers; negative modifiers still apply) (10 Juice)
[Requires Lucky Streak, Guardian Angel , Level 8] Can't Lose (1 AP) - For the next 3 rounds, all dice rolls made by Caster's side are automatically 6s. All dice rolls made by the enemy's side are automatically 1s. On rounds 4 through 7, all rolls made by caster's side are automatically 2s, and all dice rolls made by the enemy's side are 5s. (60 Juice)

Hippymancy (Flower Power) - For all Hippymancy powers, any unit under the influence of Hippymancy who is attacked can immediately counterattack. This ends the power.
Space Out - Prevent target from acting for 2 turns, or until attacked. Unit on same side can use an action to 'wake them up' (1 Juice)
[Requires Space Out] Peace Sign (1 AP) - Target cannot make a hostile action for 4 turns. Targets under the influence of Peace Sign will surrender if they are the last unit on their side. Unit on same side can use an action to 'wake them up' (3 Juice)
[Requires Space Out] Entangle (1 AP) - Target is immobilized by vines for 2 turns, and can perform no actions. (4 Juice)
[Requires Peace Sign, Level 4] Groove (1 AP) - Prevent up to 3 adjacent targets from acting for a turn. (5 Juice)
[Requires Entangle, Level 4] Choking Vines (1 AP) - Target is immobilized by vines for 3 turns, and can perform no actions. Target takes 2d6 Hits / turn. Ignores Defense. (8 Juice)
[Requires Groove, Level 8] Give Peace A Chance (1 AP) - No units on either side can take any hostile action. Only Movement, Healmancy and Hippymancy actions are allowed this turn. (10 Juice)
[Requires Choking Vines, Level 8] Call Treant (1 AP) - Summons a Treant to fight for the caster. Treant will leave at the end of the combat. (40 Juice)

Naughtymancy (Croakamancy) Uncroaked lose 1 Combat, 1 Defense, and 2 Hits each day. When any of these stats reach 0, the Uncroaked crumbles to dust. Uncroaked created during combat arise where they died.
Reanimator - Animate a single fallen humanoid unit (friend or for) as a Minor Uncroaked. Lasts until destroyed or decays. (4 Juice)

Minor Uncroaked are created as Warriors, but with only 2 AP to start.

[Requires Reanimator] Bone Puppeteer (1 AP) - Create a skeleton from a single fallen humanoid unit (friend or for). Lasts until destroyed or decays. (8 Juice)

Skeletons are created as normal characters, but with only 3 AP to start. Skeletons also gain "Special: Defense is doubled vs. 'Fire' basic attacks."

[Requires Bone Puppeteer, Level 4] Uncroak (1 AP) - Animate a single fallen unit (friend or for) as an Uncroaked. Unit has same Com/Def/Hits as when alive. Lasts until destroyed or decays. (25 Juice)
[Requires Reanimator, Dance Fighting, Level 4] Thriller (1 AP) - All uncroaked created by this caster gain Dance Fighting.
[Requires Bone Puppeteer, Level 4] Bone Warlord (1 AP) - All uncroaked created by this caster gain +1 Combat / +1 Defense for each level this caster has.
[Requires Uncroak, Level 8] Trioxin (1 AP) - Animate all fallen units (friend or foe) as Minor Uncroaked. Lasts until destroyed or until the end of the combat. (45 Juice)
[Requires Uncroak, Level 8] Bone Horror (1 AP) - Create a Bone Horror from 6 fallen humanoids. Bone Horrors do not decay. (50 Juice)

Naughtymancy (Shockamancy)
Hiya - Deal Combat+1d6 to 1 target anywhere on screen. Ignores defense. (1 Juice)
[Requires Hiya] Hoboken (1 AP) - Deal Combat+2d6 to 1 target anywhere on screen. Ignores defense. (2 Juice)
[Requires Hoboken] TooGeeWonSee (1 AP) - Deal 2d6 to up to 4 enemy targets in a 2x2 square. Ignores defense. (5 Juice)
[Requires TooGeeWonSee] Ickypron (1 AP) - Deal Combat+1d6 to up to 3 adjacent targets anywhere on screen. Ignores defense. Targets are stunned for one turn. (7 Juice)
[Requires Ickypron ] Hobobarbie (1 AP) - Deal 3d6 any targets of caster's choosing in a 3x3 square area. Ignores defense. (18 Juice)
[Requires Hobobarbie, Level 8] 4Chan (1 AP) - Deals 4d6 to any targets of caster's choosing in a 5x5 square area. Ignores defense. Surviving targets are stunned for one turn. (40 Juice)

-----

Situational Modifiers:
Elevation : Unit who are at a higher elevation than their opponents receive a +4 Elevation Defense Bonus, and cannot be targeted by Attack or Strike actions. Flying, tower and castle walls grant elevation against ground units, and flying grants elevation against castle wall units. Flying units and units in Towers are considered to be at equal elevation.
Cover : Any Strike or Fire action that passes through another enemy unit's square before it hits the intended target grants the target a +4 Cover Bonus for each occupied square it passes through. Units attacking from elevation against lower-elevation units can ignore the Cover bonus.

Movement Modifiers:
Units that enter a square that is adjacent to an occupied enemy square must end their move, if both units are at the same elevation.

[MarbitChow]

The above is the final draft of the updated rules, based on the feedback I've received. Please familiarize yourselves with these rules. Let me know if you see any mistakes or major omissions. I'll be posting the next scenario tomorrow evening.

[ETheBoyce]

I like these rules!

Question: Since TooGeeWonCee doesn't add my Combat score, does Leadership effect it?

[MarbitChow]

No. TooGeeWonSee, Hobobarbie, and 4Chan do a set amount of damage to each enemy unit in the area, which cannot be modified by any means except the Master-level Luckamancy "Can't Lose" spell.