HOME | DD
CatspawDTP — Astral game rules (color)
Published: 2012-09-19 19:10:50 +0000 UTC; Views: 10157; Favourites: 210; Downloads: 1011
Redirect to original
Description
The rules in full color for Sun and Moon—The Astral Game. The PDF file is set up for US letter size (8.5 inches by 11 inches), and is four pages long. It also can be printed from Adobe Acrobat or Reader as a “booklet” on a single sheet of tabloid paper (11 inches by 17 inches), then folded in half.(I apologize for the bizarre category, but Deviantart steadfastly ignores the existence of any game other than digital games.)
Related content
Comments: 367
One of the things that takes getting used to with the board is that while the visual distance between stars increase as you move out from the center, the absolute distance (as far as piece movement is concerned) stays the same. A lot of new players fail to realize how "far" a unicorn can shoot or a pegasus can move near the outside edge.
I dislike having my earth ponies near the center of the board, but that has more to do with the Earth restricting their movement than problems of distance. It's like having a knight near the edge of the chessboard in chess; your piece's restricted mobility means that it's movement options are more limited.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, I was aware of the optical illusion created by the board’s geometry, although I didn’t see any real way to ameliorate it. I’m not sure whether a warning or reminder in the rulebook is warranted.
Your comment on earth ponies near the board’s center is interesting. I wanted the board to have at least a little “terrain” on it, much as xiangqi has similar rudimentary elements, such as the river and the palace.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What if a unicorn positioned on S3E fires along the arc that takes it through S2F and onto S2E? That position is still adjacent to it, but does not take advantage of that turning loophole you resolved.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Good point. My gut reaction is that the “not on adjacent stars” clause should take precedence. The unicorn would be slightly more vulnerable to an earth pony approaching it along the twilight line, but no more vulnerable to a pegasus. It’s a quirk, but I don’t think it’s a damaging one—one of those edge-case artifacts that lend character to a game like this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"A unicorn pony may capture an opposing soldier exactly two stars away...It may not capture an opposing soldier that is only one star away from it." The rules specifically disallow a unicorn from capturing a soldier on an adjacent star.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I figured that wording was just to prevent a unicorn's shot from turning a corner back next to itself. This move is a legitimate path along one arc without turning. So I'm not sure if the prevention of this move is intentional or an unforeseen consequence.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It’s an unforeseen consequence, but I think a relatively minor one. There’s no avoiding all of them, I suspect, and as long as the game isn’t profoundly compromised, there shouldn’t be a major problem.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I've seen some people make their own MLP boardgames, but this is certainly the most creative, even more so than that MLP Monopoly board. Just the overall design and rules look impressive.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks very much! I tried to create something worthy of both young and adult players.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What if the capturing of an opponent's piece via escape also puts them into eclipse or banishment? You'd pretty much "outrun" the other rules and actually have the opportunity to capture their princess before they can even check the board for ways out of it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If I’m understanding your scenario correctly, the escaping player turns the tables on the opposing player—and at that point would have to announce eclipse or banishment in turn.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So the eclipsing occurs at the end of their turn, rather than before/during it and does not totally turn the rules on its head. The most interesting possibility this presents is using your turn to get a second piece threatening. Capturing becomes inadequate for getting out, unless they use a pegasus to both capture and block.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Eclipsing is the result of a move; therefore the condition doesn’t exist until the moment the move ends. That’s why the eclipsing player doesn’t announce it until after the move (and capture, if one is involved).
The announcement puts the eclipsed player on notice that she must address the eclipse immediately, on the turn she is about to take, or lose the game.
To be honest, I don’t think I’m understanding your thesis, though. Who are you thinking has an opportunity to involve a second piece, how, and why?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I did originally have a misconception about auto-capturing before making the escape move, which can be disregarded. But the following situation can still occur.
Opponent: Moves placing me into eclipse. Declares banishment.
Me: Declares escape. Makes move that puts me out of eclipse and puts opponent into eclipse. Automatically captures piece that was blocking one of my other pieces from threatening. Rare double threatened condition occurs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah! Yes, that could happen. On the suggestion of a commenter that believed the penalty capture was too harsh, I rephrased that rule:
“In tournament play, to discourage a player from calling banishment too casually or to bully an opponent into resigning, the escaping player may be permitted to capture, automatically, one opposing soldier anywhere on the board as a penalty.”
That way, if players of a friendly casual game want to disregard it they can, but anyone trying to run something more formal can invoke it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Neat. That ought to speed up casual play.
Somehow, I managed to get my speech pushed back to Thursday, which also happens to be the day of my college's games club. I might be able to do some playtesting then.
I may also have some diagrams of some basic strategic maneuvers/configurations, if you want to start compiling them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Excellent! That should give you at least a little breathing room to study the game. I was regretting pushing things so close to your deadline.
Yes, please! I don’t know whether I want to compile a central repository/document for it, or allow folks to create their own documents. I suppose I should consult the peanut gallery and see what the prevailing sentiment would be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
*eclipsing occurs at the end of your (the escaping player's) turn
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I like it. Now we only need rules for random variants as well as digital versions for people too lazy to print it out and assemble it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Once I’ve had a chance to catch my metaphorical breath, I may start building on it rather like “fairy chess” builds on that game, with variant pieces and suchlike. Of course, other folks are free to do that as well, and I certainly encourage it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well yes, I'm not trying to rush you. In fact, I think I found a guy on my end who can probably whip up a flash version for you, although he's hesitant to make AI.
Also, I like what you did with unicorns, it gives them a good "weak spot" as it were, by making them unable to attack adjacent pieces, I really wanna play a round just to see how these systems work out.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank TopGull for the interlocking moves and captures; he responded to my encapsulation of the problem as requiring each piece to be capable of threatening both of the other two with an excellent analysis and solution.
You can find a summation of his conclusions on my last-but-one journal posting!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Is a unicorn able t snipe over the twiline?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, but not through heavenly bodies. On the other hand, other pieces can move through the twilight line too, so unicorns should be vulnerable—if not to pegasus soldiers then certainly to earth ponies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
One thing that should definitely be clarified (or better yet, illustrated) is the rule that the Unicorn can't capture pieces that are one star ahead of it.
the reason being that, like an Earth pony, a unicorn could theoretically capture a piece one space ahead by "targeting" ahead one star, then Turning a corner. That is technically two stars ahead. I found the wording that closes that loophole, but it should be clarified /emphasized through an illustration in the figure.
(perhaps showing an attempt to utilize that loophole, but putting an X on it to show it's not legal)
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Oh, yeah. Do I recall correctly that you were the first to suggest jump-capture for the pegasus? If so, what name should I use to credit you?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Heh, I didn't think you'd want to credit just for a small concept like that, but I'll note you about it
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I might do the latter, which immediately popped into my head as I was reading your comment—half a second before I got to that part of it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Great job on the revision, my friends and I tested out the game based on the old rules, and it didn't work out at all. It turned into trading pieces while trying to avoid the unicorns.
I'm going to test out the new rules and let you know how it goes. Seems quite balanced now
Just wanted to ask if you could clarify something. If a pegasus encounters a unicorn that is 3 stars away, can it still fly over the unicorn and capture it and end its turn on the next start? (making its movement range to 4 because it has to fly over the first piece it encounters?).
If that is correct, then I would presume that the Earth Pony counters the Pegasus (as the earth can turn arcs while the pegasus can't), the pegasus counters the unicorn (as the pegasus has more range), and the unicorn counters the earth pony (as the unicorn can just capture the earth pony before the earth pony captures the unicorn).
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
No. The absolute limit on pegasus movement is three stars; that limits its capture to two stars.
TopGull’s analysis showed that method to be exactly complementary to the earth pony’s capture range: Each of the two can capture a piece on a neighboring star, but the ability to capture a piece two stars away is offset. My last-but-one journal posting contains links to his diagrams of the soldiers’ zones of threat. He was able to provide an answer to the essential dilemma that every piece must be able to threaten both of the others.
An earth pony threatens a pegasus by sitting “around a corner” from it; a pegasus threatens an earth pony by sitting two stars down an arc from it.
A pegasus threatens a unicorn by sitting adjacent to it; a unicorn threatens a pegasus just as an earth pony does.
A unicorn threatens an earth pony just as a pegasus does; an earth pony threatens a unicorn by sitting adjacent to it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
No
its max range is 3 stars, and it cannot land on an occupied star. Therefore, a Pegasus cannot flyover a unicorn 3 stars away and land after it (due to its max range of 3), nor can it land on that third star to capture (since it cannot land there at all)
In that situation, both pieces are safe from each other, but (assuming it's a Dark Peg vs a Light Uni), if it's the Dark's turn, the peg could threaten by moving Two stars ahead, so it is one space away from the Unicorn (this would also keep it safe from that unicorn). If it's Light's turn, It could move the uni one space ahead to threaten the Peg, but this would also put the Uni in danger. It would take a couple turns for the Uni to move so it threatens the Peg while staying safe, but you get what i mean
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What's this? Balance!? 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I haven't tried a game yet, nor even done any significant amount of consideration of strategy, but I'm not so sure that the current form of the unicorn's capture rules is a good idea. I think the fundamental problem that they used to have was how they can capture without moving, making it so capturing with a unicorn could only possibly be disadvantageous under highly contrived circumstances. I don't think it's possible to keep the ability to capture without moving and restrict it enough to make them not brokenly powerful at defense without making them offensively practically useless. My gut is telling me that the current rules are going to relegate them to a support role where they stay two spaces away from more powerful allied pieces to threaten to capture anything that takes those pieces, and that outside this their inability to capture anything adjacent to them will make them frequently useless.
But, of course, my gut will bow to whatever playtesting determines.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
On the other hand, if I can convince you to revise the rules again, I still have a chance to convince you to put in the necessity to guard the Sun and Moon . . .
Also, a question: you can put one princess in eclipse with the other princess, yes? If one princess moves within capturing range of the other, the one that moved puts the stationary one in eclipse, rendering it unable to threaten the one that moved, yes?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
But I am certain that any situation where you use the Princess to threaten another princess, would allow the threatened princess to take your princess. It'd be like how you can't put 2 kings next to each other in chess. You can not move your King (or in this case princess) into check, so you can't move 2 kings/princesses next to each other as a form of check.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, because in the current rules a princess in eclipse may not capture. Therefore if I move my princess into range of your princess, my princess is threatening your princess, so your princess is threatening nothing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah yes, I didn't realize that when I originally responded. Apparently I missed that rule on my first read.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yes, that’s right—although it’s a risky strategy, since it may be possible for the other player to turn the tables. That said, the history of chess is full of notable risky strategies that paid off, or didn’t.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I've been thinking about the unicorn balance issues, and I had an idea. Do you think it would help if you made unicorn captures directional? I.e., when you move or place a unicorn you have to choose which arc it's 'facing', and can only capture soldiers along that arc. The game pieces could be modified to include an arrow to help keep track.
I'm not an expert or anything, so this is just a thought.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I’ve decided on a revised movement schema and will be rewriting the rulebook today. You may want to check out my latest journal posting for the details.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I guess I might add my 2 bits to suggestions for rule changes
I personally think that the pieces need a movement speed, I think it's been proven that without a limit, the game is really hard to play. After all, keep in mind that the Princesses act as essentially both a King and Queen in Chess Terms, so things can't be too powerful in order to still be able to even win. Also, if pieces have an upper limit on movement of only a few spaces, then I think that it's possible that having the twilight line restrict movement isn't necessary. It's hard to say for sure though without testing, so I'll leave that in for now.
Another thing real quick, for the optional rule of gaining captured pieces, I'm thinking that maybe instead of being able to place it anywhere on your side for that turn, you have to place the soldier on your celestial body. Naturally you wouldn't be able to do that if it's occupied, so that would both standardize that system so it's a little more predictable, it gives you a significant reason to start moving your princess, and it also prevents doing that for 2 turns in a row.
Anyways, here's how I think the pieces should move. I personally think that instead of using their ability at the cost of attacking or moving, they should be able to make full use of their piece in a turn. Like how in chess you don't choose between jumping as a knight or capturing a piece in a turn. I do like how you're going for a different method of moving and capturing for each piece though. So here's my specifics on each piece:
Earth: Moves up to 3 spaces, can change arc once per move. Captures by ending their turn on top of an enemy piece. This gives them a large threat range, but also puts them at the most vulnerable as they end up in the same space as the enemy, which could be easily guarded. They make up for it by being agile and moving far.
Pegasus: Moves up to 3 spaces, can jump over enemy and allied pieces by "skipping" the space the other piece is on and landing on the space directly beyond it on the same arc. You can only skip one piece at a time, and with a movement of 3 spaces, you can only jump 1 piece a turn, and it would have to be only 1 or 2 spaces away. Captures by jumping over enemy pieces, and may continue to their full movement along the same arc. They can jump over allies without taking them, ala Chinese Checkers. This gives them a slightly shorter threat range, but they can still move a good distance, and they're good at getting out of sticky situations. For instance an Earth pony that's surrounded is pretty much dead, whereas a pegasus could more likely get out of there, and even take a piece in the process.
Unicorn: Moves up to 1 space per turn. Captures any single piece adjacent to them in any direction along an arc, regardless of initial movement. When capturing the piece next to them, they remain on the same space they were on when they ended their movement.
Possible changes to this would be:
Reducing Earth movement to 2, but I feel like they need more than that. Other than that, they're fairly simple.
Possibly making Pegasi capture like Earth, but maybe not being able to capture pieces adjacent to them, and maybe allowing them to jump over 2 spaces total, keeping in mind the max distance stays at 3 still, so it'd have to be 2 pieces right next to them along an arc.
As for unicorns, it's hard to make a piece like that not over-powered, but at the same time I like the idea. I think that even with a movement of only 1 would work, as they'd be used more for small area denial than offense. Maybe even make it so they're not allowed to move and attack adjacent pieces in the same turn, but they'd be able to capture like an Earth pony when, providing the piece was really only 1 space away.
Now, I think that this game could also benefit from more piece types, but it's hard to figure something out that would make since. What I think this might need is a sort of pawn-type piece, something that doesn't do a whole lot, yet opens up a lot of new strategies. I think I came up with something, but I'm not sure what to call it. I'm thinking maybe gems, or if each side gets 3, then maybe elements. They wouldn't be labeled as specific elements, just each side gets 3.
Element: Movement: 1 space along an arc. Cannot capture pieces, cannot be captured. Earth ponies cannot move on top of them in an attempt to capture. Pegasi can fly over them, but it's like flying over an ally, no capture occurs, and they cannot end their turn on them. Unicorns cannot attack them or move on top of them. An element cannot move on top of any other piece, again as they cannot capture.
This would fulfill the role of a pawn-type piece, essentially acting as obstacles that each side gets control over. I can think of 2 ways to implement this piece into the game:
Each side now gets the following pieces: 3 Earth, 3 Pegasi, 3 unicorn, 3 Elements, 1 Princess. Total 13 pieces
or
Each side now gets: 3 Earth, 3 Pegasi, 3 unicorn, 1 Princess. Total 10 pieces. However, either side can use their turn to move any of the elements. The elements also have a specific starting place, that being on alternate stars along the circle intersecting both the sun and moon, (the second one from the center). This puts 3 elements on each side, 6 total, with none on the twilight line or any celestial bodies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The pieces need a movement speed.
Yeah, I think it’s becoming clear that’s necessary.
The princess acts as both king and queen in chess terms, so things can't be too powerful in order to allow a win.
I’m hoping the revised movement rules will cut back on that a lot. We’ll see.
If pieces have an upper limit on movement of only a few spaces, then I think that it's possible that having the twilight line restrict movement isn't necessary.
I’m leaning pretty heavily that way.
For the optional rule of gaining captured pieces, I'm thinking that maybe instead of being able to place it anywhere on your side for that turn, you have to place the soldier on your celestial body.
It’s modeled on the “drop” rule in shogi, which is even more generous—a piece can be dropped anywhere on the board! Besides, I’d rather not make an exception to the conceptual principle that the heavenly bodies are off-limits to all pieces except the princesses, and dropping it on one’s half of the firmament echoes the original game-opening deployment.
Instead of using their ability at the cost of attacking or moving, they should be able to make full use of their piece in a turn.
That’s how I plan to do it in the revised rules.
I do like how you're going for a different method of moving and capturing for each piece though.
That’s why I’m considering converting the pegasus capture method to a checkers-style jump, as suggested by a commenter. It would make each soldier type’s capturing unique.
Earth: Moves up to 3 spaces, can change arc once per move. Captures by ending their turn on top of an enemy piece. This gives them a large threat range, but also puts them at the most vulnerable as they end up in the same space as the enemy, which could be easily guarded. They make up for it by being agile and moving far.
I plan to stay with two spaces, unless someone can present strong evidence that it isn’t practical. Otherwise I’m considering pretty much that concept.
Pegasus: Moves up to 3 spaces, can jump over enemy and allied pieces by "skipping" the space the other piece is on and landing on the space directly beyond it on the same arc. You can only skip one piece at a time, and with a movement of 3 spaces, you can only jump 1 piece a turn, and it would have to be only 1 or 2 spaces away. Captures by jumping over enemy pieces, and may continue to their full movement along the same arc. They can jump over allies without taking them, ala Chinese Checkers. This gives them a slightly shorter threat range, but they can still move a good distance, and they're good at getting out of sticky situations. For instance an Earth pony that's surrounded is pretty much dead, whereas a pegasus could more likely get out of there, and even take a piece in the process.
That pretty much echoes the revision I’ve proposed. I suspect, though it isn’t stated, that you also agree with the idea that a pegasus, unlike an earth pony, has to follow a single arc and can’t turn a corner on its move.
Unicorn: Moves up to 1 space per turn. Captures any single piece adjacent to them in any direction along an arc, regardless of initial movement. When capturing the piece next to them, they remain on the same space they were on when they ended their movement.
That’s pretty much the plan, although I think I also will allow an earth-pony-style move if the unicorn doesn’t capture. Otherwise the unicorn becomes a terrible slowpoke.
Element: Movement: 1 space along an arc. Cannot capture pieces, cannot be captured. Earth ponies cannot move on top of them in an attempt to capture. Pegasi can fly over them, but it's like flying over an ally, no capture occurs, and they cannot end their turn on them. Unicorns cannot attack them or move on top of them. An element cannot move on top of any other piece, again as they cannot capture.
It’s an intriguing idea. What I think I will do with that is make it a “fairy piece”, rather like some of the weird variant pieces one can get in fairy chess . That’s not a knock—far from it; I need things like that! The idea is to create a cultural artifact that occupies a similar niche in Equestria society to those enjoyed by chess or xiangqi or shogi in the real world, with all the baggage and accumulations that implies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Can a pegasus fly over a soldier on the twilightline and continue his way afterwards?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not under the current rules. Stay tuned, though; a revision probably is in the offing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It seems like in the movement alteration being discussed that allowing the flyover rule may not break anything too badly. Since the pegasi are limited to a straight line, the furthest they could move past a piece is 2 spaces (given that it has to pass over a piece). No matter which piece was jumped over, the pegasus would still be able to be hit by the piece it jumped. Changing their rules so they jump and can only attack pieces on the 3rd star of the arc might be interesting to try instead. That would give them the longest, if most limiting, method of attack between the 3 piece types.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I’m considering the suggestion a commenter made of instituting a checkers-style jump-capture for the pegasus, which would make each soldier’s capture style unique. A pegasus still would be allowed to jump only one soldier, though—either one friendly soldier or (capturing) one opposing soldier.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
With that, it gives defenders a huge advantage. Every piece has an effective attack range of 2 (since the pegasi have to move 3 spaces to capture a piece 2 stars away). It means that every piece needs to move within attack range of every other piece in order to attack. Except against the pegasi, where you can hide at an angle, but that still leaves a problem taking unicorns and earth ponies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>