Dated: 9/5/97

Questions are by Joan C. Artes.
Avalon Hill answers surrounded by "*"s.
Joan has a few comments near some of the "*"s.
Roberto Ullfig's "critique" in "[]".

***
REPUBLIC OF ROME

5.11) RULE 5.11 SAYS THAT GRACCHI BROTHERS (AND LICINII) ARE THE
EXCEPTION AND THEY CAN BE PLAYED SIMULTANEOUSLY. I UNDERSTAND
THAT THEY CAN BE PLAYED IN DIFFERENT FACTIONS. IS THAT SO?

*******
* yes *
*******

[never in doubt]

5.11) IN A RECENT GAME ONE FACTION STARTED WITH THE SEMPRONIUS
FAMILY (#25) WHILE ANOTHER GOT BOTH GRACCHI BROTHERS. WE ARGUED
THAT THE ONLY WAY HE COULD PLAY ONE OF THOSE STATEMEN WAS TO
TRADE (OR EVEN GIVE) ONE OF THEM TO THE PLAYER WITH THE #25
FAMILY SO THAT HE COULD PLAY THE OTHER IN HIS OWN FACTION. IS
THAT SO?

*******
* yes *
*******

[never in doubt]

5.3) WHEN A FACTION LOSES ITS LAST SENATOR, THEY GET A FREE
SENATOR FROM THE CURIA OR DECK. WHAT IF THAT SENATOR IS THE
FAMILY CARD OF A STATESMAN WHICH IS IN PLAY? IS IT RETURNED TO
DECK OR IT JOINS THE STATESMAN? (AND ANOTHER IS TAKEN BY THE
EMPTY PLAYER)

********************************
* It joins the statemen....yes *
********************************

[sounds fine]

7.312) SOME STATEMEN SHOW LOYALTY ZERO IF IN THE SAME FACTION
WITH OTHER STATEMEN. FROM THEIR CHARTS THESE RELATIONS ARE NOT
BIJECTIVE. THAT IS, SENATOR "A" HAS LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME
FACTION AS "B" BUT "B" KEEPS HIS STANDARD LOYALTY EVEN IF IN THE
SAME FACTION AS "A". IS THAT SO?

*******
* yes *
*******

[knew that]

7.312) CATO (#22A) HAS LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME FACTION WITH SCI-
PIOS/FLAMINIUS. DOES THIS SPECIFICALLY MEANS #1A, #1B AND #18A?

*******
* yes *
*******

[yep]

7.312) DO ALL THESE UNLOYAL RELATIONS REFER TO RELATIONS BETWEEN
CONCRETE STATEMEN, NOT TO THE FAMILIES? THAT IS, L. CORNELIUS
SULLA (#1C) HAS LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME FACTION WITH C. MARIUS
(#27A), OR HE HAS LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME FACTION WITH MARIUS
FAMILY (#27) WHEN C. MARIUS (#27A) HAS NOT APPEARED YET (OR HAS
ALREADY DIED)?

****************************
* always concrete statemen *
****************************

[of course]

7.312) I HAVE HEARD THAT QUINCTIUS FLAMINIUS (#18A) HAS AN ERROR
IN HIS CHART AND THAT HIS HAS LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME FACTION AS
CATO (#22A). IS THAT SO?

*******
* yes *
*******

[yep]

7.312) T. SEMPRONIUS GRACCHUS CARD (#25A) SAYS THAT HE HAS
LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME FACTION AS G. GRACCHUS. I UNDERSTAND
THIS IS A TYPO AND REFERS TO C. GRACCHUS (#25B). IS THAT SO?

*******
* yes *
*******

[STOP: These two cards are worded differently than the others; they say
"Opposing Faction Loyalty". Now, they are brothers and I have
not read anything where they are depicted as adversaries plus they held
the same philosophies and beliefs. I always took the _Opposing_ part to
mean that they have a Faction Loyalty of 0 when they are on _different_
factions.]

7.312) P. POPILLIUS LAENAS CARD (#23A) SAYS THAT HE HAS LOYALTY 0
IF IN THE SAME FACTION AS GRACCHI. I UNDERSTAND THIS REFERS TO
BOTH GRACCHUS BROTHERS (#25A) AND (#25B). IS THAT SO?

********************************************
* yes (Gracchi, latin plural for Gracchus)*
********************************************

[yep]

7.312) C. JULIUS CAESAR CARD (#4A) SAYS THAT HE HAS LOYALTY 0 IF
IN THE SAME FACTION AS CATO. I UNDERSTAND THIS REFERS TO CATO THE
YOUNGER (#22B) AS CATO THE ELDER (#22A) AND #4A DID NOT COINCIDE
IN REAL LIFE. IS THAT SO?

*******
* yes *
*******

[that's o.k.]
7.312) BOTH LICINIUS CARDS (#29A AND #29B) SAY THAT THEY HAVE
LOYALTY 0 IF IN THE SAME FACTION AS POMPEY (#30A OR #30, SEE
QUESTION 7.B). ON HIS OWN, CN. POMPEIUS MAGNUS HAS LOYALTY 0 IF
IN THE SAME FACTION AS CRASSUS (#29A). L. LICINIUS LUCULUS IS NOT
AFFECTED. IS THAT SO?

*********************************************

* 30A, the second question was not answered *
*********************************************

[See one of the previous questions/answers. Loyalties do not have to go
both ways. He should not be affected (unless another errata comes out
which says otherwise)]

7.312) A STATESMAN WHO NULLIFIES THE D/S NUMBERS OF A WAR, DOES
HE ALSO NULLIFY THE D/S NUMBERS FROM THE LEADER(S) ASSOCIATED TO
THE WAR?

*******
* yes * but this is in clear contradiction with other sets of Q&A
******* given by AH itself.

[Of course, a contradiction. We'll never know now the true intent.]

7.312) IS A STATESMAN PLAYABLE IF ANOTHER STATESMAN IS IN PLAY
WITH THE SAME ID AND OWNS THE FAMILY CARD?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Well, this depends now doesn't it. Answered well in the previous Q's.
Basically, what it comes down to is that a family card underneath a
statesman is "not in play".]

7.312) IF 2 STATESMEN WITH THE SAME ID ARE IN PLAY AND THE FAMILY
CARD COMES UP, WHO GETS IT?

**********************************
* the statemen with lower letter *
**********************************

[answered in a previous errata.]

7.312) IF 2 STATESMEN WITH THE SAME ID ARE IN PLAY AND THE ONE
WITH THE FAMILY CARD DIES, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE FAMILY CARD?

**********************************
* goes to the surviving statemen *
**********************************

[Note, that a player could lose a faction leader by this ruling. I think
this is the proper way to play it though.]

7.33) THE JUGURTHINE WAR (AND OTHERS) DOES NOT SPECIFY THE -20
TALENTS TO STATE IF ACTIVE WHILE RULE 7.344 SAYS THAT EACH ACTIVE
WAR FORCES THE -20? IS THIS RIGHT OR IT IS A TYPO?

******************************
* all wars must have the -20 *
******************************

[Yep, covered elsewhere.]

7.33) THE CONCESSIONS DESTROYED BY WARS (EGIPTIAN GRAIN, SICILIAN
GRAIN, TAX FARMERS) ARE THEY DESTROYED IMMEDIATELY WHEN THE WAR
APPEARS OR IN CASE IT IS NOT DEFEATED?

***********************
* in the Senate phase *
***********************

[O.K. I will reverse my previous perceptions regarding the grain
concessions in favor of this more universal rule. Sounds good to me.]

7.33-10.4) WHEN A WAR IS DISCARDED BY MULTIPLE "NEW ALLIANCE"
EVENTS, ARE PROVINCES CREATED? IF NOT THAT PROVINCE WILL NEVER
APPEAR.

**********************************
* yes, the provinces are created *
**********************************

[Yeah, figured this one out.]

7.33-10.12) WHEN A WAR IS RETURNED TO THE DECK BY A "NEW
ALLIANCE" EVENT, DOES IT RETAIN IT'S "FLEET VICTORIOUS" STATUS,
IF ANY? CAN A NEW ALLIANCE EVEN BE REFUSED?

*******************************************
* no, it is lost. No it cannot be refused *
*******************************************

[Sounds fine to me.]

7.332) IF ONE OF SEVERAL MATCHED WARS IS DEFEATED, THE NEXT WAR
DOES STILL MANTAINS ITS INCREASED VALUE IN THAT SAME TURN IN CASE
OF BEING ATTACKED? DO THEY NEED BEING ATTACKED IN A CONCRETE
ORDER?

*****************************
* no. HRAO may decide order *
*****************************

[First part was a given. Second part doesn't quite sit right with the
rulebook. I say this is still undecided unless I hear something to the
effect that the rulebook is wrong or that explains the wording in the
rulebook.]

7.332) IN THE SECOND REPUBLIC SCENARIO, SPANISH REVOLTS AND
NUMANTINE WAR HAVE THE SAME PICTURE? DO THEY MATCH EACH OTHER?
DOES LEADER VIRIATO LEADS BOTH OF THEM? IF THEY DO NOT MATCH BUT
VIRIATO LEADS THEM BOTH, WHAT HAPPENS IF BOTH ARE ACTIVES? ALSO
SEROTIAN REVOLT IN THIRD REPUBLIC COINCIDE THE PICTURE.

********************************************************************
* Yes, they match. Yes, he does. Sertorian war also matches and is *
* leaded by Viriato *
********************************************************************

[O.K. contradicts the earlier errata, but explains Viriathus' text. So,
Numantine, Spanish, and Sertorian match and all are led by Viriathus. He
is eliminated when all _three_ are defeated. I like it as it makes the
Middle Republic more challenging. So, pictures do match after all.]

7.332) ALSO SIRIAN WAR-ANTIOCHUS AND ALEXANDRINE WAR-CLEOPATRA
HAVE THE SAME PICTURES. DO THEY MATCH IN ANY WAY?

********************
* Yes, they match. *
********************

[Fine, not likely to ever come up though...]

7.34) HANNIBAL CARDS SAYS THAT HE MAKES AN EXTRA TAX FARMER LOSS
ROLL PER TURN. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ONLY APPLIES WHEN 2ND
PUNIC WAR IS ACTIVE. IF NOT DRAWN, OR IF ONLY 1ST PUNIC WAR IS
ACTIVE, NO TAX FARMER IS DESTROYED. IS THAT SO?

**************************************************************
* Yes, Hannibal and 2nd Punic make two tax farmers destroyed *
* Hannibal and 1st Punic make no tax farmer destroyed *
**************************************************************

[Yep, knew this.]

7.34) SIMILAR WITH SPARTACUS AND GLADIATOR SLAVE REVOLT. NOT
APPLICABLE TO SICILIAN SLAVES REVOLTS.

****************************************************************
* Yes, Spartacus and Gladiators make two tax farmers destroyed *
* Spartacus and Sicilian make no tax farmer destroyed *
**************************************************************

[Yeah, yeah.]

7.353) DOES SEVERAL DROUGHTS ALSO INCRESE THE AMOUNT OF UNREST OR
IT IS FIXED TO +1?

**************************************
* It increasaes +1 for every drought *
**************************************

[What was the confusion here?]

7.355-9.8) DO EVIL OMENS AFFECT ASSASSINATION DIE ROLLS? IF SO,
IN WHICH SENSE, IN FAVOUR OR KILLER OR AGAINST?

********************
* Yes. Substract 1 * I understand then that it favours the victim
********************

[Maybe not logical, but fits the rules as written. Could make a house
rule that says otherwise without much disagreement I would think.]

7.355) DO EVIL OMENS AFFECT INF/POP LOSS DUE TO BLACKMAIL?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Same as last.]

7.355) DO EVIL OMENS AFFECT EVENT TABLE DIE ROLLS?

*******
* no *
*******

[What! Where did this come from. Why not? I disagree wholeheartedly!
Event rolls are not _initiative_ rolls. Not only that, but it makes sense
to lower the roll since the lower-numbered events are the "eviller" ones.]

7.355) DO EVIL OMENS AFFECT THE "MURDER OF A TRIBUNE" DIE ROLL?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Same as the one before the previous one.]

7.355) DO EVIL OMENS AFFECT THE BATTLE DIE ROLL IN A CIVIL WAR?
IN WHICH SENSE?

***************************
* yes. Against the Senate *
***************************

[Enough now, card says _ALL_ rolls except for INITIATIVE rolls. Why is a
clarification needed? I will stick by the card text unless house rules
are made.]

7.359) A PROVINCE WHICH REVOLTS DUE TO THE INTERNAL DISORDER
EVENT BECOMES AN ACTIVE WAR WITH FORCE EQUAL TO HIS LOCAL FORCES
PLUES PROVINCIAL ONES. WHAT ABOUT UNDEVELOPED SARDINIA-CORSICA
WITH LOCAL FORCES 0/0 AND NO PROVINCIAL FORCES?. (SIMILAR WITH
EVENT CARD "PRETENDER EMERGES")

*******************
* It has no force *
*******************

[I assume then that a land battle need not be fought?]

7.36) DO DISCARDED INTRIGUE GO FACE-UP OR FACE-DOWN?

***********
* Face up *
***********

[I always assumed this or heard it somewhere else.]

7.5) THE SEDUCTION INTRIGUE CARD SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT SEDUCTIONS
MUST BE CARRIED BY THE FACTION LEADER. IS THAT SO, OR YOU MAY USE
A MORE INFLUENCING SENATOR OF YOUR FACTION?

***********************************
* You may use any senator in Rome *
***********************************

[O.K. I always assumed so but a clarification doesn't hurt.]

7.61) RULE 7.6 SAYS THAT A SENATOR MUST BE IN ROME IN ORDER TO
ATTRACT A KNIGHT. WHEN YOU PRESSURE KNIGHTS, MUST THEY BE FROM
ONLY ONE SENATOR, OR FROM SEVERAL? CAN YOU PRESSURE KNIGHTS FROM
SENATORS NOT IN ROME?

**********************************************
* As many as you want. Either in Rome or not *
**********************************************

[Literally, by the rules, this is correct.]

7.363) THE ACILIAN LAW GIVES FINING RIGHTS TO THE FACTION WITH
THE MOST KNIGHTS. DOES THAT INCLUDE KNIGHTS LOYAL TO SENATORS NOT
IN ROME?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Sounds good to me.]

9.21) CAN A DICTATOR, MASTER OF HORSE, CENSOR OR PONTIFEX MAXIMUS
BE PROPOSED AS CONSULS? EVEN IF THIS LEAVES NO CANDIDATE WITH
PRIOR CONSUL TO BECOME CENSOR?

*******
* no *
*******

[#!$Huh! This whole part needs a big clarification/rewrite. Also, it's not
clear whether the "NO" refers to both questions or only of them. First of
all, there are three rules at issue here:
1. A senator may not hold two offices simultaneously.
2. A consul cannot succeed himself (unless Tradition Erodes is in play).
3. A censor may be elected consul.
#2 implies that a censor (or any other officer) _can_ succeed himself. The
rules as written should therefore allow a dictator to become a consul
since he surrenders the dictatorship as soon as he becomes consul (this is
in the rules) and therefore does not hold two offices simultaneously (It
makes sense that this applies to the MoH as well). The PM should not be
allowed to be elected to any office anyway. The part about the prior
consul is just ridiculous. You should not have to look ahead in this
fashion. This answer leaves much to be desired.]

9.3) SOMEONE TOLD ME THAT THE HRAO CANNOT VOTE AGAINST HIS OWN
PROPOSALS (ALTHOUGH THE REST OF THE MEMBER OF HIS FACTION CAN).
IS THAT SO?

***************************
* no, he can vote against *
***************************

[Sounds fine.]

9.3) IN CASE THE LAST ANSWER IS YES, DOES THIS ALSO INCLUDES THE
CENSOR WHEN HE PROPOSES THE PROSECUTION OF A SENATOR? AND THE
PROSECUTOR?

*************************
* they can vote against *
*************************

[see above.]

9.34) FOR THE PURPOSES OF A PRESIDING MAGISTRATE'S LOSS OF IN-
FLUENCE, DOES ABSTENTION PREVENT A PROPOSAL'S DEFEAT FROM BEING
UNANIMOUS?

*****************************************************
* no, only a positive vote avoids loss of influence *
*****************************************************

[This just totally contradicts the rules! Why does it need a
clarification? The rules are spelled out clearly here.]

9.4) CAN THE CENSOR APPOINT HIMSELF PROSECUTOR?

*******
* no *
*******

[This was answered in a previous errata.]

9.4) CAN THE CENSOR PROSECUTE HIMSELF?

*******
* no * This is the point I disagreed in ROR 1
*******

[Wrong question. The question should have been: "Can the Censor be
prosecuted?". Since the Censor cannot appoint himself as prosecutor then
it would be impossible for him to prosecute himself.]

9.4-9.34) DOES THE CENSOR LOSE 1 INFLUENCE IF NO OTHER FACTION
VOTES YES ON HIS PROSECUTION, LIKE THE NORMAL PRESIDING
MAGISTRATE DOES? WHAT ABOUT ASSASSINATION PROSECUTIONS?

*************************************************************
* yes. In assasination prosecutions, censor is not involved *
*************************************************************

[Again, I think the rules were clear on this and this answer contradicts
the rules. The second part should probably read "no one can lose influence
in this manner in an assassination prosecution".]

9.421) CAN A FAMILY CARD (OR A STATESMAN) APPEAR WHEN A STATESMAN
FROM THE SAME FAMILY IS AT EXILE? IF SO, WHAT HAPPENS IF HE
RETURNS?

***************************************************
* The card goes under the statemen, even in exile *
***************************************************

[Sounds fine.]

9.44) WHEN AN ACCUSED IS KILLED BY POPULAR APPEAL, DOES THE
PROSECUTOR STILL GET THE INFLUENCE GAIN AND PRIOR CONSUL MARKER?

*******
* yes *
*******

[This part still pretty vague as we play that the prosecutor does not gain
any influence in a Major Prosecution (since the prosecuted senator
technically does not _lose_ any influence, he has been killed). Major
prosecutions need a lot of clearing up.]

9.64) ARE THE SHIPS OF THE "RHODIAN MARITIME ALLIANCE" EVENT
SUBJECT TO THE OVERALL ROMAN FLEET LIMIT (25)?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Of course.]

9.641) CAN GARRISONS BE RECALLED IN THE SAME TURN THEY HAVE BEEN
ASSIGNED?

*******
* no *
*******

[All this is vague in the rules but I agree with this ruling and would
also apply it to any legion (and commander as well).]

9.67) IF A PLAYER USES A TRIBUNE TO NOMINATE A CONSUL-FOR-LIFE,
AND THAT NOMINATION IS CANCELLED WITH A MURDER-OF-A-TRIBUNE CARD,
CAN ANOTHER CONSUL-FOR-LIFE PROPOSAL BE MADE DURING THE SAME
SENATE PHASE?

*******
* yes *
*******

[This one is good to know. Sounds fine to me.]

9.7.) CAN A NON-PRESIDING FACTION MAKE THE FIRST CONSUL
NOMINATIONS OF THE SENATE PHASE, USING A TRIBUNE?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Just a matter of aesthetics here, we play that the RC can always get off
the first proposal. Either way is fine.]

9.84) WHEN AN ASSASSIN IS CAUGHT, HE IS KILLED AND THE FACTION
LEADER MUST PASS A MAJOR PROSECUTION. IF HE IS FOUND GUILTY HE
ALSO IS EXECUTED. OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME FACTION IN ROME ARE
ALSO SUITABLE TO BE KILLED BY THE MOBS. WHAT HAPPENS IF THE
FACTION LEADER IS NOT IN ROME? ARE THERE FURTHER CONSECUENCES OF
A FAILED ATTEMPT? WHAT HAPPENS IF THE FACTION LEADER IS THE
ASSASSIN? FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW THESE TWO POSSIBILITIES MAKE A
SAFER WAY TO ATTEMPT AN ASSASSINATION.

****************************************************************
* If the assasin is the faction leader, or if he is out of Rome*
* the rest of faction is blameless. Now, this is a safer way to*
* make assasinations *
****************************************************************

[That's why I don't like this ruling. We play that faction leaders
automatically return to Rome to face the prosecution in all cases unless
they were just sent out to fight a war during the current phase. Even a
governor that just left must return.]

9.84) WHEN A FACTION LEADER IS SUBJECT OF A MAJOR PROSECUTION
BECAUSE OF AN ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT, IS THIS PROSECUTION DIRECTED
BY THE CENSOR? DOES HE NEED TO APPOINT A PROSECUTOR? IS THE
CENSOR (AND THE PROSECUTOR) IMMUNE TO THE "ACCUSED FREED" RESULT
OF AN ASSASSINATION PROSECUTION? IS THERE THE PRIOR CONSUL AND
INFLUENCE REWARD FOR THE PROSECUTOR IN CASE THE ACCUSATION
PASSES?

**********************
* No censor involved *
**********************

[I would say that whoever is the presiding magistrate at the time (even
if he is the one under trial) determines the voting order, There is no
prosecutor. Since the Censor and Prosecutor are not involved no chits
are drawn with an Accused Freed result.]

9.9) CAN OLD CENSOR/PONTIFEX BECOME DICTATOR/MOH THE SAME WAY HE
CAN BECOME CONSUL, LOSING HIS CENSOR/PONTIFEX OFFICE IMMEDIATELY?

***************************************************************
* No, they cannot as they still hold an office at the time of *
* election censor involved *
***************************************************************

[More of this? Since the Censor can become Consul, why not allow him to
become Dictator or MoH? Let's keep the rules simple and consistent, huh?
The PM is a different matter since he is only elected when he doesn't
already exist and can only be removed by special vote. He cannot be
elected to any office.]

9.9) IF DICTATOR IS ASSASSINATED EVEN BEFORE HE HAS APPOINTED A
MASTER OF HORSE, CAN ANOTHER DICTATOR BE APPOINTED? IF HE IS
ASSASSINATED AFTER DESIGNING A MOH, CAN ANOTHER DICTATOR BE
APPOINTED? IF NOT, DOES THE MOH GO TO WAR? WHO IS THEN THE HRAO?

******************************************************************
* No, no dictator then. Neither. Neither. MOH does not go to war.*
* Rome Consul is the HRAO. *
******************************************************************

[I agree entirely.]

10.12) IF A FORCE IS SENT TO FIGHT BOTH A NAVAL BATTLE AND A LAND
BATTLE IN THE SAME COMBAT PHASE, AND THE NAVAL BATTLE IS A
VICTORY BUT THE COMMANDER IS KILLED, CAN HIS LEGIONS GO ON TO
FIGHT THE LAND BATTLE? IF THE KILLED COMMANDER WAS DICTATOR CAN
HIS MASTER OF HORSE ACT AS COMMANDER FOR THE LAND BATTLE? IF THE
KILLED COMMANDER WAS THE MASTER OF HORSE CAN THE DICTATOR
CONTINUE THE WAR ON ITS OWN?

*************************************************************
* No. No, MOH cannot direct troops alone. Yes, dictator can *
*************************************************************

[I agree again.]

10.12) WHEN FIGHTING A NAVAL-ONLY BATTLE, DO YOU NEED AT LEAST A
NUMBER OF FLEETS EQUAL TO THE WAR'S FLEET SUPPORT NUMBER?

**************************************************************
* No, for the naval battle there is no minimum fleet support *
**************************************************************

[Agreed.]

10.21-10.31) Q. FABIUS MAXIMUS VERRUCOSUS CUNCTATOR HALVES LOSSES
IN COMBAT. DOES THAT INCLUDE LOSSES FROM DISASTER/STANDOFF?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Of course.]

10.4) DOES THE BUTTINY FROM A WAR ALWAYS GO TO ROME OR IT MAY BE
TAKEN BY A REBEL GENERAL?

****************
* may be taken *
****************

I disagree. The buttiny is gathered by Rome immediately after the
victory while the rebel declares at the Revolution phase. However
it seems logical that if he pretended to revolt, he would not pass
the buttiny to the Senate. So I would allow a senator to keep it
but that meant rebelion, without knowing the number of legions
which will remain loyal.

[Where did this come from! Just because bequests allow this why do wars?
Does the rebel also keep the provinces?! There is an optional rule for
commanders keeping booty, but that's a whole different matter. If this is
the way it is to be played we need a much more stronger ruling on this
since this is a _BIG_ change. It may sound logical but has this ever been
playtested?]

10.7) THERE ARE ONLY TWO PROCONSULS MARKERS. TECHNICALLY YOU MAY
HAVE UP TO THREE PROCONSULS. IS THAT ALLOWED?

*******
* yes *
*******

[Actually, you can have more Proconsuls if the Manilian Law is in play. I
would not impose a limit of 3.]

10.7) A DICTATOR WITH HIS MASTER OF HORSE IS SENT TO WAR, BUT HE
ONLY GETS A DISASTER OR STALEMATE OR STANDOFF. BOTH SENATORS
SURVIVE. DO THEY REMAIN AS PROCONSULS FOR THE NEXT TURN?

************************************************
* MOH returns home. Dictator becomes Proconsul *
************************************************

[Yep, MoH should return during the revolution phase with the bad news.]

14.4) ASSUME THAT A WAR IS DEFEATED AND A PROVINCE IS CREATED.
ASSUME THAT A NON-PROSECUTED WAR ATTACKS EXACTELY THAT PROVINCE.
IS THIS PROVINCE INMMEDIATELY UNDER ATTACK IN THAT SAME TURN?

********
* Yes. *
********

[We play otherwise, Either way is fine.]

14.4) WHEN AN ACTIVE WAR MENTIONS SOME PROVINCES THEY WILL BE
ATTACKED ONE BY ONE IF THE WAR IS NOT ENGAGED IN COMBAT AT THE
END OF THE TURN. BUT, DOES THE LOSS OF REVENUE OF THE PROVINCES
MANTAINS EVEN IF SOME LEGIONS ARE FIGHTING THE WAR?

********
* Yes. *
********

[Agreed.]

14.4) ARE ALL PROVINCES MENTIONED IN THE WAR SUBJECT TO THE LOSS
OF REVENUE, OR ONLY THE FIRST ONE?

**********************
* Only the first one *
**********************

[The rules pretty strongly say the opposite but this ruling does make more
sense. I think I rather play with this ruling.]

14.5) WITH ADVANCED RULE 14, CORRUPT REBEL GOVERNORS GET TO KEEP
THEIR PROVINCE'S STATE INCOME. DOES THIS APPLY TO THE SIMPLE
GAME AS WELL? (A GOVERNOR MAY BECOME REBEL IN ORDER TO SEND A
LOYAL LEGION TO HIS FRIEND)

********
* Yes. *
********

[Governors can't rebel in the basic game so can't figure this one out.
Shouldn't play without rule 14 anyway.]

14.5) ONCE A REBEL GOVERNOR HAS LANDED IN ITALY, CAN HE REINFORCE
FROM THE TAXES IN HIS PROVINCE?

********
* Yes. *
********

[I wrote endless errata covering this. Glad it matches this ruling.]

14.511) THIS RULE STATES THAT IF THE NUMBER OF FLEETS IS GREATER
THAN THE NUMBER OF ARMIES, A NAVAL BATTLE MUST FIRST BE CARRIED.
DOES THIS ALSO APPLIES AS DEFENSE WHEN A PROVINCE FACES AN
UNPROSECUTTED WAR?

***************************************************
* No. Naval battles only happen when Rome attacks *
***************************************************

[Provinces never defend against wars, they always attack.]
14.6) PLAYING WITH OPTIONAL PROVINCIAL FORCES, WE GET A DEFEAT
(OR DISASTER) AGAINST A CERTAIN WAR. IMMEDIATELY AFTER, THAT WAR
DEFEATS A PROVINCE WITH WHICH THIS PROVINCE JOINS THE WAR WITH
ITS LOCAL FORCES PLUS SURVIVING PROVINCIAL FORCES. DOES THIS
FIGURES ARE TAKEN FROM THE CURRENT DEVELOPING SIDE, OR FROM THE
UNDEVELOPED ONE?

****************
* Current side *
****************

[Agreed. In the rules I think.]

14.6) DOES THE LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL FLEETS ALSO MEAN AN INCREASED
NAVAL SUPPORT NEEDED TO FIGHT THE WAR?

********
* Yes. *
********

[Agreed.]

14.6) IN CASE OF A WAR WITH NAVAL BATTLE (AS CILICIAN PIRATES), DOES
THIS RULE ALSO INCREASES THE FORCE OF THE NAVAL BATTLE OR ONLY OF THE
FLEET SUPPORT?