Bounds or Turns?

[petedalby]

In appealing to a new audience could you look to drop some old-style terminology?

"The game comprises a sequence of 'bounds' (turns). The opposing sides take alternate bounds...."

If you have to explain what bounds are, why not just call them turns? Eg - Each player takes alternate turns.

And instead of Inter-Bound, you could have the 'Joint Rout and Recovery Phase', or similar?

Pete

[paulcummins]

i quite like interbound (though keep calling it interphase - too much genetics training:))
inter-turn would sound a bit pants

bounds says wargaming to me (things happen to and with both sides)- turns says board games (only one person does anything)

[markm]

I think bound is a stupid term

If you wiki it, it does not translate as 'turn' or part of turn. It is only in common usage because of DBM, and I have never seen it outside of that arena.

Please change it to turn.

Just my 2p.

[plewis66]

I think bound is a stupid term

If you wiki it, it does not translate as 'turn' or part of turn. It is only in common usage because of DBM, and I have never seen it outside of that arena.

Please change it to turn.

Just my 2p.

Hear hear.

[lawrenceg]

I'd vote for "turn" .

The "interbound" occurs in each player's turn so would just become another phase such as

'Joint Rout and Recovery Phase'

or a more concise "Joint Phase" as both players act
or "end phase" as it is at the end of each turn.

While we're on the subject of Rout and Recovery, is there a good reason why the rules use the phrase "bolster or rally" instead of just "rally" for improving a BG's cohesion level? You seem to be giving two names to a single game process.


Lawrence Greaves