Follow us on Facebook (Two Generals Games) as we walk through the playtest of Field Marshals of the Eastern Front ... our opus magnus on World War II in the Soviet Union. We've been steadily working on this for 1 1/2 years.

These are the Q&A we've collected about Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire.

Quite a few of these are about the Optional Rules (3-player and Inherited Kingdoms).

We hope these help!

























I know in a 3-player game, the Germans normally control any non-Roman and non-Persian pieces except otherwise noted. Now, the exceptions I know of include the Hunae and Kushans, but do they control the Civil War Legions? 

Yes: See this rule: "3. After Roman replacements are placed, the controlling player (Parthian player in a two-player game; German player in a three-player game) then places the civil war counter in any Roman area that is outside of the province where the Emperor is located. "

Also, what if a people (ex. Asian Bull peoples) end up allied to, say, Persia? Do the Germans still control them?


When the Germans control any People, that People can "ally" with the Persians or Romans (as per the two-player rules) if the German player allows it. It remains in control of the German player but can otherwise function as an ally would normally do, including providing production to its "ally." The German player can end the alliance at the end of its turn by so declaring. [This should give the German player a little leverage in a three-player game, but it may also simply result in the Persians and Romans wanting to finish the Peoples off even more quickly than they usually do.]

Even though Parthia is the Bull Peoples ally, can Parthia declare war on them? 

First, in a three-player game Parthia is not allied with the Bull People because the Bull People are controlled by the German player. So, sure, the Parthian player can declare war on the Bull People. He'd also be at war with the Germans, not that it would probably matter.

In a two-player game, the Parthian is free to backstab his Bull People allies by declaring war on them.

In a three-player game, do Rome and Parthia still have to take Artashat to take control of Armenia? 

They're never required to unless they want to control Armenia's forces. A treaty between the two might also award Armenia to one or the other.

Can the German player declare war on the Bull People in a three-player game? 

The German controls them at the start of the game, so that might not be a smart move, but yes, he can.

Also, in a 3-player game, who decides which Roman units are disbanded in a stacking violation, the Parthians or Germans? 


Parthians in what is (or will become) the Eastern Roman Empire; Germans in the Western Roman Empire.

And as for Parthia in a 3-player game, does Rome or the Germans decide?



As for the inherited kingdoms, since Commagene doesn't appear, what is to be done about it? 

Nothing. It was included only so someone didn't say "You forgot Commagene." It doesn't exist in the game.

Dates are shown in the list of the kingdoms. Are the dates only for historical interest, or are they dates by which they should be conquered? 

Rome gets these areas FOR FREE if using the Optional Rule. It "inherits" them on the dates listed. No conquest required. 

I know now that Rome takes over inherited kingdoms at the dates, but what if, say, there are still African units (which, let's assume, are at war with Rome) in Mauretania (an inherited kingdom)? Does Rome still take Mauretania peacefully, and the African units are disbanded?

Yes. But if you want a more historical approach Rome has to defeat the remaining units first as there was a 4-year rebellion over this. (It's an optional rule, so you can play it however you like.)

Does Cyprus start out as Roman? (Since it's given in 58 BC) at start.


Is Numidia inherited in 30 BC or 20 BC? 


Is Mauretania inherited in 30 BC or 30 AD? 

30 BC

If Rome peacefully gets Mauretania, what about the Mauri unit in Mauri and the Gaetuli unit in Gaetuli? 

These tribes were constantly fighting Rome, even after pacification of the coastal regions. So, they are at war with Rome. (The Mauri eventually became known as the Moors and later joined the Arabs in the invasion of the Visigothic Kingdom of Spain.)

Suppose the time comes when Mauretania is given to Rome. Is it possible to have just those African peoples in Mauretania surrender, and the remaining Mauri and Gaetuli outside Mauretania fight on? 

Yes, that is what actually happened.

Also, can the African Bull Peoples still use those units disbanded in Mauretania in the future? 


Also, when Mauritania is inherited, does revolt occur in Tingi if it's not adequately garrisoned? 

Yes, until it's been garrisoned for 100 years.

Does Rome inherit kingdoms at the start of the turn (ex. Numidia at the start of 30 BC), the end of their turn, or at the end of the entire turn? 

During the reinforcements/replacements phase.

At the start of the replacements phase or at the end?

The phasing player decides the order that he does things within each phase, so presumably it occurs as the first thing so that the Roman player can get its production.

Galatia is inherited. Is the Galatian Celtic unit permanently removed?

Not necessarily. If Parthia is allied with the Celts and retakes Galatia, the unit could return to play.

can a rebellion affect units in more than one province (besides one with an emperor)? 


Does Armenia start neutral? If so, does Rome and/or Parthia have to invade Artashat to control it? 

Yes (as per setup map). Not necessarily, as it can be obtained by treaty, but usually, yes.

If Armenia is invaded (e.g.. by Parthia) Do the other Asian peoples end up at war?

Yes. The Armenians are an "Asiatic Bull People." If any are invaded, all are allied to the other side as per the "Allies" rule.

If an Asian [Bull] people were invaded by, say, Rome, Do the Armenians automatically become allies of Persia?

Yes, in a two-player game; German player ally in a three-player game from the start.

Also, if the Germans somehow took Artashat, (also in a 3-player game), would it control Armenia?

Yes. Remember, the German player already controls Armenia at set up.

If you're asking can the Germans hand over control of Armenia to either Rome or Parthia, the answer is “it depends.”  No, he can't just declare that "Armenia is now controlled by the Romans (or Parthians)." Yes, in that he can move Armenian units to assure that Rome or Partha could declare war and conquer the Armenians easily.

Suppose in a 3-player game, Parthia seizes control of Artashat. Armenia's owned by Parthia. However, on the next turn the Asians retake Artashat. Does the German player control the Armenians?

This can get squirrelly in a three-player game, but yes. The rule states: "Any units in play switch sides if control of Artashat changes, but not until the end of the entire turn (all players)." You should re-read the rule "Armenian Exception."

Can the Armenians get one replacement or two, since replacements are based on "the number of production stars controlled by the People (or their allies)?

Armenia and its controller both get production from Artashat. Armenia gets no other production. Armenian production is separate from other Asian Bull Peoples.

Suppose Parthia sues for Peace for the 2nd time. Armenia's given up, but is Armenia automatically Roman, or does it only become Roman at the end of the turn? 

The units remain under Parthian control until the end of the turn, but Rome controls Artashat immediately. The effect depends on which point in his turn that the Parthian player surrenders. If it's during his replacement phase, he could disband his controlled Armenian units, but if it's later, he couldn't.


I know that recivilization takes 10 turns, but what does that mean? 

10 turns is 100 years, so it means that the switch takes that long. After the province has been occupied for 10 turns it no longer requires a garrison.

If Rome takes Legio in 60 BC, and it's still held by Rome's next turn in 50 BC, does that count as 1 turn of civilizing out of 10?

Yes. If you're asking "when does the clock start?" the turn it's taken is turn 0, the next same-player turn is Turn 1, etc.

Suppose a Roman legion leaves Legio before it's fully civilized. When Cantabrians return under the standard of revolt at the end of the turn (this is assuming Rome doesn't come back for the rest of the turn), they can't move. So, can the remaining Cantabrian unit move through it?


If Moesia is conquered by Rome in 60 BC, does it have to be garrisoned for 10 turns? Or does that have to wait until 380 AD? 

Moesia is presumed to have already been "romanized," by 280AD, so no garrison is required then. Before then, there is no star, so no garrison is required. 

Does a recivilization turn for Jaffa end at the beginning of the normal Roman turn, or at the beginning of the German turn? 

Recivilization occurs the instant the 100 year requirement has been fulfilled, so the end of the Roman turn. The process begins the turn an area is conquered, which counts as turn 0.

Suppose in 50 BC Persia seizes control of Antioch and Damascus (both of which have 8 turns of re-civilization to go) and occupies them for 8 turns. Do those 8 turns contribute towards re-civilization?

No, but the Roman wouldn't have to start over either. Once he reoccupies either city, he'd have still have 8 turns to go before completion. 


As for combat, let's say Rome attacks Osrohene from Antioch. Can another unit attack another location from the same city?

Yes, if you comply with the Stacking rule. That is, you cannot be overstacked at the END of combat/movement.  If you ARE overstacked, the other player eliminates the excess units.

A separate clarification: The rules state "Only one unit may participate in combat per area per turn."  I recall that one of your previous questions addressed what happens when there is a stack of reinforcements attacking out of that area. In such a case, the units that LEAVE the area to attack in adjacent (or more distant) areas are free to do so. But once a unit that is IN the reinforcement area has flipped, no other units can be flipped in THAT area. They could still leave to attack.

Can Allies support attacks?

Yes, but “Allies” is defined in the rule so entitled. In a 3-player game, if the German player and the Parthian player are both at war with Rome, it does not mean they are “allies.”

Can Allies support an attack (e.g., Osrohene supporting Parthia) in a 3-person game? 

Yes, if they are really allied. The attack rules don't change just because it's a 3-way game but remember “Allies” is a limited term that doesn’t include other players, and that control of the various peoples may be with another power, meaning that something that is allied to you in a 2-player isn’t allied in a 3-player.

Let's say two units are stacked together: can one attack an adjacent area, and the other support it?

Yes, but you must comply with the stacking rule by the END of the movement/combat phase. One of the two units would remain in the adjacent area, while the other moves to the target area and attacks/ flips there.

In an area with 5 units, it one wants to attack with support, one of those units can attack, and one can support from that area, but the other 3 can only support of they move to another area that's adjacent to the target?

First, you shouldn't have an area with 5 units in it unless it is a production City. Then yes, only one unit can be used as support in that square. The rest of them have to move out if they want to attack. This is because the rules specifically prohibit over stacking at the end of movement combat. If you were to leave them all there to attack in and an adjacent area you would be in violation of that rule.

If Osrohene were to support Parthia in a 3-player game, could it move again during the German player's turn?

It cannot support Parthia if it’s German-controlled. There is no mechanism in the game for players’ units to support each other. If the German player and the Parthian player are Allied, for example, they still conduct separate turns.

So, if Osrohene were an ally of Persia, it could support an attack on a 2-player game, but not a 3-player game?

In ANY game, if it's a DIRECTLY CONTROLLED ally, yes. But in a three-player game a Bull People is controlled by the German player. Even if he's cooperating with the Parthians, there is no mechanism for them to jointly attack Roman units -- they have to do it in separate player-turns, so no for that type of game.

I know supporting units that are to support an attack can be moved from other areas, but does the main unit have to start the turn adjacent to the area you want to attack? 

No. To be clearer, to attack an enemy you must move on top of it, not just adjacent. An adjacent unit may be needed to provide support (i.e., get enough combat factors), but the attack is conducted by the unit that moves INTO the enemy area.

Suppose there's a legion in Mediolanum. Can Rome move a unit from Mediolanum to Aquileia to attack Noricum?

Yes, of course. This is very close to the example given in the rules on Page 7 (under "Combat").

Suppose a legion attacked Gergovia from Lugdunum and moved another legion there to support it. Let's also assume another legion in Sardinia wishes to attack Bibracte. Can it move through Lugdunum to attack it?

Yes, as long as you haven't overstacked at the END of movement/combat. You would need to complete the combat at Lugdunum first of course.

Can a player use more units than is necessary to beat an enemy? (Ex. 4 celts vs. 1 Roman legion) 

Yes, but there is a stacking limit of one unit per area, so in your example, you would need 3 adjacent supporting areas.

When two or more legions are stacked in an area, do they have to move to undo the stack ("If they CANNOT, excess units are placed in the replacement pile"), or is it optional ("Overstacked units MAY immediately move in order to unstack")?

The overstacked units only have to move if you want to keep them. If they don't, they're eliminated.


Do both Rome and Parthia have to disband units if there are more units than production markers?

Yes. This requirement is (obliquely) referred to in rule 6 of the Civil War rule. Note that rebel Roman units do not have to disband excess units.

If, for example, Euro-Sarmatians (which are neutral) seize a Roman empty area, and the Romans attack and destroy it, are the Sarmatians at war?

Rome must declare war on the Euro-Sarmatians to retake an area that the Sarmatians have seized. 


In a civil war, if one of the rebellions' capitals taken, is the rebellion with the captured capital merged with the other rebellion?

They are already "merged" as per "12. During multiple simultaneous Civil Wars, all rebelling units are allied."

All 8 [rebel] legions are on the map. I know that the Parthians/Germans can disband one rebellion, but can the player disband just two units and not have to disband any rebellions?

The Parthian/German player may only disband rebel legions in order to place them elsewhere during the rebellion actions. However, during his own turn, he may disband anything he likes, unless other rules forbid it (such as a bribed unit).

Three [rebel] legions are in the replacement pile. Can the Parthian/German player use those 3 [rebel] legions to make a new rebellion?

For a fourth civil war, yes. I assuming you are asking if they can be used for a second or third rebellion: no.

Let's say Julius Caesar is in Syria when civil war breaks out in Alexandria. The CW legions have control of Alexandria. However, there's a normal Roman unit in Jaffa. Does that unit become a rebel, or does it stay loyal since it's located in Syria, where Caesar is? Same question for Italian legions adjacent to rebel area.

Caesar protects all units in the region where he is located, so Jaffa stays loyal to him. Units in Italy never rebel, but units adjacent to Italy may.

Also, assuming there are no units near the rebellion area, can the rebel legions put their units solely in areas adjacent to the capital, or does at least 1 rebel unit have to be in the capital?

The rules state: "The area chosen becomes the capital of the rebellion. Any Roman units . . . that are in, or adjacent to, that area are in rebellion." and "Replace the rebelling Roman legions, . . .  in or adjacent to the Rebellion Capital Area. . . ."   You have to replace regular Roman legions with rebel ones, so if there is one in the capital, you must place one there, but otherwise, no, you don't have to.

Suppose there are two rebel legions in the replacement box (destroyed the previous turn). Can the third rebellion use those units, or does the Persian/German player have to disband a rebellion?

No, only a fourth rebellion can use those. If there are already 8 rebel units in play (the maximum), then the third rebellion happens, but fizzles out*, making a fourth rebellion possible when any units in the replacement pile CAN be taken -- as long as there are not more than 8 rebel units in play.

*Unless the rebel player disbands units from another rebellion. Those are then available.

Let's say that a Rebel legion in Aquitania supported a successful attack. Later, the Celts (also controlled by the Germans) want to attack Aquitania. Can the Celts attack the Rebel unit stationed there, even though it (the rebel unit) was already used for combat? 

Attacking and defending are different. So, the fact that the Rebel legion already attacked does not preclude it from defending.

Suppose a rebel unit moves from Burdigala to Aquitania. Can the Celts (also controlled by the German player) attack the unit, even though it already moved? 



During the Sassanid Revolt, can Rome attack the Parthians and Sassanids?

Yes. If Rome is at war with the Parthians, Rome is also at war with the Sassanids, which is why the Parthian/Sassanid player always tries to make sure he's in a treaty with Rome before the revolt occurs. A treaty imposes a mandatory peace period, which the Romans must obey.

If Rome conquers Daci and then leaves, do the Daci still revolt?

Yes. The Romans never get a free ride on a conquered star. They have to garrison it for 100 years and if they don't, it revolts. However, if all the European Bull People have previously been eliminated, a Daci unit does not reappear there, but the city still revolts.


Are the Celts in Illyrium set up at the beginning?

Yes, assuming you mean Pannonia, Noricum and Rhaetia. Also, Boiemia (Bohemia) in Germany gets a Celtic unit.

Is there a home area for Sotiates?

No. Burdigala is the closest, so use that. Calling them "Celtic" is a bit of a simplification. Their language developed into Basque, which is a language isolate.

Also, is the one Boii unit Celtic or German? 


Are the Galatii Celtic or Asian Bull People?

Celtic. This and the above are not mistakes. The Celts were wide-spread.

Is Judea in the replacement pile at the beginning? 


Also, do the Celtic Sotiates start out in the replacement box?



If a unit attacks from a naval route (ex. A Roman unit in Brundisium wants to attack the Illyri in Dyrrhachium, can it directly attack from Brundisium? If so, because the attack',s across water, does that negate the mountains terrain effect?

You are correct. The Romans often avoided bad terrain by using the sea, for which they get surprisingly little credit in the critiques of their navy.


If Rome commits a legion from Byzantium to support, is Byzantium now without a garrison?

As long as the unit ends its movement/combat in Byzantium (which is a given if it supports an attack in an adjacent area), no.

Or is it still garrisoned because the supporting unit is still in Byzantium?



Suppose in 30 BC, when the Kushans get to replace an Asian Sarmatian unit, the original Kushan unit has not moved at all. Can Rome pick any Asian Sarmatian unit to replace?

I assume by "replace" you mean "remove an A-S unit from the game and replace it with a Kushan unit" as per the process described in the rules for building the Kushan Empire. Whether it moves or not, the Roman can pick one A-S unit, remove it from the game, and replace it as per the rules in the second paragraph under "Kushan Empire." 

Do the Kushans replace any A-S units in 20 BC? 

Yes, so they get two units that turn: one as a reinforcement and one via the "replacement of A-S units" process.

Since revolt counters on home territories stay on the map until the end of the production turn, can a player put his units on a city in revolt during production?

If a city is in revolt, a minimum of one turn of production is lost. " If the area is in your home country, you lose the production for one turn."  Elsewhere, production may be lost for more than one turn.

Okay, so the rules on "Revolts" (Revolts section 1, on revolts in a home province) state that the player must "place a revolt counter on the area to remind you, then remove it next turn AFTER the production phase. So, I believe that technically, the area is still in revolt DURING the production phase. Am I right? (Question part 1)

Yes. You lose the production for one or more turns, depending on where it is.

Since the area is still in revolt DURING the production, could legions be placed there during the reinforcement phase?

Production and reinforcement are the same phase, so no.

If a player has more units than production, does he/she have to disband them at the end of his turn or the entire game turn?

No. he just can't replace any lost units.

Can the Kushans replace ANY Asian Sarmatian units, or just those whose home areas are controlled by Kush? 

Any Asian Sarmatian unit.

After all Celts south of the line die out, can the one Boii unit south of the line be reused (since Boiemia is north of the line)?

Yes. However, since the German units defend at 2 north of the line and the Celts at 1 most players just let them go.

Also, is there any way for the Celts to reach Galatia?

They start there, but if you mean later, probably not although it's not technically impossible.


Can Parthia declare war on its own allies on its next turn?

Yes. See this rule: "New Wars. The Roman player can have Rome declare war on other Peoples anytime. Parthia can declare war on other Peoples at any time as well."


When are the Peoples units completely removed from the game?"

The rules state: "Elimination. Once all units of a People are eliminated and they are no longer able to place a unit as a replacement, their units are removed from the game. Note there are exceptions, such as the Armenians and the Celts."

The Romans eventually "Romanized" the Celts in Britain and Gaul (and elsewhere). Once that Romanization was completed, there was no chance that the "Celts" would reappear in those areas. Instead, they would simply rebel via the Civil War rule. However, that wasn't the case in Ireland and Scotland (Hibernia and Caledonia), where Rome either never went or went but didn't stay. It's possible that the Romans might conquer all the Celts but the ones in the North and then lose some of the production stars before Romanization is completed. Those areas would reproduce the Celtic tribes associated with the areas. But in all the play-testing we found this to be a very rare occurrence. Once Rome took Gaul and Britain, it kept them 99% of the time throughout the Romanization process. So, for all practical purposes, the Celts are eliminated permanently except for those north of the Barbarian line which can NEVER be permanently subdued, short of constant occupation in every area.

Are the Armenians removed from the game if they are all that's left of the Asians?

No. The rules state: " The Armenian units are never removed from the game." All the other Asian Bull Peoples would be removed.


When a Leader arrives, is it held off-map? (Except for civil wars and campaigns North of the Barbarian line, of course).

It can be, or you can place it in, say, Rome. It functions even if off map. A Roman leader must be placed on the map when a civil war occurs, however.


Suppose that Merv (a Persian city) is sacked by the Sarmatians. It's recovered in 20 BC and starts rebuilding in 10 BC. Now, since it takes 2 FULL turns to rebuild, is it restored in 20 AD?


Can a unit loot and attack the same turn? 

Attacking causes the unit to flip, meaning its turn is done. So, as long as the looting occurs first, yes.


When a unit is north of the Line, are both attack and defense reduced? 

See the table "Combat Values of All Units."

Suppose that the Illyri move into Sarmizegetusa (part of the Daci lands). Is it reduced, even though the Cantabrians and Daci both Europeans?

See the table  "Combat Values of All Units."  If it's not listed there, the Barbarian Line has no effect.

If a supporting unit (the Messagetae) stays north of the Line, does it still have a value of 2 if attacking south of the line? 

No, because their value is "2 if attacking North of Barbarian Line, 1 otherwise;" (see Combat Value of All Units, pg 8). In your example, they are attacking an area south of the line.

We're happy to announce an updated set of rules for Napoleon and his Marshals, along with an updated set of scenarios.

While there are over 1,000 changes, the vast majority of these are formatting changes (a comma deleted, a space added) of no consequence to game play. Other rules are clarified, corrected, or added. For example, our comprehensive chart was incorrect about supply in Spain/Portugal. That has been corrected.

The biggest rule change is a simplified victory system for the Grand Campaign Game. This allows the game to be played with an equal chance of each nation to win, based on a comparison of what they did versus historical. In addition, this allows a game to be played and victory calculated at the end of any year. For example, players could play 1805-1809 and then see if they've done better than historical.


Napoleon and his Marshals 4.0

Scenario Booklet 4.0


We're pleased to provide an update for the game rules of Fighting the Islamic State. 

There are about 50 updates, mostly clarifications, and a few corrections.

Link to Rules

We're pleased to present you with Napoleon and his Marshals - The Dice Game, free to download and play -- our first Print 'n' Play game.

When we were testing the original Napoleon and his Marshals and its expansions, we developed a shorter version so we could test different victory conditions and other rules effects. After a while, this smaller version of NAHM became its own game, similar to the original, but smaller, faster, and with a lot more dice. At Two Generals Games, we don't normally use dice in our games, but when we do, we use a LOT of them!

Now you can download the map and rules and use either the counters from the original game or substitute your own dice to represent the armies of the major powers of the Napoleonic era. You don't have to own any TGG game to play.

NAHM-Dice should be a good way to introduce gaming buddies to Napoleonics, or just war-gaming in general. It's colorful, the basic rules are pretty easy, and it moves quickly. Since game victory is handicapped by nation, you can quit at the end of any year and have a fair scoring of the success of each player, so it's not necessary to play all the way to the end.

Here's a picture of the 1805 scenario setup, using dice as the armies. French forces are blue, Austrians white, etc. We've used the Napoleon counter from the original game, but you can substitute something else to represent him.


Link to Download the Map.

Link to Download the Rules.