Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

World of Warcraft: The Adventure Game» Forums » Rules

Subject: "resolving battle" or Shadowmeld vs Bloodlust rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Sebastian Zarzycki
Poland
Poznań
Wielkopolskie
flag msg tools
spiral out
badge
keep going
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb


Supposedly Shaman attacks a Druid. Druid casts Shadowmeld and the battle is immediately canceled. It is not clear in rules, though, whether it constitutes as "battle" resolved. Is the battle actually resolved, when it is cancelled? Can Shaman cast Bloodlust in response to Shadowmeld? It feels weird thematically (Druid vanished, there's no one to attack again). Is it valid to use Bloodlust like this, or was it meant only to use after proper combat (exchange of hits).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sonja Reznikov
Canada
North York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shaman attacks a Druid.

Defender goes first, lets say I am Druid, so as you indicated I do not want to go against shaman so I play my ability card (shadowmeld) and the battle is canceled, HOWEVER now it is the attackers turn and you (the Shaman) now play your ability card (to make things fair regardless the battle is canceled or not) you play Bloodlust which is legal and now you get a chance to begin a round of combat.

Sonja
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian Zarzycki
Poland
Poznań
Wielkopolskie
flag msg tools
spiral out
badge
keep going
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, that doesn't answer the question either. If the battle is canceled, why the attacked would have a chance to play a card?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sonja Reznikov
Canada
North York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lets see if this would work.

During player vs player Each player (the Defender and the Attacker) have to put down one ability card unless one player does not have any cards left.
So when the defender cancels the battle, the attacker can still start a new battle and subsequent combat rounds will commence.

Because the rule says first defender then attacker play a ability card.

* So this way both players get equal chance.
the way you are reading, only the defender gets to play ability card and not the attacker which is not legal.

hope that helps.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian Zarzycki
Poland
Poznań
Wielkopolskie
flag msg tools
spiral out
badge
keep going
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Err... not really.

The only rule that is relevant here is "If two characters wish to use ability cards at the same time during combat, the defender must first play all ability cards that he wishes to use, followed by the attacker.". It doesn't say say that attacker always GETS to play his card. The problem is that the manual doesn't explain what "cancelling" combat means - and this is the core of the question. I say, cancelling is ending the battle immediately, thus preventing the attacker from playing the card. This also fits thematically with the actual WoW game. I'm not "reading" things, because there's just no actual interpretation for this in the rulebook. I guess I'm just asking for opinion, since I hardly doubt a designer would chime in at this point :)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sonja Reznikov
Canada
North York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is true as you said it is unlikely the Designer assist in clarification topics. In any case you can certainly play as you described it. The way we play (p vs p) is that we always try to ensure both players get same opportunity when it comes playing the ability card.
defender first, attacker next.

I am sure any house rules you come up with to enhance your enjoyment out of the game session is important and please share with us this way we can try yours
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.