$30.00
Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
25 Posts

Star Wars: Imperial Assault» Forums » Rules

Subject: "On the Hunt" agenda card questions... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
On the Hunt wrote:
Exhaust this card when a rebel figure suffers strain to choose an imperial figure. That figure gains 1 movement point.


The rebel figure can choose not to carry on with the ability if the imperial figure moves out of range, correct?

Example: Onar suffers strain for Haymaker and the target uses On the Hunt to move away from Onar. Can Onar then choose not to exhaust Haymaker? I'm assuming yes...

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nope, the movement point is spent as an interrupt and:

RRG - Interrupt wrote:
• If an interrupt makes the current action or ability invalid, that
effect is not resolved. Any costs used to resolve that effect are
still paid.


So the strain stays spent and Haymaker remains exhausted. Both are costs.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reepicheep Catsbane
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:
Nope, the movement point is spent as an interrupt and:

RRG - Interrupt wrote:
• If an interrupt makes the current action or ability invalid, that
effect is not resolved. Any costs used to resolve that effect are
still paid.


So the strain stays spent and Haymaker remains exhausted. Both are costs.

Just a clarification: It says "Any costs used". Could the costs not be spent in order, like any other timing resolution? I.e. The rebel gets to choose whether he suffers strain or exhausts the card first. In that case, the exhaust cost would not have been "used" at that time.

I think the costs could be assumed to be spent in a certain order (triggers are simultaneous, but everything else in IA has an order of resolution, and in this case that order would be determined by the rebel player). However, the question would be whether the word "used" was intended to mean "costs that have already been paid" or "costs that are associated with using that ability".

I can't think of any other mechanic in the game that would allow an ability to be made invalid part-way through paying the cost of that ability, so this may be a unique case.

Thoughts? Personally, I'm leaning toward the simple past-tense definition of "used" (costs that have already been paid). I feel like it would have been more natural for those writing the rules to say "any costs that would have been used" if they meant that you had to pay all costs no matter what. However, I am not as well versed in the rules as many people on here.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reepicheep Catsbane
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
nikokcg wrote:
Clipper wrote:
Nope, the movement point is spent as an interrupt and:

RRG - Interrupt wrote:
• If an interrupt makes the current action or ability invalid, that
effect is not resolved. Any costs used to resolve that effect are
still paid.


So the strain stays spent and Haymaker remains exhausted. Both are costs.

Just a clarification: It says "Any costs used". Could the costs not be spent in order, like any other timing resolution? I.e. The rebel gets to choose whether he suffers strain or exhausts the card first. In that case, the exhaust cost would not have been "used" at that time.

I think the costs could be assumed to be spent in a certain order (triggers are simultaneous, but everything else in IA has an order of resolution, and in this case that order would be determined by the rebel player). However, the question would be whether the word "used" was intended to mean "costs that have already been paid" or "costs that are associated with using that ability".

I can't think of any other mechanic in the game that would allow an ability to be made invalid part-way through paying the cost of that ability, so this may be a unique case.

Thoughts? Personally, I'm leaning toward the simple past-tense definition of "used" (costs that have already been paid). I feel like it would have been more natural for those writing the rules to say "any costs that would have been used" if they meant that you had to pay all costs no matter what. However, I am not as well versed in the rules as many people on here.

Ah, but then, I suppose you would probably complete as much of the card (in this case, haymaker) as you can before it becomes invalid. So that would mean that, even if the enemy moved away before the card was exhausted, you would have to exhaust it to continue completing the action.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Costs are spent simultaneously as they somewhat have to be. Otherwise, people might be able to interrupt to make it impossible for you to pay other costs of the same ability, which would be silly.

Alternatively, even if you provide an order, you're still able to pay that second cost, so you would do it. It's the later parts of the ability that become impossible.

Edit: I just noticed you realised the second part on your own .
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reepicheep Catsbane
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:
Costs are spent simultaneously as they somewhat have to be. Otherwise, people might be able to interrupt to make it impossible for you to pay other costs of the same ability, which would be silly.

Alternatively, even if you provide an order, you're still able to pay that second cost, so you would do it. It's the later parts of the ability that become impossible.

Edit: I just noticed you realised the second part on your own .

Makes sense. Thanks Clipper.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Owen Sieber
United States
McMinnville
Oregon
flag msg tools
I'm looking forward to having some real talk with some real folks!
badge
Hi, I'm Matt, A radar technician.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So another part of this question...

When Haymaker is played and the cost is spent, does the target also have to be declared at the same time the cost is spent?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
model359 wrote:
So another part of this question...

When Haymaker is played and the cost is spent, does the target also have to be declared at the same time the cost is spent?

No. You activate the ability after paying the cost, so anything that triggers due to paying the cost will happen before the choice of target is made.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Owen Sieber
United States
McMinnville
Oregon
flag msg tools
I'm looking forward to having some real talk with some real folks!
badge
Hi, I'm Matt, A radar technician.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:
model359 wrote:
So another part of this question...

When Haymaker is played and the cost is spent, does the target also have to be declared at the same time the cost is spent?

No. You activate the ability after paying the cost, so anything that triggers due to paying the cost will happen before the choice of target is made.


Perfect. Just checking.
thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick T
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I've run into the potential of many more situations with this card.

We are about to start a mission with Gaarkhan, Mak, and Shyla who all have abilities that may be affected. I wanted to run them by you guys to make sure I'm interpreting them correctly.

1. Gaarkhan has the Vibrosword. If uses a strain for pierce 1 while attacking and the target moves 1 space away to no longer be adjacent, is the attack invalid?

2. If Mak uses a strain for ambush and the target moves to a spot where it has LOS to Mak, is the ambush no longer possible?

3. If Shyla uses a strain to whip a figure 3 spaces away and it moves to 4 spaces away, does the whip fail and Shyla loses an action?

I think the answer is yes to all. Am I correct?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nicktenny wrote:
1. Gaarkhan has the Vibrosword. If uses a strain for pierce 1 while attacking and the target moves 1 space away to no longer be adjacent, is the attack invalid?

Yes, the attack would become invalid.

Quote:
2. If Mak uses a strain for ambush and the target moves to a spot where it has LOS to Mak, is the ambush no longer possible?

Interesting... I would say it still works, I think. This is because the timing was still valid and the rest of the ability is possible to complete. I might mull this one over a bit, though.

Quote:
3. If Shyla uses a strain to whip a figure 3 spaces away and it moves to 4 spaces away, does the whip fail and Shyla loses an action?

Only if it were the only small, hostile figure within 3 spaces and line of sight. She doesn't need to declare the target when the strain was suffered.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:

Quote:
2. If Mak uses a strain for ambush and the target moves to a spot where it has LOS to Mak, is the ambush no longer possible?

Interesting... I would say it still works, I think. This is because the timing was still valid and the rest of the ability is possible to complete. I might mull this one over a bit, though.


It depends on the order of things. Do you pay the strain before you declare the attack, or after? If it's before, the Ambush wouldn't work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick T
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
csouth154 wrote:
Clipper wrote:

Quote:
2. If Mak uses a strain for ambush and the target moves to a spot where it has LOS to Mak, is the ambush no longer possible?

Interesting... I would say it still works, I think. This is because the timing was still valid and the rest of the ability is possible to complete. I might mull this one over a bit, though.


It depends on the order of things. Do you pay the strain before you declare the attack, or after? If it's before, the Ambush wouldn't work.


Since both are attacker-based, I think Mak would decide the order. Anyhow, hard to add pierce 2 to an attack you haven't declared.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
nicktenny wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
Clipper wrote:

Quote:
2. If Mak uses a strain for ambush and the target moves to a spot where it has LOS to Mak, is the ambush no longer possible?

Interesting... I would say it still works, I think. This is because the timing was still valid and the rest of the ability is possible to complete. I might mull this one over a bit, though.


It depends on the order of things. Do you pay the strain before you declare the attack, or after? If it's before, the Ambush wouldn't work.


Since both are attacker-based, I think Mak would decide the order.


I'm not sure. That rule deals with simultaneous effects. We are talking about a trigger (declaring an attack) and a cost (suffering a strain).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
csouth154 wrote:
nicktenny wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
Clipper wrote:

Quote:
2. If Mak uses a strain for ambush and the target moves to a spot where it has LOS to Mak, is the ambush no longer possible?

Interesting... I would say it still works, I think. This is because the timing was still valid and the rest of the ability is possible to complete. I might mull this one over a bit, though.


It depends on the order of things. Do you pay the strain before you declare the attack, or after? If it's before, the Ambush wouldn't work.


Since both are attacker-based, I think Mak would decide the order.


I'm not sure. That rule deals with simultaneous effects. We are talking about a trigger (declaring an attack) and a cost (suffering a strain).


It seems that the trigger, by definition, must come first, so I think the Ambush would work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Incidentally, the point that gives me pause here is how something that interrupts a figure's defeat and causes that figure to regain Health can cancel the defeat of the figure. It could be argued that this ability works in a similar way.

Ambush + On the Hunt feels a little bit different somehow, but I can't figure out exactly why. If this indecision continues, I may well reverse my earlier thoughts...

Edit: There is a small point that a figure is defeated by having suffered damage equal to its strain, so it is somewhat past and present tense. The difference with Ambush might be that the trigger is declaring an attack. That still happened in the case the figure moved. The condition on the figure not having LoS to you is a condition at the point of the trigger, and hence we use that timing, not current timing, to figure out whether Ambush works.

Hence, the trigger could still be considered valid (the attack was declared and is still valid) and we simply need to look to see if the condition that needed to exist at declaration existed at that time.

Is this interpretation valid? I still need to think a bit more...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Liu
United States
Irvine
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:
nicktenny wrote:
1. Gaarkhan has the Vibrosword. If uses a strain for pierce 1 while attacking and the target moves 1 space away to no longer be adjacent, is the attack invalid?

Yes, the attack would become invalid.



In the attack step, there is nothing that says Melee attacks miss if the target is not adjacent after the attack is declared.

There is a new miss rule in JR but that's only if the target is out of LOS
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick T
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
frotes wrote:
Clipper wrote:
nicktenny wrote:
1. Gaarkhan has the Vibrosword. If uses a strain for pierce 1 while attacking and the target moves 1 space away to no longer be adjacent, is the attack invalid?

Yes, the attack would become invalid.



In the attack step, there is nothing that says Melee attacks miss if the target is not adjacent after the attack is declared.

There is a new miss rule in JR but that's only if the target is out of LOS


I noticed this too in the steps of Attack. For melee there is no range check after the initial valid declaration, just a LOS requirement, but I made an assumption, possibly incorrectly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The rule comes from the Interrupt section:

RRG - Interrupt wrote:
• If an interrupt makes the current action or ability invalid, that
effect is not resolved. Any costs used to resolve that effect are
still paid.
For example, if a player plays a Command card that allows it to
attack a figure, and the figure interrupts to move out of line of
sight, the Command card is discarded and the action spent on
the attack is lost.


Now the rules don't define what 'invalid' means, but the clear implication is that the target must have been a valid target for the attack. The new rule in Jabba's Realm modifies this a little bit so the attack misses instead of being cancelled entirely.

The original rule still applies here. If the target is no longer a valid target, the attack will be considered to miss or any other ability will be cancelled.

That's why the defeat interruption works. A figure that has not suffered damage equal to or exceeding its Health is not valid to be defeated, so the defeat gets cancelled if the figure gains Health while it is being defeated.

So if a figure moves out of melee range, as is the case for Vibrosword, then the attack would miss too (or be cancelled entirely if you want to read the Jabba's Realm rule extremely literally).

For the Ambush case, the figure is still potentially a valid target, but that one is still up for debate.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pasi Ojala
Finland
Tampere
flag msg tools
Get the Imperial Assault Campaign module for Vassal from http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:Star_Wars:_Imperial_Assault
badge
The next total solar eclipse holiday in 2017 in the USA.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When Healthy, Mak also has Covert, so case 2 would also depend on the distance of the figure from Mak, not just line of sight. (The 1 mp would interrupt after the cost, but before the ability is performed, so the text of Ambush would look at the new board state.)

Ambush gives Pierce 2 when declaring attack. If Mak suffers strain for a different ability, the figure moving would not remove the Pierce 2. There is no reason why Ambush would be re-evaluated.

There is nothing that would make symbols, accuracy, or keywords invalid in the attack pool, so the target moving would not make Pierce 2 invalid. It could make the attack invalid, but not the contents of the attack and defense pool.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
a1bert wrote:
When Healthy, Mak also has Covert, so case 2 would also depend on the distance of the figure from Mak, not just line of sight. (The 1 mp would interrupt after the cost, but before the ability is performed, so the text of Ambush would look at the new board state.)

I think you have missed something important... You cannot suffer Strain for Ambush unless you are attacking a figure that does not have LoS to you. Thus, the triggering part of the ability must be activated before the costs are paid. So your logic fails here unless you reevaluate the condition on the trigger after the payment of costs and hence after the interrupting movement.

2 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pasi Ojala
Finland
Tampere
flag msg tools
Get the Imperial Assault Campaign module for Vassal from http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:Star_Wars:_Imperial_Assault
badge
The next total solar eclipse holiday in 2017 in the USA.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Covert does not have timing, it is in effect or not in effect always.

But you're right, almost all of the Ambush text is the trigger, which is not re-evaluated. Only "This attack gains Pierce 2." is the actual ability.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Liu
United States
Irvine
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:
Incidentally, the point that gives me pause here is how something that interrupts a figure's defeat and causes that figure to regain Health can cancel the defeat of the figure. It could be argued that this ability works in a similar way.

Ambush + On the Hunt feels a little bit different somehow, but I can't figure out exactly why. If this indecision continues, I may well reverse my earlier thoughts...

Edit: There is a small point that a figure is defeated by having suffered damage equal to its strain, so it is somewhat past and present tense. The difference with Ambush might be that the trigger is declaring an attack. That still happened in the case the figure moved. The condition on the figure not having LoS to you is a condition at the point of the trigger, and hence we use that timing, not current timing, to figure out whether Ambush works.

Hence, the trigger could still be considered valid (the attack was declared and is still valid) and we simply need to look to see if the condition that needed to exist at declaration existed at that time.

Is this interpretation valid? I still need to think a bit more...


Seems reasonable. We'll play it that way for now, thanks Clipper and Pasi for your thoughts and well thought out explanations
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Liu
United States
Irvine
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Clipper wrote:
The rule comes from the Interrupt section:

RRG - Interrupt wrote:
• If an interrupt makes the current action or ability invalid, that
effect is not resolved. Any costs used to resolve that effect are
still paid.
For example, if a player plays a Command card that allows it to
attack a figure, and the figure interrupts to move out of line of
sight, the Command card is discarded and the action spent on
the attack is lost.


Now the rules don't define what 'invalid' means, but the clear implication is that the target must have been a valid target for the attack. The new rule in Jabba's Realm modifies this a little bit so the attack misses instead of being cancelled entirely.

The original rule still applies here. If the target is no longer a valid target, the attack will be considered to miss or any other ability will be cancelled.

So if a figure moves out of melee range, as is the case for Vibrosword, then the attack would miss too (or be cancelled entirely if you want to read the Jabba's Realm rule extremely literally).


From a list of questions I sent in

Rules Question:
If a melee figure attacks another figure and the figure moves 1 space away (but still within LOS) during the attack, does the attack miss? I know there was a rule for moving out of LOS of range attacks being a miss. Under Attack step in RRG, there is no mention of checking for range for melee attacks after it has been declared. Also a similar question: what if a figure declares a melee attack and the figure moves out of adjacency on declare?

Yes, moving away would cause the target to become ineligible, causing the attack to miss. This is more explicit in the Jabba’s Realm rulebook for ranged attacks (regarding On the Lam), but the determining factor is still whether the target remains eligible or not.

Declaration of an attack is enough to begin one. If the figure moves away, the attack misses and resolves under that condition.

Hope that helps!


Todd Michlitsch
Game Developer
Fantasy Flight Games
tmichlitsch@fantasyflightgames.com
1 
 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.