Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

BattleLore (Second Edition)» Forums » Rules

Subject: Inconsistency in the rules? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Eric O. LEBIGOT
France
Versailles
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Flesh Ripper Brute Bloodthirst ability reads:
Quote:
[Heroic] Bloodthirst: If the target unit has suffered 1 or more damage, cause 1 damage.
The consensus is that a non-full unit has suffered damage and can be damaged even more from Bloodthirst.

What is bothering me is this little rule in the Reference Book (p. 8), under "Removing Figures":
Quote:
Removing a figure is not damage.
So you could have a non-full unit that has not suffered damage. As such, it looks like Bloodthirst cannot apply.

Now, since we don't track damage on units, the consensus makes sense. But isn't there an inconsistency in the rules, here? I would love to be proven wrong and see that the rules are perfect on that point.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The "Removing a figure is not damage." is in reference to abilities that say to remove a figure and how they may interact with abilities that reduce damage.

For instance, if removing a figure did count as "damaging" the figure, it would mean a Blood Harvester in a building could use Frenzy to do extra damage and have the building "block" the "self damage" part. By saying "removing a figure is not damage", it means that even if an ability would let you reduce damage, it cannot reduce "removing a figure".

However, in terms of "status", the figure is still damaged for purposes of Bloodthirst, etc.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric O. LEBIGOT
France
Versailles
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with the intent and the example of the Blood Harvester is interesting.

Now, my point was (and still is) that it is strange that a unit that "did not receive damage" but which is now non-full is "damaged". No?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul DeStefano
United States
Long Island
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's a Zendrum. www.zendrum.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think your confusing the verb and noun of damage.

Removing a figure is not damage and nothing that applies to the act of damage applies.

Once the act of removing a figure or taking damage happens, the unit is incomplete and damaged.

The act of removing a figure is not damage. But the result is the unit is damaged.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lebigot wrote:
I agree with the intent and the example of the Blood Harvester is interesting.

Now, my point was (and still is) that it is strange that a unit that "did not receive damage" but which is now non-full is "damaged". No?

While I see what you are saying, I think it's splitting hairs a bit. When talking about removing figures not being damage, it's talking more in the "active" sense. I don't interpret it to mean that the figure isn't considered to be "damaged" in the passive sense. There is no way to track that.

A unit's current state should always be readily apparent just by looking at it, via tokens, markers, or lack of units.

Again, I can see where you are coming from, but I don't think there's really a big issue in determining the meaning in this case.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric O. LEBIGOT
France
Versailles
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree on all points—that was my understanding from the very beginning.

I asked the original question because I was wondering whether I was missing something, like for instance a définition of "damaged unit" in the rules. In fact, I think that it is a bit unfortunate that a unit that has never suffered any damage can nonetheless be damaged (Blood Harvesters are an example indeed).

In any case, I understand that the consensus is "damaged unit" = unit which is not at full health, and it does make sense when considering the likely intent of a few unit powers (Flesh Ripper Brutes and Blood Sisters, in particular). This is something that could go in a FAQ I think.

Anyway, your input is very much appreciated!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dawid
Poland
Cracow
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lebigot wrote:
In fact, I think that it is a bit unfortunate that a unit that has never suffered any damage can nonetheless be damaged (Blood Harvesters are an example indeed).
Aren't you attached to the wording a little bit too much?
Removing a figure is in fact taking a damage (Blood Harvesters using Frenzy "hurt" them selves), but it's stronger than regular damage - because it cannot be prevented.
Maybe you are right about small shortcoming of the rule book not defining this case perfectly. But knowing that taking damage is visualized by removing figures, you almost don't have choice but to conclude that unit lacking some figures is in fact damaged.
Perhaps it would be phrased better if instead of "Remove 1 figure" the ability would read "Deal 1 damage to this unit. This damage cannot be prevented".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Garrett
United States
Laredo
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All we need is a line in the FAQ that reads, "A unit that is missing 1 or more figures is considered to have suffered damage."

Oh wait, they never even gave us our FAQ. shake
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric O. LEBIGOT
France
Versailles
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ignipes wrote:
Aren't you attached to the wording a little bit too much?
Removing a figure is in fact taking a damage (Blood Harvesters using Frenzy "hurt" them selves)
The rules clearly state that this is precisely not taking damage (p. 8 of the Reference Book). Hence the initial question… The answer is just that a non-full unit is damaged (even if it has never taken damage).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric O. LEBIGOT
France
Versailles
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Budgernaut wrote:
All we need is a line in the FAQ that reads, "A unit that is missing 1 or more figures is considered to have suffered damage."

Oh wait, they never even gave us our FAQ. shake
We do have an unofficial FAQ, at least.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giulio
Italy
Scandiano
RE
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eric the unofficial FAQ document collects the replies that players got from FFG and decided to share. Have you tried to write to FFG customer care asking for a clarification? I'd be happy to add your question and their answer to the FAQ.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric O. LEBIGOT
France
Versailles
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great idea. Done. I'll share anything I get from them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Odyzeus Longbow
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I always took this ability to mean the Flesh Ripper needs to cause at least 1 damage normally and then Heroics count as damage as well.
Is that not the case, and simply any non-full helath unit can be hurt by just Heroics?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
newsaidin wrote:
I always took this ability to mean the Flesh Ripper needs to cause at least 1 damage normally and then Heroics count as damage as well.
Is that not the case, and simply any non-full helath unit can be hurt by just Heroics?

The Flesh Ripper doesn't need to cause the damage. If the target is damaged before the attack, the ability can be used. They smell blood and go into berserk mode.
2 
 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.