Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
25 Posts

The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game – Khazad-dûm» Forums » Rules

Subject: Usage of Dwarrowdelf Axe rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Frank Otte
Germany
Münster
Nordrhein-Westfalen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dwarrowdelf Axe: "Restricted. Attached character gains +1 attack. Response: After attached character attacks, deal 1 damage to the defending enemy."

Do we interprete the last sentence on the card right, that the damage is applied in the moment I appoint and exhaust the wearer of the axe, ignoring the defense of the enemy, and before proceeding with combat resolution?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Roberts
United States
Southlake
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That is how I understand it and play it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Mair
United States
Roy
Utah
flag msg tools
The Meeple Nation Boardgame Podcast - 30 minutes a week!
badge
BGGCon 2015 or Bust
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played it that the damage happens after the regular attack resolves.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fran Quinti
Spain
Barcelona
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Actually, the "After attached character attacks" means that you put one wound to that enemy after the resolution of an attack.

So it happens at the end of the third sub-phase of an attack (determine combat damage), as it is stated on the rules.

I think that there's an example at the official FAQ with an errata on Dol Guldur Beastmaster card that clarifies the "after attacks".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott M.
United States
Winter Springs
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That's how i play it,

Assign attacker, Resolve Attack+damage on target, *Apply extra point of damage as response from AXE.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Otte
Germany
Münster
Nordrhein-Westfalen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Obviously its not clear what the term "after attacks" means. Two possibilties so far:

1. The moment, after a character is applied as attacker and exhausted.

2. The moment after the complete combat resolution of a single combat.

I tend to the former, because, if the latter would be true, I can see no reason, why that axe could just not give +1 attack. At least I would see nearly no difference here, except that, if all your attack would be compensated completely by defense, you would nevertheless do one damage.

Note also, that this effect is a response, therefor it must be resolved immediately after the triggering action. But the sentence is written in SINGULAR AND PRESENT: "after CHARACTER attacks", NOT "after all characters have attacked". What should that mean, if not the moment is meant, after this character was applied as attacker.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Mair
United States
Roy
Utah
flag msg tools
The Meeple Nation Boardgame Podcast - 30 minutes a week!
badge
BGGCon 2015 or Bust
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hermjard wrote:
I tend to the former, because, if the latter would be true, I can see no reason, why that axe could just not give +1 attack. At least I would see nearly no difference here, except that, if all your attack would be compensated completely by defense, you would nevertheless do one damage.


What if you do no damage during combat and the +1 wouldn't have made a difference? Attacking with this axe is a way to guarantee at least one point of damage.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fran Quinti
Spain
Barcelona
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hermjard wrote:
Obviously its not clear what the term "after attacks" means. Two possibilties so far:

1. The moment, after a character is applied as attacker and exhausted.

2. The moment after the complete combat resolution of a single combat.

I tend to the former, because, if the latter would be true, I can see no reason, why that axe could just not give +1 attack. At least I would see nearly no difference here, except that, if all your attack would be compensated completely by defense, you would nevertheless do one damage.

Note also, that this effect is a response, therefor it must be resolved immediately after the triggering action. But the sentence is written in SINGULAR AND PRESENT: "after CHARACTER attacks", NOT "after all characters have attacked". Would should that mean, if not the moment is meant, after this character was applied as attacker.


Could be, my friend.

Regardless of that, I'll paste this extract from the official FAQ 1.2 (page 6) :

Q: When do "after this enemy attacks" Forced effects
like those on Chieftan Ufthak (CORE 90) and Wargs
(CORE 85) resolve?
A: These effects resolve immediately after step 4 of
enemy attack resolution.

Obviously is making a reference to an enemy attack, and not a character attack. But I don't see why it needs to be different for a character. Maybe I am wrong, though !
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Gadgaard
Denmark
Copenhagen
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dealing one point of damage is not the same as having a result of one damage after comparing attack vs defense.
The one point of damage is dealt regardless of defense.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Otte
Germany
Münster
Nordrhein-Westfalen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
From the rules:

"Attacking Enemies
Once all players have resolved enemy attacks, each player (starting with the first player and proceeding clockwise) has the opportunity to strike back and declare attacks against his enemies.

In order to declare an attack, a player must exhaust at
least 1 ready character."

It seems nearby, to me that "attacking" someone (note: NOT "having attacked" someone) is equivalent to "declaring an attack" against someone, so meaning a moment within the first step of an attack ("Declare target of attack, and declare attackers.").

It seems also nearby to me, that an "attacker" is not somebody who HAS ATTACKED someone, but a character who IS ATTACKING someone.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Otte
Germany
Münster
Nordrhein-Westfalen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jekzer wrote:
Hermjard wrote:
Obviously its not clear what the term "after attacks" means. Two possibilties so far:

1. The moment, after a character is applied as attacker and exhausted.

2. The moment after the complete combat resolution of a single combat.

I tend to the former, because, if the latter would be true, I can see no reason, why that axe could just not give +1 attack. At least I would see nearly no difference here, except that, if all your attack would be compensated completely by defense, you would nevertheless do one damage.

Note also, that this effect is a response, therefor it must be resolved immediately after the triggering action. But the sentence is written in SINGULAR AND PRESENT: "after CHARACTER attacks", NOT "after all characters have attacked". Would should that mean, if not the moment is meant, after this character was applied as attacker.


Could be, my friend.

Regardless of that, I'll paste this extract from the official FAQ 1.2 (page 6) :

Q: When do "after this enemy attacks" Forced effects
like those on Chieftan Ufthak (CORE 90) and Wargs
(CORE 85) resolve?
A: These effects resolve immediately after step 4 of
enemy attack resolution.

Obviously is making a reference to an enemy attack, and not a character attack. But I don't see why it needs to be different for a character. Maybe I am wrong, though !


Hmm, good point!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Gadgaard
Denmark
Copenhagen
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hermjard wrote:
From the rules:

"Attacking Enemies
Once all players have resolved enemy attacks, each player (starting with the first player and proceeding clockwise) has the opportunity to strike back and declare attacks against his enemies.

In order to declare an attack, a player must exhaust at
least 1 ready character."

It seems nearby, to me that "attacking" someone (note: NOT "having attacked" someone) is equivalent to "declaring an attack" against someone, so meaning a moment within the first step of an attack ("Declare target of attack, and declare attackers.").

It seems also nearby to me, that an "attacker" is not somebody who HAS ATTACKED someone, but a character who IS ATTACKING someone.


Agree completely.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Hanson
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Just out of curiosity, is there ever a situation where the exact order would actually matter?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allan Clements
Norway
Oslo
flag msg tools
badge
Turns out Esseb did touch the flag. Don't tell him I said so though.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Some enemies have effects which trigger when you attack them. If the damage is done before resolving the attack, perhaps the 1 damage might kill them and prevent that from happening.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Saloff
United States
Edinboro
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
This is a rebellion, isn't it? I rebel.
badge
He's a card player, gambler, scoundrel. You'd like him.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hansolo88 wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there ever a situation where the exact order would actually matter?


Dwalin with a Dwarrowdelf Axe versus an Orc.

But the damage happens after, I'm pretty confident in that due to the FAQ rulings.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Hanson
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Mattr0polis wrote:
Hansolo88 wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there ever a situation where the exact order would actually matter?


Dwalin with a Dwarrowdelf Axe versus an Orc.

But the damage happens after, I'm pretty confident in that due to the FAQ rulings.


I don't think it would matter with Dwalin since he is attacking and destroying the enemy either way. The only way Dwalin wouldn't get his kill is if the axe killed the enemy before he attacked somehow, but the text on the axe specifically says "after".

Maybe there are some enemies where this would matter, I just can't think of any off the top of my head. But I haven't played some of the more recent quests.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fran Quinti
Spain
Barcelona
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I can see two potential cards that screw the situation. From Watcher in the Water AP. Those are Grasping Tentacle and Thrashing Tentacle.

For instance, Thrashing Tentacle says:

"Forced: When Thrashing Tentacle is attacked, discard the top card of the encounter deck. If that card has a shadow effect or is a Tentacle enemy, deal the damage from the attack to 1 character an attacking player controls (ignoring defense)."

Imagine that Dwalin is your only character in play (no more allies or heroes), with that axe, and the tentacle has 1 life point left.

As I understand that effect, you decide to attack with Dwalin, hence he is declared as an attacker, and so the Forced triggers (it says when is attacked, and not after is attacked. Actually it can't be after the attack resolves, because then the enemy can be dead and the effect doesn't make sense). So in this case, if you discard a card with the conditions met, Dwalin could die and you could lose the game.

If the effect of the axe is instant (as soon as you are declared) the tentacle dies. If not, Dwalin must face a dangerous forced effect.

Correct me if I'm wrong but these could be one of those situations when the "after" matters .

So, to sum up, why don't we write a message to Mr. Nate French? Maybe is a case that needs clarification (I am well convinced of my thoughts, but is always better to contrast ).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Saloff
United States
Edinboro
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
This is a rebellion, isn't it? I rebel.
badge
He's a card player, gambler, scoundrel. You'd like him.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hansolo88 wrote:
I don't think it would matter with Dwalin since he is attacking and destroying the enemy either way. The only way Dwalin wouldn't get his kill is if the axe killed the enemy before he attacked somehow, but the text on the axe specifically says "after".


Well, that's what's being debated in this thread, what 'after' means. I'm with you though, it has to be after the normal attack resolves. It wouldn't make much sense for Player attacks to be handled differently than the Chieftan Ufthak example in the FAQ.

Though Dwalin could still get screwed that way too: he attacks an Orc and takes it down to 1 hit point, then the Axe response. I don't think Dwalin will get credit for that kill for his response. The Axe killed it, not Dwalin. But at least that scenario will only happen when you couldn't kill it otherwise, to at least still get the kill.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mattr0polis wrote:
Hansolo88 wrote:
I don't think it would matter with Dwalin since he is attacking and destroying the enemy either way. The only way Dwalin wouldn't get his kill is if the axe killed the enemy before he attacked somehow, but the text on the axe specifically says "after".


Well, that's what's being debated in this thread, what 'after' means. I'm with you though, it has to be after the normal attack resolves. It wouldn't make much sense for Player attacks to be handled differently than the Chieftan Ufthak example in the FAQ.

Though Dwalin could still get screwed that way too: he attacks an Orc and takes it down to 1 hit point, then the Axe response. I don't think Dwalin will get credit for that kill for his response. The Axe killed it, not Dwalin. But at least that scenario will only happen when you couldn't kill it otherwise, to at least still get the kill.

... but haven't they had cards that explicitly say "after the attack resolves"? The problem is that they are so loose and inconsistent with their wording that you almost have to ask Nate the question for every use case. Then he makes his potentially arbitrary decision, and quotes you back the rule that was ambiguous as if it wasn't.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Saloff
United States
Edinboro
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
This is a rebellion, isn't it? I rebel.
badge
He's a card player, gambler, scoundrel. You'd like him.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
... but haven't they had cards that explicitly say "after the attack resolves"? The problem is that they are so loose and inconsistent with their wording that you almost have to ask Nate the question for every use case. Then he makes his potentially arbitrary decision, and quotes you back the rule that was ambiguous as if it wasn't.


Oh I agree with you 100% there! ^_^
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Otte
Germany
Münster
Nordrhein-Westfalen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are even more problems for "victims" of the translation in other languages, like me. For example, the re-translation of the cards which were mentioned in this thread:

Wargs: "...after their attack"
Chieftain Ufthak: "...after he (has) attacked"
Dwarrowdelf Axe: "after... he (has) attacked"

Now, is "after the attack" the same as "after someone attacked"? You could assume, that in the former case the attack is still running (after the attack began), while in the latter case, the attack is already over.

I dont want to dive into details of grammar in english and german language, considering, which tempus you have to use, when you mean a past action, which is still running or already terminated respectively.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Irwin
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Quote:
The problem is that they are so loose and inconsistent with their wording that you almost have to ask Nate the question for every use case. Then he makes his potentially arbitrary decision, and quotes you back the rule that was ambiguous as if it wasn't.


Completely agree - the difference in wording between Legolas and Gondolin Blade, and then with Brand, was the big warning sign that differences in wording weren't nuances that reflected different rules.

When we think we detect nuance in the way that different cards are worded - in fact we're just seeing a casual approach to making card games. Fire off an email to Nate French and ask him to tell you what he meant - I don't believe anyone can figure out what he meant from comparing cards. This game just wasn't built that way.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Zeb Ulon

Oxford
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think they should have had a precise nomenclature/notation to when to apply each effect (using step numbering, e.g. 6.3.4e for the end of the 4th step of the Enemy attack sequence), on top of the lexical description. This way they could have resolved all ambiguities and at the same time kept a looser way to describe the triggers and have a freeer artistic license.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Zeb Ulon

Oxford
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
To come back to what was said, we know the timing of equivalent triggers used by Enemies:

"When X attacks" -> at the end of Step 1 (Dol Guldur Beastmaster as errata'ed in the FAQ) or Step 2 (Snow Warg, explicitely needs a defender) of the Enemy attack phase,
"After X attacks" -> at the end of Step 4 of the Enemy attack phase.

By the same logic:

"When X is attacked" would take place at the end of Step 1 of Player Attack, as soon as the attackers are declared.
"After attached character attacks" would be triggered at the end of the Step 3 of Player Attack (equivalent to Step 4 of Enemy Attack)

Am I correct?

Note that even if they had to be played at the end of the same step, a Forced effect has to be applied before a Response (such as "After attached character attacks" of the Dwarrowdelf Axe), as per FAQ rule 1.09.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Douglas Tempel
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mattr0polis wrote:
Hansolo88 wrote:
I don't think it would matter with Dwalin since he is attacking and destroying the enemy either way. The only way Dwalin wouldn't get his kill is if the axe killed the enemy before he attacked somehow, but the text on the axe specifically says "after".


Well, that's what's being debated in this thread, what 'after' means. I'm with you though, it has to be after the normal attack resolves. It wouldn't make much sense for Player attacks to be handled differently than the Chieftan Ufthak example in the FAQ.

Though Dwalin could still get screwed that way too: he attacks an Orc and takes it down to 1 hit point, then the Axe response. I don't think Dwalin will get credit for that kill for his response. The Axe killed it, not Dwalin. But at least that scenario will only happen when you couldn't kill it otherwise, to at least still get the kill.



I agree that 'after' means after the attack is resolved for the reason you've stated (FAQ on Ufthak). It doesn't make sense to think that 'after' would be different for a character.

I don't agree with your second paragraph though. The Axe kills the enemy,not the person wielding the axe? I don't think it matters that the 'response' is part of the Axe's card text. Dwalin wielded the Axe in an attack, and the attack has resulted in the enemy's death.
 
 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.