Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)» Forums » Rules

Subject: Question on the Advance (Knight) skill rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Joshua Siegfried
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Advance skill basically says that the Knight can take a fatigue point after defeating a monster to get a free move and attack. What I am curious about, since the text says (from memory...I don't have the card in front of me) that the Knight can move up to his speed and (emphasis mine) make an additional attack, is he still able to use the Advance skill if there is nothing within range to attack? Basically using it as a free move after killing something? The 'and' between move and attack is what is making me curious.

Thanks! Sorry if this question is too simple.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Hubbard
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
I'd think so. Nothing on the card says the Knight must make an attack. To me it's like a hero only taking one action instead of two on their turn.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
I played it the same way, buy I find this skill definitely overpowered.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Best skill in the game. Well, so far in our games. An exceptionally useful skill. Not really overpowered though, since it does require a fatigue and often we find ourselves at max fatigue and Resting doesn't recover fatigue until the end of the turn. It has precedent too (basically existed in both Doom and Descent 1st Ed).

We play it that yes, the hero can move and attack, and simply attacks the darkness if there's no monsters near by. We also play that the hero has to stop moving once he makes his attack, i.e. cannot "interrupt" his movement to attack.

-shnar
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jan Probst
Germany
Kiel
Schleswig Holstein
flag msg tools
shnar wrote:
We also play that the hero has to stop moving once he makes his attack, i.e. cannot "interrupt" his movement to attack.

In principle I agree - "moves" that are not "movement actions" clearly don't get the MA-specific "interruptible" clause. Same with Jain's feat for example.

I could probably be convinced to not see the "and" as chronological though, ie I might consider "attack, then move" as legit. As long as the move isn't interrupted for the attack.

Gotta study moar cards when I get game to see if "and" often carries "and then" implication. Didn't excessively strike me as such from spoiled material.
 
 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.