Recommend
37 
 Thumb up
 Hide
39 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Mage Knight Board Game: The Lost Legion Expansion» Forums » Rules

Subject: FAQs on Lost Legion rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What do you think if we create a single list with all the unresolved issues (per RAW) and submit it to Paul/Philip/Vlaada?

I'm thinking about things like the Ambush/Shield of the Fallen Kings combo, or the Shield Bash "conundrum".
--------------------------------
Addendum: I'll add here all the questions relative to the expansion. I'll try to keep the post updated as rapidly as I can.
--------------------------------
Officially confirmed (to read the detailed answers by Vlaada: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/12673668#12673668 )

Revealing Volkare's Army
Volkare's Army is discovered the first time a player starts a combat against Volkare (no discover from an adjacent hex or from the same hex if the player flees declining combat).

Ambush + Shield of the Fallen King - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/961823/ambush-and-shield...
Q: When playing the SofFK after Ambush, if the player chooses the 2nd effect of the artifact (Block 4 against two different enemies), does he add the +X Block given by Ambush to just the first enemy blocked (thus gaining 4+X against the first and just 4 against the second), or to both the blocks (thus 4+X against both enemies)?
A: 4+X is applied only to the first block used.

Shield Bash - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/946075/reducing-attacks-...
Q: When using the advanced effect against an enemy with Swiftness, is the "counts twice" effect applied before calculating the final block value? For example, against an enemy with Swiftness and Ice Attack 2, the player plays only advanced Shield Bash. He gets Block 5 which counts twice, thus Block 10. The final block value is 10/2=5 (ineffective against Ice Attack), the player needs Block 4 (due to Swiftness), so the enemy is blocked. Is the enemy's armor reduced by 5-4=1? Or does the counts twice applies to any single block point remaining after blocking, so the player only uses 4 of the Block 5 counted twice to block the attack, and the last block point is counted twice for a -2 to the enemy's Armor?
A: No, it just doubles the Block points used against the enemy with swiftness, any remaining block point doesn't "double".
In the example, the player needs a Physical Block 4 vs Ice Attack 2 when using Shield Bash advanced effect. So after the enemy is blocked, the Armor is reduced by 1.


Shield Bash vs mutliple attacks - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/973779/interesting-cases...
Q: For multiple attacks blocked by multiple sources including SB stronger effect, which is true:
a) surplus block points for all attacks accumulate to reduce the enemy's armor; or
b) armor reduction is applied only to the attack that SB is actually blocking.
A: choice B is correct.

Concentration + Shield Bash/Into the Heat + Altem Guardsmen - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/12431582#12431582
Q: Is the +2 Block given by Concentration applied to the Block 5 before doubling when facing an enemy with Swiftness (thus giving 14 Block) or after doubling (thus giving 12 Block)?
Same question for second combo: 12/14 Block or 10/11 Block?
A: The bonuses are applied before doubling (counting twice).

Into the Heat + Shocktroops - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/972389/into-the-heat-and...
Q: After playing Into the Heat, how is executed the Reduce one enemy attack by 3. Any damage from that attack must be assigned to this Unit first, even if that enemy had Assassination. Shocktroops' ability?
a) Enemy attack is reduced. Damage is dealt to Shocktroops even if Into the Heat is active;
b) Enemy attack is reduced. Damage is dealt to the Hero due to Into the Heat effect that supersecedes Shocktroops second effect.
c) The ability cannot be used at all.
A: choice A is correct.

Disbanding Units - When
Q: Can a unit be disbanded at any time, or only when recruiting a new Unit with all the Command tokens already occupied? (It matters for Wolfhawk's coop skill that gives bonuses based on unused command tokens)
A: Only when you cannot recruit more.

Attacking Volkare on a space with an unconquered fortified site - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/967465/attacking-volkare...
Q: Is it possible? The rules states that when entering a space with an unconquered fortified site, we must assault it. But, at the same time, if we enter a space with Volkare we start a combat against him, and a player can't execute 2 actions in a single turn. So, which is true in this case:
a) No player may enter a space with an unconquered fortified site and Volkare;
b) A player may enter such a space, and must assault the unc. fortified site, then executes a combat sequence as if attacked by Volkare (without being able to use a full turn).;
c) The site defenders joins Volkare army for a single combat against Volkare, if the defenders are eliminated, the site is considered conquered;
d) Volkare presence trumps everything else: the player faces Volkare's Army and disregard any fortified enemy present in the space;
e) Anything else to be specified.
This question, of course, is valid even with regards to adventure sites.
A: choice D is correct.

New Cold Toughness vs ColdFire attacks - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/990196/how-do-you-play-c...
Q: When using the advanced effect of Cold Toughness against a monster with ColdFire attack, do we get +2 or +1 Ice Block?
A: +2.

Scouts' ability and Peaceful Moment advanced effect - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/996349/scout-unit
Q: When using Scouts' ability "Move 2 - You may reveal a new tile at a distance of 2 spaces instead of one." or Peaceful Moment advanced effect "Influence 6. You may play this as your action for the turn: if you do, you may get Heal 1 for each 2 Influence you spend and/or refresh a Unit paying 2 Influence per level of the Unit.", does the "a" in both effects mean that it can be used just once per turn or as many times one wishes during the turn?
A: Just once per turn.

Not enough tokens available - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/982873/volkares-tokens
Q: It may happen that, when revealing Volkare's army, there're not enough tokens in the pool (mostly for Green tokens): what should we do in this case?
A: Please improvize. Component shortage was not part of design, and it was impossible prevent all extreme cases. Since the scenario where it happens are usually cooperative, find a way that fits your taste: whether it is a way that affect the game least (withdraw most distant orcs from the map), or not at all (use proxy), or makes thematically sense (withdraw the closest orcs). I do not recommend to give him no orcs, as it would lead to non-thematical meta-tactics (do not kill orcs so Volkare cannot recruit them).

--------------------------------

Not yet officially confirmed

None at the moment.
27 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Spirio
Austria
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sounds good, somebody has to do the work
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't know if this has been answered already, so before putting it on the list I'll write it here.

We know that Volkare's Army is revealed as soon as the first combat against him starts (so no discover from an adjacent hex or from the same hex when a player flees).

What happens if a gray token is added to V's Army after the Army has already been discovered? Is it added face down or face up?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Yan
China
Shanghai
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
According to the discussions in my post, can we add a question to the list:

Shield Bash vs mutliple attacks
For multiple attacks blocked by multiple sources including SB stronger effect, which is true:
a) surplus block points for all attacks accumulate to reduce the enemy's armor; or
b) armor reduction is applied only to the attack that SB is actually blocking.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Done.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ira Fay
United States
New Haven
CT
flag msg tools
designer
:-)
badge
Fay Games logo
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Galandil wrote:
Ambush + Shield of the Fallen King
When playing the SofFK after Ambush, if the player chooses the 2nd effect of the artifact (Block 4 against two different enemies), does he add the +X Block given by Ambush to just the first enemy blocked (thus gaining 4+X against the first and just 4 against the second), or to both the blocks (thus 4+X against both enemies)?

I'd say just +4 against the first.

Galandil wrote:
Shield Bash
When using the advanced effect against an enemy with Swiftness, is the "counts twice" effect applied before calculating the final block value? For example, against an enemy with Swiftness and Ice Attack 4, the player plays only advanced Shield Bash. He gets Block 5 which counts twice, thus Block 10. The final block value is 10/2=5 (ineffective against Ice Attack), so the enemy is blocked. Is the enemy's armor reduced by 5-4=1? Or does the counts twice applies to any single block point remaining after blocking, so the player only uses 4 of the Block 5 counted twice to block the attack, and the last block point is counted twice for a -2 to the enemy's Armor?

I think your math may be wrong here. For a swift ice attack of 4, you need 16 regular block to block it. Swiftness requires double the value to block, and ice attacks require fire blocks to be efficient. So your block of 10 with powered Shield Bash isn't enough to actually block the described attack.

My reading of the powered Shield Bash effect is: imagine the enemy's attack was higher than it actually is. For every point higher it could be and you'd still block it successfully, reduce the enemy's armor by 1. So in the example you gave, you'd need 20 normal block to reduce by 1 armor, or 24 normal block to reduce by 2 armor, etc. It's obviously more effective of a card when used against non-swift, normal attacks.


Galandil wrote:

Shield Bash vs multiple attacks
For multiple attacks blocked by multiple sources including SB stronger effect, which is true:
a) surplus block points for all attacks accumulate to reduce the enemy's armor; or
b) armor reduction is applied only to the attack that SB is actually blocking.

Definitely b. Each attack is handled individually (either take the damage or block), and cards played against 1 attack don't carry over unless explicitly stated.

Galandil wrote:

Into the Heat + Shocktroops
After playing Into the Heat, how is executed the Reduce one enemy attack by 3. Any damage from that attack must be assigned to this Unit first, even if that enemy had Assassination. Shocktroops' ability?
a) Enemy attack is reduced. Damage is dealt to Shocktroops even if Into the Heat is active;
b) Enemy attack is reduced. Damage is dealt to the Hero due to Into the Heat effect that supersecedes Shocktroops second effect.
c) The ability cannot be used at all.

Great question. I think (a), but I'm not sure. Normally if something allows an effect and another thing disallows it, the disallowing takes precedence.

And a question from me:
Can a unit be disbanded at any time? (It matters for Wolfhawk's coop skill that gives bonuses based on unused command tokens)

I think the answer is "yes," but I couldn't find anything specific in the rules one way or another.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Spirio
Austria
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ira212 wrote:
Galandil wrote:
Shield Bash
When using the advanced effect against an enemy with Swiftness, is the "counts twice" effect applied before calculating the final block value? For example, against an enemy with Swiftness and Ice Attack 4, the player plays only advanced Shield Bash. He gets Block 5 which counts twice, thus Block 10. The final block value is 10/2=5 (ineffective against Ice Attack), so the enemy is blocked. Is the enemy's armor reduced by 5-4=1? Or does the counts twice applies to any single block point remaining after blocking, so the player only uses 4 of the Block 5 counted twice to block the attack, and the last block point is counted twice for a -2 to the enemy's Armor?

I think your math may be wrong here. For a swift ice attack of 4, you need 16 regular block to block it. Swiftness requires double the value to block, and ice attacks require fire blocks to be efficient. So your block of 10 with powered Shield Bash isn't enough to actually block the described attack.

My reading of the powered Shield Bash effect is: imagine the enemy's attack was higher than it actually is. For every point higher it could be and you'd still block it successfully, reduce the enemy's armor by 1. So in the example you gave, you'd need 20 normal block to reduce by 1 armor, or 24 normal block to reduce by 2 armor, etc. It's obviously more effective of a card when used against non-swift, normal attacks.


The exampel is right (you would need at least 3 effective Block more).
So if you use the Guardians Golems which give you fire Block 4 (with red Mana) and Shield Bash for Block 5, doubled aggainst swiftness, you would get Block 9 (Fire 4 + 10 Pysical halved) against Attack 8 (4*2 because of Swift).
That would reduce the Armor by 1.
If you play more Block, you would reduce the Armor more.
But it is important that you need 2 psycial Attack to reduce it by 1 point (or 1 Fire Block)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trevin Beattie
United States
Eugene
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jack Spirio wrote:
The exampelexample is right (you would need at least 3 effective Block more).
So if you use the Guardians Golems which give you fire Block 4 (with red Mana) and Shield Bash for Block 5, doubled aggainstagainst swiftness, you would get Block 9 (Fire 4 + 10 PysicalPhysical halved) against Attack 8 required block (4*2 because of Swift).
That would reduce the Armor by 1.
If you play more Block, you would reduce the Armor more.
But it is important that you need 2 psycialphysical Attack to reduce it by 1 point (or 1 Fire Block)


Fixed that for you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam Carroll
United States
Urbana
Illinois
flag msg tools
Soli Deo Gloria!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Trevin wrote:
Jack Spirio wrote:
The exampelexample is right (you would need at least 3 effective Block more).
So if you use the Guardians Golems which give you fire Block 4 (with red Mana) and Shield Bash for Block 5, doubled aggainstagainst swiftness, you would get Block 9 (Fire 4 + 10 PysicalPhysical halved) against Attack 8 required block (4*2 because of Swift).
That would reduce the Armor by 1.
If you play more Block, you would reduce the Armor more.
But it is important that you need 2 psycialphysical Attack to reduce it by 1 point (or 1 Fire Block)


Fixed that for you.


. . . because correcting Austrians' English shows that you are really cool.shake
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ira212 wrote:
I'd say just +4 against the first.


http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/961823/ambush-and-shield...

ira212 wrote:
I think your math may be wrong here. For a swift ice attack of 4, you need 16 regular block to block it. Swiftness requires double the value to block, and ice attacks require fire blocks to be efficient. So your block of 10 with powered Shield Bash isn't enough to actually block the described attack.

My reading of the powered Shield Bash effect is: imagine the enemy's attack was higher than it actually is. For every point higher it could be and you'd still block it successfully, reduce the enemy's armor by 1. So in the example you gave, you'd need 20 normal block to reduce by 1 armor, or 24 normal block to reduce by 2 armor, etc. It's obviously more effective of a card when used against non-swift, normal attacks.


http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/946075/reducing-attacks-...

ira212 wrote:
Definitely b. Each attack is handled individually (either take the damage or block), and cards played against 1 attack don't carry over unless explicitly stated.


http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/973779/interesting-cases...

ira212 wrote:
Great question. I think (a), but I'm not sure. Normally if something allows an effect and another thing disallows it, the disallowing takes precedence.


http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/972389/into-the-heat-and...

-------

I didn't mean to be rude or harsh, but please keep this thread "clean" by personal interpretations about topics, we can all discuss them in the appropriate topics (that I linked for you).

-------
ira212 wrote:
And a question from me:
Can a unit be disbanded at any time? (It matters for Wolfhawk's coop skill that gives bonuses based on unused command tokens)

I think the answer is "yes," but I couldn't find anything specific in the rules one way or another.


Interesting new question. There's no mention in the manuals about when we can disband units, apart from point 4.a under Using Units, which states literally that we can disband Units when we want to recruit a new one and we have all the Command Tokens occupied. I'd stick to the letter of the rule and say that we can disband only to make room to new units.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Galandil wrote:
I didn't mean to be rude or harsh, but please keep this thread "clean" by personal interpretations about topics, we can all discuss them in the appropriate topics (that I linked for you).


I totally disagree. It's much better to have one thread to consolidate all of the "true" open questions about the rules, than to have them scattered in a dozen threads that are hard to find among the 100 other Rules forum threads asking questions on which there is no doubt of the answer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Galandil wrote:
Interesting new question. There's no mention in the manuals about when we can disband units, apart from point 4.a under Using Units, which states literally that we can disband Units when we want to recruit a new one and we have all the Command Tokens occupied. I'd stick to the letter of the rule and say that we can disband only to make room to new units.


I concur. I see no mention in the rules of disbanding units except when you recruit a new unit to replace them.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pawel Bulacz
Poland
Kraków
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
I concur. I see no mention in the rules of disbanding units except when you recruit a new unit to replace them.

You can also get rid of them when they turned to stone by medusa for example.
There is no way to voluntarily send them home. You signed a contract with those units.
And Ira Fay, it's nice to read somebody is googling for my name...
What did you find?
you don't have to answer it's an off topic...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
pabula wrote:
You can also get rid of them when they turned to stone by medusa for example.


That's "destroying" not "disbanding". It's explicitly mentioned as such in the rules.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
I totally disagree. It's much better to have one thread to consolidate all of the "true" open questions about the rules, than to have them scattered in a dozen threads that are hard to find among the 100 other Rules forum threads asking questions on which there is no doubt of the answer.


To consolidate to discuss (unofficially).

And it's not that hard to find a thread about an open question, subjects are there to be read/searched.

What use can there be for a kilometric thread with a lot of questions? The original FAQ thread in the MK forum is the typical example that shows why different threads are better than a single one with a gazillion questions and answers scattered inside it. It's a pain to read, with a lot of people posting their opinions and making the official answers hard to find among a lot of other posts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ira Fay
United States
New Haven
CT
flag msg tools
designer
:-)
badge
Fay Games logo
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Galandil wrote:
The original FAQ thread in the MK forum is the typical example that shows why different threads are better than a single one with a gazillion questions and answers scattered inside it. It's a pain to read, with a lot of people posting their opinions and making the official answers hard to find among a lot of other posts.

I actually think that's an example of a great FAQ thread, assuming the original first post continued to get updated. It's super convenient to go to one thread to post an answer and see other questions that people are asking. I agree that it's a long thread, but if the first post is updated, you never need to read everything in it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ira212 wrote:
I actually think that's an example of a great FAQ thread, assuming the original first post continued to get updated. It's super convenient to go to one thread to post an answer and see other questions that people are asking. I agree that it's a long thread, but if the first post is updated, you never need to read everything in it.


I'd agree with you, but under 2 conditions:

1) Original post updated with all the questions and answers;
2) No questions made in the thread that are already resolved by reading the RAWs with more attention.

The biggest problem, imo, is number 2 - there's no way to enforce a policy of "real issues only" in such a thread, and inevitabily it happens that a good number of questions are just a misunderstanding/too-light-rules-reading problems, which clots and congestionate the thread, with the final result of too much noise itt.

BTW, I just sent this morning a PM to Paul Grogan, asking him if he can read this thread and give his/their official ruling on the issues posted so far. Let's hope for the best.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Added a couple questions and a possible resolution (suggested by Benkyo) when attacking V on a unconquered fortified space.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Yan
China
Shanghai
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You haven't corrected the wrong math in the first Shield Bash example yet...

P.S. perhaps it's better to integrate the related discussion thread links into the top thread instead of put them in one of its replies. Easier to follow up, right?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
prograft wrote:
You haven't corrected the wrong math in the first Shield Bash example yet...

P.S. perhaps it's better to integrate the related discussion thread links into the top thread instead of put them in one of its replies. Easier to follow up, right?


I'll do it ASAP.

Edit: done.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alessandro Cingolani
Italy
Arezzo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One little up, to say that I just sent a PM to Filip asking to chime in the thread, after 2 months from my previous PM to Paul Grogan, to which I received no answer at all.

Let's hope for the best.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vlaada Chvatil
Czech Republic
Brno
flag msg tools
designer
mbmb
Hello all, I will try to answer those questions. The answers will be given according to the original intentions, not according the best interpretation of what we wrote on the cards. Sometimes, it may not be the same. Sorry for inconvenience, and of course, you have full right to play according of what you feel is better interpreation of the written text.

I will occassionally also add comments from my programming Alter Ego. The point is - there was a digital prototype of base Mage Knight I used for personal playtesting, so I had a very good idea how things work - if you have to implement it, there are no questions left (although there still may be inconsistences between what was meant and what was written). However, the expansion was created without digital prototype, and it shows on higher amount of unclear combinations. But I still have to think this way, for the case there will be ever a digital implementation of the game.

Quote:
Ambush + Shield of the Fallen King - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/961823/ambush-and-shield...
When playing the SofFK after Ambush, if the player chooses the 2nd effect of the artifact (Block 4 against two different enemies), does he add the +X Block given by Ambush to just the first enemy blocked (thus gaining 4+X against the first and just 4 against the second), or to both the blocks (thus 4+X against both enemies)?


Was meant as 6, 4. Sorry for unclarity. The fact is the simplified text "Block 4 against two different enemies" is kind of against rules. You cannot block two enemies at once. You declare which enemy to block, and then you play effects. So more exact wording should be something like: "Choose one: Block 8, or Block 4 and you can use Block 4 when blocking another enemy later this turn."

And this is how it would work in an eventual digital implementation

Quote:

Shield Bash - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/946075/reducing-attacks-...
When using the advanced effect against an enemy with Swiftness, is the "counts twice" effect applied before calculating the final block value? For example, against an enemy with Swiftness and Ice Attack 2, the player plays only advanced Shield Bash. He gets Block 5 which counts twice, thus Block 10. The final block value is 10/2=5 (ineffective against Ice Attack), the player needs Block 4 (due to Swiftness), so the enemy is blocked. Is the enemy's armor reduced by 5-4=1? Or does the counts twice applies to any single block point remaining after blocking, so the player only uses 4 of the Block 5 counted twice to block the attack, and the last block point is counted twice for a -2 to the enemy's Armor?


The original intention was it gives special anti-swift block, which ignores the fact you need two points of block per point of swift attack. It had to replace the previous "enemy loses swiftness" for two reasons:
because of multiple attacks, and to weaken it so a small block of this type cannot remove swiftness completelly from a huge attack. So, the original intention was not to really double the block, but to let it reduce the swift attack by 2 (in fact, to let only this portion of block to ignore swiftness). So, the surplus point does not double for purposes of armor reduction.

I am ashamed here, as this card is unclear by itself, not in combo with others. The probable reason why no tester mentioned it was that these changes were made separately, in several steps. We made Shield Bash with "blocked attack loses Swiftness" (a wording that handled the multiple attack issue). Later, we decided weaken Utem/Altem Guardians (using the opportunity to add a bit balance, when we had to change the text anyway). And in final touches, we decided to change effect of Shield Bash, to unite mechanics, not realizing part of the advanced effect will be unclear because of that.

Sorry for unconvenience.

A special type of block? My future me will hate me for this explanation if we will ever implement digital version of MK


Quote:

Shield Bash vs mutliple attacks - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/973779/interesting-cases...
For multiple attacks blocked by multiple sources including SB stronger effect, which is true:
a) surplus block points for all attacks accumulate to reduce the enemy's armor; or
b) armor reduction is applied only to the attack that SB is actually blocking.


Answer b) is correct. It takes effect during the block in which the card is played.

Quote:

Concentration + Shield Bash/Into the Heat + Altem Guardsmen - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/12431582#12431582
Is the +2 Block given by Concentration applied to the Block 5 before doubling when facing an enemy with Swiftness (thus giving 14 Block) or after doubling (thus giving 12 Block)?
Same question for second combo: 12/14 Block or 10/11 Block?


The bonuses are applied before doubling (counting twice). It gives bonus to this special anti-swift block. Please see Shield Bash above.

Quote:

Into the Heat + Shocktroops - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/972389/into-the-heat-and...
After playing Into the Heat, how is executed the Reduce one enemy attack by 3. Any damage from that attack must be assigned to this Unit first, even if that enemy had Assassination. Shocktroops' ability?
a) Enemy attack is reduced. Damage is dealt to Shocktroops even if Into the Heat is active;
b) Enemy attack is reduced. Damage is dealt to the Hero due to Into the Heat effect that supersecedes Shocktroops second effect.
c) The ability cannot be used at all.


Was meant as a). We forgot about this combination. And it was stupid from us anyway, we should have written "even if not allowed otherwise" instead of "even if that enemy has Assassination", also for sake of future features.

Quote:

Disbanding Units - When
Can a unit be disbanded at any time, or only when recruiting a new Unit with all the Command tokens already occupied? (It matters for Wolfhawk's coop skill that gives bonuses based on unused command tokens)


Only when you cannot recruit more. There is no rule about disbanding units other than this one.

Approved. I do not want to add "disband" to popup menu every time you click/tap a unit

Quote:

Attacking Volkare on a space with an unconquered fortified site - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/967465/attacking-volkare...
Is it possible? The rules states that when entering a space with an unconquered fortified site, we must assault it. But, at the same time, if we enter a space with Volkare we start a combat against him, and a player can't execute 2 actions in a single turn. So, which is true in this case:
a) No player may enter a space with an unconquered fortified site and Volkare;
b) A player may enter such a space, and must assault the unc. fortified site, then executes a combat sequence as if attacked by Volkare (without being able to use a full turn).;
c) The site defenders joins Volkare army for a single combat against Volkare, if the defenders are eliminated, the site is considered conquered;
d) Volkare presence trumps everything else: the player faces Volkare's Army and disregard any fortified enemy present in the space;
e) Anything else to be specified.
This question, of course, is valid even with regards to adventure sites.


This is a tricky question, we changed it a lot, I had to take a look to rulebook to see what was the final version... and found there is none. Sorry for that. The problem is some rules for Volkare are generic and some are scenario specific. We had more scenarios in mind than the ones that made it into the rulebook, so we kept the generic part thin.

However, the way we played the current scenarios is d). The space features are used only to count movement cost (and you cannot attack Volkare if you are unable enter the terrain), the enemies and sites on the space are ignored, except for a fortification effect. If you end up on an unsafe space after defeating Volkare, you have to withdraw. Not that it matters in these scenarios, as they end if you defeated Volkare. Might be specified more exactly in eventual future scenarios.

Yeah. The amount of special cases in other cases was too big. Ignoring them all (except for rampaging, but they act as they always do) is non-problematic. Actually, strictly logic way would be you cannot attack Volkare when he is standing on rampaging enemies (you would have to challenge them first)...

... but to lose your scenario because of single orc diggers, although you have strength to defeat 30 of them, would be kind of anti-climactic

Quote:

New Cold Toughness vs ColdFire attacks - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/990196/how-do-you-play-c...
When using the advanced effect of Cold Toughness against a monster with ColdFire attack, do we get +2 or +1 Ice Block?


Was meant as +2. Sorry for shortcut "color of attack", the text is very long on this card.

Quote:

Not enough tokens available - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/982873/volkares-tokens
It may happen that, when revealing Volkare's army, there're not enough tokens in the pool (mostly for Green tokens): what should we do in this case?


Please improvize. Component shortage was not part of design, and it was impossible prevent all extreme cases. Since the scenario where it happens are usually cooperative, find a way that fits your taste: whether it is a way that affect the game least (withdraw most distant orcs from the map), or not at all (use proxy), or makes thematically sense (withdraw the closest orcs). I do not recommend to give him no orcs, as it would lead to non-thematical meta-tactics (do not kill orcs so Volkare cannot recruit them).

Creating proxy is the easiest way... for a digital version, of course
41 
 Thumb up
2.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trevin Beattie
United States
Eugene
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Vlaada wrote:
Quote:

Shield Bash - http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/946075/reducing-attacks-...
When using the advanced effect against an enemy with Swiftness, is the "counts twice" effect applied before calculating the final block value? For example, against an enemy with Swiftness and Ice Attack 2, the player plays only advanced Shield Bash. He gets Block 5 which counts twice, thus Block 10. The final block value is 10/2=5 (ineffective against Ice Attack), the player needs Block 4 (due to Swiftness), so the enemy is blocked. Is the enemy's armor reduced by 5-4=1? Or does the counts twice applies to any single block point remaining after blocking, so the player only uses 4 of the Block 5 counted twice to block the attack, and the last block point is counted twice for a -2 to the enemy's Armor?


The original intention was it gives special anti-swift block, which ignores the fact you need two points of block per point of swift attack. It had to replace the previous "enemy loses swiftness" for two reasons:
because of multiple attacks, and to weaken it so a small block of this type cannot remove swiftness completelly from a huge attack. So, the original intention was not to really double the block, but to let it reduce the swift attack by 2 (in fact, to let only this portion of block to ignore swiftness). So, the surplus point does not double for purposes of armor reduction.

I am ashamed here, as this card is unclear by itself, not in combo with others. The probable reason why no tester mentioned it was that these changes were made separately, in several steps. We made Shield Bash with "blocked attack loses Swiftness" (a wording that handled the multiple attack issue). Later, we decided weaken Utem/Altem Guardians (using the opportunity to add a bit balance, when we had to change the text anyway). And in final touches, we decided to change effect of Shield Bash, to unite mechanics, not realizing part of the advanced effect will be unclear because of that.

Sorry for unconvenience.

A special type of block? My future me will hate me for this explanation if we will ever implement digital version of MK


While I really appreciate your attempt to clear this up, I'm afraid I have trouble wrapping my head around this idea of having “only this portion of block” ignore swiftness, especially when the block is an odd number and is inefficient.

In the example given above, ignoring “Swiftness”: Since the block is inefficient against Ice, it must be halved and rounded down from 5 to 2, if it is not doubled. That would leave no surplus point for reducing the enemy's armor. Is that your intent, or do you ignore the inefficiency of the odd point of block when reducing the enemy's armor? What if another card were played sideways to add +1 Block — would you reduce the enemy armor by 1, because your total inefficient block is 3 vs. 2, or by 2 because you used 2 more block than needed, or does something else happen because the +1 Block doesn't ignore Swiftness?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Iron James Rackham
msg tools
mbmbmb
Vlaada wrote:
Hello all, I will try to answer those questions. The answers will be given according to the original intentions, not according the best interpretation of what we wrote on the cards. Sometimes, it may not be the same. Sorry for inconvenience, and of course, you have full right to play according of what you feel is better interpreation of the written text.

I will occassionally also add comments from my programming Alter Ego.

A big thanks to the both of you! You guys are the greatest!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boris Dvorkin
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Vlaada, you are amazing. Thank you for providing all those answers!

Also, now that you told us there might be a digital version of Mage Knight, I just want you to know you're going to get 1.4 billion tonnes of hate mail from me if it never happens.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.