Post by osiris on Dec 29, 2022 12:01:52 GMT -5
This is a list of known ambiguity in the rules, that are not currently addressed by FAQ/Errata:
Gilly: if the tactics board is not full, she MUST activate, despite a CMON designer stating in the forums that they did not intend for her to be forced to activate, it was never cleared up in the FAQ as he stated. Fixed in S02 update
Expert Duellist: the 2nd option says to "destroy the attachment" but "destroy" is not well defined in the rules, does this cause a wound or not? currently major groups seem to think that this does NOT cause a wound (and therefore if the rest of the attack does not cause wounds, then the defender would automatically pass their panic test from the attack) Furthermore, if it only "destroys the attachment" that is mentioned in the FAQ as just losing the abilities of the attachment, so, would the unit not lose a wound at all, and just replace the attachment with a "normal" model for the unit?
Transferring abilities that have unique attack names (such as Bone Weapons) can they gain the abilities or no, since the new unit doesn't have an attack named Bone Weapons.
Ambush - does it work when replacing the melee attack, such as from Ride Them Down tactic card, since the trigger only requires a successful charge, however, the ability is behind the sword icon, indicating it is tied to the attack.
Furious Charge - similar issue.
Rerolls - how do they resolve when both players have rerolls? page 17 implies that all the dice are rolled, then both players apply the rerolls they want (essentially the attacker rerolls the dice that missed, and the defender rerolls the dice that hit) but page 22 implies that the attacker rerolls dice first, then after the results have changed, then the defender can apply rerolls, which would allow rerolls of rerolls. but they also mention that these sequential rule only apply when both players have an effect that can reroll "a die" (meaning the same individual die) not "dice" (meaning the entire roll). This could simply be symantics but the language is unclear and both interpretations have merit.
Less ambiguous but some people still argue about the poor wording:
Things like quaithe or ready, aim, release interrupting a charge, does the charge still resolve to the original facing "teleporting" the charging unit... (no it does not, even the developer on the forum discussed this but people only hear what they want to hear)
The 'owner moves their unit 1" away from the attacker' in the Charging multiple Enemies rule. people are trying to argue they can place their unit ANYWHERE on the board so long as it is 1" away from the attacker... even behind the attacker, which is clearly not intended. wording needs to be fixed so that it says "by the least possible distance, until 1" away"
in order to declare an action, it must be legal at the time it is declared? even if it would BECOME legal due to simultaneous actions resolving (such as an action that gives a token, and another action that uses the token, happening on a unit that does not have a token on it yet at the time of actions declaration)
Targetting - this is a complete hot mess, dont get me started. even the article posted by a well known player (but not employee) on their website is full of questionable interpretations on what is and is not targetting.
MANY MORE, ILL ADD TO THIS LIST LATER AFTER CHECKING NOTES>
Expert Duellist: the 2nd option says to "destroy the attachment" but "destroy" is not well defined in the rules, does this cause a wound or not? currently major groups seem to think that this does NOT cause a wound (and therefore if the rest of the attack does not cause wounds, then the defender would automatically pass their panic test from the attack) Furthermore, if it only "destroys the attachment" that is mentioned in the FAQ as just losing the abilities of the attachment, so, would the unit not lose a wound at all, and just replace the attachment with a "normal" model for the unit?
Transferring abilities that have unique attack names (such as Bone Weapons) can they gain the abilities or no, since the new unit doesn't have an attack named Bone Weapons.
Ambush - does it work when replacing the melee attack, such as from Ride Them Down tactic card, since the trigger only requires a successful charge, however, the ability is behind the sword icon, indicating it is tied to the attack.
Furious Charge - similar issue.
Rerolls - how do they resolve when both players have rerolls? page 17 implies that all the dice are rolled, then both players apply the rerolls they want (essentially the attacker rerolls the dice that missed, and the defender rerolls the dice that hit) but page 22 implies that the attacker rerolls dice first, then after the results have changed, then the defender can apply rerolls, which would allow rerolls of rerolls. but they also mention that these sequential rule only apply when both players have an effect that can reroll "a die" (meaning the same individual die) not "dice" (meaning the entire roll). This could simply be symantics but the language is unclear and both interpretations have merit.
Less ambiguous but some people still argue about the poor wording:
Things like quaithe or ready, aim, release interrupting a charge, does the charge still resolve to the original facing "teleporting" the charging unit... (no it does not, even the developer on the forum discussed this but people only hear what they want to hear)
The 'owner moves their unit 1" away from the attacker' in the Charging multiple Enemies rule. people are trying to argue they can place their unit ANYWHERE on the board so long as it is 1" away from the attacker... even behind the attacker, which is clearly not intended. wording needs to be fixed so that it says "by the least possible distance, until 1" away"
in order to declare an action, it must be legal at the time it is declared? even if it would BECOME legal due to simultaneous actions resolving (such as an action that gives a token, and another action that uses the token, happening on a unit that does not have a token on it yet at the time of actions declaration)
Targetting - this is a complete hot mess, dont get me started. even the article posted by a well known player (but not employee) on their website is full of questionable interpretations on what is and is not targetting.
MANY MORE, ILL ADD TO THIS LIST LATER AFTER CHECKING NOTES>