Stark 'lead by example' card question
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Stark 'lead by example' card question

  1. #1

    Default Stark 'lead by example' card question

    Hi guys, calling on the collective wisdom for some perspective on the Lead by example card.
    Here is the configuration that rose many questions during my last game, Eddard stark unit holding the objective that gives sundering and vicious at the cost of D3 wounds for each melee attack performed.

    I triggered the card with 2 miniatures left to finish off an engaged Baratheon unit with only one mini left, thinking to then activate my berserker in long range as described on the card (after this activation another unit within unit within long range activates as well etc...)

    But here is the pb, my stark unit died from the D3 wound from the objective - so what of the berserk unit? can they activate after the stark unit regardless of the fact that the stark unit is now gone from the table?

    I was in favor (unsurprisingly ahah) considering that I checked for the triggers conditions (ie measuring long range) when the keyword triggered ("start of ta friendly turn') and that the definition of activation in the rulebook seems to favor that interpretation.

    My opponent held the opposite view: no stark unit anymore so no attack for the second unit.

    Thoughts?
    Thx!
    Last edited by baltogu; 02-06-2021 at 03:06 PM.

  2. #2

    Default

    My initial feeling was that there is no problem to activate the other Unit.

    However, RAW view-point would be, that there is no longer an Unit to check if some other unit is in Long Range of. So cannot determine suitable unit to do another action.

    Sure, players can remember the place where the Unit used to be, but by RAW, the unit is not there anymore after the activation (when you would need to select other unit to activate), as it is dead by then (the damage that killed it happened still during the activation). Cannot determine an other unit within long range, as the unit to measure long range from is no longer at the table. Similar as if this card had been played without an unit being within long range after the activation (even if the unit did not die).

    "... After this activation, 1 other friendly unit within long range may immediately activate as well. ..."

  3. #3

    Default

    That's what we ultimately went for, I conceded as I was comfortably ahead in points - turns out this cost me the game in the end (though I did kill off that baratheon unit, but at a very steep price!).
    But I still find it ambiguous, the key point being: After this activation (ie: has the unit activated: yes, was the second unit eligible to activate when the card triggered: yes). Also and at the risk of sounding a bit thick - what does RAW stands for?

    side comment: the 2021 game mode updates change everything (game of throne) - I used to beat baratheons 10-2, and this is my first defeat (gone is the 2pts objective in the center, commandants are to be cautiously exposed because they can drive those 2 points per objective gains, control of the objective until you are undone by a larger unit etc...a whole different game.

  4. #4

    Default

    In board games (and games in general) "RAW" abbreviation is short for "Rules As Written".

    It is usually used as generic comment that "this is how this would go, if reading the rules strictly and by the book" (e.g. leaving out any RAI interpretations. RAI = Rules As Intended by the game developer / designer. saying "RAI" usually hints that the person saying so assumes (interprets) that the rules have a mistake, and are against what the designer meant. Such cases would usually eventually be fixed by Errata by game designer(s), if so. In this game such erratas are sometimes added to FAQ instead to break the usual convention(s)).

    "RAW" methodology also leaves out any interpretations, and goes with the simplest logic: how it is written is how it is played (unless Errata or FAQ entry exists). And if the reading can be interpreted multiple ways, the simplest interpretation (that needs least assumptions or "leaps") would be the "correct" interpretation.


    So here the RAW reading would be, that the card says that after the activation, a long range must be measured from the unit to determine if an another unit can be found, and if so, that unit may be activated. But as the original unit (to measure from) does not exist anymore on the table, no long range can be measured from that unit to determine such another unit to activate.


    Note that lot can happen to an unit during its activation, it can be in totally different place than where it started.
    Note also that there are multiple cards in this game (in v1.6 and earlier), where the trigger (when the card is played) and the effect(s) (things that happen) are not happening right next to each other. Clearest example (but by far not the only one) is the v1.6 (and earlier) "Overrun". There are even "until end of the round" effects in this game.
    Last edited by Fronx; 02-06-2021 at 03:44 PM.

  5. #5

    Default

    Thanks for the comprehensive reply and explanation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Fronx View Post
    In board games (and games in general) "RAW" abbreviation is short for "Rules As Written".

    It is usually used as generic comment that "this is how this would go, if reading the rules strictly and by the book" (e.g. leaving out any RAI interpretations. RAI = Rules As Intended by the game developer / designer. saying "RAI" usually hints that the person saying so assumes (interprets) that the rules have a mistake, and are against what the designer meant. Such cases would usually eventually be fixed by Errata by game designer(s), if so. In this game such erratas are sometimes added to FAQ instead to break the usual convention(s)).

    "RAW" methodology also leaves out any interpretations, and goes with the simplest logic: how it is written is how it is played (unless Errata or FAQ entry exists). And if the reading can be interpreted multiple ways, the simplest interpretation (that needs least assumptions or "leaps") would be the "correct" interpretation.


    So here the RAW reading would be, that the card says that after the activation, a long range must be measured from the unit to determine if an another unit can be found, and if so, that unit may be activated. But as the original unit (to measure from) does not exist anymore on the table, no long range can be measured from that unit to determine such another unit to activate.


    Note that lot can happen to an unit during its activation, it can be in totally different place than where it started.
    Note also that there are multiple cards in this game (in v1.6 and earlier), where the trigger (when the card is played) and the effect(s) (things that happen) are not happening right next to each other. Clearest example (but by far not the only one) is the v1.6 (and earlier) "Overrun". There are even "until end of the round" effects in this game.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Privacy Policy  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Contact Us  |   The Legion


Copyright © 2001-2018 CMON Inc.

-->