Rules Team HQ - Open for Business

[Lord Pyre]

So what's our next order of business? Sure we can debate about structure, or we can hit the first issue and see how it plays out, and structure from there based on how we do.

[IAmBatman]

Seems like there’s three tiers here:

Big Picture stuff: resolving and clarifying structural mechanical issues like with movement and attack triggers.

Old business: making sure we are consistent in past FAQs and have recorded all answers to previous queries.

New business: setting about answering new queries.

[IAmBatman]

But, you know, that's just my thoughts on it.

[quozl]

I would like to be on the team if you'll have me.

[IAmBatman]

More the merrier as far as I'm concerned, but since we did officially name it, it'd take an official vote. You might want to propose it in the Legend Proposal Hall.

[MrNobody]

I'm in support. Not sure we really need a vote, but it's probably a nice formality to have.

I have a rules question for us. Pretty sure I know what the answer is, but I think it would be good to be clear. What does the "until the next time you reveal an Order Marker." language actually mean?

I've kind of always taken it to be kind of implied that it only counts OMs that you reveal at the start of your turn, but I'm not sure that assumption is accurate. For example, the Sonic Screwdriver says this:

The chosen figure cannot target non-adjacent figures for any attacks until the next time you reveal an Order Marker.

If I used the Sonic Screwdriver, then used a power that reveals one of my Order Markers, would that cancel the Sonic's effect? What if I use a power to reveal an opponent's OM?

On a similar note, I've always assumed "After revealing an Order Marker on the card of a XXX you control and taking a turn with that XXX..." language implies that it only refers to the initial OM reveal you do at the start of your turn, but I know we have a few On Deck designs that assume that's not true.

I guess overall I'm asking if the "reveal an OM" language ever has some implied meaning to it, or if it just literally always means what it means.

[IAmBatman]

I think it’s dangerous to build too many mechanics on implied meanings. My assumption is always going to be the most literal reading of something unless I have very good reason to think otherwise.

[IAmBatman]

To add: for something like the Sonic, if the effect is meant to last until the start of your next player turn, that’s how it should be worded.

[Ronin]

Yeah, I'd think we're kinda stuck with the literal meaning and if we wanted to avoid that, we should go back and update cards that use the "until OM reveal buh buh buh" wording to use player turns.

[IAmBatman]

OK, so one of the most muddled issues in Heroscape lingo is triggers involving "attacking" whether that be "before attacking," "instead of attacking," or "after attacking." The question usually becomes "is this referring to an individual attack or the entire attack phase" and we've typically decided on a case-by-case basis (possibly inconsistently) which has led to greater confusion and difficult design space.

So I think it's time that we officially discuss how to differentiate an individual attack from the attack phase in our lingo, make sure that the distinction we make works with existing cards, then make an official recommendation to the Heroes (whereupon we'll do any updates necessary (hopefully very few)).

My inclination is that it'd be too difficult to specify "attack phase" at this point since there's so many before/instead of/after attacking powers referring to the phase already, but that it'd be easier to say "making an attack" for the individual attack to differentiate that way.

[tcglkn]

There's never been an attack phase and I've always played everything that said instead of attacking as replacing a single attack. Notably though with stuff like Double Attack since you didn't actually attack then you don't get the second attack.

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by tcglkn

There's never been an attack phase and I've always played everything that said instead of attacking as replacing a single attack. Notably though with stuff like Double Attack since you didn't actually attack then you don't get the second attack.

So you've played any "instead of attacking" powers on a card that has double attack as allowing them to attack once, then replace the second attack with the ability?