Heroscapers
Go Back   Heroscapers > Official Valhalla HeroScape > Official Rules & FAQ's
Official Rules & FAQ's Compilation and discussion of official HeroScape Rules and Frequently Asked Questions. **Special attacks never receive any bonuses.**

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #145  
Old January 17th, 2007, 10:06 AM
1/2ltfightr 1/2ltfightr is offline
 
Join Date: December 30, 2006
Location: AR - Little Rock
Posts: 37
1/2ltfightr has disabled reputation
Well after thinking long and hard about this one in my opinion the 4th would get the bonus. Both sides of this debate have brought forth valid arguments but in the end I agree that the bonus would be given. There is a real need for the designers of this game to expand the rules and expound on then some. A v3 rule book even only released online and in new MS is needed IMHO. This is a close one for me but in the end I agree a unit that is not on the battlefield that I can't use and that if I do not roll right does not come into play and I can loose the game if I do not roll right should not penalize the units I do have on the battlefield.

1/2ltfightr and ltfightr are a married couple. We have used ltfightr for 11 years. We have always shared that but for some reason she will not share scape and what does she mean her EOV she found 12-15-06 are hers not ours! ....!
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old January 17th, 2007, 01:04 PM
Homba Homba is offline
has been BANNED
 
Join Date: June 3, 2006
Location: MS - Jackson
Posts: 754
Homba is a puppet of Ne-Gok-Sa
Here are some items you "4th Mass get-the-bonus" diehards need to admit. Most of them should be pretty easy to admit (impossible to deny). If you don't admit an item, explain why, and we have a marker for further discussion. For those interested in this debate, forge ahead. For those who would ridicule this post for being too long, skip to the bold text at the bottom - it's just for you.

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

Admit that the purpose of every other instance of "you control" on HS cards (reserving judgment for now on the disputed 4th Mass card) is to exclude friendly units, and this is the standard usage of the phrase.

Admit that interpreting "you control" on the 4th Mass card in the sense of "tactical control" is a new interpretation of the phrase, and a departure from the standard usage.

Admit that the internal consistency of HS is desirable, and better served by uniform interpretation of ability text.

Admit that in the KMS case, the "after attacking" ruling recognized the standard usage, rather than the new interpretation some sought - thereby preserving the internal consistency of the (unwritten, but de facto) "Turn Phase" concept.

Admit that because the player decides to his advantage whether or not the AE drop upon a sufficient roll, the argument that "the player has no tactical control over the AE before they drop" is either (1) called into serious doubt, or (2) outright destroyed.

Admit that trying to answer a rules question by applying an (at best) demonstrably doubtful and new-to-HS concept ("tactical control") is inferior to answering by applying the standard usage of a common ability-text phrase.

Admit that when all non-valiant units are destroyed, the 4th Mass get their bonus. (The "Finally-Valiant" rule.)

Admit that if a destroyed non-valiant unit is somehow returned to existence (Revive Glyph), the 4th Mass would then lose their bonus.

Admit that prior to being dropped, the AE have not been destroyed.

Admit that the game ends (you lose) if you have no units on the battlefield and the AE have yet to drop. (The "Game-Over" rule.)

Admit that if you (somehow) seek to use the above "Game-Over" rule to justify the 4th Mass receiving their bonus when the AE have yet to drop, then in doing so you must flatly ignore and contradict the "Finally-Valiant" rule which requires all non-valiant units to be destroyed before the 4th Mass get their bonus.

Admit that the "Game-Over" rule and the "Finally-Valiant" rule coexist in harmony unless and until you try to overlay them with an argument whereby the 4th Mass get their bonus before the AE have dropped.

Admit that if two rules work in harmony, but go haywire when you overlay a certain argument upon them, the argument is either (1) called into serious doubt, or (2) outright destroyed.

Admit that while HS is not a simulation and does not realistically "make sense" in a whole spectrum of ways, it does and should strive to maintain internal consistency - and the "common sense" way of maintaining consistency is to uniformly interpret like ability text.

And finally, on a related note. Some people have begun to mention this (thanks), but since I am the target I wanted to highlight it:

Admit that an "Appeal to Ridicule" is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence. Prime example: 1+1=2. Appeal to Ridicule: "Six characters!? Anything that can't be expressed in more than 2 characters defies common sense and must be wrong!!!"

Admit that the Appeal to Ridicule is a childish and counter-productive "method of argument" likely to provoke open hostility, having nothing to do with getting at the truth of the matter at hand, nor of establishing legitimate markers of disagreement for further discussion. As such, it should probably be against forum policy, if the goal of forum policy is to promote polite and respectful discussion and defuse hostility before it begins. Sorry if this is hard to hear or bruises egos, but it's true. Please check yourselves, and try to set a better example.


Now I'll admit something:

The designers, in considering this question, are free to carve out an exception for the AE/4th Mass (as I observed early in this thread). They were equally free to carve out an exception for KMS (they chose not to). I would welcome them carving out an exception, because it would fuel my hope that Blastas/Parmenio/Romans/DW9 will be revisited and changed to "friendly." However, the fact remains that the designers choosing to carve out an exception makes none of the above admissions less true.

H
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old January 17th, 2007, 01:10 PM
Eclipse's Avatar
Eclipse Eclipse is offline
regurgitation cynic
 
Join Date: July 19, 2006
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 4,103
Eclipse wears ripped pants of awesomeness Eclipse wears ripped pants of awesomeness Eclipse wears ripped pants of awesomeness Eclipse wears ripped pants of awesomeness Eclipse wears ripped pants of awesomeness Eclipse wears ripped pants of awesomeness
I said it before, and I'll say it again:

The answer to this question isn't currently in the rules.

Argue all you want, but there's no checkmate in this match. Someone is going to have to get Craig (and certainly not WOTC) to come in and lop off the king's head.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old January 17th, 2007, 01:28 PM
QBakies's Avatar
QBakies QBakies is offline
 
Join Date: December 27, 2006
Location: OH - Ohio, sadly
Posts: 268
QBakies has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eclipse
I said it before, and I'll say it again:

The answer to this question isn't currently in the rules.

Argue all you want, but there's no checkmate in this match. Someone is going to have to get Craig (and certainly not WOTC) to come in and lop off the king's head.
I agree, which is why I stopped posting in this thread. I still think that you don't get the bonus because the AE are part of your army and under your control.

I'm posting now to find out if the email was indeed sent to WotC?
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old January 17th, 2007, 01:42 PM
R˙chean's Avatar
R˙chean R˙chean is offline
GenCon 2014 Main Event Champ / Obsessive-Compulsive HS Storage Organizer
 
Join Date: May 9, 2006
Location: TX - Dallas
Posts: 7,443
Images: 91
Blog Entries: 10
R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth R˙chean is a man of the cloth
I have been watching this thread since its conception.

I want to start by saying until the "finally valiant" ruling, I always played that if your army didn't start out valiant, it didn't end up valiant through attrition. I stopped playing that way once that ruling came down.

I have also never played that the 4th mass get valiant if the AE haven't dropped yet. I always considered, based on the finally valiant rule, that the AE were indeed in your control because you perform a game function with them until they drop or you are eliminated from the battlefield. Using the finally valiant ruling, once the non-valiant army cards are eliminated from your army, you are no longer performing any game function of any kind with that card. (minus sturla glyph)

Many people I play with have weighed in saying they should get the valiant bonus until the AE are on the battlefield. I have never played that way nor do I think that is a correct interpretation. The AE are ready and waiting to be deployed and are requiring pre-marker placement, game activity.

Also, I have seen the "they aren't helping me when the haven't dropped yet so why should they hurt me" point of view; I want to point out that the threat of the Drop is something a good opponent continues to take into account each time they take a turn. The take care where they place their units and if they are clumped etc… I would say that if an army card is affecting how your enemy takes their turns, that in some way the army card is helping you or at least having an impact on the game. The threat of the AE Drop has a continual impact on the game.

A must read for all 'Scapers!
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old January 17th, 2007, 03:21 PM
dnutt99's Avatar
dnutt99 dnutt99 is offline
 
Join Date: September 7, 2006
Location: CA - Oakland
Posts: 1,293
dnutt99 has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBakies
I'm posting now to find out if the email was indeed sent to WotC?
The e-mail has inded been sent as of 01/15/07.
No response as of yet. At this point in the discussion I think both sides have provided ample evidence to support the ruling on either side. That is why, (for the most part), I have'nt made an appearance on this thread in some time. I won't be completely satisfied with any "final" ruling until the official FAQ has been updated, (which we can only pray will be soon after receiving the response).

Homba, I got your PM but have been far too busy to make a proper response. I do intend on responding at some point in the near future.

9 RotV - 4 SotM - 5 DDMS - 2 MarvelScape - 7 RttFF - 6 FotV - 5 VW - 4 TT - 4 TJ - 5 GC Xclusive - 6 FB's - 1,561 Figures - 7,147 Hexes - 174.24% Complete -
(All for just $4,000 BUCKS)
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old January 17th, 2007, 04:24 PM
tsukifu tsukifu is offline
 
Join Date: June 11, 2006
Posts: 243
tsukifu has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by R˙chean
Also, I have seen the "they aren't helping me when the haven't dropped yet so why should they hurt me" point of view; I want to point out that the threat of the Drop is something a good opponent continues to take into account each time they take a turn. The take care where they place their units and if they are clumped etc… I would say that if an army card is affecting how your enemy takes their turns, that in some way the army card is helping you or at least having an impact on the game. The threat of the AE Drop has a continual impact on the game.
Now that's a compelling argument. To my mind, the fact that your opponent has to account for their presence even before they're on the board suggests that they are, in fact, "in play," even though they're not on the board. I think there's only one card that actually uses the term "in play" (MacDirk Warriors, with Highland Fury), and in that case it basically means "unless he's dead." I guess that's how I think of the AE, and how I read the "you control" in regards to them.

Of course, you could also argue that by this reasoning, Finn or Thorgrim would also be affecting play by the use of their spirit enhancements, post-mortem. They're valiant anyway, but still...isn't this a nice, clear-cut issue?
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old January 17th, 2007, 04:38 PM
Tiberius's Avatar
Tiberius Tiberius is offline
Which Team Am I On?...
 
Join Date: May 11, 2006
Location: PA - Pittsburgh (Monaca)
Posts: 4,777
Tiberius has disabled reputation
I beleive you have to account for the AE figures in the starting zone as well with respect to maximum starting spaces. That tells me they count for other things as well.

Tiberius is Rogue...
aboard STARSHIP THETA...
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old January 17th, 2007, 05:43 PM
Homba Homba is offline
has been BANNED
 
Join Date: June 3, 2006
Location: MS - Jackson
Posts: 754
Homba is a puppet of Ne-Gok-Sa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiberius
I beleive you have to account for the AE figures in the starting zone as well with respect to maximum starting spaces. That tells me they count for other things as well.
Gbob disagrees with you, citing a reply he remembers on the old forum. However, regardless of which of you is right, it is irrelevant to our issue.

The "Start Zone Exemption" (I will assume Gbob correctly recalls it) is a special AE sub-rule supplemental to the ordinary deployment rules. Fine.

But if you try to use the "Start Zone Exemption" to prove the 4th Mass get their bonus before the AE have dropped, you crash into the "Finally-Valiant" Rule which says the 4th Mass don't get their bonus til all non-valiants are destroyed.

This resulting contradiction demonstrates that the Start Zone Exemption isn't a valid piece of evidence for the position that the 4th Mass get their bonus pre-drop. When you overlay two perfectly functioning rules with an argument that causes a trainwreck between the two recognized, valid rules, the only conclusion to draw is that the argument is improper.

R˙chean, those are great observations, especially regarding the continuing influence of the threat of the drop. You hit it out of the park.

I can't agree that both sides have presented enough evidence to justify a ruling either way. The pre-drop bonus side came out swinging, but that argument has crumbled to nothing under scrutiny. The answer was right here in front of us in the available information. It just took some sorting out. This is checkmate.

If you're still clinging to the pre-drop bonus, what splinter of evidence are you clutching at? I sincerely want to know.

H
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old January 17th, 2007, 05:58 PM
LilNewbie's Avatar
LilNewbie LilNewbie is offline
Site Admin & Master Custom Creator
 
Join Date: May 8, 2006
Location: NM - Albuquerque
Posts: 5,594
LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer LilNewbie is a wielder of the Ban Hammer
If I can't move the miniatures around on the gameboard...I can't control them till they reach the gameboard. (Well I can but my friends look at me funny as I push them around on the floor and make shooting noises.)

I understand and view that the "game over" rule supports "they aren't under control" more than the other position but I can see where both sides can take issue. My reasoning is that since all official scenarios have a Round limit they could have easily stated keep rolling until a. The AE do drop or b. You run out of Rounds but they didn't and went with the current ruling where a player loses if he has no more figures on the board. Just seems to weigh heavily toward the AE aren't active until they Drop (imo).

I really think Eclipse is correct in stating it will take an answer from the designers to settle this issue because both sides are decently entrenched. Until then I'll play it the way it appears correct to me.

Newb.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old January 17th, 2007, 07:53 PM
InfinityMax's Avatar
InfinityMax InfinityMax is offline
Man Genius
 
Join Date: May 4, 2006
Location: TX - Arlington
Posts: 3,991
Images: 5
Blog Entries: 1
InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness InfinityMax wears ripped pants of awesomeness
If I can control figures, I can tell them to do stuff, like shoot at people and climb ladders. If I can't control them, then I don't control them. You can throw double-speak and declare yourself the winner until the cows come home, but I'm going to keep holding out here - if I can't control a figure, then I don't control it. Also, if I don't have blonde hair, then I am not a blonde. By the same token, if rain is falling from the sky, then it is raining. When I'm not driving, I don't control my car. I could go get in my car and start it up, but until I do, I have chosen not to control my car, so I don't control it. You can argue like Perry Mason if you want, but that doesn't change a simple truth - if I can't control it, I'm not controlling it.

Game over, won by Occam's Razor. I'm right, and you're wrong. Your argument has completely crumbled. It's right there in front of you. That's checkmate.

http://drakesflames.blogspot.com
Drake's Flames, my crassly opinionated game review site. Updates three times a week.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old January 18th, 2007, 12:14 AM
tsukifu tsukifu is offline
 
Join Date: June 11, 2006
Posts: 243
tsukifu has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4th Mass card
If every Army Card you control has a valiant personality, each soldier in the 4th Massachusetts Line receives 1 additional defense die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfinityMax
If I can control . . . I can tell them to do stuff, like shoot at people and climb ladders.
Wow, you can like, make your Army Card climb ladders and shoot people and stuff? That's pretty cool.

You know what's really crumbly? Cookies.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Heroscapers > Official Valhalla HeroScape > Official Rules & FAQ's
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:29 AM.

Heroscape background footer

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.