The Book of Noh-Varr

[Viegon]

I'm in favor of just clarifying/amending the SA rules. SAs like this (and any that say "instead of moving and attacking") are breaking the normal SA rule by taking them outside of the attack phase, but all SAs, unless otherwise specified, are still replacing the normal attack, or in other words, preventing you from also attacking normally.

My .

[quozl]

That's already been clarified officially, Vie. I think we just need to know if mixing the move and attack phases like this needs changing or clarification.

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by quozl

That's already been clarified officially, Vie. I think we just need to know if mixing the move and attack phases like this needs changing or clarification.

If you're talking about the official FAQ that TB posted a while back:

Spoiler Alert!

Can I use a Special Attack and a normal attack in the same turn?
No. A Special Attack is used instead of a normal attack for each figure unless otherwise stated on the Army Card.

That actually doesn't clarify anything. It restates the SA rule as it is in the rulebooks, again with the reliance on the timing-related wording that Noh-Varr is bypassing.

Saying that something happens instead of an attack means that it happens during the attack phase and there's nothing in the rules to suggest otherwise. Trying to go against that has implications for a lot of cards, but the timing part of "instead of attacking" language is an especially important part of how we read powers like these ones:

TELEPATHIC RAPPORT
After revealing an Order Marker on this card, instead of attacking, you may take a turn with any Unique Telepath Hero you control.

TRIGGER HAPPY
After revealing an Oder Marker on any Crime Lord or Mastermind's Army Card you control, instead of attacking with that Crime Lord or Mastermind, you may attack with the Hired Guns.

Also, we have gotten specific about SAs replacing normal attacks, when it helps clarity. Besides the many "Instead of moving and attacking" SAs, we got specific here to clarify that you only use the AIM Agents' SA once and it replaces the attacks of an entire squad:

WEAPONIZED VIRUS SPECIAL ATTACK
Range 3. Lob 12. Attack Special
Instead of attacking normally with a squad of A.I.M. Agents this turn, you may choose a space within 3 spaces of one or more A.I.M. Agents you control. All figures on or within 1 space of the chosen space are affected. Roll X attack dice once for all affected figures, where X equals the number of unengaged A.I.M. Agents you control within 3 spaces of the chosen space. Each figure rolls defense dice separately. The defending figure compares height to the lowest A.I.M. Agent to determine height advantage. A figure that receives one or more wounds from this attack receives one additional wound. Androids, destructible objects, and figures with the Environmental Suit special power are not affected by this special attack.

And here on John Fox to specify that his SA movement doesn't replace his normal movement in the manner of an "Instead of moving and attacking" SA:

SPEED SHIFT SPECIAL ATTACK
Range 1. Attack 3.
Instead of attacking normally with Flash, you may move Flash up to 4 spaces. Flash can attack up to 3 times with this special attack at any point before, during, or after this move as long as Flash is on a space where he could end his movement. After using this special attack, place Flash on the space he occupied before using this special attack.

So far as I know, those cards haven't resulted in any kind of mass-scale confusion where people no longer understand that SAs are normally instead of attacking anyway.

We can amend the rules to actually say what everyone thinks they already say. I'm fine with that. My preference is that the card better explain itself.

[quozl]

Right, I understand that this design mixes the move and attack phases in a way that hasn't really been done before.

What I am asking for are examples of powers that make that a problem.

[japes]

Originally Posted by Ronin

If you're talking about the official FAQ that TB posted a while back:

Spoiler Alert!

That actually doesn't clarify anything. It restates the SA rule as it is in the rulebooks, again with the reliance on the timing-related wording that Noh-Varr is bypassing.

Saying that something happens instead of an attack means that it happens during the attack phase and there's nothing in the rules to suggest otherwise. Trying to go against that has implications for a lot of cards, but the timing part of "instead of attacking" language is an especially important part of how we read powers like these ones:

Also, we have gotten specific about SAs replacing normal attacks, when it helps clarity. Besides the many "Instead of moving and attacking" SAs, we got specific here to clarify that you only use the AIM Agents' SA once and it replaces the attacks of an entire squad:

And here on John Fox to specify that his SA movement doesn't replace his normal movement in the manner of an "Instead of moving and attacking" SA:

So far as I know, those cards haven't resulted in any kind of mass-scale confusion where people no longer understand that SAs are normally instead of attacking anyway.

We can amend the rules to actually say what everyone thinks they already say. I'm fine with that. My preference is that the card better explain itself.

The first two are Special Powers not Special Attacks so they correctly specify "instead of Attacking"

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by japes

The first two are Special Powers not Special Attacks so they correctly specify "instead of Attacking"

My point with highlighting those is that they show that "instead of attacking" has an important meaning about timing.

Can I use a Special Attack and a normal attack in the same turn?
No. A Special Attack is used instead of a normal attack for each figure unless otherwise stated on the Army Card.

TELEPATHIC RAPPORT
After revealing an Order Marker on this card, instead of attacking, you may take a turn with any Unique Telepath Hero you control.

In order to justify the ruling on Noh-Varr's SA without upending every "Instead of ____" power, you have to rule that the blue doesn't necessarily mean anything about the timing, but the red absolutely does. I don't see any way to reconcile that, given the nigh-identical wording. That is the inconsistency I want us to get rid of.

[TrollBrute]

I'm basically fine with whatever here, though I'm not a fan of that last wording you posted, Ronin. It takes a simple power that works fairly intuitively and replaces it with a power that is not simple to parse.

Would replacing the FAQ with something else work better? For example:

Can I use a Special Attack and a normal attack in the same turn?
No. Special Attacks cannot be used in the same turn a a normal attack unless otherwise stated on the card.

It's basically saying the same thing, but without ruling on the 'instead of' wording.

[Ronin]

I'm fine with that. I'd want a note of that made in the Book of Rules, because we are technically making an extension of the classic rules, and I'd rather we didn't do that kind of thing strictly in the FAQs. Makes the rules hard to keep track of.

[quozl]

I'll add it to the Book of Rules.

[japes]

@A3n

[Hahma]

RUN AND GUN SPECIAL ATTACK
Range 5. Attack 3.
Instead of attacking normally, Noh-Varr may attack with this special attack up to 2 times at any point before, during, or after his normal move as long as he is on a space where he could end his movement.

Why can't those 4 words be added to the special attack to make it clear?

[quozl]

Because the confusion comes from moving and attacking. To follow Kumiko exactly, it would be "instead of moving and attacking normally" but then we'd need to give a static move number.