The Book of Tor-Kul-Na

[Therminator]

While I do agree with Rÿchean when it comes to the intent of the designers, I do think the wording is pretty vague. Especially the phrase "while moving." For example: what happens if you move 6 spaces and end adjacent to a small/medium figure. Can you attempt a trample? If you can, and you destroy it, do you get to move into its space even though you've used up your 6 movement?

....Reading card more carefully to see if I've missed anything...

Actually, now that I've inspected a bit more closer, I'd guess that the phrase "and on a space where Tor-Kul-Na may end his movement" answers my question. If the figure is greater than his movement away, you are unable to end your movement there, so you cannot use the power on it. Now I'm convinced, no free movement period.

[Dumb Dwarf]

Had another thought, going with my first post. Rÿchean and rdhight, you both agree with my reasoning about the moving into an illegal space except for the clause (same level) that I missed.

So set up the same situation, but this time the poor Grut is hanging out inside a castle, or under an overhang. Same level as TKN, but in a space that TKN could not fit in legally.

[IAmBatman]

If it's not a space where TKN could fit, it's not a space where TKN could end his move, thus it's not a space TKN can attack. You guys are really overthinking this one.

[Taeblewalker]

Originally Posted by IAmBatman

If it's not a space where TKN could fit, it's not a space where TKN could end his move, thus it's not a space TKN can attack. You guys are really overthinking this one.

Exactly. You have to think ahead to the possibility that A) Tor-Kul-N will destroy the figure he is trampling and move onto uts space but B) will not be able to move further (i.e., he fails to destroy the next figure or he used his last movement point getting to where he is).

[Chimpy]

You know, I think you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill here. Even if you had 20 robo rats lined up in a nice row the affect of Tor-Kul-Na's possible super stomping wouldn't matter that much.

Why? Because the likelihood that Tor-Kul-na will role an 8+ more than six times is next to nil. That is why I don't buy the whole "put Eldgrim on him" strategy either. The fact of the matter is, the dice are set so that Tork usually won't kill more than two figures a turn. The math just doesn't support it otherwise.

[dbzking]

No free move he only has 6
He must end his move on the space occupied buy opponents figure for the fact of the name of the attack trample stomp which applies he is jumping up and down on the figure to do this he must be able to reach the space the figure is on. if the figure is 7 spaces away he cant end his move there so no trample stomp but I will be adjacent and hit you with 6 unless you’re a samurai then I wait tell next turn and stomp you

Dbzking

[Ultarium]

Originally Posted by Chimpy

Why? Because the likelihood that Tor-Kul-na will role an 8+ more than six times is next to nil.

Its a 4.8% chance of getting 8+ 7 times in a row

[T-bomb]

What's the percent chance if you have Su-Bak-Na as well for getting 6 in a row?

[Ultarium]

Originally Posted by T-bomb

What's the percent chance if you have Su-Bak-Na as well for getting 6 in a row?

11.7649%

[Nooblar]

Originally Posted by Rÿchean

This requires an official ruling about as much as a fish requires a bicycle.

I do not see any strong arguments that would suggest that there is a free movement. You guys are reading that into the wording. It simple isn't there.

Exactly. Free move is almost certainly NOT the intent, but I'm saying that without a clearer description on the card we cannot make an airtight argument against it. All reasoning presented so far relies on "intent" and common sense.

All the highlighted sentence is saying is that if you use this power and you destory the figure, TKN HAS to move there. The wording does not say that he gets a free move. It says move him there; as in if you used the power and you destroyed a figure, you do not have the option. TKN must move into the destroyed figure's space.

Other cards make reference to "moving" figures, but it doesn't count as part of that figure's move phase. I think this is the root of confusion in this discussion--you can "move" a figure and you can "move" a figure. See what I'm saying?

Ask yourself: Did Hasbro intend for this figure to trample endless scores of figures in one turn? the only logical answer is NO.

Definitely, but the current wording of the card is vague enough that it's already spawned this whole huge debate. To me, that is an obvious sign that the wording needs revision. My engineering professor told me, "College graduates must write so that they are able to be understood. Engineers must write so that nobody can misunderstand them." Apparently this goes for game designers, too.

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by Ultarium

Its a 4.8% chance of getting 8+ 7 times in a row

4.8% is roughly the chance of rolling a 20 on the D20. So not that common, but certainly common enough to matter. And this is without any bonuses, such as Glyphs of SBN.

Oh, and Nooblar, I've seen bigger debates on here over less. There is, sadly, no such thing as power wording that NOBODY can misunderstand. If you don't believe me, try making a custom or two. There's always someone who can misunderstand - and it might just surprise the heck out of you. I know it surprises the heck out of me that there's even a debate here at all.

[Nooblar]

Originally Posted by IAmBatman

Oh, and Nooblar, I've seen bigger debates on here over less. There is, sadly, no such thing as power wording that NOBODY can misunderstand. If you don't believe me, try making a custom or two. There's always someone who can misunderstand - and it might just surprise the heck out of you. I know it surprises the heck out of me that there's even a debate here at all.

Yeah, I think it's the result of limited card space. And TV violence.

I think TKN can be at least improved, but I'm hard-pressed to get all the info into the available space. Hmm... I see where the designers would have got to the point of pulling hair out if they tried to add an explicit limitation of movement using Trample. I just can't do it without reworking the entire text.

But my previous argument still stands, I think. Whether or not a careful examination reveals the answer, the fact that so many people are confused (or have doubts) is probably grounds for re-thinking the way it's worded (or at least an official ruling, to satisfy the lawyers and little kiddies who get confused easily). For something this complex, there will never be a perfectly and universally understood meaning--not in the space of one card's special power text area. Kudos to the designers getting it this far.