Frenzy question

[Zarash]

Marduk wrote:
Does each individual member of the squad move and attack before the next one, or do they all move, then all attack in turn? First you may move any or all figures on your chosen Army Card, if you want to. Then after all desired movement, you may then attack with any or all figures on your chosen Army Card." [emphasis mine]


Last sentence you answered yourself it says card not cards. I would think that would mean how many every units was on the one card. It is in the singular form. Not trying to be a nitpicker or anything.

[netherspirit]

Originally Posted by Marduk

In future, I recommend you come up with more than "No, that's wrong." At least give a reason or put up a link to an official ruling, or even a link to a lengthy thread arguing it out.

Why do I need to come up with something more? I am (almost) always right when it comes to the rules. So when I tell you that you are wrong you can be pretty dang sure that you are in fact wrong. That's pretty much common knowledge too. :P

I have been around the game a long time and have a handy ability to remember the old rulings. I have read every thread ever created (here and at the HQ) that has asked a question about the rules, I have read every email response from Hasbro and now from WOTC. If you don't want to believe me when I tell you that you are wrong that's fine, and understandable, no one wants to be wrong, but in this case you're wasting your energy. A vast majority of the members know how this works, because its been asked before and answered from Hasbro, hence my common knowledge statement from earlier. It should be in the FAQ but it isn't. There are a few things that we know that aren't in the FAQ.

In the future, I recommend you don't try to argue a case for questions that have have been asked before and answered.

By all means send the question to WOTC maybe it will finally be put into the FAQ.

[Revdyer]

I got referenced somewhere back there as a "grammar guru" and I am a retired college English professor; but this is common logic, not grammar. You cannot attack with a separate set of figures from those moved (even if they moved zero hexes).

[rehlers]

I find arguing for these types of questions somewhat amusing. Its like staring at a rule and trying to think of the most absurd conclusion that could be drawn from it that is not explicitly said. The rule book and FAQ cannot include every tiny bit of common sense minutia that may come up, or it would be quite large.

I can understand reading something and being confusing about it, even if it seems like common sense to a lot of people. I had a lot of confusion about even the simple parts of the rules when I started as well. I either read in the forums or FAQ and quickly learned and accepted from other people's posts what the correct answer was. About 99% of the questions have a clear and final solution. I suggest following the forum's advice in these situations.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by netherspirit

A vast majority of the members know how this works, because its been asked before and answered from Hasbro, hence my common knowledge statement from earlier. It should be in the FAQ but it isn't. There are a few things that we know that aren't in the FAQ.

It hasn't been covered on this site as far as I could find with a search or looking through the thread names in this category; and you still are not providing a link to any such coverage I may have overlooked nor providing any justification beyond "I said so." I grant that you are experienced with the rules and concede your status as an expert on Heroscape; but I have a great deal of experience playtesting a variety of games. 'Any figure' should mean any figure. If they do not mean it, they need to change that FAQ entry to conform to their meaning - all they had to do was limit their ruling to a single sentence or use 'those figures' in place of 'any or all figures on your chosen Army Card'. Instead they chose to elaborate further and spell out that attacking is seperate from moving.

I will go ahead and submit the question, if they come back with something I'll let you know.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by rehlers

Its like staring at a rule and trying to think of the most absurd conclusion that could be drawn from it that is not explicitly said.

My problem is that it *is* what is explicitly said. And despite the common knowledge, there is nothing noteworthy that says otherwise. I don't accept 'because we said so' as worth considering from anyone but the officials, and the only person who offered a reason seems to forget the rule about common units using a single card.

[Dennys]

This was asked and answered in another thread, by the designers.

1. Move any eligible figures from the card. If you move less than card limit preoceed to step 2.
2. Declare Move "0" on remaining figures up to card limit. (3 in this case)
3. Attack with figures that "Moved", either physically, or by declaring "Move 0".

If you frenzy, you go back to step 1.

Netherspirit and Homba will remember that one. If I recall Homba sent in 3 types of scenarios for that one, and this was the order sent back.

[netherspirit]

Originally Posted by Marduk

and you still are not providing a link to any such coverage I may have overlooked nor providing any justification beyond "I said so."

Since my saying so doesn't work for you...:P

http://heroscapers.com/community/sho...=198094#216420

Can I do my "You're Wrong Dance" now?

Perhaps I need a little help from Dr. Cox?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

[Dennys]

I humbly bow to the rules god Netherspirit, I knew he'd have it.
I got it wrong.

[netherspirit]

Originally Posted by Dennys

I got it wrong.

Only slightly.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by netherspirit

Since my saying so doesn't seem to work for you...:P

http://heroscapers.com/community/sho...=198094#216420

Can I do my "You're Wrong Dance" now?

If you must. But I am disappointed that the local 'logic' consists of "because I said so". The ruling listed here (and completely off-topic, incidently, or I might have found it) is a compromise between the two interpretations. That is to be expected, I suppose. They still need to change the wording on the Movement Rules FAQ to support this - the two answers contradict each other as it stands now.

Incidently, in future I will still not accept "because I said so" as a valid argument unless it comes from the creator of the game. The rule of playtesting is the same as the rule of English classes, which is the same as the primary imperitive of the judiciary - "Regardless of whether or not it says what it means, it always means what it says." To quote Renquist, who was quoting a much earlier Justice (and has since been quoted by others), "The intent of framers of the law does not matter; interpretations of the law by necessity must be based wholely upon the law itself." In modern terms: . Or, in this case, the rules. I have been helping playtest games for 34 years now, so I have a great deal of experience with this sort of thing.

[countblah]

Hey, this thread turned into a complete disaster.