SWMGAMERS.com Forums
http://swmgamers.com/forums/

Lancer and illegal landing square
http://swmgamers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=15920
Page 1 of 2

Author:  urbanjedi [ Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Lancer and illegal landing square

What happens if the lancer (or any strafer) has its ending square become illegal or unreachable during its strafe. There are multiple ways this could happen (leia HC save (or poggle) putting a guy in the landing space) or impulsive advance or Major Max Veers CE or even Demagol's counterpush.

Would the lancer be forced to land in the next closest legal landing space (even if it creates more strafes?)

I don't ever remember this coming up in the WOTC days but it certainly could have.

Author:  Sithborg [ Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

It did come up. Some situation with the Basilisk and a Leia causing the Basilisk to stop on top of a bunch of characters. Nickname says it's a universe ripping kind of event.

Anyway, if the original landing point becomes illegal, a new landing point may be chosen.

Author:  urbanjedi [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

Does it have to be close to the original or can it be in the completely opposite direction?

Author:  Echo [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

And what if there is no possible legal landing space? Say this happens really near the end of a Lancer's movement, when it has just one or two squares left to move, and a piece is placed in the way, and there isn't another legal landing spot that it could get to? Does it just move to the nearest landing spot, and if so, how does that effect its path?

Author:  thereisnotry [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

Yeah, and if that nearest new landing space would allow the Lancer to attack 3 more characters, are those legal attacks or not? (I'd assume so, but if they weren't legal options during the initial space counting, then it seems unfair that they could be attacked via this universe-ripping effect.)

Author:  fingersandteeth [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

urbanjedi wrote:
Demagol's counterpush.



demagols push does not move strafers for this very reason even though it was initially intended to be a strafe deterrent.

I think this needs to be clarified in a separate FAQ ruling because there is nothing in the rules that deals with it.

As you are supposed to start the strafe with a legal landing spot as soon as the spot is compromised I would say that the strafer can designate a new landing spot within range. If there isn't one in range then the entire strafe ends immediately and the figure is moved to the nearest legal space to where the initial landing spot was chosen. If it doesn't work like this then strafes can get extended meaning more potential strafe targets or a longer moving distance.
Neither of those should be possible so i think the only fair method is to have the move end immediately and the strafer put in a legal spot with no further attacks possible. You might get a longer distance but not more strafe attacks.

Author:  urbanjedi [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

I think that since this was possible with WOTC only pieces then we should follow whatever precedent they may have set or be able to draw an easy conclusion from their other rulings. Whatever they may be. For past rulings they always ruled nearest legal spot so IMO that is what we should use even if it possibly extends the strafe (the only way for this to actually happen is if the opponent blocks it somehow).

As far as demagol, I don't see anywhere where it wouldn't affect strafers. It says when he takes damage (which he does on a strafe) push target character (which he can target the strafer since it is adjacent) back 2 squares if huge or smaller (which all strafers are). Unless I missed something somewhere.

Author:  fingersandteeth [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

urbanjedi wrote:
I think that since this was possible with WOTC only pieces then we should follow whatever precedent they may have set or be able to draw an easy conclusion from their other rulings. Whatever they may be. For past rulings they always ruled nearest legal spot so IMO that is what we should use even if it possibly extends the strafe (the only way for this to actually happen is if the opponent blocks it somehow).


From Scott's post above it seems that there is no precedent most likely because it probably never happened.
I don't agree that the strafer should be able to extend its movement, certainly not to extend it so that it can cause further damage. If an opponent can limit where the strafer can land mid turn it should be to the strafing characters detriment, not the other way around.

I think that if you can't reach the original landing spot then you fly to the nearest legal spot of your choosing, if there are none within range then the strafe ends immediately and the figure is placed in the nearest legal space to the original.

I don't see many other fair ways about it.

Quote:
As far as demagol, I don't see anywhere where it wouldn't affect strafers. It says when he takes damage (which he does on a strafe) push target character (which he can target the strafer since it is adjacent) back 2 squares if huge or smaller (which all strafers are). Unless I missed something somewhere.


well that was an oversight on my part, i wrote out a glossary definition but it never got added.

this was the glossary

Counter Push 2 - Force 2. When this character is hit by an attack it may immedeately spend 2 force to to 20 dmg to the nearest target enemy. The target is then moved 2 spaces away from this character. This movement does not activate any affects that are triggered by movement such as attacks of opportunity. Characters that are hit by this ability as the result of a strafe attack ignore the movement affects of this ability.

however, if we are just gonna fix the issue with some other rule then this probably isn't necessary anymore.

Author:  urbanjedi [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

I don't believe it actually came up in TN but Weeks and Graham were talking about it in their matchup with poggle bombs and lancer.

As far as what happens, I really don't care much one way or the other and will let Scott determine what actually happens as he is the one who continued on where NN left off in carrying forward the rules aspects of our game. As I always say, it doesn't matter what the rule is as long as we know what it is and how it works.

Author:  fingersandteeth [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

urbanjedi wrote:
As I always say, it doesn't matter what the rule is as long as we know what it is and how it works.


+1

agreed.

I'm actually surprised that this issue has never received a proper ruling but then there are so few ways to prevent landing in the original designated spot.

Author:  Sithborg [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

The original situation was so, so, so very rare and situational.

Author:  urbanjedi [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

I guess once you figure it out Scott, you will post and let us know what exactly should happen and how it should play out.

Author:  Weeks [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

urbanjedi wrote:
I don't believe it actually came up in TN but Weeks and Graham were talking about it in their matchup with poggle bombs and lancer.

As far as what happens, I really don't care much one way or the other and will let Scott determine what actually happens as he is the one who continued on where NN left off in carrying forward the rules aspects of our game. As I always say, it doesn't matter what the rule is as long as we know what it is and how it works.


I could have legally put a drone in his landing spot but didn't because there was no need to rub salt in the wombs of the bad matchup for him.

I did make him strafe a bomb twice though. That was cool.

Author:  TheHutts [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

Weeks wrote:
I could have legally put a drone in his landing spot but didn't because there was no need to rub salt in the wombs of the bad matchup for him.


Normally the expression is "salt in the wounds", but that sounds even more painful....

Author:  urbanjedi [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

Weeks wrote:
urbanjedi wrote:
I don't believe it actually came up in TN but Weeks and Graham were talking about it in their matchup with poggle bombs and lancer.

As far as what happens, I really don't care much one way or the other and will let Scott determine what actually happens as he is the one who continued on where NN left off in carrying forward the rules aspects of our game. As I always say, it doesn't matter what the rule is as long as we know what it is and how it works.


I could have legally put a drone in his landing spot but didn't because there was no need to rub salt in the wombs of the bad matchup for him.

I did make him strafe a bomb twice though. That was cool.


You actually can't do that as you can't attack the same dude twice with strafe as per the definition of strafe

Author:  Weeks [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

TheHutts wrote:
Weeks wrote:
I could have legally put a drone in his landing spot but didn't because there was no need to rub salt in the wombs of the bad matchup for him.


Normally the expression is "salt in the wounds", but that sounds even more painful....


Ya I'm not good at spelling, just minis.

Author:  GalacticFunk [ Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

TheHutts wrote:
Weeks wrote:
I could have legally put a drone in his landing spot but didn't because there was no need to rub salt in the wombs of the bad matchup for him.


Normally the expression is "salt in the wounds", but that sounds even more painful....


lmao! That's beautiful!

Author:  Lord_Ball [ Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

urbanjedi wrote:
What happens if the lancer (or any strafer) has its ending square become illegal or unreachable during its strafe. There are multiple ways this could happen (leia HC save (or poggle) putting a guy in the landing space) or impulsive advance or Major Max Veers CE or even Demagol's counterpush.

Would the lancer be forced to land in the next closest legal landing space (even if it creates more strafes?)

I don't ever remember this coming up in the WOTC days but it certainly could have.


I just looked over the rulebook and have to question whether or not this is even possible anymore!

The glossary definition of strafe ends with "Other characters cannot enter this space while this character is using Strafe Attack."

To me that says that the opponent is not allowed to block the landing space (basically view it as the charcter is already in that space/those spaces) so these universe ripping events can no longer occur.

Author:  Sithborg [ Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

See, that's why I need to keep looking it over. Nickname left some great gems in there.

Author:  urbanjedi [ Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lancer and illegal landing square

Lord_Ball wrote:
urbanjedi wrote:
What happens if the lancer (or any strafer) has its ending square become illegal or unreachable during its strafe. There are multiple ways this could happen (leia HC save (or poggle) putting a guy in the landing space) or impulsive advance or Major Max Veers CE or even Demagol's counterpush.

Would the lancer be forced to land in the next closest legal landing space (even if it creates more strafes?)

I don't ever remember this coming up in the WOTC days but it certainly could have.


I just looked over the rulebook and have to question whether or not this is even possible anymore!

The glossary definition of strafe ends with "Other characters cannot enter this space while this character is using Strafe Attack."

To me that says that the opponent is not allowed to block the landing space (basically view it as the charcter is already in that space/those spaces) so these universe ripping events can no longer occur.



That could solve some of the problems, just not Demagol's counterpush which could mean the lancer is unable to get to the ending space any longer.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/