Hi all - I'm new to these forums, so I apologize if this has been answered before, but I briefly looked through prior to posting and didn't see anything.

I am mostly looking for clarification about whether Syndrael's heroic feat intentionally includes the terminology that specifies that the heroic feat involves a "move action," since Jain and Tomble's allow movement but there is no wording to suggest that their feats actually involve a "move action." The situation precipitating this debate at our house is as follows:

While playing Death on the Wing (encounter 2) against 3 heroes, I at one point used the Elemental's Earth ability to Immobilize both Syndrael and Avric. During the heroes next move, Syndrael used her heroic feat to override the Immobilize, on the grounds that heroic feats are basically an 'oh s***' button that override other restrictions if there is uncertainty as to whether they are applicable or not. Syndrael's feat ultimately was pivotal for the heroes' victory because of subsequent figure placement. In discussing the encounter with my husband later, we came to the agreement that whether or not Syndrael can override Immobilize in this manner is dependent on whether or not it was intended that her feat include the wording referring to the movement involved as "move actions". My argument was that since I found this in another forum,

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/11214876#11214876

it seemed obvious that there was deliberate intention to make Syndrael's feat involve "move actions", as it has the potential to affect both herself and another hero, making it significantly more powerful than Tomble and Jain's feats in regards to what it allows for strategy when hero placement can make or break a scenario - especially when Syndrael can use it to allow another unhindered character movement even if she herself is Immobilized. or otherwise unable to move. My husband agreed that the issue was contingent on whether or not Syndrael's ability involves actual "move actions", but was of the opinion that the fact her feat included wording referring to "move actions" was a result of careless wording on the part of FFG, and that it didn't make sense for FFG to negate any benefit of her feat just because she was Immobilized, especially since her Oath of Honor ability is unaffected by Immobilize (which I don't challenge, as it was worded so as to be unaffected by Immobilize.) He also argued that since Jain and Tomble's abiities didn't involve "move actions", it didn't make sense for Syndrael's to.

Can anyone offer any insight as to which way this should go? I have been the OL in the last few games, so if we vote on house rules I am most likely going to get out-voted for whether Syndrael's feat overrides Immobilize, even though I'd vote the same way if I usually played a hero. I try to go with the literal interpretations of cards and rules if there is a gray area involved, no errata have been issued regarding it, and we can't find anything on Descent forums that heavily favors one viewpoint. I'd love some input from how more experienced players handle this particular situation, or references if anyone has seen a place where FFG addressed or clarified this. Thanks!

Syndrael's heroic feat quite clearly states move action, which immobilize prevents..

It is not careless wording from FFG, quite the opposite. Immobilized figures are unable to perform move action or suffer fatigue to gain movement points.

on the grounds that heroic feats are basically an 'oh s***' button that override other restrictions if there is uncertainty as to whether they are applicable or not.

This is a pretty bad assumption. A lot of other heroic feats are just power moves that aren't necessarily "Oh S***' buttons. Also, assuming that any ability overrides other restrictions without it specifically saying so is another bad assumption.

In general, always follow RAW (Rules As Written) to the letter and don't try to go along the lines of "Well, if I had designed it, I would've done it this way because of <insert whatever reason here>". FFG especially is generally very intentional in their wording and almost all rules clarifications can be found by following the RAW as closely as possible. When RAW is actually ambiguous, they release an FAQ. When RAW actually leads to something unintended, they release an Errata.

So: If it says "move action" then it is meant specifically to behave just like all other move actions (it provides movement points which can then be spent, and if it's your turn, can have things done in between spending those points). If it just says "move" then it is something that is treated differently and is a movement that is self contained / uninterruptible, but also not subject to the same restrictions that move actions are.

Take cover ... here comes another question along similar lines.

Syndrael's basic skill ('Oath of honor'?) is that under specific conditions you can PICK her up and DROP her next to a monster (at least in the German skill description).

Her ability is that she regains exhaustion when not moving in a turn.

Now is the skill a form of movement? Strictly following the skill card I'd say, NO.

What do you think?

That might be a translation problem, but the ability states, more or less, that if she did not move from her current spot, she recovers 2 fatigue.

The knight ability oath of honor does move you, it just doesn't do it with movement points. You have left your previous space and entered a new space.

Thanks! Can someone quote the English ability text literrally please? I have a player who won't tolerate anythimg less...

Cheers

Edit: Never mind, I was clever enough to do a search on the internet but stupid enough not to browse the teaser material on FFG directly... => http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/descent-second-ed/news/preview-4/syndrael-large.png