The subject says it all. Thanks for the help.

I see no reason you couldn't spawn behind the fog, if there's enough room, but unfortunately spawning in the fog seems to fall under this unobtrusive little rule I just rediscovered:

"The overlord player may not place spawned monsters in a space that contains a figure or an obstacle, such as a pit, rubble, or water." (JitD Rules p. 12)

The inclusion of pits on the list of examples indicates that this applies even if the obstacle doesn't block movement, and fog is listed as an obstacle in AoD rules p. 7.

Interesting observation. I would have just said of course, as long as there is more than one space between the monster and hero. But I guess not. I still think there should be a fog trap card.

Antistone said:

I read the same thing in the rules when we were trying to figure it out the other night so we ruled thta you could not spawn in the fog. Clearly you could spawn behind it as it blocks line of sight.

The one thing I was unsure about though was the definition of obstacle. Is it just anything on the board that isn't a chest/glyph/treasure/potion/run key/corrupt space?

I think the technical definition of obstacle is something that blocks one or both of movement and LoS.

Veinman said:

I don't think this is correct. By this defention pits wouldn't be obstacles as they don't block either they only alter movement. Same goes for mud. Lava has no effect on either movement or LOS

Good point, maybe "alters" movement instead of blocks?

Well, fog does seem like a bit of an obstacle, I think I would probably rule it as one, although I'd also think monsters should be able to spawn in the fog, and agree that there should be a fog trap card. Imagine, "Blood Apes in the Mist..."

The definition of obstacle escapes even the designers of the game.

That being said, in the AoD rulebook's component list, the list of new props doesn't mention fog, aside from a mention of "30 Obstacle Markers". If you add up the Corrupted and Fog markers in the game, they account for that obstacle listing, so Fog was technically an obstacle when it was first designed.

Of course, since RtL, the word obstacle has lost all definition, and things that were obstacles before (Pits) don't get included in most attempts at redefining what an obstacle is (such as "blocks movement"). The most recent listing of obstacles is not comprehensive but does not include Fog, since it's just a list of Post-RtL obstacles. There's also a completely incorrect listing of "relevant obstacles" in the FAQ, but it's certainly not comprehensive and should not have been billed as such.

Long post short: Fog is an obstacle, you can't spawn in obstacles.

EDIT: You know, I just realized that obstacle refers to two different things in this game and the rules: movement obstacle and LoS obstacle. Furthermore, those meanings might very well be intended to be kept separate: obstacles for the purposes of the Sniper upgrade are not necessarily obstacles for the purposes of playing the Crushing Block card, and vice-versa. Thinking about it this way, all of the inconsistencies in defining "what is an obstacle" make sense: which meaning of "obstacle" you get depends on the context.

Sigh.

The "relevant obstacles" list in the FAQ is specifically only listing obstacles that prevent the use of the (revised) Crushing Block trap card. It's still a fairly crumby list, but it's not necessarily incorrect for what it claims to be.

And I doubt that splitting obstacles into "movement obstacles" and "LoS obstacles" really helps. The problem is with all the various rules that specifically trigger on or ignore "obstacles" (spawning, fly, acrobat, precision, etc.). It's possible that the lists should be different for each rule, but having separate lists for "movement" and "LoS" purposes isn't likely to help any more than any other arbitrary division, considering that it doesn't really matter whether or not fog counts as an obstacle for purposes of Fly.

Antistone said:

The Crushing Block trap card is necessarily incorrect for what it claims to be, because it implies that you can use Crushing Blocks next to Pits and Lava, which you couldn't do before and can exploit instant-kill pits to destroy heroes (since the OL defines where the hero is placed). There's several quests that have special cases for Pits, Lava, Corrupted Terrain etc., so it's hard to call that rule anything but wrong.

as for the splitting of obstacles....I'm not saying it should be done. I'm sayin that if you approach the confusion about obstacles from the standpoint of splitting them into two kinds of obstacle types, then all of the conflicts between the FAQ, Pre-RtL Props, and RtL-and-Beyond props makes sense. I'm not advocating a split: I'm saying it appears to exist in the designer's intentions, despite being absent from the rules. I'm arguing said appearance from the point of view that obstacle appears to mean different things based whether you check the FAQ, check the rulebooks, or submit the question to the designers. It all comes down to the fact that we keep having to write "obstacle for the purposes of ___", since the word is very much ill-defined.

Thundercles said:

I know. I'm saying that they still don't make sense to me even if I imagine there are two categories of obstacles.

You can try to explain your reasoning to me if you feel like it. Or not.

Antistone said:

oh, that's what you mean.

yeah, I meant the existence of weirdness makes sense. The weirdness, I don't know, man. I don't get where they were going with it all either.