Wnated to ask if objective tokens block line of sigt and movement in "Tipping the scales" quest (from labyringt of ruin campaign)?

Nothing is specified in th quest rules and we played the entire game as if it would block it. Until the moment OL started to loose the game and decided that it is a perfect timing to check the "objective token rules" =)

Also wanted to ask what would you do in such case - replay the quest? Or maybe some other "diplomatical" decisions?

Wnated to ask if objective tokens block line of sigt and movement in "Tipping the scales" quest (from labyringt of ruin campaign)?

Nothing is specified in th quest rules and we played the entire game as if it would block it. Until the moment OL started to loose the game and decided that it is a perfect timing to check the "objective token rules" =)

Also wanted to ask what would you do in such case - replay the quest? Or maybe some other "diplomatical" decisions?

First, please note that I do not have the rules of this specific quest in front of me. But, in general, objective tokens do NOT block movement or LOS. In point of fact, you are allowed to move into the objective token's space to pick it up (although usually you can also be next to it).

For the Base Rules, Page 15, under Carrying Objective Tokens:

Couldn't have said it better, any2cards. I just would, however, note the remember that most of the time, quest rules tend to specify that objective tokens may be picked up while adjacent , which as you pointed out, overwrites the or in a space containing default in the rulebook.

Wait a minute, so you say: Skills/abilities > quest rules

There is a quest in a base box campaign where you have to heal some lord (villager token) by making an attribute test near specific objective token. And in that quest rules specified that this lord cannot gain health by any other means. But if you say "Skills/abilities > quest rules" then it means that I can use heores healing abilities to heal him?

As for objective token - thank you for the answer!

Wait a minute, so you say: Skills/abilities > quest rules

There is a quest in a base box campaign where you have to heal some lord (villager token) by making an attribute test near specific objective token. And in that quest rules specified that this lord cannot gain health by any other means. But if you say "Skills/abilities > quest rules" then it means that I can use heores healing abilities to heal him?

As for objective token - thank you for the answer!

I do not have the specific quest in front of me, so I don't want to comment without reading the text. But, in general, the reason the rule pirority (Card Text > Skills/Abilities > Quest Rules > Expansion Rules > Base Game Rules) has card text and skills/abilities higher than quest rules is because often they are created and come from a different expansion - so they are created in a "vacuum".

For example, suppose you are playing a quest from the base game of Descent, but you are using a hero, with an associated Skill deck from Nerekhall. Since these were created way after the base game, there was no way the authors of the base game could ever consider interactions of those abilities/text etc. with the base game.

If you did not allow card text and skill/abilities to override quest rules (in general), then you would essentially negate entire groups of heroes, skills, weapons, etc. At that point, you may as well say that you can't mix expansions at all.

Unfortunately, this does end up causing situations where the "intent" of the quest gets subverted by some heroic feat or ability or skill, etc.

You are always free (as we often do) to look at the quest logically, calmly, and rationally, and make a group decision as to how it will play. I have found, however, that with certain groups of people, this is easier said than done !!!

Sure, but there are other times when text will say "by any means" or some such, and this is final, and doesn't get trumped by anything. For example, Sir Palamon in Castle Daerion. He "can't recover damage by any means." This means ANY MEANS . No heroic abilities, no feats, no skills, nothing. He never recovers damage, period. At least, that's how I've always played.

To read that sentence as "Sir Palamon can't recover damage, except from healing abilities" makes zero sense, since those are the only means by which he could ever recover damage in the first place. My reading, therefore, is that the sentence must be excluding those means.

To me, it makes sense that almost all skills/abilities allow the hero to "break the rules" in some specific way (Advance lets the knight move and attack without using an action, for example.) A Thief can search a search token from multiple spaces away-these sorts of abilities can come into conflict with the rules/quest guide. However, as I've said, I've taken the phrase "by any means" to actually mean "by any means."

Folks ... I didn't create the rule priority ... it was given to me by FFG when answering a question of mine. That is why I was very clear to put into my last post the following:

You are always free (as we often do) to look at the quest logically, calmly, and rationally, and make a group decision as to how it will play.

@Zaltyre ... I agree with you ... in the specific quest you mention (and others that are similar), my group and I tend to side with the specific quest rules - that is we attempt to play the quest with the perceived "intent".

Also, I believe Castle Daerion has several Erratas, and none mention alllowing Sir Palamon to heal.

They've given him more defence, they've allowed him to move, but the text still says, "cannot heal by any means"

the rule pirority (Card Text > Skills/Abilities > Quest Rules > Expansion Rules > Base Game Rules)

Courtesy of the Official Rules of the English Language, "by any means" overrides that rule priority. So we actually have:

"By any means" (in any of the following occurrences) > Card Text > Skills/Abilities > Quest Rules > Expansion Rules > Base Game Rules.

That's why Palamon can never recover health, or the Dragons in the first encounter of "At the Forge" can never be moved otherwise than with their normal movement (I asked if they could be moved with a crossbow, since card text > quest rules, and FFG said no for this very reason).

Works for me. "BY ANY MEANS", otherwise known as G-D Mode, is now greater than everything.

EDIT: I have updated my doc to reflect same. Can't wait to tell my group this. Should get a good laugh.

Works for me. "BY ANY MEANS", otherwise known as G-D Mode, is now greater than everything.

EDIT: I have updated my doc to reflect same. Can't wait to tell my group this. Should get a good laugh.

Now don't get too carried away by "By any means", because it still falls short of G_D mode in the sense that if, for instance, a rule says "if this figure is moved by any means, then [something] happens" and you move that figure for no in-game reason with your finger , then that [something] obviously wouldn't happen.

Works for me. "BY ANY MEANS", otherwise known as G-D Mode, is now greater than everything.

EDIT: I have updated my doc to reflect same. Can't wait to tell my group this. Should get a good laugh.

Now don't get too carried away by "By any means", because it still falls short of G_D mode in the sense that if, for instance, a rule says "if this figure is moved by any means, then [something] happens" and you move that figure for no in-game reason with your finger , then that [something] obviously wouldn't happen.

I'm going to make a custom hero whose Heroic Feat reads "if this hero is tipped over, by any means, the tipper win this quest"