A bunch of heroes were bleeding. After resolving an action other than taking the action to remove it, you take a strain.

If you have stain=endurance it converts to damage

You cannot intentionally take take strain that would cause damage. "A hero cannot choose to suffer (strain) if the amount of (strain) he has suffered would exceed his Endurance. This includes suffering (strain) to gain movement points or using abilities with a (strain) cost."

So effectively if you're full on strain you can only take the rest action (and consequently have endurance left when the bleed would kick in.) or remove the bleed. If you do anything else you are choosing to take a strain in excess of endurance.

However, its not explicitly a (strain) to do X. Where is the line between choice and game effect? My thought if you perform and action that will result in you 100% taking strain, you are choosing to suffer it no matter the source. If its merely a possibility (like you have to roll a die for an attribute test and take strain if you fail) it would be allowed.

If you're askign whether the heroes must rest, the answer is no. because in this case, they are not "choosing to suffer damage instead of strain" they are "choosing to bleed".

Like the stun condition, the heroes have no obligation to remove the condition before performing their actions, as long as their actions respect the condition card; so a stunned hero could take any actions that do not involve attacking or moving out of their space, a bleeding hero can continue taking actions as long as they suffer the "strain"., etc...

If you're askign whether the heroes must rest, the answer is no. because in this case, they are not "choosing to suffer damage instead of strain" they are "choosing to bleed".

Like the stun condition, the heroes have no obligation to remove the condition before performing their actions, as long as their actions respect the condition card; so a stunned hero could take any actions that do not involve attacking or moving out of their space, a bleeding hero can continue taking actions as long as they suffer the "strain"., etc...

Right, but part of respecting the bleed card is taking strain. That's something they do by choice. IE they have options they can do that would not cause strain, including options directly on the card if you want to limit it to just the card.

Right, but part of respecting the bleed card is taking strain. That's something they do by choice.

The strain is a side effect of the bleed condition. You're not intentionally taking strain like you are when you gain extra movement. You're just not clearing a condition, one which happens to give you strain.

I answered this question several weeks back.

Please refer to it here:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/134770-bleed-and-nexu-movement/?hl=%2Bbleed+%2Bstrain

FWIW, Here's a extremely similar instance with prey upon doubt

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1337073/prey-doubt-question

Again the player is presented with a choice which includes suffering strain, yet is not a <strain> to do X situation.

Note that the restriction doesn't say "You can't suffer strain to pay for X" Just you can't choose to suffer it. You have a choice, you suffer strain. In any case I sent it off to FFG support to see if I can get a response. This actually has a pretty wide ranging impact on how strain interacts with abilities.

Strain caused by bleed is not a "Choice".

A "choice" in regards to strain is using strain to power an ability.

Strain caused by bleed is not a "Choice".

A "choice" in regards to strain is using strain to power an ability.

That is an assumption. It doesn't actually state that in the rules. Go ahead and quote me the text that says it only applies to abilities. Go read the prey upon doubt thread. Same deal, opposite response of you guys. Like I said, I emailed them. We'll see if intent matches up to RAW this time or not.

It seems the OP lives up to his name...

It seems the OP lives up to his name...

Meh. You either want to play the game correctly or not. I came looking for sometime laided out in the rules that I maybe missed. People trying to pass off their home rules as fact when there are gaps in the rules isn't useful for anyone. Resorting to ad hominem attacks instead of trying to lay out a logical argument just means you've run out of ideas.

You, theruleslawyer, consider the implication that you might be a rules lawyer to be an ad hominem attack?

Given that, in the case of bleed, you could make that 'choice' while fully strained, but have the action you perform reduce your strain load before suffering the penalty, I suspect the ruling will support the restriction only applying to actions and abilities, but I'm curious as to how they would word it.

Strain caused by bleed is not a "Choice".

A "choice" in regards to strain is using strain to power an ability.

That is an assumption. It doesn't actually state that in the rules. Go ahead and quote me the text that says it only applies to abilities. Go read the prey upon doubt thread. Same deal, opposite response of you guys. Like I said, I emailed them. We'll see if intent matches up to RAW this time or not.

No, it's not an assumption. It states this in black and white:

Additional, "Strain in a Campaign:, RRG, Page, 23

1) Heroes have many abilities that have (strain) costs. These abilities require the hero to suffer (strain) in order to use the ability.

2) A hero can suffer 1C (strain) at any point during his activation to gain one movement point. He may do this up to twice per activation.

3) A hero cannot choose to suffer (strain) if the amount of (strain) he has suffered would exceed his Endurance. This includes suffering (strain) to gain movement points or using abilities with a (strain) cost.

4) If an effect forces a hero to suffer (strain) that exceeds his Endurance, he instead suffers one (damage) for each (strain) he cannot suffer.

1 and 2 CLEARLY state how strain is suffered voluntarily by the hero.

The key here is that you cannot spend strain voluntarily if this would cause you to exceed your Endurance, and taking strain due to a harmful effect is not voluntary. Voluntarily, you take strain BEFORE you perform/modify an action. Nothing about the Bleed condition is voluntary, nor is Bleed a cost to be paid to do something, it is a harmful effect that occurs as a penalty.

But please, post your bleed question's answer here, and I will add it to the FAQ.

You, theruleslawyer, consider the implication that you might be a rules lawyer to be an ad hominem attack?

Given that, in the case of bleed, you could make that 'choice' while fully strained, but have the action you perform reduce your strain load before suffering the penalty, I suspect the ruling will support the restriction only applying to actions and abilities, but I'm curious as to how they would word it.

Its about intent. I don't consider it a bad word. He does.

Anyhow, if a faq were issued in that direction, "Chooses to suffer strain to pay for an effect" would be fairly clear, but it leaves a lot on the table in terms of game design. If you play the subversive tactics imperial deck manipulating strain becomes fairly important. There's a lot of stuff where you're intentionally filling up strain to limit options. Prey about doubt for instance becomes way more interesting if you can't just take a health instead of limiting surges. Just as a thought exercise, say they introduced some terrain that caused stain when you entered it. Being able to load up the rebels with strain until they're too tired to slog through that mud would be neat vs them just being able take a health point and skip across. In any case its an interesting enough question to ask.

Well it doesn't only apply to actions or abilities since the rule says, "this includs suffering strain to gain movement points."

This is a very interesting question, though I think the Prey Upon Doubt thread is even more interesting. I think guidance from FFG will certainly be helpful.

Prey Upon Doubt actually gives the Rebel a choice though. Either choose to suffer 1 (strain) or add +1 (evade) to the defense roll. Prey Upon Doubt even uses the word "chooses".

In that instance, if the Rebel were maxed out on strain, he/she could not choose to suffer the strain.

The key here is that you cannot spend strain voluntarily if this would cause you to exceed your Endurance, and taking strain due to a harmful effect is not voluntary. Voluntarily, you take strain BEFORE you perform/modify an action. Nothing about the Bleed condition is voluntary, nor is Bleed a cost to be paid to do something, it is a harmful effect that occurs as a penalty.

But please, post your bleed question's answer here, and I will add it to the FAQ.

It clearly states those are some ways you can suffer stain. It doesn't say that is an exclusive or exhaustive list. Voluntary is your word, not theirs. Its actually not used once in the RRG. Cannot choose to suffer is their wording. Getting the bleed card attached is not your choice. What you do with it is your choice. They never mention that is must be a cost, just that those are some examples. You're making a error in assuming that since "costs paid" in the the set of "Things you chose that cause strain" that "costs paid" is the whole set. If you read LTP:7 strain you'll see it referrs to those just as the most common. Like saying because salmon are fish, all fish are salmon.

I believe the thread is talking about allies and whether they can choose to suffer strain and take a damage instead. That raises interesting questions about the validity of choices generally.

Prey Upon Doubt actually gives the Rebel a choice though. Either choose to suffer 1 (strain) or add +1 (evade) to the defense roll. Prey Upon Doubt even uses the word "chooses".

In that instance, if the Rebel were maxed out on strain, he/she could not choose to suffer the strain.

See, this I can buy from a RAW perspective. That if they intend that its a choice, they'll use choose as a keyword. Bleed could have been "after resolving an action other than below, the player must choose to suffer 1 <strain>" FFG isn't as careful with their keywords as I'd like but its certainly a possibility.

Prey Upon Doubt actually gives the Rebel a choice though. Either choose to suffer 1 (strain) or add +1 (evade) to the defense roll. Prey Upon Doubt even uses the word "chooses".

In that instance, if the Rebel were maxed out on strain, he/she could not choose to suffer the strain.

See, this I can buy from a RAW perspective. That if they intend that its a choice, they'll use choose as a keyword. Bleed could have been "after resolving an action other than below, the player must choose to suffer 1 <strain>" FFG isn't as careful with their keywords as I'd like but its certainly a possibility.

Thank you for proving my point.

Bleed does not say ""after resolving an action other than below, the player must choose to suffer 1 <strain>"" (this would allow for a choice).

Bleed does say ""after resolving an action other than below, you suffer 1 <strain>"" (this does not).

Clearly we arent going to change each other's minds. Let's see what the design team has to say.

Prey Upon Doubt actually gives the Rebel a choice though. Either choose to suffer 1 (strain) or add +1 (evade) to the defense roll. Prey Upon Doubt even uses the word "chooses".

In that instance, if the Rebel were maxed out on strain, he/she could not choose to suffer the strain.

See, this I can buy from a RAW perspective. That if they intend that its a choice, they'll use choose as a keyword. Bleed could have been "after resolving an action other than below, the player must choose to suffer 1 <strain>" FFG isn't as careful with their keywords as I'd like but its certainly a possibility.

Thank you for proving my point.

Bleed does not say ""after resolving an action other than below, the player must choose to suffer 1 <strain>"" (this would allow for a choice).

Bleed does say ""after resolving an action other than below, you suffer 1 <strain>"" (this does not).

Clearly we arent going to change each other's minds. Let's see what the design team has to say.

To be fair, that's assuming its a keyword. Abilities don't have choice as a keyword either. It's implied.

I need to go look through all the cards and see if there are other cards this might have implications for.

Just for the argument, let me throw something here. If a hero is forced to rest or remove bleed if it has maximum strain, what about figures that do not have endurance rating like allies and imperial figures ?

Does that mean that an ally or imperial figure must absolutely remove the bleed effect and can do nothing else ?

Would it not be strange if lack of endurance stat = more flexibility ?

Just for the argument, let me throw something here. If a hero is forced to rest or remove bleed if it has maximum strain, what about figures that do not have endurance rating like allies and imperial figures ?

Does that mean that an ally or imperial figure must absolutely remove the bleed effect and can do nothing else ?

Would it not be strange if lack of endurance stat = more flexibility ?

Well only heroes are unable to take strain if they're at their limit. Its pretty clear RAW that allies would just take damage. However allies don't play the strain game at all. No benefits or restrictions. A little odd maybe, but its not the only place in the rules they are treated differently.

Q:" Does choosing to suffer strain not being allow if it would go over endurance apply to indirect sources? Such as bleed and choosing do another action that would cause you to suffer strain over your limit. IE I'm full on strain, bleeding, and choose to attack. This will cause me strain over my limit. Is that allowed?"

A: Yes. In this case, you would take damage instead.

Justin Kemppainen

Assistant Board Game Manager
Fantasy Flight Games

Awesome, thanks.

Added to FAQ, glad I was on the side of correctitude on this one.