Fristly, excellent, thanks Antistone. As I said its really a first draft and sometimes one can be too close or too mixed up with what one has written and changed several times to spot the mistakes.
Not to mention just being plain wrong, or not having the best ideas.
Antistone said:
Props: Your definition of props says that it includes prize tokens, but prize tokens say they don't fit into other categories. Also, Props says it includes terrain, but the given definition doesn't include natural terrain (since there is no token involved); that ought to be clarified.
Obstacles: You have removed from this category many things that were explicitly listed as obstacles in various rulebooks. I realize that the FAQ entry for crushing block is completely different from the "obstacle" categorization in any book, but you haven't made your categorization equivalent to that FAQ ruling either. Your enumerated list also doesn't match your stated definition, since it excludes rolling boulders (which are "mapboard spaces that are impassible" if rubble is). And after your various rewrites, I'm not sure if any effect in the entire game is limited specifically to obstacles (by either of your definitions). What's the deal here?
Traps: This category is explicitly not supposed to overlap with Terrain, but you included rolling boulders and crushing walls in both. Suggest they be deleted from Terrain.
Effects: You've made Sahla's ability substantially more powerful by including things like the monkey counter tokens.
Acrobat: As written, your rewrite allows heroes to choose not to trigger encounters or activate glyphs. I suggest that prize tokens be removed from the list, and there should possibly be a clarification that you still experience the effects for standing in terrain, as opposed to the effects for entering terrain (thus, your LOS is restricted by pits and fog, for example).
It might be a good idea to define Acrobat as "the same as Fly, except...". Makes for more consistency, and hopefully means that only the Fly ability will need to be errata'd ever again, rather than changing both Fly and Acrobat.
Fly: I still do not believe that Fly was ever intended to provide any advantage against trap tokens. Also note that Rolling Boulders and Crushing Walls say that they are treated as walls for purposes of blocking movement, and so I don't think figures with Fly are supposed to be able to move through them. Also, as written, this allows Razorwings to fly over boulders, but still causes them to die if a boulder rolls into them.
Also, you've given Acrobat and Fly the ability to end movement on top of the Shadow Soul, which probably wasn't intentional. I suggest you remove familiars from the list of things they're allowed to move through, as that ability was never granted by the original version, and I don't think any familiars block movement anyway (unless there's something in RtL--if there is, I don't think there's a simple rewrite).
I believe there's also a ruling saying that figures with Acrobat/Fly are still supposed to suffer penalties for entering hazardous terrain involuntarily (e.g. as a result of Knockback).
Further Considerations: I can think of two major rules you haven't touched on that could possibly use this classification system:
(1) "Empty spaces" for traps and the like.
(2) Monsters are prohibited from spawning on obstacles (explicitly including pits).
Currently, "obstacles" is too narrow to use as the sole criteria for either of these rules, and "terrain" is too board (as it includes things like natural corrupted terrain that almost certainly shouldn't interfere with these). Admittedly, #1 could quite possibly use "everything except corrupted terrain". I would consider moving more stuff into the obstacle category to make #2 work as written (or at most require a change to "obstacles or traps").
Large Monsters: Suggest point 1 should be more general--there could conceivably be things that block movement other than obstacles and traps, and there could conceivably be things other than Fly that let you enter otherwise impassable spaces. Perhaps "large figures may not enter any space that small figures cannot enter, and may not end their movement overlapping any space that small figures cannot end their movement within."
Suggest point 2 should say something like "did not already occupy" rather than "did not occupy previously," since the current version seems more likely to be mistaken for meaning that they can never be harmed by the same piece of terrain twice in the same game.
You may also want to explicitly call out what happens if they don't move during their activation and overlap spaces that they would suffer damage for entering.
Stairs: This strongly resembles my question #16 from the first reply in this thread.
Props:
I see about the Prize tokens points. Props is intended to be an over-classification, one that describes all tokens present as part of the map-board (as compared to tokens that are on the map board, not part of it). Possibly an extra sentence explaining this would help. I'm not convinced it is necessary so I'll leave it to others to add here.
I don't see the problem with the terrain thing. Props include Terrain but not all Terrain pieces are Props. That is apparent from the Terrain description. Still, if you think it would be better fixed, feel free to do so.
Obstacles:
Firstly, all of the original rulebooks used 'obstacles' in an uncertain and messy way that didn't fit with various other uses. So I am assuming that these are being abandoned
entirely
in place of the comprehensive re-explanation we are doing. Most obstacles are being moved to Terrain, because we need to separate out non-impassable stuff. Calling most of the "this space is made up of" stuff 'terrain' seems suitable, especially as some former 'obstacles' simply aren't necessarily obstacly in nature (ie don't block or slow movement, eg Giant Mushrooms).
Secondly, the FAQ entry for Crushing Block is still not exhaustive because it misses impassable (sudden death) pits and also impassable trees (which occur in at least one RtL encounter location. So that needs revising anyway. We don't currently have one term for all entries in this FAQ answer, and due to Acrobat we aren't likely to in the future either.
Thirdly, Rolling Boulders are specifically not obstacles according to Acrobat - which means if we class them as obstacles then we must make an exception for Acrobat. They do fit with Trap Tokens in the way that Acrobat specifically seems to not counter them.
I don't entirely like them as Trap tokens either because to me they don't fit the definition of an entrapped area - they are terrain that is changing (moving) due to a triggered trap. I've gone back and forth several times between obstacles and trap tokens and if there is any inconsistency this is probably why.
In the end, what I wrote seemed the best combination to me.
Although each of your points is correct, please look at the total effect and see if you can find holes in it then. Or even better, offer a better solution.
Trap Tokens:
Oops yes. One of those move them here, move them back, move them back again mistakes. I think they are best classified as Props, Terrain
and
Trap Tokens. Better IMO to remove the sentence that says Trap Tokens are not Terrain (some are, some are not). The sentence about not being Trap Cards is to help clarify TrapMaster and similar effects, but is certainly disputable.
Effect Tokens:
Bugger! Monkey wound tokens were added in late trying to cover everything. It is a shame because they really do fit best in here. However, despite the fact that I don't think that improving Sahla's ability a little bit by this method would be a bad idea (Sahla is adequate, but there are a least 5 mages you would choose ahead of him without a second thought), I am certainly not trying to change any rules. I can think of two solutions.
a) leave monkey wound tokens out of the classification system altogether and add a note at the bottom mentioning them. This could also work well solving some other potential issues - glyphs might work better like this too?
b) add a note in the monkey section stating that monkey tokens may not be removed by any special effect.
Acrobat:
Prize tokens can be removed. I was thinking of opening chests but that is not a movement effect of the space, it is a Movement Action. Acrobat as written does not change any 'standing in' effects of terrain etc. It only operates when
entering
or
moving through
. That is exactly as per the original wording of Acrobat. I guess an extra clarification could be added but IMO it is not necessary and is only needed for incompetent rules-'would-be'-lawyers.
I'm not convinced Acrobat should be 'as Fly except'. I think it is important to have all the effects of the card on the card (the basics at least) and not have the card refer to another card.
Fly:
We disagree here. I do see fly specifically protecting against Trap Tokens (not Trap Cards necessarily - surprise gets the effect, but the tokens they leave behind can be flown over). As evidence I offer two things. First, Fly does not have the same exceptions noted in Acrobat for things I would classify as Trap Tokens. Secondly, a figure with Fly may end it's turn on an Obstacle (old screwed up definition - osud) which does damage without taking damage. Now Boulders and Crushing Walls have been defined as obstacles (osud) in the FAQ answer about Crushing Block, despite boulders being classed with Scything Blades as not-obstacles in the Acrobat skill (osud). So if Boulders are obstacles (osud) then probably so are Scything Blades and thus by definition Flyers can end on Scything Blades without taking damage.
Really though, it's take your pick, since there are so many contradictory old rulings. My pick is that Trap Tokens (which are not Traps) are ignoreable by Fly. Traps though, would still hit flyers (the element of surprise).
I'm not aware of the Knockback/Acrobat/Fly ruling. It is not in the current FAQ, nor in the GLOAQ (there is a relevant question in the GLOAQ but the answer says the hero is a 'valid target' for pit damage - not 'recieves pit damage', which would seem to indicate that some heroes may not receive the damage - due to Acrobat/Fly/Tiger Tattoo etc probably).
Familiars are removeable but then we need to do something about Villagers. I don't see anywhere else suitable to put Villagers. They are not terrain and not obstacles from the pov of Crushing Block. They might be another candidate for a non-classified unique section like monkey wound tokens.
Further Considerations:
Yes indeed. Things like these are exactly why we want a classification system rather than an individualised system. Unfortunately there are so many overlaps, crossovers, unique cases and exceptions that a classification system is very difficult.
1) Unless someone comes up with a better system this one might be better to just have the exception. "All figure, Props and Natural Terrain except Corrupted Terrain"
2) Again, unless there is a better system I would keep this one simpler. "Monsters may not spawn on any space they cannot end their turn (
aside - which includes other figures, activated glyphs, obstacles, Boulders and Crushing Walls)
or entirely inside a pit."
Large Monsters:
Yes, both better than my efforts although the first is partially redundant (if you can't enter then you already can't end).
1. No space of a large figure may enter any space that small figures cannot enter.
2. When a large monster moves, it is affected only by any space it moves into that it did not already occupy. Each single space of movement is adjudicated separately for this purpose.
6. If a large figure does not move at all then it is treated as though all of the spaces it occupies are newly occupied spaces for effects that happen when a figure doe snot move off them in a turn. (this could definitely be improved!)