This evening my Agency build used Military Bikes to defeat an excellent player named Nathan, whom I have never before been able to seriously challenge.

He was surprised and dismayed by the way Military Bike works, and felt the card is quite abusive.

I have to agree with him in concept, SO, I need now to reassure myself that I'm playing them correctly.

Please correct me where I am mistaken: - - -

Say on my turn I commit characters to story A (only), one of which has Military Bike attached.

All committing characters are exhausted but the bike is not.

My opponent can ONLY commit characters to Story A in defense.

After story A is completely resolved, I use the disrupt to exhaust Military Bike to commit the attached character to Story B.

Even though the character was exhausted, he can still be committed to Story B by the Military Bike.

My opponent cannot commit characters to Story B in defense.

Story B is now resolved, generally gaining me successes for skill and unopposed.

And the only things the defender could have done about it, were:

Destroy the Character

Destroy the bike

Take the Biking Character's skill to zero somehow.

Remove (bounce) the Biking character from story A before it can be resolved.

Pre-Exhaust the bike somehow before it can use its disrupt

Thanks in advance for any redirection or reinforcement.

Chick

This is how it works right now.

Yes, it is very powerful, especially if you have someone with investigation icons riding the bike (and assuming you can protect the rider at the first story).

There is nothing the opponent can do to oppose the rider at the second story.

It's kind of like Seduction of the Tombs, only without the Professor of Archaeology.

Also,

If the Shub character Binding Worms was in play, you would not be able to move to another story.

The card actually reminds me of the CCG Syndicate card "On the Lam" except that its support a support card and "On the Lam" was an event card.

Interesting comment about Binding Worms !

I'm very familiar with "On the Lam". Used it to defeat the (English Language) Yithian Deck at that tournament years ago. That was quite a thrill.

Chick

Another way an opponent could get rid of your bike would be to somehow drive that character insane before stories resolved.

and yeah, On the Lam was a fun card to play! It got to a point where everyone knew I would have it in the deck and made sure they had surprises for it!

On the Lam (cost 1 event surprise) moved your character before or after the struggle. Military Bike (cost 2 support see it coming) is after only. Well, On the Lam became less surprising after everyone went out and bought four Arkham Premiums. Four Deep One Rising were in the same guy's cthulhu deck.

chicklewis said:

Thanks for the confirmation. However, I have two more questions due to the League deck I was running these past weeks - fasten your seatbelt, here we go :

1°) About the word 'unresolved' in the Military Bike card text

Mainly it's the situtation as described above by Chick but with a variation :

The Active player commits characters in two stories A and B at the normal commit step - nothing in story C (no Conspiracies in play). The character with the Bike is committed in Story B. The Active player decides to resolve the Stories in the following sequence : first Story A, then the Story B.

He resolves A and wins the story - so he replaces it with a new story (we call it AA) before proceeding. Then he resolves the story B, which contains the Bike. He may activate the Disrupt of the Bike and then move the character to :

a. Story C *only*¨(=> this was my understanding of the "unresolved" wording, according to the 'Story Phase' and 'Winning a Story' rules)

b. Story C *OR* story AA (the new one)

2°) Consequences of the "re-commit" step

same situation as described - but with precise cards :

"Dr Ali Khafour" on the Bike - what happens? May I draw one card when I 're-commit' Khafour?

So here my question is : is this 're-commit' step allowed by a card text has the same characteristics as the commit step allowed per the game rules? I think we need some precise example in the FAQ about this, because there are many cards with effects linked to the commit step. Examples : Rabbit's foot, Grim Waith, The Ravager from the Deep,... I let you think about other combos ;-)

Anecdote : the AP12 which contains the Bike hit our local FGLS really late. Some players were waiting to add this pack to their League deck (3 players with Agency Faction on 16 players). I had a AGENCY/Miska deck and I was opposed to a buddy playing a MISKA/Agency deck lately. My opponent throwed some characters in T1 an T2, and I managed to wound them. Then he played a Chess Prodigy with the Bike. He scored 3 points in two stories. I stalled him for one turn with a Confident Rookie and a Shotgun attached (very thematic - check the illustration of the Rookie if you don't know the card :-). Then, instead of killing the Chess Prodigy, I managed to steal the Bike with Repo Man and as the Bike was Ready, I used the Bike effect *immediately* on the same Story resolution! It helped me to win the game very quickly.

Still no news - it seems nobody saw my questions? Gosh, this forum has a poor usability

Wendigo said:

I think you can commit to the new story this way. And yes, Ali Kafour will trigger again, you will draw the card as a response after all stories resolved.

A side note - Seduction of the Tombs received an errata making it not actually commit a character. Therefore, no surprise unopposed stories.

On the Lam was most useful before story resolution - it wouldn't let the same character count their icons and skill towards two stories in one turn (ignoring other effects like Burning the Midnight Oil combos).

Military Bike is perhaps the most powerful of the lot, because it lets you get an unopposed story resolution (assuming the character survives to that point) as well as contributing to the resolution of the first story.

Thanks for you answers.

I must confess that I expected a more affirmative answer on the stories resolution sequence when the Military Bike is on the Active player side. Maybe I will post a second thread in the rules section, beacuse i realized afterwards that the first question by Chick Lewis was in the General Discussion section.