If, in a quest, the lieutenant only appears in the second encounter, and I equip a relic on him, can I use the relic's effect (like bones of woe) during the first encounter? And in a quest like "the man who would be king", alric farrow is in the first encounter, equipped with the duskblade. can I transfer it during the second encounter to, say, baron zachareth?

thanks!

If he only appears in the second encounter, he is not in any way on the map or in the current game, so no, you cannot use the relic he wields.

If the 2nd encounter of the man who would be king doesn't say that any specific lieutenant should wield the duskblade, and you have gained the duskblade during the campaign, you can give assign it to a different lieutenant.

I disagree with the second part. Relics are assigned by quest, not by encounter. You cannot transfer a relic from one LT to another between encounters- if Alric has it in encounter 1, Alric has it in encounter 2, even if Alric is not in encounter 2.

You're right Zaltyre, my bad. I forgot that the rules state that they are assigned by quest.

No problem. FYI (relevant bits bolded):

The overlord version of a relic may be wielded by any lieutenant, and this is the only way the relic’s abilities can be used by the overlord. If the overlord has no lieutenant in a given quest, or if he opts to leave his relic behind (see below), he receives no benefit for the relic’s abilities . Each lieutenant can wield only one relic.

During the setup step of each quest, the overlord chooses which relic (if any) each of his lieutenants wields during the quest. Place the chosen Relic card next to the Lieutenant card. If the relic is not wielded by a lieutenant, the overlord keeps the card near his Overlord deck and its abilities are ignored during this quest . If a lieutenant wielding a relic is defeated during a quest, the abilities of that relic are ignored for the remainder of the quest but the overlord keeps the relic.

As a followup, here's a related question I've had for a while.

If a lieutenant wielding a relic is defeated, but is allowed to return as a reinforcement (such as Baron Z in The Overlord Revealed, or Lady Eliza in encounter 2 of The Twin Idols), do they or do they not still wield the relic? The rules say " If a lieutenant wielding a relic is defeated during a quest, the abilities of that relic are ignored for the remainder of the quest but the overlord keeps the relic. " This seems very anti-thematic and a penalty for the defeated Lt. I've played this as an exception. Reasoning that the Lt was more knocked out than defeated, so the Lt returns with the relic. Or should the Lt really return relic-less? Opinions?

Honestly and I know this isn't really the right way to play it, but every encounter during setup, I equip each lieutenant with whatever relic they have and they keep it for the remainder of the encounter, even if Koed. Seems like the better way to do it. Upon reading this thread, yes that's not the right way to do it, but I have no real intent on changing it up.

Cejel- that is an FFG worthy question. RAW, it seems clear that the relic is disabled. However, I think the rule was probably written to keep the OL from continuing using staff of shadows if merrick was defeated. It may be yhe decision that if merrick comes back, he can use it again.

Thematically, assigning relics by quest and not by encounter makes sense. You are fighting Alric (with the duskblade) on the way to Zach's throne room. You defeat him and run through the hallways only to be confronted by Zach- also with the duskblade! That scenario doesn't make sense.

From my point of view the current rules dealing with relics for OL are not balanced !

Indeed based on all the quests I have (all but Heirs of Blood and the Last 3 H&M Packs) we have :

80 Quests among them 54 involve lieutenants but among these only 10 use more than one lieutenant

If we go by encounters it gives

120 Encounters, 64 with lieutenants 11 with more than one lieutenant

knowing that nearly all multi lieutenant Quests are Final or Interlude one's, on one campaign (9 / 11 Quests) at the most 3 will have more than a lieutenant, average wil be only one : the final !

So my thinking is : knowing that more or less half of the enconters during a campaign don't use lieutenants and on the other half only one will have more than one... once you have a relic and it's up to the OL to choose the Quest... why would the OL go after more relics ? where he can go at the place for more XP or more OL Cards ?!?!

This conducted me to propose the following house rules everytime I played :

- OL can give to his lieutenants, at the start of the quest, as many relics as he wants

- If more than one lieutenant is present he is free to split is relics as he wants but knowing the lieutenants will not be able to exchange their precious relics during the quest.

- If a lieutenant as more than one relic the OL must choose at the start of his turn which one (and only one) he equips till his next turn.

Of course the base campaign is the more impacted due to the number of relics given as rewards !!!

But, again from my point of view, these house rules give some reason to the OL to choose relic's rewarded Quests, without given him too much power...

at least the rare times where we had the possibility to use these house rules, I don't noticed that the OL was really favoured with them !!

If the lieutenant wielding a relic is defeated, then the abilities of that relic are ignored for the remainder of the quest, even if that lieutenant reinforces, as in the case of Overlord Revealed. It is important to note, however, that in a quest that states that the lieutenant is not defeated, but that something else happens when he or she suffers damage equal to his or her Health, then the relic would still be available.

It seems to me that for quite some time now (approximately since Adam Sadler left,) FFG has been answering rules questions for D2 by simply using the most literal interpretation of the rules as written, regardless of balance or logical concerns.

Not that I blame them, mind you. This game has a ridiculously high nit-pick factor when it comes to rules questions. It has ever since first edition, really. Something about the OL having an even chance of winning just makes everything a life or death question, I think.

Oh well, that's what house rules are for.

It is interesting how important tiny details become.

No problem. FYI (relevant bits bolded):

The overlord version of a relic may be wielded by any lieutenant, and this is the only way the relic’s abilities can be used by the overlord. If the overlord has no lieutenant in a given quest, or if he opts to leave his relic behind (see below), he receives no benefit for the relic’s abilities . Each lieutenant can wield only one relic.

During the setup step of each quest, the overlord chooses which relic (if any) each of his lieutenants wields during the quest. Place the chosen Relic card next to the Lieutenant card. If the relic is not wielded by a lieutenant, the overlord keeps the card near his Overlord deck and its abilities are ignored during this quest . If a lieutenant wielding a relic is defeated during a quest, the abilities of that relic are ignored for the remainder of the quest but the overlord keeps the relic.

Hmm this section doesn't make it very clear if the OL gets the benefits of the relic when the lieutenant is not on the map, but in the quest.

As they use the term "quest" throughout this section I think in the case they really mean quest (spanning over several encounters) you can indeed use the relic when the lieut is not on the map, but can't switch relics between encounters. If they mean encounter, imo you can switch relics between encounters, but don't get the benefits of the relics if the lieut is not on the map.

It seems to me that the relic is used by the OL only when that LT is on the map- that's why when a LT gets defeated (and therefore removed from the map) the benefits of the relic go away, too. To summarize, this is how I've played with relics, and as far as I know, how the rules say to play:

-Relics get assigned to LTs at the start of a quest (two LTs cannot use the same relic for different encounters)

-Each LT can only wield 1 relic, unless quest rules say otherwise (e.g. Alric wields the Duskblade in addition to any other relic)

-If a LT is defeated, the relic he was wielding cannot be used for the rest of the quest.

-If the LT is not on the map yet (perhaps it is encounter 1 and he doesn't get placed until encounter 2) the OL cannot use the relic.

It seems to me that the relic is used by the OL only when that LT is on the map- that's why when a LT gets defeated (and therefore removed from the map) the benefits of the relic go away, too. To summarize, this is how I've played with relics, and as far as I know, how the rules say to play:

-Relics get assigned to LTs at the start of a quest (two LTs cannot use the same relic for different encounters)

-Each LT can only wield 1 relic, unless quest rules say otherwise (e.g. Alric wields the Duskblade in addition to any other relic)

-If a LT is defeated, the relic he was wielding cannot be used for the rest of the quest.

-If the LT is not on the map yet (perhaps it is encounter 1 and he doesn't get placed until encounter 2) the OL cannot use the relic.

For what it's worth to others, this is also the way we play with relics.

I at least did not know (before this thread) that the lieutenants lost their relic. (And I can't say I like it )

The OL keeps the relc- it is just nixed for that quest. Also, the number of quests where LTs stand up is relatively small.

Well, on the 2 lasts quests we played in LoR, the lieutenant was killed before he even had a turn. So why bother equipping it with a relic then. (Splig in let the truth be buried, where he can stand up again and ariad in tipping the scales where she can be reinforced)

Splig got killed before having a turn in let the truth be buried?? Do you mean encounter 1 or 2? After having played that in our group, I just don't see how that's possible, though I understand how in quests like that it's disappointing.

Well I don't remember exactly how it went, but it was something like this:

Encounter 1: Logan Lashley as treasure hunter went first and used a move action to move to the bridge, which is within three spaces of a search token, so he used Dead Man's Compass' to move one more space, now he could easily target Splig. He used 'Dungeoneer' to search the search token, and performed a free attack. Then he used his Heroic Feat to perform another attack.

'Not Me!' failed on both attacks for Splig so that didn't help him.

Logan has the 'Bow of the Eclipse' which gives him 2 pierce and he gets another 2 pierce from 'Sleight of Hand', which made whatever Splig rolled with his defense dice irrelevant.

Since he was not adjacent to another hero, he got +1 damage from the 'Delver' skill.

The 'Bow of the Eclipse' rolls BRG, so its not that hard to get a minimum of 4-5 damage, + either 1 and/or 3 damage from the surge abilities, +1 from 'Delver', which can barely be blocked thanks to the 4 Pierce...

.. times 2. Which (lets say) equals 18 damage, which is more than Spligs 16 Health.

So he didn't even survive the first hero turn, let alone the first hero round.

Suffice to say, Splig never actually managed to move the chain even once during the quest.

That sounds like poor Splig placement to me- Splig started in relative safety in our case, and was able to do a good number of moves before being taken out, especially given the movement/ LOS restrictions.

Poor Splig placement? "Quest setup: Place Splig on the Hallway as indicated". He was right where the rules told him to be.

Sorry I forgot that. poor other monsters perhaps? I need to look at that quest again.

Place Splig on the Hallway as indicated. Place the goblin archers on the Hallway. Place the Zombies and open group on the Collapsed chamber.

Purple are the archers, green is Logan (yellow is his move action, orange the dead mans compass move, blue his LoS to splig)

So unless I have been playing the game wrong and 43B somehow is considered part of the Hallway (even though it cleary isn't tile 29B) there is no way I could have placed my Goblin Archers in front of him.

Ah, no, you're right, I was remembering the setup wrong. We went after the open group before going after Splig, I think- didn't see the point is just repeatedly attacking him (I don't actually remember if Splig even started with a relic in this instance.)