Hi all,

I have a question about how to deal with conditions when special rules from the Campaign Book apply.

There are certain conditions (e.g. Burning, Stunned) that require taking an action to remove it. That is clear for heroes in all cases. But what happens when a character receives one of these conditions and the Campaign Rules state that this character or figure can only perform a specific set of actions and no other actions? For example Friedrich (treated as a hero) in The Monster's Hoard, in which the Campaign book specifies that he can only perform one movement action and no any other actions. Or Ruin (monster) in The Frozen Spire, in which the Campaign book specifies that he can only perform a one-tile-forward movement. Can they remove the condition without contradicting the Campaign Special Rules?

As far as I know, Campaign rules prevail over any other rules and in our current campaign the OL states that removing the conditions is a clear contradiction. The heroes disagree but we seem to be unable to get to an understanding in this campaign and need help to unlock this situation

Thank you!

In my opinion they are different topics. "The Frozen Spire" don't say any others action. In the Monster's hoard says it. In this question they are two things that they are not similar. Reanimate doesn't have the special campaign rules, then it applies differents rules. As far I know these examples always are using Reanimate and they are not named by this specific campaign rules. In the "The Frozen Spire" you can not use dash the "contradict" OL card then using same logic you cannot use applied an action contradicting campaign rules.

The stun conditions can be avoided by heros with cleansing touch as example.

Stun Fireforge

Descent game player.

Stun, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about "The Frozen Spire." All I was trying to communicate is that conditions requiring an action to remove have been ruled (in the answer I posted previously) to be allowed to be removed by spending an action, whether or not the figure in question would normally be allowed to take such an action.

Normally, heroes and monsters have their basic actions which are allocated based on player choice, with the opportunity for special actions- whether by card abilities, quest rules, or condition cards. On the other hand, there are several characters/objects (the reanimate, summoned stones, NPCs of various flavors) for whom actions are much more limited. The FFG clarification essentially says that the condition discarding action becomes an additional option if such a figure has a condition. For example, the reanimate being a familiar is allowed only 1 move action. His card allows him only 1 attack action. Normally, he can't do anything else. However, if he is burning, the player controlling him can choose to discard burning as an action in place of the move action, or the attack action.

Stun, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about "The Frozen Spire." All I was trying to communicate is that conditions requiring an action to remove have been ruled (in the answer I posted previously) to be allowed to be removed by spending an action, whether or not the figure in question would normally be allowed to take such an action.

Normally, heroes and monsters have their basic actions which are allocated based on player choice, with the opportunity for special actions- whether by card abilities, quest rules, or condition cards. On the other hand, there are several characters/objects (the reanimate, summoned stones, NPCs of various flavors) for whom actions are much more limited. The FFG clarification essentially says that the condition discarding action becomes an additional option if such a figure has a condition. For example, the reanimate being a familiar is allowed only 1 move action. His card allows him only 1 attack action. Normally, he can't do anything else. However, if he is burning, the player controlling him can choose to discard burning as an action in place of the move action, or the attack action.

Thanks! It seems much clearer now. Reading the text in the Stunned card, what I understood was that, if you suffered that condition, it automatically substituted your possible action choices for this single, special action; that is, you no longer had the option to choose which was going to be your next action (assuming that you wanted to perform actions in your turn, instead of just keeping the condition and doing nothing else). That was what I understood in " Discard this card or token. This is the only action you may perform on your turn while you have this card or token". Burning seemed a bit clearer as it can be removed by an adjacent friendly figure. But now I see it differently.

Just for the record (it's hard to tell based on your response,) "Stun" does not rob you of both of your actions (unlike a stand up.) It only costs 1 action. So, a hero (or with this example, the reanimate, too) could discard stun, then attack, or discard stun, and move. You've got 2 actions, "stun" just forces your next action to be "discard stun."

Just for the record (it's hard to tell based on your response,) "Stun" does not rob you of both of your actions (unlike a stand up.) It only costs 1 action. So, a hero (or with this example, the reanimate, too) could discard stun, then attack, or discard stun, and move. You've got 2 actions, "stun" just forces your next action to be "discard stun."

Yes, that was I was meaning. The Stunned condition forces you to discard it and take no other action until you discard the condition itself. After that, you are free to normally choose your second action from your available or permitted options (unless you have no more remaining actions). Thanks!

Stun, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about "The Frozen Spire." All I was trying to communicate is that conditions requiring an action to remove have been ruled (in the answer I posted previously) to be allowed to be removed by spending an action, whether or not the figure in question would normally be allowed to take such an action.

Normally, heroes and monsters have their basic actions which are allocated based on player choice, with the opportunity for special actions- whether by card abilities, quest rules, or condition cards. On the other hand, there are several characters/objects (the reanimate, summoned stones, NPCs of various flavors) for whom actions are much more limited. The FFG clarification essentially says that the condition discarding action becomes an additional option if such a figure has a condition. For example, the reanimate being a familiar is allowed only 1 move action. His card allows him only 1 attack action. Normally, he can't do anything else. However, if he is burning, the player controlling him can choose to discard burning as an action in place of the move action, or the attack action.

Thanks Zaltyre,

I have a hardly discussion with Kaiya in Monster's Hoard quest, not in " The Frozen Spire ". I was trying to clarify that the text in quest " The Frozen Spire " says something different for actions that the quest " Monster's hoard ". In " the Frozen spire " said " Ruin can perform only one move action per turn " then in this case I absolutely agree with your comments about this topic, also with reanimate, summoned stones etc then stunned condition has to be rule.

However in "Monster's hoard" quest, it says: " he cannot perform any others actions, and he cannot recover hearths any means ". I will try to put an example: if Frederick cannot gain hearths also he cannot do an action to discard stunned condition card, because stunned condition said: "this is the only action you may perform on your turn while you have this card or token." and campaign text says " he cannot perform any others actions ". In this case in my opinion general rules are not applied due quest rules shall be applied. In my opinion if you allow to do actions due the card text then you also allow to gain hearths. In summary when Frederick is stunned only in this quest (as far as I know), he gains an action (stun card action becomes an additional option available) defined by the stun card but this action cannot be perform ed by quest rule.

Logic:

he cannot perform any others actions, and he cannot recover hearths any means

if he cans perform an action defined in stunned condition then he cans recover hearths any means

Maybe "Monster's hoard" quest should be written in a different way.

Many thanks in advance.

I think I understand your point now. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're suggesting that if Stun discarding is allowed, then that sets a precedent for a card ability overriding the restriction on performing other actions, which would in turn allow other card abilities (like healing ones) to also override.

While in a general sense, you're correct, I think it's important to recognize that the clarification is explicitly limited to conditions. That is, conditions are being set apart as an exception to the quest rules, and the ruling is specifically not intended to extend to other types of card abilities such as hero skills. While this obviously begs the question, "why make a special exception for conditions compared to other card abilities," I think the answer is that not doing so has the potential to fundamentally break the quest. This was recently addressed in a similar question about Bertram getting out of a pit space. If he can't move out of the pit space, the encounter is effectively over, as one of the victory conditions becomes impossible.

As a general rule, Descent quests are designed such that neither victory condition should become impossible until the other one has been achieved, and that if one victory condition is achieved, the encounter ends immediately such that both victory conditions cannot occur. Anytime I see a situation that conflicts with that ideal, it is necessary to try to find a solution that does not.

Most NPCs that have restricted actions are immune to conditions, and avoid this problem. Familiars like the reanimate can be resummoned to clear the stun, so they don't really need this exception. However, some quests, like "the Monster's Hoard" have NPCs which are subject to conditions. If Friedrich couldn't clear stun, all the OL has to do to win the encounter is stun him, because he won't be able to perform another action for the rest of the quest (unless the heroes happen to have a disciple with cleansing touch.) Friedrich needs this exception.

The only other way to do it would be to Errata all of the quests which have NPCs crucial to the victory condition and make them immune to conditions, but that further marginalizes the usefulness of conditions in general, which arguably is already a problem.

Thanks Zaltyre,

Now you understand my point.

Only to understand the context of discussion-> Game event: only one razorwing lived (all others monsters were dead), it stunned Frederick (It wasn't easy because they were protecting Frederick with " cloud of mist " and OL cann't use the special). After stunned (began discussion and OL suggested to search card) heroes tried to found " curse doll " in search cards but they didn't found, in case heroes found curse doll they would win the encounter I. Then after be stunned, encounter really was decided by search cards. One turn more without Frederick stunned and the heroes would win this encounter (reinforcements were defeated by heroes everytime reach river's edge and OL never win the encounter due circumstances).

Maybe only for "the Monster's Hoard" Frederick cannot be stunned as monster Golem.

It was a mix: probability of being stunned, probability of search card, setup heroes/OL cards and monster/quest...

That sounds like a rough encounter. I would encourage you to think, however, how differently things would have unfolded if Freidrich were stunned on round 1 if he weren't allowed to clear it.

If it makes you feel better, it sounds like the heroes could have used the curse doll to clear his stun, anyway.

Yes, it was a rough encounter. And Heroes began discussion because they discovered OL just win the encounter I and heroes were exhausted.

OL was thinking about how to stun in this particular quest and the best place to prepare the trap. Quest's setup does monsters only could stun Freidrich after round 3 or 4(or more with others monsters) because open group are located in the other side of the map and they have to run the whole map. Heroes should be focus in master monster (it has stun) instead of minion monsters (don't have stun). In my opinion if heroes focused on master monster they can reach the victory. If heroes only try to defend Friedrich they lost the encounter.

Sorry, it is not about feeling, I tried to focus only in the rules. In first instance we want to play all quests, and later we will try to balance quest without touch the descent rules (configuring the setup of quest or small changes in quest, allowing or disallowing monster for example).

In "Monster's hoard" a stun strategy balances only the encounter I (not the quest) to OL. (OL found a strategy that Freidrich never can move and heroes weren't happy)

However also a stun strategy in "The frozen spire” balances only the encounter I (not the quest) to heroes. (Heroes found a strategy which Ruin never can move and heroes were happy)

Note: In our game experience, OL had a quest "Blood of heroes" when all monsters were defeated on round 1, and round 2 won encounter the heroes.

Yeah, some of the qusts in the shadow rune are favorable to one side or another. It sounds like both the heroes and the OL in your group are looking for loopholes to turn the quest rules to your advantage- that may not go so well (though there is nothing wrong with planning a strategy based on the scenario.)

Also, please note that while a stun may not be the "auto-win" that either side is hoping for, the figure still needs to spend one of its actions to discard it. In the case of the monster's hoard, that is a turn Freidrich can't move, and same with Ruin in the frozen spire.