Guess you can call me Fizzflop now.

You know I will be using that?

Yeah, well, after that awful ruling I made, I kinda deserve it. I flipped, then I flopped, then I flipped again. So that's 40 for the flip, another 40 for the flop, and another 40 cause that caused a flap. So that a 120 flip-flop-flat-fee.

What I meant by Twin Shadows turning some rulings on their heads wasn't the fact that the rules themselves had not changed, merely the subtleties of how we interpret the rules, in the fact that TS introduced some new cards and concepts that force us to look closer at the RAW instead of an accepted extrapolation pre-TS. For example, attacks that are generated during an activation that do not stem from an action, such as the "Lead By Example" card. What is commonly referred to as the "single-attack rule" should be more accurately called the "single attack action rule". Meaning that during an activation, only one of the *ACTIONS* can be used to perform an attack, and that further *ACTIONS* cannot be used to gain more attacks.

Another question is about melee reach attack.

When the attacker (RED one) stand behind a wall, like this picture, can I attack every colored point?

One rebel players, who often plays Descent as EVIL LORD says I can only attack the BLACK point in this kind of situation in Descent.

But BLUE, GREEN and YELLOW points are also legal target right?

The only valid melee target from the red attacker (assuming the attacker has Reach) is the black defender. LOS cannot be drawn to any of the other points.

"Reach", RRG, Page 22:

A figure with this keyword may perform (melee) attacks that target figures up to 2 spaces away.

• The attacking figure must have line of sight to the target in order to make this attack.

Fizz, wouldn't the blue be a valid target if black wasn't there? You can draw LOS from Red to Blue. Only if there was a figure on both black and blue, you couldn't target blue? (I think the intention of the original question was if there was only one other figure on one of those 4 squares, which of them would be valid targets)

From Red, Black blocks LOS to Blue.

If Black were not there (see below)

Blue would be a valid melee target with Reach since it is in LOS and up to 2 spaces away. Green and and Yellow would still be invalid melee targets since you cannot count spaces through walls, Red does not have LOS to Green (but it does to Yellow). And both Green and Yellow are 3 spaces away.

From Red, Black blocks LOS to Blue.

If Black were not there (see below)

Blue would be a valid melee target with Reach since it is in LOS and up to 2 spaces away. Green and and Yellow would still be invalid melee targets since you cannot count spaces through walls, Red does not have LOS to Green (but it does to Yellow). And both Green and Yellow are 3 spaces away.

I know this is an older thread...

But don't you have to be adjacent to targets to do a melee attack? For reach a figure may be adjacent to one of those spaces. So in both examples there are no eligible targets as the wall is in the way.

But of course, the diagonal space is adjacent so the black figure is in range. Nevermind me.

Xamn: An old thread, but the thread was about melee attacks with Reach. Black isn't adjacent to Red, so red can't be attacked by normal melee attack. But with reach the target needs to be in LoS and within 2 spaces.

Xamn: Not "adjacent to the adjacent space", but up to 2 spaces away and within LOS. See below for an example on why this distinction is important:

Red being the attacker in this case, the two targets are not adjacent, but are still legal targets with reach.

Additionally important for melee attack with Reach and Cleave (Cleave can hit any **eligible** target, not just an adjacent target to the original target). I mention this because in the original case, if Black were defeated by the original melee attack with Reach, and Cleave was triggered, Blue would become a valid Cleave target.

In the new case (shown above in this post), with red attacking with Reach, both yellow and green are eligible targets for Cleave, even though they are not adjacent to each other.

Brutality works because Brutality specifically calls out that it breaks the single attack rule. You need to read that fully, the RRG rule specifically calls out abilities that grant an attack, as well as the attack action.

When the rule boils down to (and this has been discussing to sickening detail on the forums for the past year, and has been called the "single attack rule"), is that you cannot VOLUNTARILY commit an action or use an effect that forces you to attack more than once during an action, per activation. (Again, Brutality breaks the rule. As does Assault. Cards override the rulebook).

Meaning, if you were to use a Nexu's Pounce, or Vader's Brutality (which expressly allows you to attack up to two targets), you cannot voluntarily choose any effect that grants ANOTHER attack during your activation, such as an attack action, or any other special action or effect during the same activation.

Where parting shot *NORMALLY* gets used is where the Hired Gun is killed (which normally, is not during its activation, as being defeated during your own activation is a rare event), thus the Parting Shot would not break the Single Attack Rule. However, in the case of Experimental Arms, the figure would be defeated during its own activation, and as such, follows the single attack rule.

So, I ruled one way, then after examining it, I changed my ruling. Go ahead and submit the "Experimental Arms + Parting Shot" query to the rules link below.

Counterpoint - Parting shot is an interrupt.

An interrupt pauses the current activation, and it is stated that a unit can interrupt itself.

Therefore, parting shot takes place outside of the activation, and does NOT violate the one attack per activation rule.

There is no one attack rule. Any figure can perform any number of attacks during and outside of their activations as long as they spend only one action to perform one or more attacks. Additional attacks can be received from abilities that are not actions without restriction. Parting Shot is not an action, so it does not count towards the one attack action limit in any case.

Right, there is no "one attack rule", there is a "single attack action" rule, as I stated above after that quote in a correction.

Additionally important for melee attack with Reach and Cleave (Cleave can hit any **eligible** target, not just an adjacent target to the original target). I mention this because in the original case, if Black were defeated by the original melee attack with Reach, and Cleave was triggered, Blue would become a valid Cleave target.

I'm finding it difficult to square this with the claim from the "Stun to prevent Parting Shot" thread. If keywords are applied after the figure is removed from the map, then you can Cleave through to a figure that was being blocked by the defeated figure, but you couldn't prevent an impendingly defeated Hired Gun from using Parting Shot with a Stun on the killing attack. Conversely, if you do apply Stun while the Hired Gun is still on the map, then you couldn't also Cleave "past" it.

read my reply in the "Stun to prevent Paring Shot" thread. I don't think stun stops parting shot.

I think I've made it clear with some examples there.

I agree in this case that cleave is applied after the figure is defeated and thus something behind the figure could be cleaved with Reach.

Makes sense thematically too.... its a big follow through attack and the momentum continues forward after you kill something.

Yes, you can Cleave through to a figure that was being blocked by the defeated figure.

Edit: see also https://boardgamegeek.com/article/19357013#19357013

Also, see the reference cards, which explicitly say that Blast and Cleave are performed after the attack resolves.

Hello there.

We just start a new campaign with my players, and I love HIRED GUNS, but we have a question here.

HIRED GUNS' ability "Parting shot", makes him can perform an attack when being defeated.

And I choosed TECHNOLOGICAL SUPERIORITY as my Imperial class.

So, when I attached "Experimental Arms" on HIRED GUNS, which I can suffer 1 health after the attack resolved to gain +1 surge, when a HIRED GUN is defeated and use his Parting shot ability, is this still work? Can I use the Experimental Arms to apply +1 surge in this attack?

Another question is about melee reach attack.

When the attacker (RED one) stand behind a wall, like this picture, can I attack every colored point?

One rebel players, who often plays Descent as EVIL LORD says I can only attack the BLACK point in this kind of situation in Descent.

But BLUE, GREEN and YELLOW points are also legal target right?

Thanks for the answers anyway.

Hello everyone. I have just aquired SW:IA and joined this community after stumbling across the message boards and was hoping for some clarification on the melee portion of this thread.

From the Rules and Reference Guide:

And:

Followed by:

So. The red figure in the example above has LOS to use reach on the black target only, but can not perform a standard melee attack on any target. Do I have that right?

With reach I'm pretty sure that red could only attack blue as it's the only target it can see.

If all colored spaces have figures, the figure on the red space has Line of sight to black only (distance 2), the black one blocks line of sight to the other spaces.

You can draw line of sight through the attacker and the target, but not through other figures (unless the target is Massive).

Because the distance is 2, red can't attack black with melee, but can attack if red has Reach .

If there's only one target present at a time, then the situation changes, because the blue space is also 2 spaces away from the red space and in line of sight. The green and yellow spaces, however are 3 spaces away, so can only be attacked with ranged attacks.

And to clarify.... Red is not adjacent to black but does have LOS. Thus red can shoot black, but can not melee attack.

I assume Reach only breaks the adjacent requirement if attacking at range 1 and not at range 0? Or do we assume that reach doesn't need adjacency at all and therefore Red with reach could attack black?

Reach allows you to use a melee attack up to 2 spaces away. An adjacent target is still 1 space away, not 0. Attacking "around" a wall would be 2 spaces away since you count spaces based off of movement and cannot count the spaces from Luke to the Stormtrooper though the wall, you have to count around it.

Reach does not require adjacency. Instead, reach requires line of sight and the target within 2 spaces. (See Reach from the RRG)

(By definition, adjacent figures are distance 1 from each other. By extension a figure in the same space with an object might be distance 0 from each other, but we don't have a ruling about it - they are adjacent for the purposes of Blast and Cleave, and can be targeted independently, but adjacency in the same space is not defined for other uses - thus the interact rule and a number mission rules need to have "on or adjacent" specified. A figure or object should be within 0 spaces of itself.)