Ferocity + Unstoppable = double counter?

I've seen this asked on BGG but it was a two post thread and no official ruling.

I agree that an official ruling would be nice. The main question is whether Unstoppable grants a counter, or if it moves the normal counter to a different time. The Rules Reference Guide refers to making "a counter" (always singular) and the Ferocity ability states that the unit may make "its counter" (not "its counters"), implying each unit gets a single counter, so if Unstoppable simply moves the timing of the counter, the combo wouldn't work.

Keep in mind that this is a very specific combo. Here's how it works.

1) The Daqan unit attacks an adjacent Obscene unit.

2) The damage dealt does not defeat the Obscene.

3) The Daqan unit has some number of retreat results (through morale results or Superior Tactics, for example)

4) BEFORE resolving those retreat results, the Obscene may use Ferocity to make a counter attack.

5) The Daqan unit is not defeated or forced to retreat from the Obscene's counter attack.

6) The Daqan unit resolves its retreat effects and the Obscene is unable to resolve the retreats because its movement is restricted, so it takes damage and is defeated.

7) Now the Uthuk player can play Unstoppable to give the Obscene a counter before it is defeated.

So even though a clarification would be handy, you can see that this combo will not come up often. For my part, it looks like the combo works and Unstoppable is allowing a counter at that specific time without regard to whether the unit has countered already or not. That's what needs clarification.

Reference Book p.10 "Unstoppable" second bullet point: "The player cannot perform the counter if the target unit was forced to retreat one or more hexes before being eliminated.". Thus Unstoppable and Ferocity are mutually exclusive: if the Obscene are eliminated in place, use Unstoppable. If they are forced to retreat, use Ferocity.

If it said "forced to retreat" and stopped there, I'd believe it. But because it says 1 or more hexes, it seems like it is not the act of resolving retreats, but the fact that the unit has actually moved 1 or more hexes that prevents the counter, because you cannot counter if you are not adjacent, but since this is a card that grants a counter, it could possibly trump the rules. To keep that from happening, they had to clarify that you could not retreat away from the starting hex if you use Unstoppable.

I sent in a rules clarification question yesterday, so I'm waiting to hear back on that.

[i've started this in a new thread so as not to clutter the FAQ thread.]

Thanks Garrett. Yes, better keeping discussions off-FAQ thread, otherwise it's likely to lose some vital questions

Sorry for clogging things up on the other thread! Here is, essentially, a re-post of my response to Budgernaut and Giulio (without the quoted material):

Budgernaut, agreed. However, the reference book does not imply anywhere that only one counter is allowed; not in either of the entries for Ferocity or Unstoppable, nor in any passage about combat, counters, retreating, timing, or resolving multiple effects.

Ferocity: "...it may perform its counter immediately before the attacking unit resolves retreats." I think the use of its vs a counter here is insignificant as a possessive. Its is referencing the counter permitted according to the text on the unit card for the obscene which is the golden source of the ability. The card states: "Ferocity: During your opponent's Attack Step, if this unit would be forced to retreat, this unit may counter before it retreats." You are just allowed a counter, not to change the timing of an otherwise permitted one. Unstoppable, as you already pointed out, also simply allows a counter, no change of timing to a preexisting one there according to the unit card or reference passage.

Giulio, if you look at the numbered sequence Budgernaut laid out, it outlines exactly when these two abilities are not mutually exclusive. As you said, the second bullet point in the reference on Unstoppable doesn't allow the counter when the uthuk has been forced to retreat "one or more hexes before being eliminated." In the above sequence, the obscene has retreated 0 hexes prior to elimination, therefore it triggers. Ferocity obviously triggers as well in the same scenario and you are left with two counters granted; One prior to step 8 in the combat sequence (Ferocity) and the other executed during the resolution of step 8. I say Unstoppable occurs during step 8 because it cannot be played prior to retreating one or more hexes towards subsequent elimination (like Ferocity can ).

P.S. very excited to hear the official ruling from customer service thanks for asking!

Reference Book p.10 "Unstoppable" second bullet point: "The player cannot perform the counter if the target unit was forced to retreat one or more hexes before being eliminated.". Thus Unstoppable and Ferocity are mutually exclusive: if the Obscene are eliminated in place, use Unstoppable. If they are forced to retreat, use Ferocity.

If it said "forced to retreat" and stopped there, I'd believe it. But because it says 1 or more hexes, it seems like it is not the act of resolving retreats, but the fact that the unit has actually moved 1 or more hexes that prevents the counter, because you cannot counter if you are not adjacent...

Honestly I don't know. I was on the point of writing that you were right, then I thought "forced to retreat" does not mean "retreat". You seem to read the sentence as it would be " The player cannot perform the counter if the target unit retreats one or more hexes before being eliminated." Are the two sentences equivalent? What do you think? (I suspect we have hit one of the many subtleties of the English language here and I'm not a reliable judge on that)

Edit: The "1 or more hex" part could be there to avoid the rule lawyers like us to pretend that the unit cannot counter because it was forced to retreat 0 hexes, if for some reason it can ignore one flag, for instance.

My interpretation is that the phrase "forced to retreat one or more hexes before being eliminated" is there to make sure that the Unstoppable Counter cannot be performed at range. Without that phrase, card rules trump the other rules, so you would be able to counter even if you retreated. But like you said, the phrasing isn't 100% clear.

I agree with you that "forced to retreat" and "retreat" should not necessarily mean the same thing. I would imagine that "forced to retreat" means that retreat effects are being resolved one way or another (whether as movement or damage), while "retreat" should be the actual movement caused by resolving retreats. However, nothing in the rules seems to support this interpretation. I don't think the rules were written tight enough for us to interpret the difference on rules alone. If we did try to do it, my argument would be that under the Retreats heading in the Rules Reference, bullet point #3, it says, " Retreating units cannot move off the game board or into a hex containing either impassible terrain or enemy units. A unit that would be forced to retreat into one of these hexes instead ends its movement and suffers one damage for each retreat it could not resolve (unless it is supported)." [emphasis mine.] The phrase "would be forced to retreat" implies that the unit is not actually forced to retreat and instead of being forced to retreat, it suffers one or more damage. This argument is too rules-lawyery for my taste. I'm not likely to defend it as the definitive answer, but it is certainly one interpretation.

I like your thoughts on why "one or more hexes" was added. While it doesn't match with what I wrote above, it's possible that "forced to retreat" was never considered as an actual game phrase, in which case it would equal "resolve retreats" and your interpretation would make sense. Unfortunately, I think we really just need an official ruling at this point, because I can see it going both ways depending on designer intent.

I've been checking my email multiple times a day, but still haven't heard back about this interaction from FFG. With Worlds registration going on and GenCon right around the corner, they must be pretty busy.

I don't recall ever having to wait this long to hear back on a rules question. Is two weeks normal for anyone else?

GenCon's approaching, so, yes, it'd be normal. Wait one more week, then mail Derrick, or ask again

Three weeks so far. Still no answer?

Three weeks so far. Still no answer?

Not yet.

YES! They combo! (I got a response.)

My question:

Hello. I have a question about the interaction of the Uthuk Y'llan lore card Unstoppable and the Obscene ability Ferocity. There is more detail on the situation in this thread: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/223765-unstoppable-and-ferocity-do-they-combo/ The main question is, if your Obscene is pinned against an enemy unit or impassable terrain, is it possible to use BOTH Unstoppable and Ferocity to deal 2 counter attacks to the attacking unit? It would work something like this:

1) The Daqan unit attacks an adjacent Obscene unit.

2) The damage dealt does not defeat the Obscene.

3) The Daqan unit has some number of retreat results (through morale results or Superior Tactics, for example)

4) BEFORE resolving those retreat results, the Obscene may use Ferocity to make a counter attack.

5) The Daqan unit is not defeated or forced to retreat from the Obscene's counter attack.

6) The Daqan unit resolves its retreat effects and the Obscene is unable to resolve the retreats because its movement is restricted, so it takes damage and is defeated.

7) Now the Uthuk player can play Unstoppable to give the Obscene a counter before it is defeated.

Derrick's answer:

So this one is tricky, and it really just revolves around the Unstoppable lore card…

The language and various wordings used for “retreat” throughout the game has always caused headaches and frustration. However, I believe I have an answer regarding this one.

Honestly, a compelling argument can be made for either side of this issue, which ultimately means the matter comes down whatever the original intent was. Since the members who worked on this are no longer with the company, we’ll just have to wager a guess and decide on a ruling.

With that said, it is our belief that the inclusion of the second bullet point for “Unstoppable” on pg. 10 of the Reference Book (the one that states, “The player cannot perform the counter if the target unit was forced to retreat one or more hexes before being eliminated.”) was specifically added to address the event in which the target unit would physically retreat (read “move”) one or more hexes due to a retreat.

So yes, in the event that a unit is forced to retreat into an enemy unit or impassable terrain and would be eliminated, it is still possible to play Unstoppable. However, in regards to the Obscene, it must follow the rules for “Counter” when performing both counters. If the first counter with Ferocity causes the Daqan unit to retreat, then the second counter from Unstoppable cannot be resolved because the unit is no longer adjacent.

Hope this helps clear things up!

Thanks, Garrett, also for entering the answer in the FAQ thread!