In Sea of blood encounters:

Can a flying hero (Zyla) move through water without having to pay the fatigue/wounds?

Since water isn't an obstacle (it's terrain), and since heroes can't have soar, I suspect the terrain effects them normally. Is that correct?

It doesn't make the slightest bit of sense that a flying creature can ignore water underground but not above ground, but that does appear to be correct by a strictly technical reading of the rules, as the underground water markers are obstacles but the above ground water markers are props. Personally, I'd chalk it up to Kevin Wilson being a much better idea man than he is a rules lawyer, and let flying affect water in encounters.

Also, if you're going with a strictly technical reading then until they release errata for SoB Soar doesn't help a creature get past water either, as it's only mechanical effects are +4 range and protection from melee attacks. The stuff about Soar in the FAQ is specifically in the Road to Legend section.

James McMurray said:

Water is still an obstacle by a strict RAW reading.

Although it is not specified in SoB (how typical that FFG have made the exact same mistake as they did in RtL, covering everything together as 'Obstacles and Props' rather than clearly defining the new items), water is already previously specified as an obstacle.
There are now three types of water (in dungeon, shallow and deep) but since water has previously been defined as an obstacle they will automatically default to being obstacles unless otherwise specified.

Note also that under "Colliding with Obstacles" rocks, sandbars, reefs, whirlpools and shallows (which appear to be the same thing as 'water (shallow)' are referenced as obstacles, even though they are not defined anywhere (with the default exception of shallows) as such.

There are other 'props' which have this undefined problem but it would be, IMO (based on experience with similar things from RtL), safe to assume that barrels, pipe organs, sandbars, railings, scrub, reef, statues, weapon mounts, water and whirlpools are all obstacles.
The cage is tricky, and possibly needs a new definition.

The net effect is that Flyers can fly over water without suffering from its effects.

First: I agree completely. However, we're playing the "hyper technical anal retentive fliers can't fly over the sea" game here.

The water markers in default Descent are expressly defined as obstacles. The parts inventory calls them obstacles and the rules state that they are. However, those rules refer only to the water markers provided with the base Descent rules (after all, the others didn't exist, and only the base set's water tokens are pictured).

The water in Sea of Blood is not covered by the base Descent rules. It can't be, as it didn't exist at the time (indeed, the entire concept of "outside" didn't exist). A closer reading of the SoB rules did find a reference to shallows being obstacles on p. 29. No definition is given (that I could find) for deep water counters or the water that appears on the fold-out map.

So, if an overlord wished to look stupid and be a ****, he could definitely make a case that flying heroes cannot fly over deep water, as it is not classified as an obstacle. They could still fly over shallow water, and any water underground. Any group playing with such an overlord should point out that the Sea of Blood soar does not allow for safe travel over terrain, and thus cannot be used to avoid the hazards of shallow or deep water at all. With luck many dragons, manticores, and razorwings will drown before they can get an attack in.

James McMurray said:

<shrug>
Perhaps not hyper technical anal retentive enough!

Take a look at the titles of the various types of water in the SoB rules under props and obstacles etc pg38. All are named as " Water (subtype) ". Therefore, hyper-technical-anally-retentatively, they are still 'Water' and covered by the original definition of water as an obstacle. This is confirmed by the reference to shallows (which appear to be the same thing as Water (Shallow) as far as I can tell from the pdf rulebook) as an obstacle that can be collided with on pg29.

The argument that SoB water is not covered as it did not exist in DJitD is not a good one for two reasons.
First, 'Water' did exist in DJitD. That it now has additional subtypes that did not then exist is not important. The way the three types of water are titled on pg 38 makes it reasonably clear, if not explicit that they are all still 'water'. For those demanding explicits, it does (explicitly) name them as water, and does not explicitly claim that they are not water.
Second, Lava, Fog, Mud and lots of other things didn't exist in DJitD. They came from other expansions which are not required to play SoB. However, their rules from their own expansions are still part of the official Descent (sorry, gone word blank, there is a special word for this) Lore/Doctrine/Rules. So these things are officially obstacles even though neither DJitD nor SoB lists them as such.

It is possible to still construct an argument that SoB water is not an obstacle. However to do so you may not admit any obstacles except those mentioned in the FAQ, as even the obstacles covered by DJitD have been rewritten in SoB and or therefore no longer covered by their original rules. That makes you (general you, not specific!) not hyper-technical-anally-retentive, but an obstructionist moron since you are deliberately choosing a twisted interpretation that crashes the game engine over a more likely, more reasonable, also technically correct (more than one thing can sometimes be technically correct), more supported by evidence and logic interpretation that does not crash the game engine.

Further, the SoB rules for Water(shallow/deep) are contradictory anyway. They specifically block movement, and also give you rules for moving through them. Not 'exception' rules to blocking, but different rules.

From the sounds of things characters that can fly have no problem as it states on pg. 30 under Swimming "Unlike in dungeons, figures can move through water in encounters and on the first level of islands. There are two types of water outside-shallow and deep."

On a side note how many people actually play the game and put the rules to use rather than sit online reading them and just come up with probable outcomes and then say the rules are broken or don't work?

We play them a lot, though we don't have SoB yet. I've yet to see a rule that didn't work. There are a few we're not fond of, but we rescinded the only house rule we ever made.

James McMurray said:

+1
4 complete RtL campaigns, a solo RtL campaign and a partial campaign. That's several hundred hours of gaming I'd guess.

Of course, for 99.9% of us it just isn't possible to play SoB yet...

But in general the rules work exceptionally well. For the most part, the closer you look, the better they work. I think we basically only houserule pit LOS.
Most rule problems are created by inept rule lawyers deliberately trying to cause a problem, or by sloppy editing work by FFG (mostly solved by FAQ and largely fixable by reasonable people anyway).

Well I was just curious because it doesn't sound like there is much actual playing happening on these boards and more conjecture more than anything. This isn't me centering any one person out just an observation I have been following since the original boards.

CanadianPittbull said:

That sounds like conjecture!

Seriously though, I've caught myself doing this more often than not: in playing, there's usually little time for pontificating at length on any particular rule, and what we discuss here tend to be the odd corner cases. Also, in my group, we almost always just make the decisions we assume are correct, only to later read some forum armchair overlord's treatise about how wrong those decisions happened to be.

There was once where we ran up against a particular rule ambiguity: the crystal of tival. My buddy didn't use it because he assumed he couldn't use it except at the beginning of his turn, while I assumed that, as long as you put it on at the start of your turn, you could use it at any time. I was the OL, so I waited until he had opted to not use it and get his hero killed before pointing out that he totally could have used it earlier. Even then, it didn't come up until the game was over.

Almost all the rules problems I have are discovered while reviewing and prepping my play sessions, and not during any actual acts of gaming.

The only "rules" my group doesn't like are the ones that to *them* don't make sense. For example, they really don't like the Soar rules. It doesn't make logical sense to them. Also, they don't like moving diagonally between two obstacles (since they tend to forget you can).. They also don't like tht water blocks Movement.

But for the most part, they're okay with most rules.

-shnar

Hey don't get me wrong I am all for legitimate discussions on valid rules inquires but I find it is just laziness on some peoples parts to not attempt to play out the game and rules for themselves and if they still are having issues then these boards are their best bet to find the answers they are looking for. If they can get them from people who have ACTUALLY played the game to those who are just "arm chairing it". Anyone new to the forums and looking for insight into the game will only come across a message board wrought with people belly aching about broken rules and how the game is so horrible or "doesn't make sense". What works in the REAL world doesn't necessarily work that way in the game mechanics and thus has to be done in a more abstract way.

I personally have never had a problem with the way Soar works so I don't see where the problem is and by the sounds of it I have chalked it up to the people who don't have a problem with it (or most of the rules in general) are actually playing the game and seeing these mechanics in play. And those who seem to gripe from the sidelines are the ones who just mutter BS for the sake of it.

The problem with Soar (at least in our group) is that it doesn't make sense to them. They're trying to apply logic to mechanics of a game. If the creature is 4 spaces "up", why can't I walk underneath him? If I'm shooting him, shouldn't the range be less than 4? I.e. if he's 4 up, and 3 away, that's a distance of 5 in a straight line from the hero to the Soaring creature, not 7 (i.e. going diagonally up, instead of over and up). etc.

They had similar problems with Taunt (they assumed it would make the creature move towards the Taunter, even though I thought I explained it was just the attacak) and don't get me started on Knockback...

I have a hard time telling them to "man up" and play the game as written, since if they stop liking the game, we'll never play it again, and I'd like to keep playing it. I'm really enjoying it. For the most part, they are too, but there is some frustration showing up here and there, and I'm trying to make things work.

-shnar

shnar said:

The same reason you shouldn't walk under pigeons...

Honestly this is from a mechanics position given that the figure it taking up physical space on the board so for ease of mechanics and not having to confuse the players and add convoluted mechanics of keeping track with Soar tokens and what not. It is just easier to make it abstract and have the flying critters take up the space they would normally take up whether flying or not. I guess that is where drawing the line between reality and trying to apply that to a boardgame which is a dungeon crawler and NOT a war simulator.. Also if you really had to you could use the scene from Jason and the Argonauts (1963) where Jason is fighting the harpies as an example of a melee fighter fighting a flying critter but I digress.

And your pigeon retort is awesome! LOL!

I don't like the soar rules, and I've used them a lot. I don't dislike them enough to try to get our group to change them but they're poorly defined (as evidenced by the number of questions devoted to them in the FAQ and the number of questions that crop up here about them), nonsensical (for reasons which should be able to go unspoken), and can create unwinnable scenarios (although it requires lieutenant encounters involving treachery to make them readily reproducable).

What happens in an encounter if a hero falls from the ship? Can he come back on his ship? On an ennemy ship?

Can he take off his armor at the start of the turn?

Can we add fatigue to rope jump or firing canons?

What happens in an encounter if a hero falls from the ship? Can he come back on his ship? On an ennemy ship?

Yes, though he may have to go over a railing.

Can he take off his armor at the start of the turn?

Yes.

Can we add fatigue to rope jump or firing canons?

No, as they're not attacks.

With one movement point a hero can jump back on a ship? wahou! what heroes!