Hi!

I have some doubts when indirect damage hits the table. Let's say my opponent plays Followers of Mork dealing me two indirect damage points, can I assign those damage points to a unit with only one health point left, or assign them to a section with 7 damage points and no developments? The rulebook says that damage inflicted outside the combat is treated in the same way it is treated during combat, this is, first you assign the damage to a unit, it is possible to assign damage in excess of the unit's health, for example, in order to kill a unit with thougness, after the damage is assigned it is dealt. Following this procedure, it will be possible to assign more indirect damage to a unit than the unit can resist. What do you think? is there any "official rule" against my thoughts?

So far nothing to prevent it officially. With "Surprise Assault" and "Bolt Thrower" more indirect damage dealers from the Path of the Zealot, this has been a hot topic of late. I think someone has sent in for a clarification.

shiba_nivengo said:

A minor point. The rules say "in a similar manner" not "in the same way". "Similar" means (to my knowledge) that a lot of the things are the same, but not all of it. Anyhow the rules does not speak of where the similarities ends. So i guess we have to wait for something official.

If it is the case, then "Repeater Bolt Thrower" and "Surprise Assault" are useless....

Or there is a combo to discover....

I mean if you can distribute X damage to a unit with 1 HP

smalldwarf said:

Just like Rock Lobber is useless if you can sacrifice a unit with 1 HP...

"Surprise Assault" definately is very situational, but "Repeater Bolt Thrower" can be the center of a deck : if you don't overdevelop your Battlefield Zone (say place only 2 developments there), you can acitivate it multiple times a turn for 2 indirect damages each, requiring that many 1 HP unit.

So can I assign 1 indirect damage to my unit with Toughness 1 and then cancel it?

Cr33z said:

This is definately a legal and wise move.

The "issue" with Indirect Damage is about "over-assigning" it to a target.

I mentioned this in the FAQ thread, because I wasn't wise enough to look down and notice here. I think with Indirect Damage and Combat Damage, the point of Who Is Assigning needs to be very carefully considered. If your opponent assigns extra damage, it's because they need to for some reason. If you assign it to your own guys, it's because you're dodging the possibility of assigning it elsewhere. Thus assigning it all to a 1HP guy is a pretty cheap move if it's legal.

I strongly suspect it's not legal, though.

I don't think it will effectively make difference. The indirect damage sources do not have to do large amounts of damage by default. Most if not all allow you to control (in one fashion or another) how much damage you are going to inflict. No reason to sit on it while you keep feeding developments or gain resources or what have you. Use it when you have enough to kill a unit, assume it will always be the most expendable, and just move on. If instead he assigns it to the toughest guy, then you just took him down a peg or two.

Its effectiveness is based on how you use it more than which way FFG rules, IMO.