I wonder if someone can point me to an uFAQ relevant for this hypothetical situation:

1. Syndrael as a knight uses Oath of Honor on the reanimate , choosing the ynfernal hulk as a monster adjacent to the reanimate .
2. As there are no empty spaces adjacent to the ynfernal hulk, according to the current ruling, Syndrael would be placed into the "closest empty space" and skip the attack part of Oath of Honor .

The question is what does "closest empty space" refers to? Would she be able to teleport to one of the spaces labeled with a "2" or does she need to end on a space labeled with a "1". Basically, can a player in this situation choose a blocked space and then look for the closest empty space from there (choice of "1" or "2") or does the rule of Oath of Honor kick in and the empty space closest to the original position of the knight must be chosen ("1s" only).

Seems to me that all spaces (1)s and (2)s are available fot the Knight. Looks naturally when following the text of the card. All of the blocked spaces(goblins and reanimate) are equally adjecent. I can't see any catch.

Oath of Honor states "closest empty space adjacent to the monster". All empty spaces are equally "close" to the monster, which indicates that the word "closest" refers to Syndrael, or chosen Hero

Edit: My first post! Hello

I had to look twice at your diagram to determine that the "1" and "2" were not ranges from the hulk. I don't know about a ufaq, but I can offer this nugget:

(long-winded answer alert. Short version: 1 and 2 are equivalent and indistinguishanle with respect to the text of oath of honor.)

Once it is clear that there are no empty spaces adjacent to the hulk, in my opinion the primary question is, "does oath work at all (is nearest empty an option)?" I am almost certain that answer is "yes".

Once that is out of the way, you're only left with interpreting what "closest empty space" means. Again, I think this is obvious based on monster reinforcement, placement of familiars, etc. It means to that while no space exists which perfectly follows the criteria on the card (empty + adjacent to the selected monster) you may choose a space that most nearly meets these criteria (empty + minimum possible range from selected monster). EDIT: That sounded nice, but I think it's wrong.

If you suspect it means "closest space to the knight" I offer another hypothetical. numbered=empty, G=Goblin, H=hulk, K=knight, R=reanimate

2GHHGG1K
2GHHRG1

Now the "2" spaces are closer to the hulk than "1" spaces.

The range from the original space of the knight to the final space is irrelevant once the monster is selected . EDIT: No, it's not.

I do believe that if the knight started 2 spaces up (side of reanimate) oath would move him nowhere as his original space best satisfies the card requirements.

5 hours ago, Arachnomorph said:

Oath of Honor states "closest empty space adjacent to the monster". All empty spaces are equally "close" to the monster, which indicates that the word "closest" refers to Syndrael, or chosen Hero

Edit: My first post! Hello

Welcome to the board! The "closest" in Oath of Honor is actually in respect to the original position of the knight using Oath of Honor (not the hero adjacent to the monster). But as Zaltyre pointed out, this aspect is no longer relevant as soon as there are no empty spaces adjacent to the monster.

I may actually have to issue a retraction. I typed the response before coffee. I see the issue, now, and I think the logic behind my response actually works in favor of the "1" spaces being necessary instead of the "2" spaces. Oath of honor does actually specify that you have to choose the closest adjacent space, and that "closest" definitely seems to reference the original position of the knight. In my dreamlike state, I forgot that clause and remembered the card as, "remove and place in a space adjacent to that monster ."

"Closest" adds another selection criteria. The order of target space selection for Oath of Honor would then be:

1. Find another hero within 3 spaces who is adjacent to a monster. If none exists, you've got to stop here. If there are multiple, pick one (any one).

2. Determine if there are any spaces adjacent to that monster that are also empty.

2a. If there are, remove your figure from the map and place it in the space that is fewest number of spaces from your original position. (If multiple spaces are the same range from your original position, choose one).

2b. If there are not, repeat step 2 for spaces 1 additional range from that monster. Repeat this step as necessary until an empty space is found. After a space is found, perform step 2a.

3. Attack the monster with a melee weapon (if possible).

Thanks again. Do you feel confident that it can go into the CRRG or do we need confirmation by FFG?

Now that I'm awake, I'm 99% on your 1/2 diagram.

I'm less confident on the situation where the knight is currently occupying the nearest empty space as there is some ambiguity as to whether it's the closest space before he's removed, or after.

you could interpret "place your hero figure in the closest empty space to that monster" as closest to you at which point, 1's would be the only option. I read the card carefully and it seems to me that it is the closest space to you. I have had a knight play with this ruling.

I changed the entry for Oath of Honor in the CRRG:

Oath of Honor
The Knight performs the following:
1. Choose another hero within 3 spaces that is adjacent to a monster. Choose a monster adjacent to the hero.
2. Place the Knight in the closest empty space from his current position that is adjacent to the chosen monster. If there is no adjacent empty space, place the Knight in an empty space within 2 spaces of the chosen monster that is closest to the Knight's current position.
3. If possible perform an attack against the chosen monster.

Any corrections or suggestions how to further improve clarity?

Step 2 is not as general as it could be (it could hypothetically extend to an arbitrary number of spaces) but since this is a game and not code, you're all set. I have never seen all spaces within 2 of a monster be filled and still had it be a candidate for oath.

Yes, that's what I thought, too. I think even if this happens, players should be able to get the general principle.

What about this: since there are no empty spaces adjacent to the Ynfernael Hulk, Oath of Honor cannot be used with that monster. Pick the Goblin next to the Reanimate instead.

Exactly, I agree with lucaster. I think you are overlooking the part about moving "the hero figure in the closest empty space ADJACENT to the monster AND perform an attack".

If you can't move to a space adjacent AND attack, then you can't use OoH against that target ( I think that's the point of the Oath.. )

2 hours ago, Hasnatir said:

Exactly, I agree with lucaster. I think you are overlooking the part about moving " the hero figure in the closest empty space ADJACENT to the monster AND perform an attack".

If you can't move to a space adjacent AND attack, then you can't use OoH against that target ( I think that's the point of the Oath.. )

I see where you're coming from, but I disagree. There are numerous examples of figure placement being allowed even when all spaces in the allowed range are blocked. Familiars may be summoned 2 spaces away if all adjacent spaces are blocked, monsters may be reinforced on other tiles if they will not fit on their reinforcement tile...

There is also precedent while placing figures for the player to be free to make his choice first, and then place in the closest empty space. For example, when reinforcing monsters:

Rules question: If a monster may reinforce on one of two locations, but one of those locations is blocked, must the OL place the monster on the unblocked area instead of placing it on the "closest available space" next to the other, or may he choose where to place?

Answer: The overlord may choose the location and then place on the closest empty space.

Thanks,
Nathan Hajek

Oath of Honor takes place sequentially- you choose a hero with a monster adjacent to him, then place your figure adjacent to that monster. First, I'd claim that in the absence of that goblin (let's say it's another hero occupying that space) Oath of Honor would work on the hulk even though it's not adjacent (similarly to the rules about familiar placement or monster reinforcement). Second, I'd claim that the goblin's presence has no impact on the validity of the hulk as a target for the ability, since (as shown by the response above) the choices can be made independently of the other options.

I agree with you, but that's about "figure placement/spawning".
Here, you're not trying to place another figure on the map, or just move someone.
What ( I think ) OoH lets you do is move adjacent to the enemy you want to attack, AND then attack. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any "and" in the sentence.
Condition 1 has to be met in order to apply condition 2 ( attack the enemy ). Condition 2 isn't optional. It doesn't say "you can". It says "and perform an attack with a Melee weapon".

English isn't my mother language, so excuse me if something isn't properly explained

Don't worry, you're communicating fine. I still disagree with your conclusion. The issue of resolving a card incompletely has also been addressed by FFG, with a clear stance that it is allowed. For example, in FAQ v1.6 (page 3) there's a specific question about Advance (another skill of the Knight) asking whether "Advance" can be used without performing the attack- it can.

Just in case you're worried that's only specific to that skill, I followed up the posting with another question:

Rule Question:
Is a player allowed to only partially perform an ability/ skill action? There is precedent for exhausting the Knight's "Advance" to move without performing any attack, but there are several other cases that I'm not sure about. For example:
The Blood Ape's "Leap Attack"- may he move but choose not to attack any figures?
The Geomancer's "Terracall"- may he exhaust this card without summoning a new stone if he is at his limit- or if he isn't?
The Beastmaster's "Changing Skins-" can he exhaust the card to gain surge benefits without attacking a monster near his wolf, or if there is no monster near his wolf?

Broadly speaking, players may choose to not perform parts of a skill or ability while still performing the other parts. Requiring that each part is performed leads to a lot of timing questions and confusion about resolution, so the ruling really needs to be this way. However, players should use common sense when using this general ruling. For example, the player cannot use Stalwart to move and attack, but then not be defeated. In general, players should assume that they can skip sections of abilities and skills. In the rare case where doing so (while using common sense) is questionable, that may require a ruling.

Thanks,
Nathan Hajek

I see. It's pretty much the same as "Leap Attack".
It's kind pointless to name them "something attack", if you can still skip the attack, but that's just the way FFG works with ruling I guess.

1 hour ago, Hasnatir said:

I see. It's pretty much the same as "Leap Attack".
It's kind pointless to name them "something attack", if you can still skip the attack, but that's just the way FFG works with ruling I guess.

Believe me, I would appreciate it as much as anyone if ability and rule wording was more precise. I hope you found this productive. I did

For sure I did, thank you.
I just wanted to say that it sucks, that after spending a lot of $$$, we're left with some " Requiring that each part is performed leads to a lot of timing questions and confusion about resolution " BS. I wasn't implying you're ok with the ruling

True, but he didn't write the rules, he's making the decision to provide the clearer resolution based on how the game already works. A lot of Descent's "issues" are deep enough (or widespread enough) that they'd require a major overhaul to properly correct. It's a very enjoyable game, but it's not without its flaws.

You could issue a rewording of all skills/hero cards to be sure they use consistent terminology and clear wording... but realistically that's just not happening.

I find much of the reasong and lawyering in this thread to be a bit far-fetched.

You're going out of your way to shoehorn an ability in a situation at all costs, without first asking yourself whether the conditions that allow the ability to be applied subsist in the first place... or whether the thing you'r trying to do makes sense thematically.

The Pathfinder ACG has a nice rule that helps in situations such this: "Cards do what they say. Cards don't do what they don't say". It'd be useful to take inspiration from that sometimes.

We want to perform the ability with sequencial application? Well, the second step of the sequence cannot be performed.

Had there been another Hero in place of the Goblin Archer, it would have been the same: no empty spaces adjacent to the Ynfernael Hulk -> no deal.

Quote

I find much of the reasong and lawyering in this thread (and other similar) to be a bit far-fetched.

You're going out of your way to shoehorn an ability in a situation at all costs, without first asking yourself whether the conditions that allow the ability to be applied subsist in the first place.

I understand where you are coming from. However, when applying your "if conditions are not met, the effect does not happen"-stance to other situations, you run into serious problems. One example would be heroes blocking tiles where reinforcements are placed (=no reinforcements at all). That's why FFG ruled in the past that in all these situations figures are placed in the closest empty spaces instead.
I understand that the situation I described in the OP does not occur very often and might be far-fetched, but I find it interesting to discuss hypothetical situations like this with like-minded people. I am a rules geek, after all.

42 minutes ago, Sadgit said:

I understand where you are coming from. However, when applying your "if conditions are not met, the effect does not happen"-stance to other situations, you run into serious problems. One example would be heroes blocking tiles where reinforcements are placed (=no reinforements at all). That's why FFG ruled in the past that in many situations figures are placed in the closest empty spaces instead.

Some abilities, effects and skills in games are referred to as"situational" exactly because they require a specific situation to be used in. Oath of Honor is a situational ability. We can clearly see that the situation described by OP is unfit for Oath of Honor, so why the obstinacy?

The Quest Guide specifically states how to treat Reinforcements when spaces are blocked. Instead, (unofficial) rulings on the tone of " in general , when X, then Y" should be taken like grain of sault, because they are issued without pondering enough about specific instances or combinations nor future expansions, and may lead to nonsensical applications (hint: Counting through Spaces + Oath of Honor + Portcullis).

Like Zaltyre, I think that corresponding rules from the official rule/quest books are examples for the general principle:

"If an effect causes a figure to be placed in a blocked space, the figure is placed in the closest empty space instead."

Numerous uFAQs support this stance: placing familiars , figures being placed in blocked spaced by quest effects , etc.