Stunned condition in the app

By The Mick, in Legends of the Alliance

24 minutes ago, Uninvited Guest said:

As I stated above, Stunned does not prevent a figure from attacking within it's activation because the LotA rules on Stunned Imperial figures are entirely new rules overriding the original.

<Lightbulb>. I see what you're getting at now and you're right: I was combining the new LotA rule with the portion of the Stunned condition from the base game that disallows attacks until the condition is discarded. This new rule has no such limitation and should be taken as a complete reprint of the text on the card from the base game. Doh!

To recap, and make sure we're all on the same page now:

"Move and Attack" is a single instruction, counting as both a move instruction and an attack instruction. However, the distinction doesn't matter much in this context because the new Stunned rule (which supersedes the rule printed on the Stunned condition card) places no limitations on attacks for the figure except that the figure cannot attack outside it's own activation while stunned. During the attack portion of a "Move and Attack" instruction the figure is still technically stunned, but nothing in the new rule prevents it from resolving the attack portion. It WOULD prevent, say, an Imperial Officer from giving a Stunned figure an attack or move action during the Officer's activation since that would be outside the Stunned figure's activation.

Edited by cdj0902
4 minutes ago, dwaynedauzat said:

Interesting. So if Stunned is changed to ONLY affect Imperial figures while "outside of their own activation," a stunned Nexu could still Pounce 6 spaces and Attack a Hero then Move 0 points to reposition? I have a feeling that this is not what was intended. I'd still like to see an official rules clarification on this.

RAW... Yeah that sounds right. And I agree that Pounce does create a need for rule clarifications. E-Webs are hard to affect with Stunned as well, but I'm kind of okay with that.

3 minutes ago, cdj0902 said:

<Lightbulb>. I see what you're getting at now and you're right: I was combining the new LotA rule with the portion of the Stunned condition from the base game that disallows attacks until the condition is discarded. This new rule has no such limitation and should be taken as a complete reprint of the text on the card from the base game. Doh!

To recap, and make sure we're all on the same page now:

"Move and Attack" is a single instruction, counting as both a move instruction and an attack instruction. However, the distinction doesn't matter much in this context because the new Stunned rule (which supersedes the rule printed on the Stunned condition card) places no limitations on attacks for the figure except that the figure cannot attack outside it's own activation while stunned. During the attack portion of a "Move and Attack" instruction the figure is still technically stunned, but nothing in the new rule prevents it from resolving the attack portion. It WOULD prevent, say, an Imperial Officer from giving a Stunned figure an attack action during the Officer's activation since that would be outside the Stunned figure's activation.

Agreed :)

12 minutes ago, cdj0902 said:

To recap, and make sure we're all on the same page now:

"Move and Attack" is a single instruction, counting as both a move instruction and an attack instruction. However, the distinction doesn't matter much in this context because the new Stunned rule (which supersedes the rule printed on the Stunned condition card) places no limitations on attacks for the figure except that the figure cannot attack outside it's own activation while stunned. During the attack portion of a "Move and Attack" instruction the figure is still technically stunned, but nothing in the new rule prevents it from resolving the attack portion. It WOULD prevent, say, an Imperial Officer from giving a Stunned figure an attack or move action during the Officer's activation since that would be outside the Stunned figure's activation.

Sounds correct, but feels bizarre.

1 minute ago, dwaynedauzat said:

Sounds correct, but feels bizarre.

I thought so at first too thinking about it from a Rebel perspective, but from the Imperial perspective it's not so weird because it's just like removing condition and then attacking. That said, repositioning after what would normally be two actions is a little odd.

Although I agree that this ruling seems reeeeeally weird at first glance, I think @Uninvited Guest is right in that it does sort of make sense when you compare it to what an imperial would do.

Take the two examples that we've been talking about here, E-Web and Nexu.

If I was an imperial with a stunned E-Web I would spend my first action to remove the stun and my second to attack. In the app version the E-web first attacks (even though it is still stunned) and then does a move of 0, which clears the stun. It seems like the order is all messed up but the result is the same (1 attack, no movement)

Ditto the Nexu. If I'm an imperial player I would use my first action to clear the stun and my second action to pounce. The app uses its first action to pounce (while stunned, which does feel weird) and then its second action to reposition, moving 0 and clearing the stun. Again the results are the same - the only real action that got performed was a single pounce.

So from what I can tell this is actually a pretty elegant design mechanic it terms of imitating what an actual imp player would do in the normal game. It just feels really weird when you first look at it.

Edited by ManateeX
3 minutes ago, ManateeX said:

If I was an imperial with a stunned E-Web I would spend my first action to remove the stun and my second to attack. In the app version the E-web first attacks (even though it is still stunned) and then does a move of 0, which clears the stun. It seems like the order is all messed up but the result is the same (1 attack, no movement)

This is the only thing I'm not so sure about. The E-web has Assault , so it could attack twice and end its activation still stunned. I don't quite remember how a typical turn for the E-web goes in the app though, so maybe I'm forgetting something about the process. Please correct me if I am.

15 minutes ago, ManateeX said:

Although I agree that this ruling seems reeeeeally weird at first glance, I think @Uninvited Guest is right in that it does sort of make sense when you compare it to what an imperial would do.

Take the two examples that we've been talking about here, E-Web and Nexu.

If I was an imperial with a stunned E-Web I would spend my first action to remove the stun and my second to attack. In the app version the E-web first attacks (even though it is still stunned) and then does a move of 0, which clears the stun. It seems like the order is all messed up but the result is the same (1 attack, no movement)

Ditto the Nexu. If I'm an imperial player I would use my first action to clear the stun and my second action to pounce. The app uses its first action to pounce (while stunned, which does feel weird) and then its second action to reposition, moving 0 and clearing the stun. Again the results are the same - the only real action that got performed was a single pounce.

So from what I can tell this is actually a pretty elegant design mechanic it terms of imitating what an actual imp player would do in the normal game. It just feels really weird when you first look at it.

I think what makes it feel weird is that, in the base game, the Imperial player would have to burn an action getting rid of the Stunned condition before they could move or attack with the figure. This would leave 1 action remaining to attack or move. Assault just means you can use both actions to attack, overriding the "one attack per Imperial" default rule.

A Stunned base-game E-Web would not be able to attack twice during it's activation, it wouldn't have the action economy to do so. In LotA a stunned E-Web has more action economy the way Stunned is written: it could indeed attack twice. It loses the movement points in a "Move and Attack", but can still attack twice. Stunned has reduced efficacy in LotA.

Edited by cdj0902

It seems like the following suggested rules change to the Stunned condition could have been a simple and straight forward approach to making it work with the App:

"An Imperial figure with the Stunned condition spends its first action to discard it."

This leaves the Imperial figure with one more action to spend on its first instruction such as, Move to Attack, Pounce, etc.

Why does it need to be any more complicated than this?

Edited by dwaynedauzat
12 hours ago, dwaynedauzat said:

It seems like the following suggested rules change to the Stunned condition could have been a simple and straight forward approach to making it work with the App:

"An Imperial figure with the Stunned condition spends its first action to discard it."

This leaves the Imperial figure with one more action to spend on its first instruction such as, Move to Attack, Pounce, etc.

Why does it need to be any more complicated than this?

Honestly this is probably the first "house rule" I'll start using in my games. The new Stunned rule adds needless complexity to a very simple base game rule, seems weird mechanically, and gimps the Stunned condition. These Descent-based games have too much "skirmish miniatures game crunch" as it is, and since they add unpredictable "effects" to unit activations each round it's already hard enough to form a skirmish-style strategy across multiple rounds anyway. Anything that simplifies rules is a good thing.

Perhaps writing the rule this way was supposed to make these figures even harder to deal with to make up for AI deficiencies as opposed to playing against a human Imperial player, but I'd rather keep the rules simpler and turn the difficulty up to Hard if that's the case.

While the imperials use the rules for the app for stunned I do not think they are mutually exclusive.

Original rule - A stunned figure can not perform an attack or voluntarily move.

App rule - Stunned: When an Imperial figure with the Stunned condition
would gain movement points from a Move instruction, it gains
no movement points instead. After an Imperial figure with the
Stunned condition resolves a Move instruction, it discards the
Stunned condition.
Stunned Imperial figures cannot attack or voluntarily exit their
space outside of their own activation.

The app rules doesn't specify that the figure can't attack but it should be implied based on the normal rule. The only way to remove the stun is to perform a move. Thus the figure must resolve a move first granting it 0 movement to remove the stun. Once the stun is removed it can complete the later part of the action (ie perform an attack). Based on this the nexu cannot pounce and the e-web does not get 2 attacks, because a move never happened.

If the first move and attack would remove the stun but not let you attack I believe you would still take that action over skipping it. The imp figure ignores the stun when determining its logic and applies the effect once it has selected the action.

Example

Stormtrooper

Move 3 and Attack X
Move 2 to Reposition 3
Move 6 to Respostion 3

StormTrooper Moves 0 and Attacks if able
the Moves 2 to Reposition 3

IG88

Move 1 and Attack X
Move 1 and Attack X
Move 3 to Reposition 3
Move 4 to Reposition 3

Given X is not in LOS but will be moving 1 space:
IG88 would Move 0 and not have LOS to attack
then IG88 would Move 1 and then attack X

This is why i dont think you skip the attack actions if they cant gain LOS but normally would if not for the stun. This way IG88 doesn't ignore his attacks and just move when he could move to be in LOS.

E-Web

Attack figure X
Attack figure X
Move 1 to Attack figure X
Move 1 to Reposition 6
Move 3 to Respostion 6

If moving 1 space would put the E-Web in LOS he would Move 0, Attack if possible, then Move 1. Playing it this way the E-Web doesnt ignore the stun and attack twice.

Nexu

Pounce figure X
Pounce figure Y
Move 3 to Reposition 4
Move 8 to Respostion 4

Based on the rules I would think you just perform the moves, however I believe this is something they overlooked in the wording due to it not moving. The spirit of the rule I believe you would perform one pounce only. The nexu should really have its first action be to discard a stunned condition since the logic will skip if if the figure does not have the status.

On 1/4/2018 at 0:11 AM, dwaynedauzat said:

"An Imperial figure with the Stunned condition spends its first action to discard it."

While much more simple it has a very different effect. A Storm Trooper could have LOS to a target and completely skip that action. It instead takes the move away from that action making it much weaker, but still gives the ST the ability to perform the attack if able.

4 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

While much more simple it has a very different effect. A Storm Trooper could have LOS to a target and completely skip that action. It instead takes the move away from that action making it much weaker, but still gives the ST the ability to perform the attack if able.

I'm not sure that I follow what you are saying. With my suggested rules change the Stormtrooper would basically only get one action to perform an instruction. Nothing would be skipped. It loses its first action by having to discard it's Stunned condition. Then it performs it's second action to execute the first instruction in it's list, which is "move to attack." If there are no legal targets then it would skip that first instruction and perform the next one, being "move to reposition." Then it would end it's activation.

Of course this is only a suggested rules change. :rolleyes:

5 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

While much more simple it has a very different effect. A Storm Trooper could have LOS to a target and completely skip that action. It instead takes the move away from that action making it much weaker, but still gives the ST the ability to perform the attack if able.

I reread your post and it made more sense to me the second time. Yes, it would have a very different effect.

RAW, the ST would stay put, attack, then reposition.

With my suggested rule, the ST would move closer to attack, then end its activation in a vulnerable position.

I suppose the difference would be a weaker (farther) attack with a better repositioning vs. a better (closer) attack with a bad positioning.

:unsure:

17 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

The app rules doesn't specify that the figure can't attack but it should be implied based on the normal rule.

(The discussion got a little more detailed on pg 1, but here's a TL;DR)

The new rule is in a section titled Rule Changes for Legends of the Alliance. The normal rule doesn't apply. So the Nexu can pounce (compare to an IP playing - he/she would remove stun then pounce, it just occurs in the reverse order in the app), and the E-web can attack twice (...I got nothing for this, possibly an oversight in the rules).

17 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

While much more simple it has a very different effect. A Storm Trooper could have LOS to a target and completely skip that action. It instead takes the move away from that action making it much weaker, but still gives the ST the ability to perform the attack if able.

I think you might have misunderstood (I know I did the first time I read the post). The way I took it initially was that the Stun was affecting the first instruction, but I think the way @dwaynedauzat meant it was that the figure removes the Stunned condition and then begins its instructions.

Edited by Uninvited Guest

I guess it's a case of "we must unlearn what we have learnt" since Stunned condition is redefine in the App rule. Like @Uninvited Guest points out, it's a new rule not an edit to the original game rule. A stunned imperial figure cannot attack outside of its activation. Besides that, there is no mention in the app rule book about a stunned imperial figure not being able to attack during its activation.

Regarding the base activation instructions, the way I understand the stunned rule is as follow :

Move to engage : I feel it would be skipped most of the time since a stunned imperial figure won't be able to engage (gain 0 movement point from the stunned condition) unless it is already adjacent to the target it must engage in which case it does not skip the instruction even if it did not move. (App rule book page 15 about skipping the move to engage instruction : "If the figure cannot move adjacent to any target, this instruction is skipped.").

Move toward : From this instruction, the imperial figure would gain 0 movement point and discard the stunned condition. This condition is not skipped no matter what according to the app rule book page 15 : "If the figure is already adjacent to its target or cannot move closer to its target, it does not skip this instruction".

Move to reposition : Similarly to the previous instruction, a stunned imperial figure would gain 0 movement point in it's attempt to reposition and then discard the stunned condition. This instruction will not be skipped (App rule book page 16 : "If the Imperial figure cannot move far enough to satisfy the reposition value, it does not skip this instruction")

Move to attack : if an attack action would instruct an imperial figure to gain X movement points and attack, the imperial figure would instead gain 0 movement point (then it would discard the stunned condition) and it would attack if it has line of sight to its target. If it does not have line of sight and no valid target, then this attack action would be skipped instead (so imperial figure would still be stunned since the attack action was skipped app rule book page 16 "If it cannot move to attack any target, it skips this instruction").

So move toward and move to reposition are instructions that will always permit removal of the stunned condition. Move to engage and move to attack will permit removal of the stunned condition in certain circumstances otherwise you skip to the next instruction without discarding the stunned condition.

So an eweb with the following list of instruction would be able to attack twice while remaining stunned until the rebel figures move out of line of sight of the eweb, in which case, at the start of its activation it would skip the first 3 instructions and attempt a Move 1 to Reposition 6. Because of the stunned condition it would gain 0 movement point and discard the stunned condition, ending the first action. Then it would proceed to Move 3 to reposition 6.

Attack figure X
Attack figure X
Move 1 to Attack figure X
Move 1 to Reposition 6
Move 3 to Respostion 6

@IanSolo_FFG Very well explained.

Edited by dwaynedauzat
8 hours ago, Uninvited Guest said:

The new rule is in a section titled Rule Changes for Legends of the Alliance. The normal rule doesn't apply.

I noticed this and thought about it when writing it and you may be right, I questioned it myself. The part that made me think both rules work together is the new rules say nothing about the status itself (except for the part outside their turn), just how an imperial can remove it. This makes me think the core rule still in effect as this change is in addition to it.

Its really something that needs to be clarified by FFG with some examples. Its hard to believe that the E-Web can ignore it until you move out of LOS. As for the Nexu it really doesnt matter as the pounce is either before or after the stun is removed.

My example of IG88 above is really where I think it could really hurt the AI activation. If he has to skip both attacks because he has no LOS when he could attack with the 2nd one that's pretty big.

18 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

The part that made me think both rules work together is the new rules say nothing about the status itself (except for the part outside their turn), just how an imperial can remove it. This makes me think the core rule still in effect as this change is in addition to it.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean. During their activation when they would gain MP they gain 0 and remove the condition. That’s not “how it’s removed,” that’s what it does. The way it reads is that removing it is part of the effect.

The appendix is rule changes, not rule supplements. That’s what the rest of the rulebook is for. When you read the rest of that section everything else is very clearly overriding.

18 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

My example of IG88 above is really where I think it could really hurt the AI activation. If he has to skip both attacks because he has no LOS when he could attack with the 2nd one that's pretty big.

Again, think about it with an IP involved. The IP would remove the condition with the first action and not have LOS to attack with the second.

18 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

Its hard to believe that the E-Web can ignore it until you move out of LOS.

I agree there and I would like to see that either confirmed or clarified, but those are rules as written. Personally I like the challenge.

On 1/13/2018 at 12:32 PM, Uninvited Guest said:

The appendix is rule changes, not rule supplements. That’s what the rest of the rulebook is for.

How the imperial figure removes the status is the change. It says nothing about changing how the status effects the figures so we should assume it has not changed.

On 1/13/2018 at 12:32 PM, Uninvited Guest said:

Again, think about it with an IP involved. The IP would remove the condition with the first action and not have LOS to attack with the second.

That's not what my scenario was tho.

A normal IP would remove it with the first action, use the 1 MP and then attack with the second action (notice the app is basically using the Focus to Kill skirmish upgrade on IG88 thus the free movement).

My interpretation of the rule IG88 would perform the action Move 1(now 0) and attack(no LOS) then perform the next step (which is identical) and Move 1 and Attack target. My interpretation does basically the same as the IP would.

Other's interpretation IG88 would skip the first move attack because he cant gain line of sight, then the next because he cant gain line of sight, then perform just the moves moving 0 and then X.

Edited by Vazzucious
17 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

How the imperial figure removes the status is the change. It says nothing about changing how the status effects the figures so we should assume it has not changed.

Again, yes it does. Page 10, under Conditions states "Note that the effects of some conditions have changed as described in Appendix 1 on page 21." Emphasis mine.

17 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

That's not what my scenario was tho.

A normal IP would remove it with the first action, use the 1 MP and then attack with the second action (notice the app is basically using the Focus to Kill skirmish upgrade on IG88 thus the free movement).

My interpretation of the rule IG88 would perform the action Move 1(now 0) and attack(no LOS) then perform the next step (which is identical) and Move 1 and Attack target. My interpretation does basically the same as the IP would.

Other's interpretation IG88 would skip the first move attack because he cant gain line of sight, then the next because he cant gain line of sight, then perform just the moves moving 0 and then X.

My point about the IP was more in regards to a normal campaign in which they wouldn't have Focused on the Kill, but you have a fair point regarding the movement. Still though, we can't really apply rules that aren't there.

That said, the second to last sentence under the "Move X to Attack" section on page 16 states "If it cannot move to attack any target, it skips this instruction." This should be applicable as it's reads as though it is in regards to what the figure can do, as opposed to what it is instructed to do.

Don't get me wrong, I like you're way better. It's just another funky thing like they E-web.

18 hours ago, Vazzucious said:

How the imperial figure removes the status is the change. It says nothing about changing how the status effects the figures so we should assume it has not changed.

That's not what my scenario was tho.

A normal IP would remove it with the first action, use the 1 MP and then attack with the second action (notice the app is basically using the Focus to Kill skirmish upgrade on IG88 thus the free movement).

My interpretation of the rule IG88 would perform the action Move 1(now 0) and attack(no LOS) then perform the next step (which is identical) and Move 1 and Attack target. My interpretation does basically the same as the IP would.

Other's interpretation IG88 would skip the first move attack because he cant gain line of sight, then the next because he cant gain line of sight, then perform just the moves moving 0 and then X.

I understand that you refer to using IG-88 skirmish fix in campaign mode. However, like @Uninvited Guest mentioned Focus on the Kill is not a legal attachment card for the original campaign mode (unless of course, you house rule it in). Thus, an IP activating IG-88 without having line of sight would remove stunned condition (first action) and then move into position for next round. This is exactly what the app will instruct you to do and I think it make sense.

Let's suppose that IG-88 is not stunned and is 2 spaces away (or 2 movement points away to make it more simple) from having line of sight to a valid target. In that case, would you move 1 to attack (but you would not attack because you are still 1 space away from having a valid target) and then move 1 to attack as your second action? That would go against the rule pointed out by @Uninvited Guest about "move to attack" instruction being skipped if you can't draw line of sight.

20 minutes ago, IanSolo_FFG said:

I understand that you refer to using IG-88 skirmish fix in campaign mode. However, like @Uninvited Guest mentioned Focus on the Kill is not a legal attachment card for the original campaign mode (unless of course, you house rule it in).

Yeah I totally understand this. I was more talking if a player was selecting the logic in the order given in the App compared to the logic selecting it. The logic doesn't think a step ahead, but a player would.

2 hours ago, Uninvited Guest said:

Again, yes it does. Page 10, under Conditions states "Note that the effects of some conditions have changed as described in Appendix 1 on page 21." Emphasis mine.

I agree it changes the stunned effect but it does so like this. The change is purely to discard the card for the Imp Fig since they don't have the action to spend, the attack and exit your space restriction remain.

Stunned_595_ffflogog_whatermark_cc.jpg.1e4ebccba77f1045ea9b687ead38b421.jpg

This may be the part where the Imperial Rule comes into effect for the IG88 example. I know if i use the first move/attack to discard stun I can attack with the second move/attack. The player would choose the most punishing option on how to remove the stun. Even tho I do not gain LOS i know i can attack with the next action and that is the most punishing move.

I know we have been back and forth on this, and I don't want to be a jerk bringing it back up. My intentions are good and I appreciate your input on this. I Just want to make sure I and everyone else are understanding the rules correctly.

Edited by Vazzucious
47 minutes ago, Vazzucious said:

I agree it changes the stunned effect but it does so like this. The change is purely to discard the card for the Imp Fig since they don't have the action to spend, the attack and exit your space restriction remain.

Stunned_595_ffflogog_whatermark_cc.jpg.1e4ebccba77f1045ea9b687ead38b421.jpg

This may be the part where the Imperial Rule comes into effect for the IG88 example. I know if i use the first move/attack to discard stun I can attack with the second move/attack. The player would choose the most punishing option on how to remove the stun. Even tho I do not gain LOS i know i can attack with the next action and that is the most punishing move.

I know we have been back and forth on this, and I don't want to be a jerk bringing it back up. My intentions are good and I appreciate your input on this. I Just want to make sure I and everyone else are understanding the rules correctly.

It is an interesting discussion!

I bring back your previous example on IG88

On 1/11/2018 at 3:34 PM, Vazzucious said:

IG88

Move 1 and Attack X
Move 1 and Attack X
Move 3 to Reposition 3
Move 4 to Reposition 3

Given X is not in LOS but will be moving 1 space:
IG88 would Move 0 and not have LOS to attack
then IG88 would Move 1 and then attack X

This is why i dont think you skip the attack actions if they cant gain LOS but normally would if not for the stun. This way IG88 doesn't ignore his attacks and just move when he could move to be in LOS.

If you would play against an IP he would remove stunned condition and then he would have to move to be in position to attack next round since he doesn't have line of sight after removing stunned. The app would do something very similar. Since IG88 is stunned and does not have line of sight, it would skipp the first 2 instructions (Move 1 to Attack X). Then it would Move 0 to Reposition 3. After that it would discard the stunned condition. Its second action would be Move 4 to reposition 3, which is basically similar to a real IP. I'm curious why you think the app IG88 should be able to attack compared to the traditional one IP vs all game?

I think the Imperial rule enters the scene when you have a choice (two valid rebel targets at the same distance for example). In that case, you select the one that is the most punishing to the rebels. Here, I don't think you have a choice. Per the rules, you cannot Move 0 to Attack X if you do not have line of sight to X (after moving). You have to skip this instruction.

Edited by IanSolo_FFG

But is comparing it to an IP the best bar? You have to take into account the logic and abilities for enemies in the app are better to compensate for the lack of a human player. I don't think its fair to compare what an IP would do with campaign rules/deployment stats vs what a real person would select when doing the logic of the app. A trooper with LOS can Move 0 & remove Stun + Attack, then reposition 3. That is almost a full turn in the normal campaign and more than what an IP could possibly do if stunned. This is a handicap to make the app more difficult.