Hey guys I have read all the manuals, FAQ and lots of forums trying to find the answer to this but can't find anything definitive. Here is my question.

In the dungeon #30 stuck in the middle some of the squares on the board will web you. So here is the scenario: I move a Melee character to a square that webs him. His turn ends cause he can't hit anyone. I then moved my ranged character through him to a square in front or adjacent to him. Is my ranged character now webbed?

The Overlord in my game is rulling since i moved through my webbed hero i spring the trap and get webbed adjacent to him. I assumed a web trap in the dungeon would work similar to a monster having grapple. If one hero is already grappled in that square then another hero can safely pass through that square without being grappled.

I tried to explain that as clearly as possible. Let know if you need more clarification. We plan to play again tomorrow so i would appreciate anyone's opinion before then.

Thanks.

Dred said:

I don't think you can safely assume that the web trap wouldn't work just because grapple doesn't work. That is a specific ruling for grapple, which does not mean that it automatically applies to web.
GLOAQ
Q)Can a fiendly figure move through a space occupied by another friendly figure that is currently being grappled?
A) Yes. Grapple can only hold one figure per space , however.
No mention of Web being restricted to only holding one figure per space.

The nearest thing that is analogous is also in the GLOAQ
Q) Can a Hero with Acrobat open a door in which both spaces in front of the door are occupied by creatures, as long as he does not end his turn in one of those spaces?
A) yes and b1) yes. If this causes a hero to become paralyzed or something due to a trap, simply have the Overlord move the hero to the nearest empty space of the overlord's choice.
That is pretty close to the exact same situation really, so as definitive as you are ever likely to find.
Unfortunately for you, it supports your OL's case, not yours.

Thanks for the response. I am fine with this ruling if everyone generally agrees with it. I just needed to know so as not to do it from now on. =) Do you think this is a question that should be clearly defined in the FAQ?

Aside from the grapple analogy i compared it to. my thinking was also that WEB as a trap can only effect one square as per the dungeon map. When a trap is sprung by a hero how can merely passing through the square that is occupied by another hero in the trap spring up in a square adjacent to it?

Also going along with this ruling of being webbed adjacent. Then it would possible for lets say dark charm being played on a hero with knockback, overlord would attack another hero making the knock back travel him through the web trap that was already occupied by a hero and then get webbed adjacent to him.

Again thanks for the response.

Dred said:

That actually wouldn't happen. The figure being knocked back actually passes over the space he goes through and ignore them. He is only affected by the space he lands in. (emphasis mine)

Knockback
After inflicting at least 1 damage (before applying the effects of armor) to a figure with a Knockback attack, the attacker may immediately move each affected target figure up to three spaces away from its current location. The figures must be moved to spaces that do not contain other figures or obstacles that block movement. The figure does not actually move through the first two spaces - it is knocked completely over them. As such, this “knockback movement” is not blocked by any intervening figures or obstacles (though a figure cannot be moved through a closed door or wall).

Thanks for the quick responses. Well i won't be making that mistake again. (webbed adjacent got my hero killed.) =) good to know on the knockback.

Dred said:

First, Web is not a trap, it is a Lingering Effect. It might result from a trap, but the web effect itself is unrelated to trapping in any way.

Second, there is a difference between Trap Cards and dungeon spaces that are 'trapped'* (have some hidden effect when moved through, although I don't think 'trap' is actually mentioned anywhere). Trap cards have specific triggers that they may be played on. The trigger for most 'space' traps (spiked pits and crushing blocks for example) is a hero moving into an empty space. That is the only reason that such traps can generally only 'hit' one hero. Effects generated by 'traps' (unofficial terminology) that are actually hidden effects on spaces are generated whenever a hero (or figure in some cases) moves into that space. There is no requirement for the space to be empty.
The trap didn't spring up in the adjacent space, it sprang up in the original space and the hero 'stumbled' into the adjacent space, still suffering the effects of the trap, purely because there isn't room for two heroes to coexist in the same space.

Things you should 'correct' in your thinking.
1. These are not traps, but 'hidden effects'.
2. The effects happen on the spaces designated, not on adjacent spaces - but since figures may not co-exist, the second figure is artificially transplanted by one space in order to maintain game integrity.

* Note that there is also another type of space - a space that may have Trap Cards played upon it as though it was something else (eg as though it was a chest or door). In this case the 'effect' is coming from the Trap Card, not the space, it is just that the space acts as an extra type of trigger for the Trap Card, additional to the trigger type written on the card.

I understand what your saying and the thinking process you mention. Now that i know the proper ruling i just won't move through heroes on such spaces. I think it was just a combination of me not wanting to be wrong and trying to logically justify my way out of it. =) I mean i accept Reach+Sweep for ignoring LOS. Even though you could throw out stuff like but in real life if he was swinging his weapon in a big circle it would come to a stop on the giant brick wall between me and the enemy and only do a 180 attack. =P I know silly argument but you see what i mean. =) Anyway i am cool i just want to play the game correctly which is why i been reading forums and faqs and have already caught a few things we were doing wrong 3 weeks ago when we first bought RTL.

Thanks for all help. I was thinking of starting a new topic to ask a new question. but maybe i will just ask it here since i think its a really easy one. I just played and had the following Scenario.

Two lieutenants on Riverwatch, there are 3 seige tokens on the town. We move from Tamriel with the Staff that lets us move two trails. Pass the one encounter check and get into Riverwatch. We attack one of the lieutenants. We kill him (overlords first time playing RTL too so he didn't think we could finish him in one round) its at this point we read the FAQ on the two lieutenants on one town rulling.

Its page 14 in the Erratta its not letting me copy paste for some reason. =P We read it and decided that we can't attack another Lieutenant same turn so end our turn 1 hero in each of the buildings. Now its his turn I thought he would have to attack us cause we were in the town and he could not raze it. But he said that he can role for the seige and not attack us. So he rolls a surge and the town is razed. He then moved his Lieutenant along the water trail to a dungeon.

Did we play that out correct? I wasn't sure but then i kinda agreed with it that it sounded fair.

Thanks again.. I will probably search the forums for more answers but it sounded ok to me.

Dred said:

You can attack both Lts.

RtL pg 10
If the heroes end their movement in the same area as a lieutenant, they may (but do not have to) attack that lieutenant (see “Encounters Involving Lieutenants” on page 16).
In this case they end their movement in the same area as Lt A and can attack Lt A. They also end in the same area as Lt B and can therefore attack Lt B.

FAQ pg14
Q: What happens when there are multiple lieutenants in the same space as the hero party? If the heroes (or theoverlord) choose to attack, are both lieutenants present at the same encounter ?
A: Each lieutenant is an entire encounter unto himself . If the heroes choose to attack a lieutenant when there are two or more lieutenants in the same space, they must choose one to encounter (it should really say "first" or "at a time" here to be clearer). The overlord may attack the hero party with one lieutenant at a time. Only if the heroes are still in the same location at the end of the encounter (if the heroes win or the lieutenant flees, or if the space in question is Tamalir) can the next lieutenant attack.
This question is asking about whether the two Lts work together in the same encounter, and is answered in that light only. If the heroes attack multiple Lts, they choose one of them to fight. That does not invalidate them choosing another to fight afterward (during the same turn), providing they are not TPKed during the first encounter (because a TPK ends your weeks action immediately so you can't make another attack).
It is a slightly confusing answer because it also partially addresses what happens if two Lts attack the heroes in the same turn (in separate fights) but does not address what happens when the heroes attack two Lts in the same turn (in separate fights).

As per FAQ pg 15...
Q: If heroes are attacking a lieutenant in a town, can they "visit" the shops, etc. before encountering the lieutenant or only after battles have resolved?
A: Only after battles have ended
...the heroes may not 'visit' town until they have fought all the battles that they intend to fight. Once you visist the town, that is it, no more battle this turn.

After that, you played correctly. Rolling for Sieges is in Step 2 of the Week and is independent of OL Actions. The seige is rolled for, the city is razed and then the OL gets to do actions in Step 3. For a Lt an action is either place a seige counter or 'move' (even if 'move' means staying in the same place to attack the heroes). Reread RtL pg10 carefully.

Corbon is right.

Besides, if the official rule were that you could attack only 1 Lieutenant per week, it would make the game impossible to win for the heroes against the Demon Lord (3 locations away from Tamalir), the Titan (3 also) and the Beastman Lord (4 locations away but he has 5 Lieutenants) if the OL plays to win, as he would be able to put into place an endless chain of Lieutenants going from his keep to Tamalir, and there would always be at least one Lieutenant remaining on the city to put a siege token or roll for the raze, even if the Lieutenants flee on the first turn of their encounters with the heroes every time.

While we're doing random RtL questions...

Can I, as an Overlord, play Power cards up to my maximum (i.e. 2 in copper mode), then draw a new one, decide I like it more than what I have in play, and play it over top of an old, thus discarding an old Power card of my choosing and putting the new one into play?

The fact that you can do this for monsters and traps - that is, you can remove an existing pit to play a pit trap if all of your tokens are used up, and can "kill" an existing beastman to spawn a new one if all your figures are used up - leads me to believe that you can do the same for Power cards. That said, there's nothing that I can find that addresses this situation or says that you can discard old Power cards to play new ones. The only relevant text I can find is:

"The overlord cannot have more than two Power cards in play during a given dungeon at once."

Cymbaline said:

IIRC there is disagreement on this.

I am of the school that the rule does not prevent you from playing a third OL card but once it is played then immediately comes into effect causing one to be discarded.
IMO "in play" is not the same as "playing a card" - it means 'active', which for a power card (continuous effect) is not until after it has been played (as opposed to , say, a space trap card - an instant effect) which acts immediately as it is played).

Others disagree - and have reasonable arguments, just not (IMO) definitive ones, any more than mine is.

Cymbaline said:

I scoured both RtL rulebook and FAQ with a search for "Power card", and could find no answer to your question. This might be something your group has to decide for itself (as a hero, I think I would usually be happy that my OL spends 16 to 25 threat to replace one of his Power cards, so why not?).

I found one quote that might indirectly be relevant though:

P. 17 of the rulebook: Before play begins in the dungeon, the overlord looks through his Overlord deck and places the cards listed beneath the portraits on the fortifying lieutenants’ cards into play for free. Furthermore, these cards do not count against the number of Power cards in play.

So if you have two Power cards in play and one is from a fortifying Lieutenant, you don't have to replace it; you can add a third one.

Thanks for the feedback; kind of nice to know I didn't miss it. I tend to agree with Corbon, and also sort of noted those words - "in play" versus "can play" or anything to that effect. I made my case to my players last time around, and they agreed with me given the monster / pit trap treatment. Was curious if there was an official ruling, though.

Ispher said:

Word.

Ispher said:

Agreed. That said, from my Overlord perspective, if I happen to get out Genius early in the dungeon, and can delay the heroes, I can rack up a ton of curse tokens. I can then play Hordes of the Things, slap down a few extra beastmen, and when they get to the final level of the dungeon, Hordes of the Things becomes useless (assuming it's a non-rumor one area dungeon, etc.), and I can happily replace it with DOOM! or what have you. Ditto for Brilliant Commander. Is it better to spend the 20 threat from DOOM! on flipping the spawn counter and throwing down more creatures? Maybe. Depends on a lot of things. But if you have excess threat and nothing good to spawn in your hand, overriding your own power card can be worth it, I think.

Doh! so we missed an opportunity to save Riverwatch. Oh well. We played this game twice. The first time we were just sorta feeling out the game didn't read through the rules so much got a lot of stuff wrong and overlord was kicking ass. Like 70 conquest to our 20 or something. So we restarted read through the rules much more thoroughly. and are still in the copper age. 47 conquest for heroes. 50 conquest for the overlord. Despite losing the city I think we are doing ok.. We'll see how the game changes when we get to silver.

Thanks for helping us out with the rules. Seems like its pretty hard to interpret every rule correctly on the first playthrough or just easy to miss things.