9 hours ago, SpiderMana said:

Another plausible situation is if you're in AE and block for a friend using an Ally, if the boost card does a damage to your Ally and finishes them off before the attack goes through, your AE is the new target of the attack.

This is the way we play it, but I just realized, this isn't actually RAW (unless I can't find it and it is there somewhere). I'm now wondering if there has been any official ruling to say that if an Ally defends, and is defeated by the boost ability, that the attack is no longer considered defended by the Ally.

3 hours ago, DarthofZA said:

This is the way we play it, but I just realized, this isn't actually RAW (unless I can't find it and it is there somewhere). I'm now wondering if there has been any official ruling to say that if an Ally defends, and is defeated by the boost ability, that the attack is no longer considered defended by the Ally.

What happens if a boost card like Concussive Blast kills an ally with one remaining health left? Is the attack undefended?

If a defending ally is defeated by a boost card effect, then the rest of the attack must be resolved as undefended.

-[Marvel Champions LCG Designer] Caleb Grace

https://hallofheroeslcg.com/official-ffg-rulings/

6 hours ago, IceHot42 said:

Yep the later is what happened with Klaw III. BP Ally (Quake) had to block for Dr strange as he drew a second attack off Gang Up. Concussive Blast dealt one to all my characters and left the rest of the attack undefended. Klaw then drew a 3 Boost and BP went from 6 health in AE to 0. (*note apparently the Rule Book entry for undefended attacks has been changed from Hero to Identity )

I’m pretty sure an undefended Attack goes back to the original target as if it hadn’t been defended in the first place (in this case, Dr Strange).

26 minutes ago, FearLord said:

I’m pretty sure an undefended Attack goes back to the original target as if it hadn’t been defended in the first place (in this case, Dr Strange).

No, as soon as you declare Black Panther's Ally as the defender, the new target of the attack is the Black Panther player. It can't revert to a different player, but if the Ally dies, the Identity controlling the now-dead Ally takes the hit.

Thank you for all yours answers.

31) I checked the HallofHeroes website that @SpiderMana gave us about (didn't know about it It's in my favourites now, thanks for that !).

and I found this in the erratas :

Quote

Followed (Captain America 32) Should read:
“Interrupt: When attached scheme is defeated, deal 4 damage to an enemy.” (Changed “Response” to “Interrupt”.)

So in this case my problem has already been asked in a previous question of mine : What's the clear difference between Interrupt and Response ?

By the rules (v 1.3),

and

So, if I'm smart enough, Interrupt does happen before the effective resolution of the triggering condition. And Response does happen after the triggering condition has been resolved.

But somehow, with that Followed card, why did they change response by interrupt ? Because to me time does not actually stop... What I usually do is emptying all the menace tokens, then I apply the 4 damages and finally I discard the defeated side-scheme. But if I take Interrupt definition to its core, I declare a thwart action or card ability that would empty a side-scheme card, then I apply the 4 damages and finally I effectively empty the side-scheme and discard it.... Is that it ? Where as if they had kept the Response I would do as I described first. Is that right ?

Side-question : Can someone give me an example of the first part of the last bullet in the definition of Interrupt : " If an interrupt changes (via a replacement effect) or cancels an imminent triggering condition, further interrupts to the original triggering conditions cannot be triggered." ?

Thanks !

3 hours ago, Elrad said:

But somehow, with that Followed card, why did they change response by interrupt ? Because to me time does not actually stop... What I usually do is emptying all the menace tokens, then I apply the 4 damages and finally I discard the defeated side-scheme. But if I take Interrupt definition to its core, I declare a thwart action or card ability that would empty a side-scheme card, then I apply the 4 damages and finally I effectively empty the side-scheme and discard it.... Is that it ? Where as if they had kept the Response I would do as I described first. Is that right ?

So as I understand it, the reason for that errata is because Followed wouldn't technically work as a response? The side scheme would discard itself before the response could trigger, leaving Followed with no target to trigger off of? I'm not entirely sure, it's a kindof weird timing issue on that one.

3 hours ago, Elrad said:

Side-question : Can someone give me an example of the first part of the last bullet in the definition of Interrupt : " If an interrupt changes (via a replacement effect) or cancels an imminent triggering condition, further interrupts to the original triggering conditions cannot be triggered." ?

So, for example, if you're playing Risky Business... Norman Osborn can be stunned, in which case the status effect will interrupt his attempt to "attack," right? Since the Stunned status cancels his attempt to attack, Norman's forced interrupt doesn't trigger and take counters off of Criminal Enterprise. I think that's what that portion of the rules is getting at.


While we're at it, I might as well plug the discord . If you prefer the forums, that's fine, but there's a rules channel on there with several people who will get pinged whenever you ask a question, and they tend to know what they're talking about a little better than I do 😂 (I get most of my rules knowledge from following along on that channel). The guy who runs the Hall of Heroes site is on there, too, which is how he keeps up with all of the rules questions the rest of us are submitting to the devs. They're super friendly about rules questions, too, so no need to worry you're asking too many questions.

3 hours ago, Elrad said:

So, if I'm smart enough, Interrupt does happen before the effective resolution of the triggering condition. And Response does happen after the triggering condition has been resolved.

This is exactly the difference, so let’s look at Followed (Interrupt) and Followed (Response).

1. Play card that removes threat / declare basic thwart action.
2. Pay costs.
3. Resolve effects, removing threat from side scheme which has Followed attached, leaving it with zero threat.
4. Side scheme is defeated, which is the triggering condition for Followed.
5. Interrupt occurs here: Followed (Interrupt) resolves.
6. Defeat of side scheme resolves: side scheme and all attachments are discarded.
7. Response occurs here: Followed (Response) would resolve... but it got discarded when the side scheme defeat was resolved so it is now out of play and has no effect on the game.

This is the reason it was changed: the card doesn’t actually work as a response because it tries to resolve after it has been discarded. In this case I imagine everyone was playing it as intended whether or not they realised there was an error.

3 hours ago, Elrad said:

Side-question : Can someone give me an example of the first part of the last bullet in the definition of Interrupt : " If an interrupt changes (via a replacement effect) or cancels an imminent triggering condition, further interrupts to the original triggering conditions cannot be triggered." ?

Suppose we have the first player with Get Behind Me! in hand and the other three players have a copy of Energy Barrier in play. The first player draws Concussive Blast as their encounter card. If the first player were to play the interrupt Get Behind Me! then the other three players could not use the interrupt on their Energy Barriers.

I also think that if you have two Energy Barriers in play and draw Concussive Blast then you could only use the interrupt on one of them, because after the effect of the interrupt on the first Energy Barrier resolves you would no longer be taking damage. However, I’m not 100% certain of that example. Perhaps someone else can confirm?

16 minutes ago, Assussanni said:

I also think that if you have two Energy Barriers in play and draw Concussive Blast then you could only use the interrupt on one of them, because after the effect of the interrupt on the first Energy Barrier resolves you would no longer be taking damage. However, I’m not 100% certain of that example. Perhaps someone else can confirm?

Correct. I'm not sure of the details (You might be able to queue up the trigger for the second energy barrier?), but one way or another by the time you get to the second energy barrier, it doesn't have any damage to trigger off of.

32) regarding Espionnage :

Do we agree that this card doesn't prevent surge from happening ? Because written like that, I tend to think that you simply draw two cards and then let the surge effect resolve itself.

PS : with all these questions and the rate of mistakes made in applying the rules, I definitely see how complex this game is. You play one step of any sequence wrongly and you can finish on your knees... or being cheating as **** :-D

Espionage doesn't say cancel, so it doesn't cancel. You just draw 2.

thanks

Two really basic question I'm sometime asking again and again :

33) When you draw "shadow of the Past" and have to put in play the nemesis character engaged against your identity and put the rest of its deck in the encounter discard pile, what happens to the Nemesis when you defeat them ? Do they go to the Encounter discard pile ? I've always played like this so I hope I hadn't to put the nemesis character out of play after defeating it...

34) what is the real purpose of Obligation cards ? I mean, yes they hinder you by giving you two options : wether you go back to AE and you engage it in order to pu that obligation out of play for the rest of the game or you apply a penalty and only discard the card.

I don't really see how much of a hinderance it is. Yes you lose opportunities to use you hero on your turn because you would need cards to ready it. And sometimes (mostly with additional heroes) you have some nasty negative effects to endure in order to discard that card, but beside that, I fail to see any other purpose to that type of card, even if the entry in the rule book let imagine that one identity can have multiple obligations, etc.

35) Regarding Norman Osborn When He's supposed to attack we place 1 infamy token on Criminal entreprise and that's it, we don't proceed to the villain attack sequence, we don't draw boost cards, etc, is that correct ?

36) Regarding the Avengers Tower :

Can I exhaust the tower to reduce the cost of the next avenger ally I'll play if I have zero allies in play ?

Thanks :-)

33) You are correct. Once a nemesis is in play it’s treated just like any other minion so it goes into the encounter discard once defeated.

34) For the hero obligations I guess the purpose is just to add some extra flavour to the heroes as well as a little uncertainty into the game. As long as your obligation is in the encounter deck there is an extra risk to defending because it leaves your hero exhausted, and therefore unable to remove your obligation from the game if it comes up.

On the most recent live stream they said that The Once and Future Kang would be including some more obligation type encounter cards and I think they acknowledged that they hadn’t done much with this card type so far other than the hero obligations (looks like the discussion starts just after the 12 minute mark).

I think having a card type that can only be dealt with by being in alter ego form is a good idea and could lead to some interesting choices if they are well designed.

35) I believe that is correct, the forced interrupt says “instead”, so it replaces whatever the normal effect would be - in this case the villain attacking you and everything that entails (defending, drawing boost cards etc.).

36) Yes, only the first sentence of the card cares if all your allies have the Avenger trait. The action part is separate and doesn’t specify any costs or restrictions based on the number or type of allies you have in play.

Thanks for replying :-)

37) (we break the Champaign when I get to the 50th question :-P )

I find myself in a corner.

I'm fighting against the Green Goblin in the risky business scenario.

I find myself at a moment when the green Goblin must attack me and there is only one more token on State of Madness .

The goblin attacks me.

I draw a boost card and this one is :

But then, State of Madness on which there was only one token is now empty and by the rules I must turn it on Criminal Entreprise and turn the Goblin back to Osborn...

but what happens to the attack, then ? Do I resolve it normally even though Norman can't attack ? I know that it is the Goblin who initiated the attack, and that's why I'm in a (very small) problem

26 minutes ago, Elrad said:

But then, State of Madness on which there was only one token is now empty and by the rules I must turn it on Criminal Entreprise and turn the Goblin back to Osborn...

but what happens to the attack, then ? Do I resolve it normally even though Norman can't attack ? I know that it is the Goblin who initiated the attack, and that's why I'm in a (very small) problem

This is an excellent question which somebody has thankfully gotten answered by the devs. You do complete the attack as Norman, using his 0 ATK stat. So you only take damage if you had another boost card for whatever reason and that boost added damage.

Normally Norman's Attack is replaced by putting counters on Criminal Enterprise, but that interrupt only happens if Norman is the one initiating the attack. So in the case of Goblin initiating and getting flipped, there's a weird little window where Norman is in fact capable of attacking.

Wow....

I've resolved the attack by taking all the damages (counting in the Goblin basic atk value)... oh so you only take the boost icons as damages... interesting. Thanks :-).

EDIT : oh and I had had to put a boost card as a result of I don't remember what so for that attack He had two boost cards.

That was a semi-disaster as I played as Black Panther/Leadership and Black Widow/Justice. Soon during the game, Black Widow got killed but somehow I managed to keep Black Panther in Hero form so The Goblin didn't exhaust all the Madness tokens until That very moment I just described. I finished him after He flipped back to Norman. Quite a slow game, only had to deal with a minion but all my bench of Allies did heroically die dealing 5 damages to the villain and Hawkeye being the last one standing did take a huge 7 dmg attacks so BP could survive and thanks to Wakanda Forever ! It did the job....

38) I decided to post it after editing my last post and it's just to receive confirmation that I can play multiple times Wakanda Forever ! in the same turn because it's not written anywhere that i've to exhaust BP's armour. Did I play correctly or not?

1 hour ago, Elrad said:

38) I decided to post it after editing my last post and it's just to receive confirmation that I can play multiple times Wakanda Forever ! in the same turn because it's not written anywhere that i've to exhaust BP's armour. Did I play correctly or not?

You can absolutely play Wakanda Forever as many times in a turn as you draw it and have the resources to pay for it.

39) I know I'm coming with really basic questions but two post before I was telling tat I played a game today where I had Black panther and Black widow. I lost Black widow early. So Green Goblin still had his 28 hp (2 X 14). but When I beat his lvl 1 card, I just set his HP to 18 and not 36. I guess I was right to consider the "living" identity and not both the identities regardless of their presence/absence on/from the table ?

17 minutes ago, Elrad said:

39) I know I'm coming with really basic questions but two post before I was telling tat I played a game today where I had Black panther and Black widow. I lost Black widow early. So Green Goblin still had his 28 hp (2 X 14). but When I beat his lvl 1 card, I just set his HP to 18 and not 36. I guess I was right to consider the "living" identity and not both the identities regardless of their presence/absence on/from the table ?

The "Per Player" symbol doesn't ever change if a character is knocked out, no. It does keep the villain's hit points a lot higher, but on the bright side you have twice the room for Threat to go up.

39) The per player icon is defined as the number of players who started the scenario, not the number who are currently in play (Learn to Play: top of page 9). So Green Goblin should have had 36 HP in the situation you described.

Haha i totally cheated then like i mentioned above :-D

And I think I may have cheated a second time...

In the Green Goblin pack's leaflet I read that they advise us - in the Risky business scenario - to be ready to deal a maximum damage to the Goblin in one round before getting him back to his Osborn form.....

But if I'm correct, the green goblin does change back to Osborn if and only if State of madness is empty . Or that can last for a few rounds if the identities are left on their hero sides and do not offer many openings to the Goblin to take those tokens back (instead of Scheming)....

Yes, if you stay as Hero, the odds of Goblin reverting to Norman are reduced. However, note that there are a number of cards in the encounter deck that can remove counters from State of Madness, and there's always Advance, which is a pain in every scenario.

7 hours ago, Elrad said:

Two really basic question I'm sometime asking again and again :

33) When you draw "shadow of the Past" and have to put in play the nemesis character engaged against your identity and put the rest of its deck in the encounter discard pile, what happens to the Nemesis when you defeat them ? Do they go to the Encounter discard pile ? I've always played like this so I hope I hadn't to put the nemesis character out of play after defeating it...

34) what is the real purpose of Obligation cards ? I mean, yes they hinder you by giving you two options : wether you go back to AE and you engage it in order to pu that obligation out of play for the rest of the game or you apply a penalty and only discard the card.

I don't really see how much of a hinderance it is. Yes you lose opportunities to use you hero on your turn because you would need cards to ready it. And sometimes (mostly with additional heroes) you have some nasty negative effects to endure in order to discard that card, but beside that, I fail to see any other purpose to that type of card, even if the entry in the rule book let imagine that one identity can have multiple obligations, etc.

33) You don’t put the other Nemesis cards into the encounter deck discard pile, you shuffle them into the Encounter deck (as it says to do on Shadows of the Past). If you defeat the Nemesis Minion (or the side scheme) they are discarded as normal - they’re now part of the encounter deck.