In a two player game, when an enemy is stunned it says "next attack". Does the stunned effect count for player 1 and 2 or just 1 and then the Rhino attacks 2?

In a solo game that effect would last the entire round, so I'm inclined to think he would be stunned for both players but wanted to be sure. For the life of me could not find in a rulebook.

Next attack is the next single attack. So the stunned villain would complete his 2nd attack. This does still make the round easier so don't discount the use of stun.

Not sure. With one hero if the vilain his stun he din’t attack me but I think if in the encounter the card tell that the vilain attack again this time he isn’t stun. So for me in multiplayer stun would be only for one attack against one player.

i will follow to see if It right or wrong.

2 hours ago, HirumaShigure said:

Next attack is the next single attack. So the stunned villain would complete his 2nd attack. This does still make the round easier so don't discount the use of stun.

But this seems like a significant disadvantage for playing a 2 player game versus solo...

9 minutes ago, player537497 said:

But this seems like a significant disadvantage for playing a 2 player game versus solo...

Eeeh not really? The only particular advantage in solo is when you can stun every single round, which is nearly impossible outside of Ms Marvel. With two players, you have twice the capability to play abilities that stun the villain.

6 hours ago, player537497 said:

But this seems like a significant disadvantage for playing a 2 player game versus solo...

Yes and no. In solo, you get attacked all the time and you always need to block it or take it. It can be difficult to rest as switching to alter ego at the wrong time essentially means the scheme will just advance. In a multiplayer game you have significantly more control because you can block for each other, take turns to go to alter ego, etc, etc. Cancelling attacks is always useful though.

12 hours ago, SpiderMana said:

The only particular advantage in solo is when you can stun every single round, which is nearly impossible outside of Ms Marvel.

Just started playing solo Hard mode Rhino and I've had a lot of success with a Protection Captain America deck I made. Heroic Strike, Tackle and Mockingbird give him 7 cards with stun in his deck. I haven't been able to keep him stunned every round but it's pretty close, and Cap has plenty of options to handle the few times Rhino does attack.

Webbed Up has the advantage in multiplayer of being able to stack on top of Stunned, allowing for multiple negations in a single round. In a four player game, it's otherwise hard to defend the second or third player without throwing somebody in front of the hit.

6 minutes ago, AradonTemplar said:

Webbed Up has the advantage in multiplayer of being able to stack on top of Stunned, allowing for multiple negations in a single round. In a four player game, it's otherwise hard to defend the second or third player without throwing somebody in front of the hit.

Does it? I’ve played that “When the enemy would attack” triggers both the Stunned condition and Webbed Up, discarding them both (and then you Stun them per Webbed Up), so there’s really no point in Stunning while Webbed Up or Webbing Up while Stunned.

I believe there was a ruling that stated that Stunned interrupts first, and since the original condition is no longer impending, the second interrupt is no longer viable.

43 minutes ago, AradonTemplar said:

I believe there was a ruling that stated that Stunned interrupts first, and since the original condition is no longer impending, the second interrupt is no longer viable.

Well, status cards do have timing priority over all conflicting card abilities -- see rules reference p. 16. That part is clear, and though it does not clarify whether the interrupt window continues or not, I think the answer is in the Replacement Effect section.

Quote

If multiple replacement effects are initiated against the same triggering condition, the most recent replacement effect is the one that is used for the resolution of the triggering condition.

Therefore to my mind, it's safe to conclude that webbing up a stunned Villain will save you three attacks.

54 minutes ago, Ascarel said:

Well, status cards do have timing priority over all conflicting card abilities -- see rules reference p. 16. That part is clear, and though it does not clarify whether the interrupt window continues or not, I think the answer is in the Replacement Effect section.

Therefore to my mind, it's safe to conclude that webbing up a stunned Villain will save you three attacks.

This is correct.

Dang! That’s great!

So we can stun then webbing up a vilain, but we can’t webbing up then stun him ?

I think one time I did do webbing up then play mockingbird to stun Rhino. So that was another mistake.

2 minutes ago, Slobosoy1 said:

So we can stun then webbing up a vilain, but we can’t webbing up then stun him ?

I think one time I did do webbing up then play mockingbird to stun Rhino. So that was another mistake.

You can still stun a villain that's Webbed Up. The resolution order only cares about what's there, not when it got there.

3 minutes ago, Slobosoy1 said:

So we can stun then webbing up a vilain, but we can’t webbing up then stun him ?

I think one time I did do webbing up then play mockingbird to stun Rhino. So that was another mistake.

He can simultaneously be stunned and webbed up, is the important bit. How that happens is up to you!

6 minutes ago, Slobosoy1 said:

So we can stun then webbing up a vilain, but we can’t webbing up then stun him ?

I think one time I did do webbing up then play mockingbird to stun Rhino. So that was another mistake.

It does work the other way, because the status card has priority. You would look at which of the effect is the more recent one only if neither were a status card, such as if you played two Webbed Up on the villain, as unlikely as that is. But if you webbed up a villain that was already stunned, on the villain's next attack the status card would go away first, because it has priority.

(As an aside I hate saying status card, because I use tokens... 😂 )

2 minutes ago, Ascarel said:

You would look at which of the effect is the more recent one only if neither were a status card, such as if you played two Webbed Up on the villain, as unlikely as that is.

I don't think two Webbed Up on an enemy would be affected by the "most recent" rule. The interrupts on them would trigger simultaneously, and those are the two replacement effects which would compete, not the cards themselves.

If there were two ongoing replacement effects (e.g. if Webbed Up said "The next time the enemy attacks...") then it would matter.

10 minutes ago, Buhallin said:

If there were two ongoing replacement effects (e.g. if Webbed Up said "The next time the enemy attacks...") then it would matter.

Replacement effects are defined by using the would auxiliary and the instead qualifier. From the reference:

Quote

Most replacement effects are interrupt abilities in the format of “when [triggering condition] would happen, do [replacement effect] instead.”

And since Webbed Up says:

Quote

When attached enemy would attack, discard Webbed Up instead . Then, stun that enemy

This clearly is a replacement effect. This is anyway taken for a replacement effect in the official FAQ itself, regarding its interaction with Spider-Sense.

If you have two Webbed Up on a villain, only the most recent one triggers as per the rule I quoted earlier.

1 hour ago, Ascarel said:

Replacement effects are defined by using the would auxiliary and the instead qualifier. From the reference:

And since Webbed Up says:

This clearly is a replacement effect. This is anyway taken for a replacement effect in the official FAQ itself, regarding its interaction with Spider-Sense.

If you have two Webbed Up on a villain, only the most recent one triggers as per the rule I quoted earlier.

I know they're replacement effects. What I'm saying is that there is no "most recent effect" with two Webbed Ups because Webbed Up is not actually a replacement effect - it's an interrupt. The replacement effect doesn't exist until the interrupt has been activated. Those interrupts are resolved one at a time, each creating a replacement effect. (Pretty sure I was thinking about this wrong above).

If you have two Webbed Up, both trigger conditions are met. Per simultaneous triggers you choose the order, though it obviously doesn't matter in this case. The first one resolves its replacement effect fully, stopping the attack, discarding itself, and then stunning the enemy. Then the second one will still fire - you don't have a choice, because it's Forced. It will try to cancel the attack (but can't, because there isn't an attack any more) and discard itself. The stun won't fire because of the requirement for "then before it".

Not that you CAN have two Webbed Up, but it's a nice thought exercise. Man, what I wouldn't give for FFG to actually make a game with solid timing rules...

Yeah I think it should be explicitly stated in here that Webbed Up does clarify "Max 1 per enemy."

That said, I might still ask about the hypothetical double-Webbed-Up at the live stream next week.

Would you trigger both of them immediately? If you trigger one and resolve it fully before triggering the second, then there is no attack remaining for it to interrupt. I expect the second Webbed Up would theoretically stick around for the next non-stunned attack.