this cards decreases heroes' line of sight to five

does this also affect the familiar Boggs the Rat?

rubenmaes said:

In theory, yes since he is treated like a Hero for the purposes of LOS. However, anticipate some discussion without a clear answer since on the old forum someone claimed to have a KW answer involving Boggs being nocturnal and therefore he's fine.

Our group plays that he is effected.

Big Remy said:

I officially have no position on this issue, but just to play devil's advocate (and because I encourage people to be precise about what the rules actually say), allow me to point out that's not what the rules on page 14 actually say. The text reads:

"The overlord player cannot spawn monsters within line of sight of Boggs, just as if he were a hero."

That doesn't say that he counts as a hero or is treated like a hero, it says that he prevents spawning within his line-of-sight, just as heroes prevent spawning within their line-of-sight. It does not say that Boggs resembles a hero in any fashion except that whatever spaces happen to be within his LOS are off-limits for spawning, and even in that one narrow respect, it doesn't say that he counts as a hero, it just says that he has the same ability.

You're right, I was attempting to give a quick answer which unfortunately wasn't completely accurate.

I'll throw one back. It all depends on your interpretation of the words "just as if he were a Hero". Some might argue that means that for the narrow purposes of spawning, Boggs is in fact a Hero.

We could argue about the use of the english language, and we'd still be here in 2 weeks time.

Or, we could think what would be best for the game. Now, I've not used Boggs, but I've read a number of session reports and threads to say he is really really good - possibly a bit too good (I think - correct me if I am wrong).

If that is the case then Gust of Wind should affect Boggs too imo.

Big Remy said:

Just to clarify, are you arging that:

A) Therules are inherently ambiguous and that some interpretations allow the Gust of Wind to affect Boggs, or
B) The text is unambiguous therefore Gust of Wind affects Boggs under any valid reading of the text?

Because it is possible to write rules that are actually ambiguous (or even self-contradictory), and so that's a possible position you could take, but it's different from the position that the rules say one particular thing.

I would point out that even if Boggs is treated as being exactly like a hero for purposes of spawning, that doesn't necessarily mean he should be treated as a hero for purposes of line-of-sight . Gust of Wind doesn't specifically allow you to spawn monsters 6+ spaces away from heroes even if you're in their line-of-sight, it limits their line-of-sight and leaves their spawn-blocking ability exactly as it was.

And if you're arguing for position B (gust of wind definitely affects Boggs) rather than A (rules are ambiguous), then I'd also like to you explain to me what's wrong with the alternate reading that "just as if he were a hero" means "this mechanic works the same as the one for heroes, but Boggs is of course a familiar and therefore not actually a hero."

Paul Grogan said:

You realize you're essentially advocating that we throw out the rulebook and write a new one, since you think we should use "whatever rules are best for the game" rather than "the rules that currently exist?" Except that even once we've written the new rulebook, if we can't agree how the english language works, then we still won't be able to agree on what the new rulebook says, and a group of people can't sit down and play the game unless they can reach agreement on what the rules are.

If you've got some mystical oracle that will tell us all exactly the perfect rules to use in some language-independent fashion, that's great. Otherwise, the question of what the current rules say is a perfectly valid line of inquiry, and one that we ought to be able to reach agreement on fairly easily if we're all fluent in the language.

Also, your justification for your ruling being the option that is "best for the game" is highly dubious.

Antistone said:

Actually, I was just messing with you. I pretty much agree with your initial statement, I was throwing out an argument that I have seen people use in the past concerning Boggs. Though given those two choices, I'd guess I'd have to go with B.

To me, and I will freely admit I could be completely wrong and off my rocker hence why I love forum discussions, is that Boggs is a familiar who happens to act as a roaming pair of eyes for the Heroes, granting them a LOS by proxy to prevent spawning and that's all he does. I do believe that Gust of Wind should affect Boggs.

I completely agree with your statement about wat Gust of Wind is really doing, limiting LOS rather than allowing you to spawn 6+ away. Hence why I think Boggs should be affected, since his ability to block spawning is based on his LOS.

Its things like this, that you know had to have come up in playtesting at some point, that they never specifically put a notation in the rulebook or in a FAQ that always makes me want to go for the most common sense and simpliest answer to Descent rules questions since they had to have figured it was something obvious to understand.

Now that I have probably throughly contradicted myself 8 or 9 times, I'll just reiterate that my group has always played it that Boggs is affected by Gust of Wind.

So, you just said that you agree with all my arguments for why Boggs shouldn't be affected, and yet not only do you disagree with the conclusion, your agreement with the arguments is actually the reason you disagree with the conclusion. And you think that there's no ambiguity in the written rules--or maybe you were just hypothetically arguing that? I can only infer that I have you totally confused.

As the saying goes, common sense is not so common, and interpretations that seem natural to one person don't necessarily seem natural to anyone else. If you and all your players happen to agree that a particular way of playing "makes sense," then you can get away with tossing the rulebook and playing that way, but if you run up against anyone whose intuition happens to be different than yours, you have no rational way of resolving your disagreement, because you're both just using intuition, and your intuitions don't agree. That's why writing clear rules is so important for designers and carefully reading rules is so important for players.

I don't have any problem with people constructing house rules, but I do strenuously object to people passing off their house rules as official rules, so if you don't have a solid argument for your position based on the actual text of the rules, I would request that you present the way you play as an interpretation or house rule instead.

God, this is what I get for writng stuff when I'm not focusing completely on it. I have no desire to turn into long drawn out arguement with no good end.

Alright, we must not be communicating correctly here, so I'm going to start over. Also note that this argument also occurred on the old forum with no good resolution either. All emphasis is mine.

First , the rule concerning LOS for spawning from JitD page 12:

"The overlord player may not place a spawned monster in a space t o which any hero figure on the board has line of sight (see “Line of Sight,” page 9-10). Exception: For purposes of spawning new monsters, other monster figures do not block a hero’s line of sight."

If a Hero figure has line of sight to a square, the OL can't spawn there.

Second , the rules for Boggs from JitD page 14:

"This familiar is granted by a Wizardry skill card. Boggs’s speed is 4. The overlord player cannot spawn monsters within line of sight of Boggs, just as if he were a hero."

The presence of Boggs is equal to the presence of a Hero for the purposes of determining legal locations to spawn and that any effect that limits and or extends a Hero's LOS in regards to spawning, and spawning only, effect Boggs as well.

Third , the Gust of Wind card:

" Play at the start of your turn. Until the start of your next turn, the heroes ' torches are blown out and they cannot trace line of sight farther than 5 spaces away . This card does not affect monsters' line of sight."

Heroes do not have LOS past five spaces for the purpose of determining legal locations to spawn.

Taken together, I have always had it come out to this:

Boggs is treated as a Hero for the purpose of determining legal locations for spawning monsters (combination of First and Second points). Since Gust of Wind limits the Heroes LOS for the purposes of spawning, I see no reason why it should not affect Boggs. Nothing on his skill card points to him being immune to the affects of Gust of Wind. I have seen nothing in a FAQ that suggests otherwise. Were Boggs immune, I would have expected to see a statement to that effect on the Gust of Wind card or in a FAQ by now given the number of times this very question has occurred.

One arguement I have seen used is that Boggs is a marker and not a figure. I find this to be completely irrelevant. In 2 separate spots in the description of Familiars it says:

"Familiars move like heroes, except that they can move through enemy figures and can end their movement in the same space as another figure ."
"Familiars may occupy the same space as another figure , and figures may move through and trace lines of sight through familiars."

In both of these statements, the use of another figure indicates that while a marker is being physically used to represent, they are to be treated as figures that follow special rules.

I will gladly send it in as a question for official review, but given their record of late on rules question submissions I won't hold my breath. I'm not trying to pass anything off as a House Rule, as I see nothing in the rules that indicates that Boggs is immune to the effects of Gust of Wind and several statements that indicates he is hence why I regard what I have written as the abiding by the RAW.

I would love to hear how other players deal with this situation, instead of just you and I, respecting your opinion as I do, just go around and around on it.

Big Remy makes a logical and well thought out point. It helps that I agree with him, as we have always played it that Boggs is affected by the Gust of Wind card.

Antistone said:

It would be an interpretation founded on... not very much... to suggest that Boggs being treated exactly like a hero for the purposes of spawning does not include all parts of spawning - one of which is LOS of heroes restricting spawn locations, or all parts of Boggs - one of which is his LOS.

There is nothing wrong with the alternate reading that "just as if he were a hero" means "this mechanic works the same as the one for heroes, but Boggs is of course a familiar and therefore not actually a hero." But familiar or not, for this mechanic (spawning), Boggs, including his LOS , is treated as a hero, even though he is a familiar.

Therefore anything which restricts Heroes LOS, also restricts Bogg's LOS - for the purposes of spawning. In other words, if Boggs had a ranged attack he could shoot targets in locations that he could not prevent spawns because his LOS is only restricted for the purposes of spawning (unlike the other heroes whose LOS is restricted full stop IIRC).

Yours is an alternative interpretation, but a pretty dodgy one IMO that simply ignores certain inconvenient parts of the rules. I think I'm still sticking with B at the moment, though this is without having access to the actual cards and wordings as I type.

Corbon said:

How awesome would that be? A ranged version of Furr. Except it would probably never do any damage since the Blue dice is horrible.

Big Remy said:

Different approach: "The heroes' torches are blown out and they cannot trace LOS farther than 5 spaces away"

Boggs is not carrying a torch, but still has LOS, even if he is alone in the dungeon (with no torches at all). So, why again should he be affected by blown out torches?

I know you people don't like to think thematically, but rule-wise. That's true for me as well, but when the rules are not clear, I fall back on in-game logic.

In my statement above, I made 1 assumption: "Rats carry no torches". I think this is a pretty safe assumption.

Siebeltje said:

What is not clear? Boggs is treated as a hero for the purposes of spawning. That includes LOS.

That aside, thematic thinking in Descent would have you break every second rule, and lead to different rules for every game depending on the thematic interpretations of the individual players. Thematically, I could argue that Bogg's eyes, while able to see in the dark better than normal heroes (can Elves see in the dark anyway in the Terranothian universe?) still require a moment to adjust from the torchlight environment to the darkness as the torches blow out and in that moment the monsters storm the heroes.

Thematics is more variable than actually reading the rules and trying to figure out what is clear and what is not.

Siebeltje said:

Counter argument: Two things about rats. One, they actually use their whiskers mostly to find their way in the dark. Since I doubt that Boggs' whiskers are more than 25 feet (5 squares) long, its not going to prevent spawning by giving LOS that way. Second, a rat's darkvision requires some light to work. So unless that dungeon cave is filled with luminescent fungus or something, with the torches blown out his eyes are not going to have any light to work with so he's going to be effectively blind, hence Gust of Wind still works.

Thematic arguments rarely work in determing rules for Descent. Of course, logic doesn't always work either.

To counter you counter argument:

You had to make a lot more assumptions about rats in the world of Descent. I only had 1 assumption and derived everthing else from the rules/cards.

It is not that I am really that PRO-rats can see in the dark, it is more that I'm trying to offer the other view, because I think the rule is ambiguous (that's not the correct word for the situation, but it has to do for now). I hope an official ruling will be made about this matter..

What assumptions? I assumed rats in Terrinoth operate like real world rats that's all. As for him not carrying a torch, my explanation doesn't require him to. He needs a LIGHT SOURCE. If the light source is gone, he can't see anymore cause a rat's vision requires some light to work.

As for it being ambigious, see what I wrote before with the rules quotes. I really don't see how that is ambigious unless you really want to start splitting linguistic hairs. If you do that, you have to call into question 99% of the rules and FAQ entries.

For example: Go take a look at the FAQ and what it says about "empty spaces". There are two entirely different definitions that don't mix well with each other. That's ambigious.

How's this for ambigious thematic/mechanics problems in Descent? Whose carrying the torch ?! A torch, unless the Hero felt like strapping a burning stick the backpack above his head, would take up one hand's worth of item space from a thematic and mechanics standpoint. So that means that one Hero would always be limited to using a one handed weapon without a sheild. That stops I think all magic users from using a weapon if they are carrying it. A ranged character would be limited to the one handed ranged weapons. Tanks might be the ones carrying it, as most of the one handed melee weapons are good but then they go no sheild or off handed weapon.

In the context of this whole discussion, that leaves Boggs the Rat dragging a fiery brand behind him as the torch. Unless of course, the torch is magical and is floating along next to the Heroes in which case you think it would never go out.

My point of that rambling above, is that basing a ruling on thematics in Descent rarely ever works. If you can give me a good answer that doesn't involve thematics and the can tell me exactly who is carrying the torch I'd be inclined to give the idea that Boggs isn't affected more merit. Right now, I think the rules are pretty clear on it.

Yes, heroes line of sight is restricted to up to 6 spaces away.

No, Boggs is not affected by Gust of Wind, this was clarified by Kevin W. in the old forums.

Hope that helps you.

I'm not touching the thematic arguments with the proverbial ten-foot pole.

As far as the mechanical arguments...I will attempt to explain again, very clearly, the assumptions I think you are making, and why I think those assumptions require justification:

First, and most importantly, there is a difference between these two statements:

A) The rules for X happen to be the same as the rules for Y
B) Any X counts as a Y and is subject to all of the same rules

The difference between A and B is that if something comes along and changes the rules for Y, in case A, there is no reason that this would affect an X in any way, but in case B, it would, because an X is a Y.

As an example, the rules say that familiars move like heroes (p. 14): "Familiars move like heroes, except that they can move through enemy figures and can end their movement in the same space as another figure." One could hypothetically take this statement to mean "the way in which familiars move is the same as the manner in which heroes move" (A) OR "familiar movement is considered to be a special case of hero movement" (B).

If you chose interpretation (B), then the Overlord could play traps like spiked pits in response to familiar movement (though it wouldn't hurt the familiar), familiars could activate glyphs of transport (because they activate whenever a hero moves over them) and trigger encounter markers ("when a hero ends their movement on this space..."), etc. because those are all triggered off of hero movement and there's no rule specifically saying that familiars can't do those things (it says they can't perform movement actions, but none of those are on the table of movement actions on page 16). However, I think we can all agree that the more reasonable interpretation is (A), that the rules are merely informing us that familiars move in the same manner as heroes, not that they count as heroes. Therefore, things that specifically respond to hero movement do not automatically also respond to familiar movement, even though familiar movement works in the same manner.

But when it says that Boggs the rat blocks spawning "just as if he were a hero," you're immediately assuming version B, even though the text is even less supportive of that in this passage (because Boggs' ability is completely defined even if you chop off the "just as if he were a hero" part, whereas familiar movement cannot even be understood unless you look up how heroes move). Not only that, but you contend that version A isn't even a valid reading--but you have offered no reason for this, and precedent seems to be against you.

Secondly, even if we assume that Boggs actually counts as a hero for purposes of preventing spawning, you are making the further assumption that he also counts as a hero for all mechanics that interact with his ability to prevent spawning. Line-of-sight is not a sub-mechanic of the spawning rules; it's used for other, unrelated stuff as well (like attacking).

It is true that restricting Boggs' line-of-sight would affect his ability to prevent spawning, but there is nothing that says that Boggs counts as a hero for things that affect line-of-sight, just that he acts like a hero for spawning. If you argue that line-of-sight is part of "for purposes of spawning" because it changes the spaces affected, you could just as easily argue that effects that move heroes should be able to move Boggs, because his location also changes what spaces he prevents monsters from spawning in.

The rule book states that you treat Boggs as a hero for Line of Sight , note that he is not treated as a hero for Effects . If this wasn't true, then the overlord could play traps on Boggs, who is not a hero but rather is a familiar.

EDIT: Someone put the bold text in here...

"This familiar is granted by a Wizardry skill card. Boggs’s speed is 4. The overlord player cannot spawn monsters within line of sight of Boggs, just as if he were a hero."

You cannot place mislead people by only puting in bold "just as if he were a hero", but you must also take into account what comes right before. The correct 'text bolding' would be as follows:

"This familiar is granted by a Wizardry skill card. Boggs’s speed is 4. The overlord player cannot spawn monsters within line of sight of Boggs, just as if he were a hero."

Now that the text before hand is bolded, which is there for a reason. He is a 'hero' only in Line of Sight , not any effects that come from other sources, e.g. Gust of Wind which only affects Heroes, not Familiars.

DeltaEcho said:

I've browsed the old forum, I saw where it was mentioned that KW said that but even that person said he couldn't remember if it was ever actually said or if it was official. He said something about Boggs being "nocturnal" as a reason. Not what i would call a clarification.

There is a big difference between playing a trap card and having something like Gust of Wind affect Boggs. Gust of Wind is the only OL card I can think of that would have any effect on him, and its also the only card that has a direct impact on Heroes LOS.

All things considered, if I'm wrong I'm wrong. If so, then this goes down as my first House Rule then until I see something official, because from every standpoint I can think of it makes no sense to have Boggs not be affected.

Okay, I am evident an idiot, which I find depressing to admit. Bummer.

I went looking on Boardgamegeek to see if the question was tackled there. There is an answer to the question posted by Mike Z, who is/was a playtest coordinator for FFG. According to him, Boggs is immune to Gust of Wind.

He says the card only refers to Heroes, and besides rats can see in the dark (sorry, but that part is inaccurate. They can see in the dark provided they have some light to see by, however minimal. Blame the scientist in me for nitpicking this part.)

So unless I get an email back from FFG saying otherwise, it seems to be that Boggs isn't affected. They should really stick it into the next FAQ to prevent confusion though.

So my apologies to Antistone and DeltaEhco for this dragging out longer than it needed to be, since I should have just went and checked BGG's forum in the first place for an alternate source. I might end up calling it a House Rule, because I really don't agree with that ruling even though I try to stick to the designers rules.

Antistone said:

<shrug> I think it is you are making assumptions, both about our assumptions (a lot of crap that does not follow from my arguments at all was snipped) and about how your own arguments relate to the rules. So we aren't going to get far. Last time to restate my case with an added request to please not extrapolate what you think I'm saying into some weird tangent that is not anything even approximating what I'm saying (and I apologise if I now or earlier did the same thing).

As far as I'm concerned its simple. I'm not a programmer, so excuse my gross errors of simulated prgramming language/style.

<spawning mechanic> -> <Boggs = Hero>

</spawning mechanic> -> </Boggs = Hero>

For the purposes of Spawning, Boggs is a hero. Outside of Spawning he is not.

Spawning mechanic is explained on pg 12 which includes the following

• The overlord player may not place a spawned monster in a space to which any hero figure on the board has line of sight (see “Line of Sight,” page 9-10). Exception: For purposes of spawning new monsters, other monster figures do not block a hero’s line of sight.

At this stage (mid spawning mechanic - the card has been played and monsters are being placed), Boggs counts as a Hero, and all things which affect heroes affect Boggs. Gust of Wind is a continuous effect (until the end of the next Hero turn IIRC) and at this time Boggs, counting as a hero, is affected by it. Once the spawning mechanism stops, Bogg's will not be counted as a hero and thus will not be affected by it any longer. Hence the comment by me earlier that his LOS for shooting (if he could) would be different than his LOS for spawning. Proper heroes are affected for shooting LOS as well as spawning LOS but Boggs is only a hero for the purposes of spawning.

Important note: LOS is not a one-time effect, it is continuous and must be reevaluated at any or all times that it applies. It can and does change many times during a turn as different figures move, cards are played and effects applied.

It seems to me (and see my apology above if this is incorrect) that your argument is based on Boggs not being a Hero for the purposes of LOS, only for spawning and then assuming that because he is not a hero when GoW is played, he is not affected. But both GoW and LOS are continuous effects and their effects/results will change situationally as the game/turn continues. So the first part of your argument is technically correct - Boggs is not affected by GoW when it is played. However the story doesn't end there as Boggs will be affected by GoW during the only time that it actually matters (for the purposes of spawning), so effectively he is affected by GoW when it is played.

Descent rules often outright laugh in the face of real-world and game-world logic, so arguments like this will crop up pretty often. You could logically argue it both ways:

1) Boggs is considered a hero-class figure for spawning, and gust of wind affects hero-class figures

2) Boggs is still a familiar-class figure and the gust of wind card only affects hero-class figures. Gust of Wind must explicitly list familiar-class figures in order to affect them.

Looks like the game's creators considered argument 2 to be the correct option, which means that the mechanics follow explicit instead of implicit readings in this case. In other cases, you have to infer what the rules mean when combined. One of the reasons why I try to avoid "spirit of the rules" arguments is because it's hard if not impossible to reverse-engineer what KW and the other designers were thinking when creating the rules for Descent. It can be done, but you should probably go ahead and not try to make the argument stand on its own. "Other arguments aren't conclusive, so go by the spirit of the rules" is a good way to start a rules war, hahahahaha