How I loathe this power!

Kirga picked it up back in Silver campaign and has been slaughtering me with it, It's not too bad in dungeons, the Heroes have been managing to get around fine on their own in there, She's helped the Slow moving tank that gets a free Guard when declaring a Battle Action move around getting three hits a turn, but that's about it.

During outdoor encounters though!
We have been playing it that ShadowCloak does not mean not in Line of Sight, Therefore if she can see my leuitenant hiding in a tree she can pull him out of it and have the rest of the team beat on the poor guy.

I lost a leuit this way just smashed him good, while I thought he was all safe in a tree across the map.

Then today I had a Troll hiding in a tree, and we decided the proper way was "Size matters not" that she can lift a Troll with only the cost of one fatigue and move it out of a tree space. 57 hp diamond troll with Regen 20. Dies in 2 rounds *sigh* (and rolled a miss both rounds) *shakes head* this game hates me.

I believe both interpretations are correct as the rules are written. I'm not sure what Shadowcloak and Telekinesis both saw RAW but unless Telekinesis explicitly says "In LOS" and Shadowcloak says "out of LOS" or something to both of those effects than there doesn't seem to be much of a way around this tactic. I'd encourage trying to keep the party as low on fatigue as possible and killing the Telekinesis character as often as possible to keep him off the map.

I've not seen telekenesis yet in our campaign, but from everything I have read about it, it seems that it is one of the "broken" things in RtL which a lot of people think need changing. What to change it to however I have no idea.

We don't let it work on named monsters.

Neostrider said:

Kirga is currently equipped with the armlet that lets her spend surges to regain fatigue, and the tank just got the BattleCry ability so everytime he declares a battle action he and everyone around him gains fatigue.... It ain't easy

Dribbler said:

Be gratefulfor small mercies... ...It isn't on someone who starts with 5 Fatigue (Kirga has only 3 base).

And that Leadership (on someone else) isn't being used as a free 'rest' on the Teke-er every turn...

Or perhaps its Silhouette, with Swift, Telekinesis, Tiger Tattoo (RtL can make for some devastating combos) running 16 per turn, with a dodge (provided by another's leadership) that she can convert into a rest later with the 2 fatigue not being used on Teke-ing, 4 fatigue spent on Telekinesis to make gaps to move through, clear glyphs/treasure to move onto, or just move herself faster, and not even a potion needed!

There are effects, like knockback, that get weaker the bigger the monster size (ie one less space of knockback per space occupied by the monster beyond the first space).

If you want to house rule telekinesis, I d suggest using the very same mechanic. So the fatigue cost for moving a monster 1 space, increases by 1 for every space the monster occupies beyond the 1st space.

Oh, and dont forget that trees block LOS, so you better get behind a tree, instead of in it, when you want to protect him vs telekinesis

That skill is so overpowered (especially in RtL) that our group doesn't even allow it to be used. We simply took it out of the skill pile.

In my opinion, a Shadowcloaked figure is NOT in LOS of an enemy figure unless that enemy figure is adjacent. It seems to me that is the whole point of Shadowcloak......to avoid/evade LOS. It isn't the equivalent of Dodge, that is a different sort of skill entirely. What other reason would there be for the power to work, but to avoid LOS? (Be concealed, avoid detection....however you want to state it..). Therefore the use of Telekinesis on a Shadowcloaked figure from anywhere further away than an adjacent space would be illegal, as the Telekinesis skill explicity states "to move any figure within your line of sight 1 space..."

Dreepa said:

Indeed, TK should follow the same rules as knockback. That could still be too strong, but that would give some help to the big multisquare monsters.

Telekinesis should be consideredan attack for shadowcloack.

Schmiegel said:

You can houserule that way, but RAW Shadowcloak has no effect on LOS.

Your thematic argument can be countered by another (as can all thematic arguments, pretty much) - Shadowcloak is not completely hidden, just a partial concealment - enough to prevent targeting or enable a duck-behind-the-cover-so-you-can't-hit effect against longer range attacks, or possibly just supreme reflexes to enable lithe super-dodging given that fraction of a second for an arrow to reach the target from some difference away. Once you get close (adjacent) the inability to target is negated because you can just point in the general direction and hit or the target doesn't have enough time to duck behind the cover from a point-blank attack.

Telekinesis can definitely be used on shadowcloaked figures in the RAW.

Thematically there is no basis to assume that Telekinesis needs the precision of an arrow in order to 'connect' with its target, the telekinesis-er just needs to have 'something' to 'lock on' to - and you can't see telekinesis coming to duck back behind the tree or lithely twist aside with super agility etc the way you could with an arrow or magical attack.

Yeah that absolutely does not work having a Shadowcloak figure not be in LOS unless the figure is adjacent. I can understand wanting to make this arguement for when tree spaces are granting Shadowcloak, but what about Deep Elves? They have Shadowcloak all the time. So by your argument you would never be able to see a Deep Elf, even in the middle of a dungeon with no trees around? I completely understand the viewpoint and thematically agree with it, but the RAW doesn't really support it.

Having shadowcloak affect LOS would also mean Deep Elves could always be spawned right next to heroes (as long as they're not really adjacent), and I'm sure there'd be way more problems.

But house ruling that telekinesis is only possible if an attack is possible does make perfect sense.

Hi,

haslo said:

Er, no. From the basic rulebook: "The overlord player may not place a spawned monster in a space to which any hero figure on the board has line of sight." It's not the figure that matters, it's the space. If you can see the space, nothing can be spawned there, regardless of the spawned monsters' ability.

Not that this really matters in this discussion, but I couldn't let this misconception pass...

-Kylearan

Thanks

Luckily, the impact of that misconception is rather minor, since this would have been the first case of a monster in both Doom and Descent where the heroes wouldn't have LOS to it if they had LOS to its space

Edit: But, on the other hand, since attacks always target a space and never a monster, making Shadowcloak restrict LOS to the monster wouldn't do anything anyway

Shadowcloak reads:

"A figure with the Shadowcloak ability is only affected by attacks made by adjacent figures. The figure does not suffer any wounds or effects from attacks originating farther than one space away."

Therefore, Shadowcloak has NOTHING to do with LOS. The ONLY determining factor for it is whether its attacker is adajcent or not. If you houserule Telekinesis to require LOS then technically Shadowcloak will still not protect against it.

The point of telekinesis per space occupied seems to make sense and It fits with the rules for web and knockback.

But it doesn't fit with the rest of the rules that you can't get line of sight on a figure with shadow cloak.

SkittlesAreYum said:

I think this all comes down to whether or not you consider telekinesis an "attack" Personally, I do. I know there are those who would disagree with me.

All in all, if a deep elf doesn't get hurt in an open hall when she's under a breath template, she shouldn't be able to be gripped by telekinesis.

Again, though, this is simply my opinion. You are welcome to interpret the rules as you see fit. Personally, when considering the viability of an action, while the rules have priority, I also consider the impact the ruling will take on gameplay. In this case, it's fairly clear that telekinisis GREATLY impacts the worth of shadowcloak. My ruling would be that you can use the ability on that deep elf as much as you want, provided you're standing next to them when you start moving them.

And yes, trees block LOS, so if you disagree with my opinion about TK being an attack, my best advice would be to hide the critter you're protecting behind trees/obstacles, and failing that, hide them behind other critters, who also block LOS.

Osaka said:

Err, what?

There is no 'interpretation' necessary here, no 'rulings'. The RAW are completely clear. Shadowcloak does not interact at all with Telekinesis, there is no connection between the two skills. Shadowcloaked figures can be Telekines-ed.

You are welcome to make a house rule that they can't but it is a house rule, not an 'interpretation'.

The same for Telekinesis being an Attack. It is not. Full. Stop. You might consider it effectively an 'attack', but that is not the same thing as a rules-defined Attack. Sure, house rule it, but, again, there is no 'interpretation room in this area.

Maybe another way to look at this issue is to ask just exactly what is it about a tree in an outdoor encounter that confers the Shadowcloak ability? If it isn't line of sight, what is it? To me, if you're hiding in a tree, you can't be seen from a distance. That's a LOS issue. In addition, giving a deep elf and a tree the same attribute is in itself asking for problems. Personally, I prefer the interpretation of a deep elf being quick and athletic, and able to deftly avoid attack if it's not emanating from as close as possible, as opposed to being able to avoid LOS visually. (And the LOS interpretation causes obvious problems with monster spawning, it is true.) However that interpretation is itself a "thematic" one as the term "Shadowcloak" does not imply that type of a skill set......except as a final outcome. There probably is a better word for it. A shadow is a variation of light, or relative lack of light, which is a visual thing. In the "Shadowy Copse" outdoor encounter, figures can't attack from further than 3 spaces away because they can't get LOS, because of the shadows. When an ogre hides in a tree and gains Shadowcloak, he isn't suddenly turned into an elflike, nimble athletic creature, I don't think. As for cloak, the best analogy I can think of is from Star Trek, when a Romulan Cruiser starship would deploy its "Cloaking Device" and suddenly disappear (from sight). The Enterprise could still fire at it, and possibly hit it....but that was made far more difficult by not being able to see it. At least that was my take on it.

Maybe I was missing something (yet again...). In any event, while I would say that the term "Shadowcloak" is problematical in this application for a deep elf, and clouded further when you apply that aspect to a tree, that in itself doesn't convince me that it's appropriate for a troll to be extracted from a tree from long range via telekinesis. That won't be allowed when I'm the OL. I have enough problems... And I remain unconvinced that the rules allow it, even though the points were all well taken. Even if they did, in an absolutely literal sense, we all know that there are 5,000 or more situations in Descent where the rules are less than 100% clear, and I think that is what this is about. So you can call it a "house rule", or a rule interpretation. I'd call it the latter.

Schmiegel said:

Good points. I, personally, think the concept of Shadowcloak is not that you're averting LOS (akin to the dragon hiding behind a tree and not being seen, which is quite silly) but rather, the trees providing a certain amount of cover. Tho represented by a discrete tree on the maps, think of the shadowcloaked spaces as tree-filled thick, so that a player shooting into those spaces with a ranged weapon, is simply, likely to have his arrow clip a tree and be misdirected before hitting even a dragon within. So it's not that the dragon is hidden (that would be Stealth) but that a player at a range simply cant get his missiles or magic to cut thru the brush to strike the target effectively. Thus you have Shadowcloak.

If instead, a Tank or Troll walks up thru the thick, and whacks you over the head with a club, it's not like you're going to be counting on the nearby tree limbs blocking his melee attack that surges thru them, unlike an arrow shot from a distance.

That's how I see the tree spaces, and they seem to make sense then. At least moreso than a dragon hiding behind a tree.

I see no reason TK would not work on a Shadowcloaked figure.

To revise the TK card to say "Excludes figures with Shadowcloak [or Stealth]" would take some thought, to evaluate if nerfing TK would be making Stealth or Shadowcloak too strong. I'm guessing from this discussion, it would be a good revision.

-mike

We use the variant rules about monster placement which were introduced in the German version (I think; does this therefore count as RAW?!?): monsters are not placed on the board unless heroes have had line of sight to that spot (though on the Overlord’s turn he can move them into sight/range). Spawning points are not immediately available to the Overlord (they become available when heroes have seen the spaces) but the heroes have no idea where the monsters are. We find it adds to the atmosphere immensely.

We have Telekinesis in play (we’ve had it in the party since Copper) & it doesn’t overpower our Overlord – maybe because he’s good, maybe because we’re bad or maybe because of the way our monsters are laid out (or not!) as I explained above. We play Telekinesis according to the rules & use all the expansions so Shadowcloak doesn’t stop Telekinesis (because it’s not an attack) and the size of a monster is irrelevant (there has been no official amendment from Kevin Wilson on this matter as far as I know – happy to be proved wrong on this one).

Also, I’m happy to go along with the whole Yoda/Luke/X-Wing theory on the size of an object (monster) mattering.

Interesting – that’s how we play & I’m discussing the skill with our Overlord currently as one of the characters will buy it at some point.

Osaka said:

There's no way TK is an attack. There's absolutely nothing to support this assertion. Just because you *want* it to be an attack so it's more balanced in its interaction with Shadowcloak does not change anything. You can't say "this makes more sense for balance" and then interpret the rules so that becomes true.

Now, that doesn't mean I'm opposed to your balancing decision. I'm simply making it clear that you are house-ruling TK and Shadowcloak. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that (if my group used TK we would do the same). That's the whole point of house rules: to adjust imbalances that are supported by the rules. I just want to make it clear that you are using house rules.

You're right, of course... The rules don't say anything to suggest that TK is an attack. On the other hand, I feel that it shares certain commonalities with attacks, and so if it were up to me, I'd call it an attack. I'm hoping they'll decide to make it so in a later edition of erretta or FAQ, but I'm not holding my breath.

Sorry if I made it sound like I thought that the rules said it was an attack. That wasn't my intention. My intent was to say that _I_ considered it to be an attack, and that I'd likely be deciding to house rule it as such.

Then again, if it were entirely up to me, I'm not sure I'd let trees protect models from breath weapons either ;-)

I've always been of the opinion that the rules are to be followed until such a point as it completely contradicts common sense. I'm honestly not sure it does here. It all depends on how you feel TK works, and how Shadowcloak works. All in all, unless they FAQ it, I agree wholeheartedly that there's nothing in the rules to stop someone from flinging your LT around. So unless/until this changes, hide your important model behind another one, or stand behind the tree instead of underneath it. Or just give the TK hero something more important to do (like stop the bleeding) :-)