Hello everyone!

We play Descent since over a year now and have just recently added the first two expansions to our game. We love the game. However, sometimes rules are unclear to us and one sees it different then the other. That usually results in heated discussions that can last for a long time. So we decided the other day to write our questions down and ask in the forum pages for clarifications.

I have already checked out some answers to frequently asked questions here: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=4&efcid=1&efidt=17937 and also briefly read the FAQ thread. I was able to find answers to some of our questions but not all.

1. Leap: can a leaping creature use its leap ability even if not moving over a hero? Or is that strictly for an attack? That rule is confusing because in the rulebook it says it is used in an attack but then it furthermore says that the creature may attack the heroes it leaped over.

1.a. Is leap considered melee on blood apes or does the attack change into range? (the blood ape monster card says the blood ape attack is melee and he roles with a red die, which to me answers the question quite clearly, but my husband is wondering if the attack changes into range or even magic because the blood ape would be attacking from above - especially because the rulebook clearly states that the leap attack ignores range) - this is important because some armor gives additional protection against range/magic and melee attacks

2. Fog: Can figures larger than fog spaces trace line of sight normally? Examples: Spider sits on two fog tiles with its front or spider sits on two fog tiles with its back. Can it trace line of sight beyond the adjacent space in either example?

3. Armors and Traps: Does armor with the ability to roll black dice in order to cancel wounds being dealt to a hero allow that hero to roll dice to cancel wounds being dealt by traps after the hero has rolled the black dice to determine how much damage he takes from the trap in the first place? Could the hero avoid being hit by the trap completely that way? (or does the "ignore armor" rule for those traps include armor special abilities as such?)

4. Leech: If the monster isn't wounded, when attacking, does the hero still loose fatigue for each wound lost even though the monster can't be healed from the attack due to not being damaged in the first place?

5. Poltergeist: Does moving a resting hero remove the hero's rest order? (or any order for that matter?)

5a. Can the overlord move monsters onto activated glyphs with the Poltergeist card?

6. Armor: Can a hero choose not to "use" his armor when being hit? This would make an interesting strategy with "divine retribution" ability.

7. Earth pact skill: Does a hero recover 2 wounds if he didn't "move" (literally) but spent movement points to open a store for example?

8. Shadow soul: A bit confusing how the shadow soul moves. Considering all familiars move after the hero's turn, does that mean the shadow soul can move after the hero has chosen to move it adjacent to himself or chosen to swap with the shadow soul in the beginning of his turn?

8a. When choosing to move the shadow soul adjacent to the hero at the beginning of the hero's turn, does it matter from where the shadow soul is coming? For example, could the shadow soul only move up to its 5 spaces to get adjacent to the hero or could it come from anywhere within the dungeon? (kind of like a summoning)

Also, when I read the FAQ thread, a question came up on one of the answers in that thread:

The Overlord
Threat and Surges
Do the surges used to generate Threat for an Overlord get spent, or can they be used to activate effects? eg, the OL rolls 3 surges and has the option to use 1 Surge for 1 damage. Can the OL gather 1 Threat and +3 Damage, or only 1 Threat and +1 Damage? Clarified: Can surges used for Threat also be used for abilities?
Technically, you spend the 2 surges to gain 1 threat, so you can't use it for both things. With the Dark Prayer ability, you spend 1 surge to gain 1 threat, +1 Range, and +1 Damage.

It says here that the overlord may choose to spend 1 surge for 1 damage. I was always under the impression (by reading the base rules of the game) that the overlord can never use the surges for anything but gaining threat tokens! (except for Dark Prayer of course). Did I understand that rule in the original game rule book wrong? So the overlord can choose to not take threat tokens but use surges as damage instead?

Here is the rule I'm referring to from the rule book: Using Power Surges (Overlord): The overlord player may spend two surges to gain one threat token. Any unused surges are lost. (!!!)

Last question (though there are a lot more, we didn't write down and I don't remember them now) is on knockback. The rulebook is extremely confusing there. The rule in the book reads as though the creature that has the knockback ability gets knocked back! Which to me makes no sense at all. Shouldn't the figure that is being attacked and dealt damage to be knocked back by the figure with the knockback ability? Can someone please in great detail explain this ability to me?

Thank you all so much!!

1. Leap: can a leaping creature use its leap ability even if not moving over a hero? Or is that strictly for an attack? That rule is confusing because in the rulebook it says it is used in an attack but then it furthermore says that the creature may attack the heroes it leaped over.

The ape can leap with or without making an attack as part of it. The attack(s) come as part of the leap ability, not the other way around.

1.a. Is leap considered melee on blood apes or does the attack change into range? (the blood ape monster card says the blood ape attack is melee and he roles with a red die, which to me answers the question quite clearly, but my husband is wondering if the attack changes into range or even magic because the blood ape would be attacking from above - especially because the rulebook clearly states that the leap attack ignores range) - this is important because some armor gives additional protection against range/magic and melee attacks

Leap attacks are standard blood ape melee attacks.

2. Fog: Can figures larger than fog spaces trace line of sight normally? Examples: Spider sits on two fog tiles with its front or spider sits on two fog tiles with its back. Can it trace line of sight beyond the adjacent space in either example?

Large monsters and terrain is an ever-shifting morass in Descent. I'll let wiser heads answer this one.

3. Armors and Traps: Does armor with the ability to roll black dice in order to cancel wounds being dealt to a hero allow that hero to roll dice to cancel wounds being dealt by traps after the hero has rolled the black dice to determine how much damage he takes from the trap in the first place? Could the hero avoid being hit by the trap completely that way? (or does the "ignore armor" rule for those traps include armor special abilities as such?)

Things that ignore armor only ignore the armor trait, not all armor abilities. so yes, armor that rolls power dice to negate wounds will still work against pits.

4. Leech: If the monster isn't wounded, when attacking, does the hero still loose fatigue for each wound lost even though the monster can't be healed from the attack due to not being damaged in the first place?

Yes.

5. Poltergeist: Does moving a resting hero remove the hero's rest order? (or any order for that matter?)

5a. Can the overlord move monsters onto activated glyphs with the Poltergeist card?

don't know.

6. Armor: Can a hero choose not to "use" his armor when being hit? This would make an interesting strategy with "divine retribution" ability.

No. If they don't want to use it, they have to unequip it during their turn.

7. Earth pact skill: Does a hero recover 2 wounds if he didn't "move" (literally) but spent movement points to open a store for example?

Yes

8. Shadow soul: A bit confusing how the shadow soul moves. Considering all familiars move after the hero's turn, does that mean the shadow soul can move after the hero has chosen to move it adjacent to himself or chosen to swap with the shadow soul in the beginning of his turn?

8a. When choosing to move the shadow soul adjacent to the hero at the beginning of the hero's turn, does it matter from where the shadow soul is coming? For example, could the shadow soul only move up to its 5 spaces to get adjacent to the hero or could it come from anywhere within the dungeon? (kind of like a summoning)

Not sure.

Also, when I read the FAQ thread, a question came up on one of the answers in that thread:

The Overlord
Threat and Surges
Do the surges used to generate Threat for an Overlord get spent, or can they be used to activate effects? eg, the OL rolls 3 surges and has the option to use 1 Surge for 1 damage. Can the OL gather 1 Threat and +3 Damage, or only 1 Threat and +1 Damage? Clarified: Can surges used for Threat also be used for abilities?
Technically, you spend the 2 surges to gain 1 threat, so you can't use it for both things. With the Dark Prayer ability, you spend 1 surge to gain 1 threat, +1 Range, and +1 Damage.

It says here that the overlord may choose to spend 1 surge for 1 damage. I was always under the impression (by reading the base rules of the game) that the overlord can never use the surges for anything but gaining threat tokens! (except for Dark Prayer of course). Did I understand that rule in the original game rule book wrong? So the overlord can choose to not take threat tokens but use surges as damage instead?

Without a special ability (such as Dark Prayer) the OL can only use surges for threat.

Last question (though there are a lot more, we didn't write down and I don't remember them now) is on knockback. The rulebook is extremely confusing there. The rule in the book reads as though the creature that has the knockback ability gets knocked back! Which to me makes no sense at all. Shouldn't the figure that is being attacked and dealt damage to be knocked back by the figure with the knockback ability? Can someone please in great detail explain this ability to me?

The creature hit is the one that gets moved.

5. Poltergeist: Does moving a resting hero remove the hero's rest order? (or any order for that matter?)

I think that in general, anything that alters a figure's position would count as moving. However, moving does not interupt a rest order. From the DJITD booklet:

Rest
A hero that has placed a rest order may use it at the start of his next turn to return his fatigue to its maximum value (see “Spending Fatigue,” pg. 17). A hero’s maximum fatigue value is the starting value printed on his hero sheet, plus any additional fatigue granted by skills and abilities.
A rest order stays with a hero until removed by one of the following events: 1) the hero takes one or more wounds, or 2) the beginning of the hero’s next turn, when it is used to restore the hero’s fatigue.

IIRC the only order that is discarded for moving is the Aim order.

5a. Can the overlord move monsters onto activated glyphs with the Poltergeist card?

I don't believe the OL came ever willingly place a monster on an activated glyph to stay. It can happen via hero actions (knockback or TK) and then the OL must move them off the glyph at his first opportunity at the monster's activation.

8. Shadow soul: A bit confusing how the shadow soul moves. Considering all familiars move after the hero's turn, does that mean the shadow soul can move after the hero has chosen to move it adjacent to himself or chosen to swap with the shadow soul in the beginning of his turn?

The shadow soul's movement is separate from the actions the controlling hero can use in conjunction with the shadow soul. So yes, the shadow soul gets it's movement after the hero has decided whether he will swap, move or leave the shadow soul.

8a. When choosing to move the shadow soul adjacent to the hero at the beginning of the hero's turn, does it matter from where the shadow soul is coming? For example, could the shadow soul only move up to its 5 spaces to get adjacent to the hero or could it come from anywhere within the dungeon? (kind of like a summoning)

With a few exceptions detailed in the FAQ, the Shadow Soul can move from anywhere to end up adjacent to the controlling hero.

Also, when I read the FAQ thread, a question came up on one of the answers in that thread:

The Overlord
Threat and Surges
Do the surges used to generate Threat for an Overlord get spent, or can they be used to activate effects? eg, the OL rolls 3 surges and has the option to use 1 Surge for 1 damage. Can the OL gather 1 Threat and +3 Damage, or only 1 Threat and +1 Damage? Clarified: Can surges used for Threat also be used for abilities?
Technically, you spend the 2 surges to gain 1 threat, so you can't use it for both things. With the Dark Prayer ability, you spend 1 surge to gain 1 threat, +1 Range, and +1 Damage.

It says here that the overlord may choose to spend 1 surge for 1 damage. I was always under the impression (by reading the base rules of the game) that the overlord can never use the surges for anything but gaining threat tokens! (except for Dark Prayer of course). Did I understand that rule in the original game rule book wrong? So the overlord can choose to not take threat tokens but use surges as damage instead?

Here is the rule I'm referring to from the rule book: Using Power Surges (Overlord): The overlord player may spend two surges to gain one threat token. Any unused surges are lost. (!!!)

This is an example and the only time I can think it would apply would be with a Dark Charm when the OL controls a hero's attack and can use the abilities of the hero's weapons that allow him to spend surges on damage or abilities (ie. Blast with Sunburst rune). Innately, the OL may only use surges to gain threat unless it is for the monsters with Dark Prayer.

Say the example was an attack with a Dark Charmed hero using the Axe. Then it should make sense.

dragon76 said:

The other guys have done a good job except for this.

Yes, the OL may move monsters onto activated glyphs with Poltergeist.
The restrictions for an activated glyph are that a monster may not end its move there (it did not, poltergeist is a separate event, not the ending of the monsters movement) and may not spawn on an activated glyph.

Corbon said:

I concur. Keep in mind, however, that the monster will still be required to move off the activated glyph at it's first opportunity, just like if the glyph had been activated underneath it by Astarra or an acrobatic hero.

Also keep in mind that technically every monster does get activated during the OL's turn, even if it does nothing. Effectively, any monsters that the OL chooses not to do anything with are considered implicitly to have been "activated, did nothing, ended turn" (this is mentioned in the FAQ, I believe in relation to damaging effects like Burn - ignoring the monster during the OL turn will not prevent it from burning. By a similar token, ignoring a monster will not allow it to camp on an activated glyph. The monster must be activated and once that happens, it must move off the glyph. Even if that's all it does with its turn.

Since Poltergeist must be used at the start of the OL's turn, this means any monster put on the glyph will be forced to move off before most heroes will notice the obstruction (it might get in Tahlia's way, though.)

Corbon said:

I'm just curious as to what precedent or logic leads you to believe that you can use poltergeist to move critters onto an activated glyph? The restrictions for an activated glyph are that a monster may not end it's move there for sure, but the FAQ also states that a monster may not be placed there as an initial spawn point even though it would still be activated and moved in that same turn the exact same way as it would with Poltergeist.

This is what I was basing my post on.

dragon76 said:

Poltergeist is not spawning.

I already explained the logic.
The restrictions for an activated glyph are that a monster may not end its move there (it did not, poltergeist is a separate event, not the ending of the monsters movement) and may not spawn on an activated glyph.
Neither of these apply, therefore Poltergeist is not restricted.

Corbon said:

So you are saying that the apparent and evident trend of preventing an OL from ever intentionally placing a monster on an activated glyph is not applicable to poltergiest because it isn't specifically spelled out?

Situationally it is exactly the same as spawning a creature on an activated glyph would be in terms of timing and effect (ie the monster would not be able to stay there as it will be momentarily activated and must move that same turn).

I can't see how the similarities can be discounted and dismissed quite so easily myself.

+1 for dragon i mean that is plain munching play i mean really i don't think that every card must write in it's text what you can do as it states in the rules if it isn't overriden by the card text the rules still apply.

Let's not forget about the OP's original questions either. Neither James nor myself answered his second question about large monsters and fog as neither of us felt up to tackling it.

2. Fog: Can figures larger than fog spaces trace line of sight normally? Examples: Spider sits on two fog tiles with its front or spider sits on two fog tiles with its back. Can it trace line of sight beyond the adjacent space in either example?

Large creatures are a mess and it's lame from FFG they can't clear it up. This whole rule i use what ever space i want is kinda ridiculous. This is getting impossible to play when you use it with trees. Answer me this how many movement does a large creature pay to get inside a tree? (hence gaining shadowcloack) the answer would be 2 right? What if i don't want to get INTO the tree and i just use the other spaces that are empty but i end my movement on the tree? I have paid 1 movement and have shadowcloack. This is backed up also by the incident card that has blood apes that pay 1 movement to enter tree spaces which i find weird since you can already do that by the way the latest faq deals with large creatures. Really we need FFG to deal with that.

Corbon said:

Hmm...yes the Poltergeist card is separate from the monster's normal activation. With that being said, it did "end its' movement" from within that separate event. It will then end its' movement AGAIN during it's normal activation. It is a fuzzy detail which I haven't come to the conclusion which side makes more sense to me.

dragon76 said:

Yes, that is what I am saying.

Trends are useful in certain circumstances, but are not applicable when the rules are clear cut. They also should not be applied ad hoc to anything and everything.
Note also that the trend, if we can make a trend from just two slightly related points, merely shows monsters not intentionally ending. their. movement. on activated glyphs (spawning in a location might be considered as having ended their movement from an imaginary previous activation*). You have developed from that the issue of preventing the OL from getting them there, but our very limited 2 point trend can also be developed in other ways. That trend isn't supported by your knockback example either - if a hero can knockback a monster into an activated glyph so can a monster - mechanically the actions are identical. You have to use 'the trend' to prevent a monster using knockback, in order to put that point on the trend, and that is classic circular logic.
It is entirely possible (IMO probable) that the 'trend' is effectively limited to just how a monster ends it's movement, that is, the movement the monster makes under its own control during it's activation . As *ed below, spawning might be thought of as merely an extension of that, which means our two data points are much more tightly related this way, and we limit our trend to that tight relation.

The rules say no spawning on, and no ending move on. That is all. Poltergeist is neither and is not even related to either of the restrictions. It is an event, separate and unique.
It is not 'situationally' the same. It is not thematically the same. It is not mechanically the same.
In fact, 'situationally' it is probably closer to being knockbacked onto the activated glyph and almost identical to telekinesis (both of which you allowed I might add) - it is an outside force affecting the monster beyond it (the monster's) control.

*As for spawning, you might like to think about how the spawned monster got to that space it spawned from. If it starts it's move there, then that means it effectively ended its move there the last time it was 'activated'... (even though there was no 'activation', I imagine that the monsters are thought to have emerged out of hidden passages, been hiding there unknown all along, etc etc, not just 'generated' out of thin air).

Drglord said:

Fog is a mess at the moment because it is likely that there is a keyword inadvertently left out of the description.
Figures adjacent to a fog space have line of sight to that space.
A figure in a fog space has line of sight to all adjacent spaces, but not to any other spaces.
Add "Only" as the very first word and the whole thing makes a lot more sense. A lot more. The question will be asked for the next FAQ.

Large creatures and terrain is also a mess and is also being addressed (hopefully with better resolution) again in the next FAQ.
Technically, the current rule (FAQ) reads
The overlord may choose to have a monster affected by any terrain it partially occupies. A monster MUST be affected by any terrain it completely occupies. If the monster is completely occupying multiple terrains, the figure has to be affected by one of the terrains (Overlord's choice).
Thus the technical answer to the OP question is that the monster may choose whether they are affected by the Fog or not. If they are affected, they can't see out except to spaces adjacent to the Fog (the parts of the base outside the Fog would not even be able to see the spaces adjacent to themselves but not adjacent to the FOG!) But they'd gain the fog benefit when heroes try to 'see' them. That is a ridicilous mess of a situation and a good example of why the rules still need fixing in both these areas. It also needs to be defined when the monster may choose, and when the monster may change that choice. It is just unworkable as is in truth...

The trees thing is a separate issue. I don't really have a problem with large monsters getting 'free' benefits from trees, in order to keep the game simple and allow them some benefit at all. They have plenty of disadvantages already.

And the incident doesn't negate anything, since there are many situations in which a 2 space monster like a blood ape will want to move into two tree spaces, so the incident rule is necessary if that monster is not supposed to have to pay 2 MP to do so.

Kain_Dragoon said:

Hmm...yes the Poltergeist card is separate from the monster's normal activation. With that being said, it did "end its' movement" from within that separate event. It will then end its' movement AGAIN during it's normal activation. It is a fuzzy detail which I haven't come to the conclusion which side makes more sense to me.

That movement is of the monster, not by the monster. So although 'it' is moving, the movement does not belong to 'it' and is not 'it's movement'.

Corbon said:

My views are based on an entirely different viewpoint. My argument has to do with 'forces' under the OL's control rather than any thematic reasoning at all. I'm in fact surprised that you have brought out thematic reasoning as a valid argument when you consistently dismiss it when it is used as 'evidence' by other posters.

You'll noticed that I allowed for Hero's abilities to 'move' a monster onto an activated glyph. While I can only conceive of a couple of scenarios where that would be of use it is the hero's choice if that is what they want to do as part of their tactical game.

From what I have read and the ruling to which I keep refering from the FAQ it would appear to me that the OL is generally disallowed from purposefully maneuvering to leave a monster on an activated glyph for any length of time. This is already covered in the monster movement rules and has been added to by the FAQ in the spawning rules.

If you can provide a clear cut rule or ruling where the OL is allowed to place a monster on an activated glyph then by all means enlighten us with your wisdom . I have provided two examples where this action is specifically prohibited for the OL. While Poltergeist may be a 'mysterious event', by game mechanics it is a card played to provide a tactical repositioning and as such I believe it falls under the same limitations as any other monster movement under control of the OL.

dragon76 said:

My views are based on an entirely different viewpoint. My argument has to do with 'forces' under the OL's control rather than any thematic reasoning at all. I'm in fact surprised that you have brought out thematic reasoning as a valid argument when you consistently dismiss it when it is used as 'evidence' by other posters.

You'll noticed that I allowed for Hero's abilities to 'move' a monster onto an activated glyph. While I can only conceive of a couple of scenarios where that would be of use it is the hero's choice if that is what they want to do as part of their tactical game.

From what I have read and the ruling to which I keep refering from the FAQ it would appear to me that the OL is generally disallowed from purposefully maneuvering to leave a monster on an activated glyph for any length of time. This is already covered in the monster movement rules and has been added to by the FAQ in the spawning rules.

If you can provide a clear cut rule or ruling where the OL is allowed to place a monster on an activated glyph then by all means enlighten us with your wisdom . I have provided two examples where this action is specifically prohibited for the OL. While Poltergeist may be a 'mysterious event', by game mechanics it is a card played to provide a tactical repositioning and as such I believe it falls under the same limitations as any other monster movement under control of the OL.

Your two examples are in fact actions prohibited for monsters , not for OL's in particular. Yes, the OL controls the monsters, but the prohibitions are actually related directly to monsters , not the OL.
DJitD pg17
Important: Monsters may not end their movement in any space containing an activated glyph of transport,
FAQ pg6
Q: Can a monster end its movement on or be spawned on to a glyph of transport?
A: Monsters can end their movement on or be spawned on to unactivated glyphs, but cannot end their movement on or be spawned on to activated glyphs.
Your extrapolation isn't valid because it goes further than directly indicated by the text with no additional support. Ie, it leaps a step (from 'monsters can't' to 'OL can't'), without any support for the leap.*
'Monsters can't' is a subset of 'OL can't'. What you are doing is saying since A is a subset of B, and A is prevented, all of B is prevented. That is false logic.

Extrapolation from what the text says is that monsters are limited in what they can do. Not the OL.
Poltergeist is not an action of the monsters. So it is not restricted wrt activated glyphs.

*If we had a ruling from FFG saying poltergeist couldn't move a monster nto an activated glyph then
a) that would be fine (FFG can make those leaps, we can't) and
b) you would thereafter have support for that leap and your conclusion would be valid and able to be used is similar situations in the future
But we don't have such a ruling, and we don't need one. It is not like we have this unplayable hole of what to do, or that this situation has any major, or game changing effect.

Corbon said:

I'm just going to have to say that I remain unconvinced by your argument at this point in time. While I agree that this has no relevant major or game changing effect I don't agree with you that no rule saying you can't means that you can. What about the missing rule about walls? Intuition, common sense and inference all lead to one obvious conclusion in that instance. To me this is just more of the same as without an OL (remarkably ) the monster figures can neither move about the playing surface when it is their turn, nor can they place themselves on the board when spawned. It is the player who performs these actions as they are the tools of his tactical game. The Poltergeist card is another such tool and IMO I believe that without some iota of evidence to the contrary it should be subject to the same limitation. I also fully admit that my opinion is based on inference from the existing rules as per the discussion above. Which way will it be played if it ever comes up (shrugs) who knows? My group will discuss it at the time and work it out then.

That being said. As it would only be of tactical use against the one hero who can actually use movement points during a guard during a vanilla game, it's not something that really needs to be discussed to death. Just enjoying the discussion.

dragon76 said:

It isn't a case of no rule saying you can't means you can.
It is a case on the rule saying you can, and no exception to the rule saying you can't.
Poltergeist
...Move all figures and tokens (but not obstacles) up to 2 spaces, however you choose. ...
The rule says you can move them however you choose - which by default, means onto an activated glyph. Unless of course there is another rule which says you can't move them onto an activated glyph.

dragon76 said:

Intuition, common sense and inference all lead to one obvious conclusion in that instance. To me this is just more of the same as without an OL (remarkably ) the monster figures can neither move about the playing surface when it is their turn, nor can they place themselves on the board when spawned. It is the player who performs these actions as they are the tools of his tactical game. The Poltergeist card is another such tool and IMO I believe that without some iota of evidence to the contrary it should be subject to the same limitation.

But the obvious conclusion is not the one you have reached. As I demonstrated (and you ignored), you have made an additional, unsupported, illogical (see the A/B subset explanation) leap in your conclusion.
The 'obvious' conclusion, is that monster s can't end their controlled movement on an activated glyph. However this is not monster controlled movement, it is poltergeist controlled movement.
Until and unless you can find an additional link expanding 'monster movement' into ' all OL control', then your conclusion is not only not obvious, it also has an illogical inconsistency.

dragon76 said:

Me too.

My inclination is to agree Corbon on this point.

However, I think it should be noted, that using Corbon's logic, Poltergeist should still be able to move monsters onto rubble or other impassable obstacles, since their restrictions specifically say "Heroes and Monsters cannot move through rubble". This restriction certainly follows the same schema of wording.

Additionally, since the JitD rules merely say that "Figures... must end their movement on an empty space" (which is the sole formal restriction on spacial coexistence), one could use the same argument that Poltergeist can move several units onto the same space.

-pw

phelanward said:

I thought you had an excellent point until I checked those impassable obstacles.
DJitD pg17
Rubble
Rubble markers represent a type of obstacle that blocks both figure movement and line of sight.
Water
Water does not block line of sight, but like rubble, it does block movement.

In both cases the obstacle blocks movement of the figure in general, not just movement by the figure. It is a subtle but real difference. This is more than just the fgure not being able to move (themselves) onto the obstacle, which is how the movement rules directly relating to movement by figures words it.

In short, there are actually two sets of rules for movement into rubble/water, and I believe you accessed/referenced only the more limited set that didn't cover the situation fully.

phelanward said:

Again, this is from the section implicitly about the movement by (not of) figures. We already know that movement of (not by) figures can break these rules from Knockback being able to knock over impassable obstacles of figures.
We also know that the 'empty space' rule mentioned here is well outdated (and just badly written, to not mean what it actually says. Figures can end in spaces that are non-empty, occupied by trees, pits and all sorts of other things, just not by stuff they can't end their move in (other figures, impassable terrain unless soaring etc).

In response to corbon then about large creatures. So you let them go in and out of trees without paying the 2 movement costs as long as they have a space outside a tree right? That was the way i was doing it but since someone noticed that incident (no we haven't played it yet quite strange since this is our 5th campaign but incidents clearly don't happen often enough to cycle them all i don't think we have even cycled the whole 44 dungeons yet must still be missing at least 9 of them) that said that an ape can pay 1 MP to enter trees so you are saying it is supposed to apply when the full 2 squares of an ape want to go into a tree. Seems kinda strange since there is a single outdoor tile that has that potential and i really wonder if they would do that. It is the same thing with the errata with the OAK trees that said that the trees were blocking movement only on small figures since until that time i was playing in error as everyone says that large creatures could ignore rumble and someone said if that was the case then why the errata since they can do that already.

I have seen alot of weird stuff even their movement is weird. By the way can a 2 space creature like an ape completely sidestep to the right or left? And by sidestep i don't mean moving 1 square diagonally as seen in the rules but completely sideways like moving sideways. Their whole movement is ackward as they can cover the same ground by using 1 point of movement or 2. Anyways i was wondering if their any develepoment from FFG since i love this game and i play ALOT of hours i would like to know that the company i have paid more than 250 euros to buy everything about it is covering me in rule support since these questions have been around the air for a long time.

wow, I didn't think I'd break out such a discussion about one rule o.O

Anyway, thank you all so much for your answers! It is greatly appreciated!

As for the Poltergeist movement - I can see both points valid, both make sense in some way or another. What threw me off as well was the wording on the card: "however you like"

However, I think it should be noted, that using Corbon's logic, Poltergeist should still be able to move monsters onto rubble or other impassable obstacles, since their restrictions specifically say "Heroes and Monsters cannot move through rubble". This restriction certainly follows the same schema of wording.

I don't quite get that - your sentence sounds paradox... should still be able to move monsters through rubble with Poltergeist, you say, but then you reason it with the restrictions that monsters can't move through rubble... makes no sense to me, - edit: nvm, I see what you mean now - but anyway, if I remember correctly, the Poltergeist card specifically states that you can't move them into obstacles. But I could be remembering that wrong...

by the way, what is meant when people say "vanilla" descent?!

Kyria said:

It depends on who is saying it and the context. Usually it refers to Descent games played from the quest books, not as part of an Advanced Campaign. Sometimes people use it to refer solely to a game played using the the base set with no expansions at all.