If Dunhere has Unexpected Courage attached to him can he attack the SAME enemy twice if it's in the staging area?

Page 20 of the rulebook states:

"Each player can declare an attack (with any number of eligible attackers he controls) against each enemy with which he is engaged once each round."

I guess the question is, does the limit of one attack only apply to enemies you are engaged with?

A similar issue aries with Legolas in a multiplayer game is he ends up with Unexpected Courage. His Ranged keyword allows him attack enemies engaged with other players during my part of the Combat phase. Can I use him to attack a single Enemy engaged with another player twice? Can I declare one attack against the Enemy on my turn and the ready him with Unexpected Courage to assist another player when he declares an attack against the same enemy?

I would prefer the rules to be re-written to read:

"Each enemy may only be declared as the target of an attack once per turn."

Maybe we'll see this in the FAQ.

Brad Harrington said:

No you cannot attack the same enemy twice. You can attack two separate enemies with UC.

on page 20 towards the end where it says "once each round" helps clear that up

now the example with Legolas, I think you can attack the same enemy that your teammate has attacked seeing as you are not engaged with him.

I guess I wasn't clear in my post which side of the argument I support. I don't agree with your interpretation. I believe the "once each round" only applies to "each enemy with which he is engaged".

Since both Dunhere and Legolas have the capacity to attack enemies which you are not engaged with, they should be able to attack that enemy twice with Unexpected Courage (or even Quick Strikes).

I think it's a valid question. The first response contradicts himself by saying Legolas can and Dunhere can't even though both are not engaged with the enemy. It would seem to be both can or both can't. I myself would fall on the side of both can attack the same enemy twice in those circumstances because of the specific wording that "with which he is engaged"

I agree with the previous 2 posts. Legolas (controlled by player A) can join in on player B's attack as player B fights an enemy engaged with player B. Then Legolas readies up and solo attacks the same enemy engaged to player B (player B is not allowed to attack the same enemy twice, but the rules say nothing about Legolas shooting across the table twice).

As for Dunhere using his special ability, because the enemy is not engaged with the controller of Dunhere, I believe it is ok for Dunhere to smack the enemy in the staging area, ready up, and smack the same enemy again (still in the staging area).

The rules only prevent a player to declare multiple attack on the same target. There is no other restriction. At least in the actual state.

I agree there is nothing in the rules to specifically prevent Legolas or Dunhere from attacking the same enemy twice, because the rules do state that the player can only attack each enemy with which they are engaged once.

I guess my question is why would the designers let ranged characters and Dunhere attack the same enemy twice? If they can do it, why is it so important that other characters cannot? Whats the point in making that rule?

The "special ability" of a ranged character is to attack enemies engaged with someone else, and Dunhere's is to attack enemies in the staging area.

Surely the important part that their powers override is the requirement that the player be engaged with the enemy, I'm not so sure the intention was also let them over ride the single attack per enemy requirement.

perhaps it is, but IMO this seems to be a loop hole in the ruleset, rather than the designers intention for the powers, but what do I know about what their intentions were eh!?

Maybe one for the FAQ?

Pumpkin,

I agree it's probably more of a loophole than designer intent. Thus my FAQ suggestion:

"Each enemy may only be declared as the target of an attack once per turn."

Although to be honest, some of those enemies are pretty **** tough and it's nice to be able to attack them multiple times

I have to disagree... one shouldn't try to analyze the wording of every card in any possible way, only to create another advantage and thus make the game too simple - to many law students here, I guess

more important is also to play the game "as intended" - now, in lack of an official statement, anybody can say the game was intended like this and that, I have to admit - but wouldn't you also admit, that it seems logical - the fact being that you can attack normally once - that you can't attack twice at all?

I read the rulebook like this: "with which they are engaged" not to permit legolas and dunhere to attack twice, but to clarify that you can only attack enemies, with which you are engaged and not enemies in the staging area. that's the more "common sense" way - why would they be allowed to attack twice, their abilites already granting them some heavy rules bending? no reason... therefore --> attack only once...

unexpected courage is still VERY useful, though - you can attack another player's enemy or in the staging area and then ready the hero and fight against enemies against which you are engaged

pumpkin said:

Good point. It's entirely possible that FFG didn't want to open a can of worms by allowing multiple attacks vs the same enemy with which you are engaged. Any cards coming in later sets that key off of the idea of "each time you attack an enemy or any enemies that have a special ability in the future that has something to do with "each time this enemy is attacked" could and would get crazy. I'm just guessing here but it seems like a good rule to maintain simplicity as best as possible. We all know how these customizable games get insanely complex after several releases.

As to your 2nd paragraph, I think it's the card "Unexpected Courage" that is the problem, not the guys. They knew what they were getting into when they made such a powerful card that would be an FAQ nightmare (don't get me wrong, I love UC).

Your 4th paragraph raises an interesting point. Perhaps they wrote it that way because "being engaged to an enemy" is basically the only way you can really attack an enemy (barring exceptions). It really could be a loophole and that they really didn't intend for ANY enemy to EVER be attacked more than once. I suppose it's too late now. I'm curious (if) how the official FAQ is going to rule on this and some other situations as well.

Vyron said:

Yep, that pretty much sums up how I feel about it

How about this one. I attack Ungoliant's Spawn with all my characters leaving it with one hit point, I then play A Light in the Dark and throw UG back into the staging area, ready Dunhere with UC and then attack UG in the staging area dealing one point of damaging and killing the beastie.

I am not longer engaged with Ungoliant's spawn so do the rules stating you can only attack a creature engaged with you once still apply?

From the rules, page 20: After a player’s first attack has resolved, he can declare
another attack against any eligible enemy target that he has not yet attacked this round.

From the rules, page 24, re ranged attackers: In either case, the character
must exhaust and meet any other requirements necessary to make the attack.

I can find no evidence suggesting that ranged attackers or Dunhere can attack the same target twice. However the first quote suggests that Legolas or Dunhere could possibly attack an enemy, that has been attacked earlier in the round.

Casamyr said:

you may be no longer engaged - but you already attacked this enemy once (per round)... imo you shouldn't be allowed to do that, because of rulebook's wording... things like this would mean a doubling of dunhere's or legolas' strength in the end, which is too powerful...

What about Gandolf? He can come into play and dish out 4 wounds to Ungoliant's Spawn and then attack US that round if it's engaged right?

Hahma said:

Coming into play and dealing 4 wounds is not an attack.

Yeah, that's what I thought and the way I've been playing it. But just wanted to make sure after seeing some of the other concerns come up in this thread.

more important is also to play the game "as intended" - now, in lack of an official statement, anybody can say the game was intended like this and that, I have to admit - but wouldn't you also admit, that it seems logical - the fact being that you can attack normally once - that you can't attack twice at all?

I read the rulebook like this: "with which they are engaged" not to permit legolas and dunhere to attack twice, but to clarify that you can only attack enemies, with which you are engaged and not enemies in the staging area. that's the more "common sense" way - why would they be allowed to attack twice, their abilites already granting them some heavy rules bending? no reason... therefore --> attack only once...

Trying to determine how the designers "intended" the game to be played is a guessing game at best. I know of several occasions where virtually the entire community agreed on what the intent of a card was... only to have the official ruling go in a completely different way. The only concrete information we have at this time is the rulebook and the cards themselves. I agree that the "intent" may have been to only allow an enemy to be attacked once, but if I'm running a tournament I don't feel the rulebook or the cards clearly supports that ruling.

I do not agree that it is logical nor that is is it a fact that a character may attack only once. At no point is that stated (or even implied) in the rulebook. You may only declare an attack against an engaged enemy once per round and you must exhaust characters to do so. However, if you were able to somehow ready a character after an attack, there is nothing to indicate you couldn't then use that character to attack a different engaged enemy. The only limitation on which characters can participate in an attack is that they must be eligible (i.e. Ready, and potentially requiring card text or a keyword) .Therefore, "attack only once" isn't a rule and shouldn't be applied to this situation.

How about this one. I attack Ungoliant's Spawn with all my characters leaving it with one hit point, I then play A Light in the Dark and throw UG back into the staging area, ready Dunhere with UC and then attack UG in the staging area dealing one point of damaging and killing the beastie.

I am not longer engaged with Ungoliant's spawn so do the rules stating you can only attack a creature engaged with you once still apply?

Sounds like a perfectly legal play to me.

I think that these situations clearly call for a FAQ entry since there are several ways this could be ruled:

1. Each character may only be declared as an attacker once per round. (Vyron's suggestion)

2. Each enemy, regardless of their state (Engaged to you or an opponent or in the staging area), may only be the target of an attack once per round. So, if you have Ranged and another player declares an attack against one of the enemies he is engaged with you had better use the Ranged character since you won't have an opportunity to use him later yourself against the same enemy.

3. No limit on number of attacks per character or per enemy other than the one stated in the rulebook: Each enemy may only be attacked once by the player it is engaged with. If two other players have character with Ranged, they can each use that character to declare an attack against the enemy on their respective turns. Dunhere can attack enemies in the staging area as many times as he can be readied.

I'm personally pulling for option 3 since I feel both options 1 and 2 are too restrictive from a design perspective.

Brad Harrington said:

We seem to have misunderstood one another: your initial question was: attacking the SAME enemy twice, to which several others and I responded - no, attacking the SAME enemy twice would not be legal - just compare the quest phase: aragorn can commit to a quest, ready himself, but CANNOT commit himself TWICE, therefore doubling his willpower - he stays committed for that phase.

attacking TWICE in general is imo totally ok, if you can ready Dunhere with Unexpected courage, you can attack two DIFFERENT enemies - my suggestion was that you can attack the SAME enemy engaged with you ONCE per round (so disengaging and then attacking in the staging area wouldn't be allowed...) attacking one enemy engaged with another player with legolas, then reading him and attacking/defending against your OWN problems seems quite ok to me!

Therefore: Each enemy engaged with a player can only be declared as a target of the specific player's attack once per round (permitting the "aid" of other players, ofc)

regarding you second suggestion - the rulebook says something different - so I can attack another player's enemy with a ranged character in "my attack turn":

rulebook p. 24: Ranged: A character with the ranged keyword can be declared

Brad Harrington said:

I agree, that's they way we're playing it, and I feel it's supported by the rules as written. It's stated you only attack enemies you are engaged with once, and being engaged is also defined in the rules.

Thanks,

Don

Vyron said:

I think the point you are missing is the rules state a player may not attack an enemy "with which HE is engaged" more than once per turn.

So, let's say I have two different characters, both with the Ranged keyword. When it is my turn to declare attacks, I could declare an attack with one of my characters against an enemy engaged with you. (The rules are clear about this, no argument here). I could also choose to add the second character with Ranged as an attacker for that attack. However, I believe the way the rules are currently written, I could wait for the first attack to resolve and then declare a second attack with my second Ranged character against the same enemy since he is engaged with you. Now, I'm not sure sure there is much value to a play like this as an enemies defense strength would be counted twice, but that doesn't make it illegal, just not optimal.

Also, if I assist another player with an attack against an enemy with which he is engaged, I believe I can attack that enemy again when it is my turn to attack is I have an eligible attacker.

Vyron said:

The rule quoted doesn't specify it is an either/or decision. It doesn't say they cannot do both, as it assumes the character would be exhausted and therefore not eligible for more than one attack.

That rule is also a good example of poor wording on the part of the developers since it states a character can declare an attack, where elsewhere it clearly states the player declares the target of an attack and then chooses attackers. It should say "A character can is eligible to participate in attacks against these targets..."

Enemies in the staging area are not engaged with any player and the limit of one attack against the enemy per turn doesn't apply because that enemy cannot normally be attacked at all. Dunhere's card text overrides this rule and is written in such a way as to not place any limits as to how often an enemy can be attacked.

I totally agree with your post above - that's what I've written previously - sorry if my wording wasn't very clear. forget everything above and comment on this, if it please you:

to clarify finally: the ONLY thing I think impossible for now is to attack the same enemy TWICE per round as ONE player. So either I attack another one's enemy (via ranged modus) "with" him, OR later on my own (which makes no sense, no argument there), but NOT BOTH. also, dunhere can attack two different enemies in the staging area (via unexpected courage), NOT the same enemy in the staging area TWICE and also not an enemy I have already attacked (via Light in the Dark)... if anybody else pushes an enemy back to the staging area before my attack turn, however, then dunhere ofc may attack that enemy...

what do you think?