Hi. I have a question regarding encounters where the group fights a lieutenant.

First a quote from the RtL handbook, page 16;

"Sixth, if a hero kills the lieutenant, the heroes gain 250 coins and 4 conquest tokens..."

What happened was that the overlord used his lieutenant to commit suicide (his had blast 1, 1 hp left). So does this mean "a hero did not kill the lieutenant" and that although he encounter was won the players didn't get anything? B/c we players thought it was a very nasty stunt he (overlord) pulled there. Because if that is allowed, why don't all overlords always make their minions finish off the "BBEG", should the heroes not succeed quite in it? Isn't that kind of rude?

So in other words, the rules about doing suicides and negating awards from the players...I'd like to know more about this.

Thanks,

Aamaxu

I think you would have to take this as I think it was intended, rather than by the letter of the rules. Otherwise, as you say, the OL will be trying to kill off his own leaders near the end, which is a bit silly.

Otherwise, as you say, the OL will be trying to kill off his own leaders near the end, which is a bit silly.

Exactly my point, is this legit, rules-wise? This would mean the heroes gain nothing during that encounter, except for dying or so...

Hi,

one could argue that since you won't get a curse token when a master dark priest gets killed by indirect means, and you won't get 50 gold if a master monster gets killed by indirect means as well, the party won't get the CTs if the lieutenant dies in such a way. The rules *could* be interpreted that way, but I agree it would be kind of silly.

-Kylearan

To the best of knowledge, its completely legitimate for him to do that however:

A) Its extremely bad gaming for him to do so. I mean, is he that desparate to deny you 4 CPs?

B) Its his own fault for not getting his Lt out of there when he should have.

C) I probably wouldn't be playing another campaign with that OL.

There are always going to be cases where the Rules as Written can be manipulated by someone who thinks of a creative play that circumvents what the rules were written for. Then you get into reading it verbatim, or reading it for the concept intended and enforcing that. I'm usually of the mindset that you read the rules to understand the game, and then some technicalities will be discovered post-rules, and for these you have to make a reasonable decision. Applying the rules in this case, it seems most agree, is inappropriate, since the intent was not (presumably) that an OL could suicide each level leader and deny the heroes any CT. That's simply defeating the point of the level, if the heroes beat it, and force an OL to have to suicide, to me that's as good as killing him themselves. Tho this does go against the common rule that indirect kills do not reap the rewards of the kill.

For example one could ask, in regular descent, if there is a single red monster left in an area, and he's going to die, and he cant kill a hero to gain anything for the OL, can the OL attack himself, to kill him and thereby deny the heroes the 50 gold? Eh, I guess so, but we tend to play w/o such shady antics.

Added to the list of questions

Big Remy said:

I agree: I am sure it is legitimate for the OL to do so and then Deny the heroes the 4 CP's. I am not sure about treasure for winning the encounter though. I need the rules at hand to find out and unfortunately my game is somewhere else at the moment.

What I do disagree on is that it is bad playing on behalf of the OL and very unfair for the heroes. He just lost a Lt compared to that 4 CP's and maybe some hundreds of GPs is almost nothing. Sometimes I do something like this myself fx: Damage a creature with berserk with another creature to gain some extra dices. But these things are nothing compared to the heroes in my campaign lets start with the classic: Wake party members by hitting them when surprised in an encounter. Then there is all the rest like:

-knockbacking heroes to gain movement or come to otherwise unreachable places.

- fleeing encounters or dungeon that they could beat but estimate it would cost too many resources.

telekinesis....don't get me started on that one.

I sort of things that all groups have to decide either silently by gentlemans agreement or talk about if the campaign is going to be a "heroic Good VS Evil" campaign where no one uses dirty tricks or a "I want to win and I use every rule for that end". I don't think one campaign is more right than the other. Maybe you could say that the heroic approach is the roleplaying/cinematic approach and the other is the traditional boardgame approach.

-

From the FAQs that can be downloaded at the support page

"Q: If a master monster is killed via some indirect means,
such as being knocked back into a pit, a hero’s aura
ability, a lingering effect, or a familiar, who gets the
bounty of coins?
A: No one. A “killing blow” must be the product of an
attack roll."

So although very bad gaming on the OL part heros would get the 4 conquest tokens or gold.

Except it has to be an attack roll made BY the Heroes. That ruling doesn't cover the OL suiciding a Lt or level boss. FFG rarely ever takes into account that as a tactic.

Seppuku FTW!....lol...It's there fault in the first place that he got to kill himself, use an aimed attack if your unsure.

I think about it as an evil act, by an evil lutienant I mean...he sacrifices himself just to show them the finger, and deny them victory over him.

I don't think my players would cry about that for the simple reasons that they know I wouldn't play in any way that the rules would deny me.

I let them play the gauntlets and rapidfire combo at its full strenght, so while I'm not nerfing them, they shouldn't nerf me.

My opinion though, its pretty much allowed and as for a previous comment about not playing anymore with the OL that does that, fine with me, goes to show your mad at people who think outside the box. Not to start anything but it think house ruling something cause you think its unballanced, even though the rules allow it, is just lame. I find myself playing counter-strike and the admin disables the MP5-submachine gun...just cause he think its a stupid weapon, and its to cheap for the power it provides, I ...don't ...care..., It's still a weapon...like anyother, you can buy it too. Not the best example but the fastest thing that comes to mind, besides team fortress 2 in which they ban the grenadier...

gecko23 said:

What everybody seems to have forgotten is that in RtL no-'body' gets the rewards anyway. The hero 'party' gets rewards, not the hero who did the killing blow. This is a significant difference and IMO makes the ruling in the FAQ irrelevant for Dungeon Leader bonuses in RtL. SInce the interpretation that one of the heroes must do a 'killing blow' for the heroes to get the dungeon leader rewards would see them not get the runekey and be unable to progress, this interpretation must be incorrect. If you still wish to apply this rule-that-does-not-apply then you are required to also use the rule that anything which makes it impossible for the dungeon to be completed (such as the crushng block beside the invulnerable Beastman leader near the fountain) is illegal. Therefore Dungeon Leaders cannot be killed by anything other than a killing blow from a hero. Thats a pretty large twisting of the rules to follow one FAQ ruling which answered a question which does not apply in RtL anyway...

Simply put, the RAW do not require a hero to provide a killing blow in order for the party to get the appropriate rewards.

However, the killing blow rule would still apply for things (like Curses) that apply to individual heroes.

Corbon said:

Just to play Devil's Advocate, then why does it say on page 16 of the RtL rulebook say:

"Sixth, if a hero kills the lieutenant, the heroes gain 250 coins and 4 conquest tokens (instead of the usual 100 coins and 2 conquest they get for killing an encounter’s leader)."

It doesn't say "if the lieutenant is killed", it says if a HERO kills the Lt. That FAQ ruling doesn't override this statement that a Hero must be the one to kill the Lt to get the rewards. If the OL kills the Lt the Heroes get nothing for it.

As for level bosses on page 17/18:

"Upon killing the leader, the heroes immediately receive it and can open the corresponding red rune-locked door. Additionally, the heroes receive 100 coins and 2 conquest tokens for killing a dungeon level leader ."

"The dungeon leader has the same stats as a normal leader, but when the dungeon leader is killed the heroes receive 250 coins and 4 conquest tokens (rather than 100 and 2, respectively)."

The wording for dungeon level leaders is problematic. It never says a Hero must be the one to kill the level boss as it does for Lts but it can certainly be read that way.

As for the my whole "poor gaming" statement, obviously others feel different which is fine. Personally, if I'm playing OL and I'm stupid enough to get my Lt in a situation where he's going to die, I'm not going to take the cheesy way out to simply deny the Heroes 4CT. I was stupid, they deserve the reward for it. Just means I have to make 1-2 extra kills next dungeon to make up for the difference, and use Crushing Blow a few more times.

Well yes, I should make some clarifications here.

As the situation went, my character had grapple and due to the OL's brainfart I could grapple him thus prevent the lieutenant to escape. He had blast 1 and my char + another were constantly battleing him but unluckily for us he was left with 1 hp when the OL attacked us all thus killing himself.

Big Remy said:

Agreed, the wording is inconsistent and problematic - very poorly written.

Pg 15, Normal Encounter

when a hero deals the killing blow to an encounter’s leader, the heroes receive 100 coins and 2 conquest points.

This one is specifically a killing blow, by a hero....

Party Victory
If the heroes kill all of the monsters on the board, they win the encounter and may loot the bodies.

No mention of killing blow. '...the heroes kill...' could be read in several ways. One extreme would be if a single monster dies in any way other than a Killing Blow then it has not been killed by a hero and therefore there is no reward for the party. The other extreme is that 'the heroes' refers to the entire party and all its efforts, be they direct or indirect (in other words, anything that dies, dies, (at worst) indirectly, because the Party was present, therefore everything in the dungeon is covered by this).

Pg 16, Lt Encounter

Sixth, if a hero kills the lieutenant, the heroes gain 250 coins and 4 conquest tokens

This one has to be by a hero, but does not mention a Killing Blow. Is a hero's Aura part of that hero if it kills the leader? Is knockback into a pit the act of a hero? Both yes and no are true answers unfortunately. However, by the RAW, a Lt suiciding would not be the act of a hero (although it will be indirectly because of the efforts of one or more heroes), so the Party would not benefit.

Pg 17, Running the dungeon level

Upon killing the leader, the heroes immediately receive it (red rune key) and can open the corresponding red rune-locked door. Additionally, the heroes receive 100 coins and 2 conquest tokens for killing a dungeon level leader.

We are back to 'the heroes', so exactly the same as Party Victory on pg 16. Note in this case that the game fundamentally breaks down if the heroes can be denied the red rune-key. In fact it is FAQed as illegal (by inference) for the heroes to not receive the Red Rune Key. Therefore, 'the heroes' must be defined as "the entire party and all its efforts, direct or indirect" or we run into issues with Leaders having no wound tokens left but not 'being killed' yet (not dying).

Pg 18, The Third Level

when the dungeon leader is killed the heroes receive 250 coins and 4 conquest tokens

This one doesn't even mention the heroes! Should it be different to the other levels? Probably not...

Pg 21, Exploring the Overlord's Keep

The battle continues until either the Avatar kills all of the heroes, or the heroes kill the Avatar .

Again, we have 'the heroes' which, if it is not taken to mean both direct and indirect effects, can result in a neverending battle with only the heroes participating (the OL has suicided but the battle continues without him) - a draw?

Summary:

1. The only clear reference to a killing blow is a normal Encounter Leader.

2. Most common reference is to 'the heroes' which can be interpreted several ways. However, interpretations that do not basically mean "the heroes were present so they are the cause even if they just stood and watched" cause the game to break down in several ways.

3. One reference does not even include the heroes!

4. The RAW are inconsistent and mostly non-specific.

This seems like an area where consistency would be logical, although there is no real substance behind this feeling.

If one follows the RAW as best one can, it is not possible for the OL to conclusively deny the Heroes rewards for non-killing blow results except in the case of a normal Encounter.

I am pretty sure this has also been asked on the old boards.

I am sure the consensus was that each time a hero died (whether from terrain, monsters or suicide) the OL gets conquest, and each time a boss (or lieutenant) dies the heroes get their reward.

This was reached because of the sentence on page 17: "Upon killing the leader, the heroes immediately receive it [the red runekey] and can open the corresponding red rune-locked door. Additionally, the heroes receive 100 coins and 2 conquest tokens for killing a dungeon leader. "

It therefore follows, that if the heroes do not get the reward for a suicidal dungeon boss, they also cannot continue into the dungeon and everyone agreed that the OL should not be able to pull such low tricks.