And Katsuyori, think about Descent: Journeys in the dark. Descent works the same way, where a character can start and finish movement with or without an action at any point in their activation (but after having declared what their action will be). Such an activation is called an advance and is written in the rules almost as simply as I just stated. When the rules declare an outline for an activation, it is a 100% must. A person can

-Advance

-Run

-All-out attack

-Order

(or something very similar to that). You MUST do one of the following, because there is NO point to standing still. You wouldn't not do a guard or dodge order, even when apparently safe, unless you wanted to be an ass to your teammates because your characters are all neck ****** deep in a nest of enemies.

You wouldn't stand still in tannhauser unless you want to be an ass to your opponent. If your character is too much of a wimp to stand up against whoever you are playing against because you ****** up tactically and you have no CP- too bad. Have some balls and fess up to your mistake and take it to the face. I know it's just a game and I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay ****** overreacting and trying to take out frustration on something totally unrelated, but at the same time..

It's a game, why can't you allow your opponent a SINGLE attack against you when you **** up and they have every right to?

I apologize for my internet etiquette. I don't mean to argue, it's just that there's 2 **** pages and a subject that I think the rules CLEARLY cover and i have NEVER had a problem with.

I see what you guys are saying, but I think - AT BEST- the rules state either way 50/50%

I see that when it states "can move and take one action" it refers to a vague outline, but then it takes that vague outline (of the broad term of acting and the various ways of moving) and then declares in direct sentences what a character performs. I sincerely believe that following the pattern of rules that it would also bullet "Neither Move nor Act" because otherwise there would be no point to saying "without moving" under "Act" and "without taking an action" under "Move". Sure you can Move without using the full value, even reduce that value to 0- but the latter is "without moving".

And I could see Miah's skipping activation, but like Katsuyori I also like to be very prudent about words. The rules state you MUST signify that a character has been activated, and ONLY makes mention that a turn ends when all characters have been activated or put on overwatch.

All I'm saying, is that if you should want to do nothing- you should be under that "on overwatch" category. The only difference.

Totally off-topic, today I beat my friends who were using Asteros!.....

It was capture the flag...

And I didn't even bother trying to put wounds on him...

And I was matriarchy...

But hey! I was using the starting point on the red path, and guess what ******* path they put a fire grenade on before I had all my voivodes out and 1 of 2 was trapped?

And hey! Was loving how Irishka's meteops target circles and not characters and how any character currently standing in makes it detonate! Take THAT Hoax!

Clam, calm down a little, and send you thoughts to FFG and see what they say, I personally never alter the way I play without an official ruling, but that's just me.

But that said, your strict interpitation of the rules on pg 10-11, does seem acurate, but those of us playing since the 1.0 days have never played it like that, and maybe we just need to read the 2.0 rules a little better.

And, I'm very sorry for your loss, I hope your venting here helps.

Grandclam ... fwiw you don't seem to be overreacting to me .... But then, I play Overwatch and Activation the same way you do

I'm very sorry for your loss - I lost one of my best friends over ten years ago and it still hurts

-JohnMcK

@ GrandClam

I'm sorry for your loss, but your violence is excessive. First of all we need to be quite, and it's yet difficult after reading of your offensive posts. Then, you could try to ask this burning question to FFG instead of barking.

Repeat, I'm really sorry for your loss: you need all your friends and your relatives in this moment, but you don't need to shout with us.

Just repeating my forespeakers: I am also sorry for your loss. I hope you´ll recover properly.

And do not worry, no harm done. Until now, it seemed to me just to be some normal (a little bit enthusiastic) discussion about somewhat unclear rules and people trying to figure out how it really works, pointing out own arguments, experiences, and interpretation of words. No problem for me, it is like "daily business" for FFG players.

@ GrandClam: I can only agree with everything Katsuyori just stated. I'm really sorry, and I don't think there's harm done by your enthusiastic posts.

However, I have to point out the following: Altough every character has to be activated during each turn, the characters can't be forced to actually do something that would trigger overwatch. It's quite clear that a character isn't forced to carry out an action. But he also isn't forced to actually move because he isn't forced to spend any of his movement points (page 17 in the Revised Rules, "Moving"). So if a character spends 0 Movement points to "move" 0 circles, he would not trigger overwatch because he didn't move onto a circle belonging to the path of the character on overwatch. At least, that's the way I understand the rules.

If anybody thinks that this leads to an unfair situation or makes overwatch not worth it, they should note: The character in question has effectively lost his entire activation and every enemy character is free to move in and gun him down AND the character on overwatch is still on overwatch and ready to attack everyone that comes in for support.

I can just support Katsuyori with her Mexican Standoff-idea, so both characters looses their activation and we'll play it that way. Nether got in such situation until now.

??! said:

Just my thought. I agree.

Good feedback here, folks. Thank you.

During the game, I interpreted it the way Grandclam did, then I posted to see if I made the right call. Sounds debatable.

FYI - this wasn't someone trying to be a jerk. This was a new player asking the question so he'd know what his options were.

Thanks,

- netgeist

Well they could both be on overwatch staring eachother down lol. What if one character is on overwatch and the other character is on the same path and moves out of path.. i understand that that doesn't trigger overwatch since you're not moving on the overwatch characters path.

??! said:

The way i see it, it still an activation + CP vs activation only... So the overwatch is going to be at a loss, maybe they are just 2 chars away from the fight trying to complete an objective and no one is comming, or maybe people are comming but not on the same path, or maybe he gets to use his overwatch after all on another char, but i really doubt all of that, since if you are not going to activate someone to deny an overwatch, for sure its going to be your last activation, or in this case your last non-activation... So again, activation + CP > activation only! To counter like GrandClam said and also spend a CP to be on overwatch too, thats for me the mexican stand up you all talk about, thats the same cost for both sides and that can be funny, but i still think they both would shoot each other, its war! Not a movie or a comedy or a play...

So thanks GrandClam for your interpretation of the rules, thats my interpretation from now on, but makes the fire granades hell. And sorry for your loss...

Otar said:

Just remember: No one forces a player to put a character on overwatch. The player does it voluntary and not without reason. Furthermore, the player putting a character on overwatch knows that maybe overwatch won't be triggered. So if anybody thinks overwatch isn't worth it in a given situation, he just won't put a character on overwatch.