I really feel that the ruleset of descent would be far more robust if "attacks target a space not a figure" ruling would be removed from the FAQ. I think the rules are simpler if attacks must target a figure first then have effects from there.

granor said:

Yeah but then what do you do about Blast? You could make it the exception rather than the rule I guess.

Neostrider said:

1. The first option. In all cases the attack is references in a singular fashion. However we know that in stage 6, when the attack is applied to figures, each figure responds differently with its own armour value etc. SO we have evidence of a stage 6 split and evidence of attacks being singular.

2. Yes to the first part, but your issue here with Soar, Fear and Ironskin all affecting the attack and changing the attack values (and therefore affecting/protecting all the targets of the attack is worng and demonstrates that you still haven't understood the concept of how abilities work differently.

3. Sorry, but you apparently don't know how they work. Each ability must be read carefully in isolation, and applied in a manner (and timing, and to what target) that it indicates. It might help if you think of various things as unique items, some of which are merely abstract entities. You have the Attacker (a 'real' figure). You have 'the attack' (an abstract concept with Range and Damage values and extra affects/abilities that are part of the attack (eg Pierce, Bleed etc). You have "the requirements for the attack to 'not fail'" (another abstract concept, which consists of no Xs, the required range from attacker to 'target'. You have the 'defender's response' another abstract concept which consists of the various things that happen in the course of changing 'the attack' to 'the result'.
'The attack' is a singular thing and remains a constant across all particular targets (that is, each target is affected by the same 'the attack'. Therefore, anything which affects 'the attack' protects every other target. This includes such abilities as Black Curse (specifically affects the attacking figure, which gains a penalty to 'the attack') and Fear (specifically affects 'the attack').
The requirements for an attack to affect that particular target may vary - a Stealthy target has an extra (clear) dice on which no X can be rolled. A Soaring target has an increased range requirement (not an increased range) for the attack to affect it. These abilities do not affect the attack - only the ability of the attack to affect that figure is changed, so they do not protect others.
The defenders response is always unique to each defender - armour various as does the defensive abilities which affect the defender. These defensive abilities affect only the defenders response to the attack, so they do not protect others. Examples include Ironskin (specifically affects the owning figure) and Ox Tattoo (specifically affects the owning figure).
Various abilities affect various of these unique parts. You must carefully read each ability to see which of these unique parts of the attack it affects.
Note that while the rules do not describe these unique, sometimes abstract components that I have described, the abilities do clearly describe the different 'targets' of the ability and how/when they operate. Fear is specifically 'the attack', Soar specifically 'the required range', Ironskin specifically 'the (Ironskinned, defending) figure'.

4. Not so. It is different for different abilities. You may be the only one left that thinks that all abilities only protect the owner. I think pretty much everyone else recognises that Fear, and Black Curse* can protect other figures just to start with. And that Ironskin, Soar, Stealth and Ox tattoo protect only the owning figures.
*Heck, Black Curse affects the attack even if the Black Cursed figure is not involved at all, as long as it is within 3 spaces of the attacker - it could be 15 spaces from any affected space and still affect the attack (assuming a range 12 bowshot for example).
I'm not sure why you have a mechanical problem with the rules. That it seems an abuse to you is a strange thing since Both Black Curse and Fear for example have both clearly written rules and are also very thematically suitable to protect lots of figures.

5, Well, in this case yes, SInce the Golems protection is Ironskin. Both thematically and rules wise it is an abuse to have the beastman protected by the Ironskin of the Golem. I think everyone is in agreement here by now. However Ironskin is specifically written to work differently from Fear. It would be both thematically and rules wise appropriate for the beastman to be protected by the scariness on the demon it shares a space with!

6. This paragraph isn't really clear to me but you've completely misunderstood how the abilities operate (differently, not all the same) so I suspect on that basis that the first part is pretty meaningless anyway. Incidentally, the evidence for this 'interpretation' is in the writing of how the abilities work and what they target as explained above. And the evidence for attacks being singular and not splitting until they are 'defended (step 6) is in the consistent singular language used when referencing attacks and ranges.
It is not unreasonable for them to reference 'attack or attacks' at least once somewhere in the rules - especially since both blast and breath were in the original DJitD and they knew from the start that more than one target would be affected by some attacks. Yet they never once did reference 'attacks' or 'ranges of an attack'. I think that it is unreasonable that they not do so even once when they knew that a single attack could and would have multiple figures responding to it differently in step 6, if not before'

Corbon said:

You missed my point: the creatures "react differently" by some of them seeing the attack fall short and also taking less damage as opposed to taking less damage in my view. Basically, I'm trying to dismiss the "problem" that you came up with when discussing the idea of "one set of parameters for attacks", but I wanted to allow my interpretation to continue working even when using your words.

For the record, it never says anywhere that attacks have to have "one set of parameters", and when you say that each creature is allowed to "react differently" to damage, you're just trying to semantically sidestep the fact that you would necessarily have different damage values for different creatures if one of them negates Sorcery (which adds to the damage or range parameter). There are several effects that can cause different creatures to have different damage parameters applied against them (not wounds) and there's no reason why the same should not apply to Range except for your subjective reasoning that range should never be different. For example, elevation causes the attack to be made at -1 Range and -1 Damage, so two figures in the same space (one elevated, one not) would suffer different attack parameters.

Really, the only thing that must be the same across all creatures is which surges, enhancements, and other optional bits (Sorcery) get put into range, and which get put into damage. Whether or not all creatures suffer the same parameters is covered in one sentence only: all figures take full damage. The rules aren't defined enough to cover these corner cases, and I think we've both proven that it's possible to make the attack rules say two mutually exclusive things and cause a breakdown when dealing with Ironskin.

I think it's time to write the FAQ question: it needs to be done in such a way that the answer will define this aspect of the attack rules and no other such problems can surface.

Big Remy said:

I would not allow blast to target an empty square. Given the fact that it increases the number of times you get to attack (basically). I would suggest the limitation of having to attack a figure instead of a square while odd is easily made up by the effect itself. Actually the number of players that woud complain about the new ruling would show that blast is still used.

Thundercles said:

Not so much missed that part of your point, as ignored it., I have already repeatedly argued against that point, and IMO disproved it. I didn't see the point in doing so again, then.

While it is not explicit that an attack has one set of parameters, all references to an attack and its range are singular. There are no references (I don't think, not got the pdf on this pc to check), singular or otherwise, to the damage of an attack (exceot that all creatures take full damage, which is supporting evidence). However, SInce the attack is singular, the range is singular, it is logical to assume that the damage is singular and the effects are singular. This all follows consistently with the rules. Then once you get to step 6 we are told to apply the attack (at all times until now referenced as singular, including the only parameter referenced) separately and individually to each 'target affected by the attack.
All affects that change the attack parameters are either 'global' (affect the attack) of secifically affect the 'target figure. Ahh, yes, except Elevation. Elevation is a problem as that is a n individual affect that affects the attack. I accept that this one causes problems (it is the only thing so far) and the most accurate way of resolving it is to take the elevationof the space targeted. as this is where the attack 'hits'. However that breaks the rule of large creatures getting the benefit of terrain that any part of them is in, so its not a perfect solution.

Really, I'm not sure why you think the only things which must be the same are surges, enhancements and optional bits. The dice are the same (except specifically excepted for Stealth), the attackers skill and equipment bonuses are the same. In fact everything is the same except things which affect the target figure (and Elevation). Since the target (affected) figure doesn't come into the attack equation until step 6, where we are specifically told to treat each targeted figure individually (therefore 'splitting' the attack, the entire attack is the same until step 6 (except for Elevation).

I think the FAQ question is probably best addressing the precise attack sequence rather than the Ironskin/sorcery problem directly, as that will cover more future problems surfacing.

granor said:

Then by doing that you completely nerf Blast, IMO.

Corbon, please understand that I DO understand how the abilities apply. You challenge my statement of understanding how they work by listing abilities I do not list.

"You may be the only one left that thinks that all abilities only protect the owner. I think pretty much everyone else recognises that Fear, and Black Curse* can protect other figures just to start with. And that Ironskin, Soar, Stealth and Ox tattoo protect only the owning figures." - Corbon.

I did not bring up abilities such as: Black Curse, Ox tattoo, or stealth. I bring up Soar and Ironskin because those two abiliies are the two abilities you seem most against me. In an instance where two figures share a space your interpretation. We seem to agree with how Soar would play out, but your idea of how Fear and Soar and Ironskin interact with the attack is interesting. Soar clearly says range to the figure is +4. This is odd because it doesn't say it applies to the attack or range of an attack.

"Any figure with Soar is considered to be flying above the ground, and the range both to and from it is increased by four spaces." - RtL rulebook.

RAW Soar doesn't apply to an attack, just the range to 'it.' It is clearly the figure, but in your interpretation of how Ironskin works, you're not targeting the golem, you're targeting the square. Because this is how it works in your idea, applying that logic to Soar means its broken and won't work. If you ask, "But once range is enough the special defensive abilities would apply." than I"d point out that Immunity to Sorcery range isn't retroactive in your example and so range increases by Soar wouldn't be.

So pick your poison: Defensive abilities happen before hiting the square (Ironskin works against sorcery range, Soar works) or Defensive abilities happen after range has been determined to hit (Ironskin doesn't work against sorcery range, Soar is broken). This happens because Soar applies the range increase TO THE FIGURE, NOT THE ATTACK.

My problem with Fear is that if the attack is applied seperately, then does the ability to ruin the attack happen before the attack splits or after. This begs the next question, the one I've been asking and trying to admit that NO SIDE CAN KNOW FOR CERTAIN: "Does resolving hit/miss happen [per figure and damage applied] or [once and then all effects are applied per figure]. Damage is obviously applied seperately, but resolving hit or miss is not clearly defined in a multiple figure situation, and we cannot know when that happens in the order of operations. Because the rules were NEVER written in a way that clearly defined how multiple figure resolution works, we CANNOT possibly know for certain. "The attack" in the Fear description could mean, "The attack as a whole" or "the attack against this figure."

Edit: After reading Stealth I am more inclined to allow fear to affect the attack as a whole, but only because Stealth was given special consideration in a multiple figure situation. Fear sadly doesn't have any consideration on how it would affect multiple figures. Out of curiosity, if two figures with Fear 2 were beside each other and both affected by the attack would you require 2 or 4 surges to be spent? 2 surges implies that those two surges are applied sperately to each figure's fear. 4 surges seems to satisfy the idea of having Fear apply to all monsters, and thus stacking as abilities normally do. I'd say 2.

Big Remy said:

When you say Nerf are you saying that blast is less powerfull than it was? This a agree with. Are you saying the power level is so low now that you would not use blast anymore? This I disagree with. Blast is the only weapon effect that increases the number of attacks you are allowed to make in one turn.

You're nerfing it as in making it less useful. Being able to target an empty space, and hit a monster around a corner outside of LOS is one of the most useful things about Blast IMO. If you switch to it having to target a figure, you competely remove that aspect of its power.

Of course I would still end up using it, but probably less than I do with the way it is written now. Removing the target an empty space part basically turns a Blast weapon into every other magic weapon out there with the noted exception of it being able to expand its damage radius.

Big Remy said:

Yes just like every other magic weapon except for the fact that these magic weapons allow you to attack multiple times a turn, something no other weapon ability in the game allows.

granor said:

Okay, just for clarification here when you say "allow you to attack multiple times a turn" do you really mean that? Because Blast weapons don't grant you extra attacks. It does ONE attack that hit MULTIPLE targets, which is very different. The OL plays one Dodge card on that attack, and you roll an X, the attack is over and so its your attack for the turn (unless you battled).

If you want to houserule the thing for Blast, that's fine. Just IMO it takes away from its usefulness forcing it to have to target a figure.

Neostrider said:

1. Well, you keep providing evidence that you misunderstand ('defensive') abilities. They do not all apply at the same time or to the same things. You did it in the post I replied to, you've done it again in the post I am replying to now.
Neostrider, earlier: "Corbon, I don't understand your breakdown of the abilities. .... Affecting the attack is quite obviously what they are doing" - but they are not. Some affect the attack, some affect the requirements of the attack (not the same thing as the attack itself), some affect the defender (not the same thing as affecting the attack.
Neostrider, earlier: "With a single attack ironskin, soar, and fear would affect the outcome of the whole attack, changing range and damage values" - no, they wouldn't (all, Fear of those three does affect the outcome of the whole attack) because each is applied in its own specific manner. Ironskin is applied to the defending figure, so does not affect the whole attack. Soar is applied to the requirement for the attack to affect the soaring figure, not to the attack,
Neostrider, earlier: "I am becoming aware that I'm the only one that thinks a single monsters abilities should only benefit the monsters listed in that ability. This means for many abilities, they say that they affect the attack." No, some do, some don't. While you may have only meant a(n undefined) subset of abilities (which to be fair you did say 'many' rather than all in the second clause) the first clause seems to include all abilities the way you wrote it. I apologise if I misunderstood you but in combination with the other evidence that you are lumping all the 'defensive' abilities together it seems a fair assumption you were here too.
See also your 'current' paragraph 3 above, where you insist that all abilities apply at the same time, either before X or after Y. Also your entire paragraph 2 above is based on both Soar and Ironskin working the same way, when they do not. You still seem to misunderstand.

2. Agreed, RAW Soar does not apply to an attack, it applies to the 'range to it'. The 'it' refered to is very clearly the required range for the attack to affect the soaring creature. You always target the space, not the figure. So the range to the space will in fact be 4 less than the range required for an attack hitting that space to affect the Soaring figure in that space. I've been over this in details before...
Figure A wants to shoot figure soaring B. The range required to hit the space B is in is, say, 6. Figure A rolls dice, adds skills abilities etc which affect the attack and comes up, at the end of step 5, with an Attack of Range 7, Pierce 2 and Damage 13. The attack does not 'fail' because there was insufficient range. It still successfully hits the space, and if there is another non-soaring figure C in the space then C is affected by the attack normally. However, Soar very clearly says that the range (required) to the soaring creature is increased by 4. So in order to affect the Soaring creature, the attack must have Range10. Since it does not, the attack is unable to affect the Soaring creature. Soar protects the creature by affecting range required even though the space not the creature is targeted because Soar is not applied to the defending figure. It is applied to the requirements of the attack before it can hit the defending figure.
Ironskin OTOH (and therefore the immunity to Sorcery) is applied to the defending figure. Which means that it does not affect the attack, or its requirements. It affects the defending figure. By the time the defending figure is affected by the attack, Range has already been resolved as being enough to for the attack to succeed - by definition, since the defending figure is already being affected!
Soar and Ironskin work differently. If you try and make them work the same then you will have problems - however you will have already broken one of them to create those problems, so you have only yourself to blame!

3. No, no, no. Defensive abilities are applied at their own specific time. Some, like Black Curse, apply before you (successfully) hit the space. Others, like Soar, apply after you successfully hit the space but before you successfully affect the monster in that space (actually I think Soar might be unique in working that way). Others apply after hitting that space has been resolved successfully and affecting the defender has been achieved. Its not one or the other!
While Soar affects the "Range to the Figure", it is not an affect on the figure. It is an affect on the requirements of the attack.
DJitD pg 10 Step 4: "If the total range rolled is lower than the required range needed to hit the target, the attack fails and no damage is done". In this case, Soar only applies to the Soaring creature and so the attck can both succeed (have enough range to reach the target space) and yet still fail (due to lack of range) against the Soaring creature only . This is unusual, but is a direct result of the way Soar is written.

4. Fear is simple. Fear says the attack fails. Since by definition Fear must be applied during step 5, when surges are spent, and we are all in agreement that spending surges and enhancements etc are collective for all subjects of the attack (ie before the attack is 'split') then we can see very clearly that Fear is applied to the entire attack (before it can be split) and effectively protects everybody (happily, that also fits thematic logic for most people).
This whole 'rules were not written for multiple targets therefore we cannot be certain' argument just does not hold any water whatsoever IMO. We know how to do attacks. We know that attacks can hit more than one target (blast and breath are in the original rules). Therefore we are compelled to follow the normal rules for attacks as default. We have no excuse for changing rules or making up extra rules just because FFG didn't bother to write the attack rules again with multiple targets. The standard attack rules work fine. Do the attack. Add in all affects which affect the attack. Apply the attack to the figure. Apply it to the next figure. Apply it to the next figure. It's easy, it works, you just have to follow carefully what the rules say in each particular circumstance.

What's interesting about Fear is that it will stack. Do an area attack against multiple Fear monsters and you have to pay for Fear for each one .

The only condition that approximates Sorcery vs Ironskin would be Elevation. I feel that we have two legitimate ways of seeing the attack sequence, with only subjective arguments against both, so we should concentrate on figuring out how to as a yes or no question (or possibly a series of yes or no questions) that will nail down exactly what happens when a defensive ability reduces Rolled range when a monster is affected or attacked .

I appreciate that there are other abilities that are not 100% clear, but the one's we're worried about are Ironskin (when dealing with Sorcerous Range) and other abilities that may or may not reduce Rolled range when applied to specific figures. Soar increases the Range target, Fear is another effect entirely, and Black Curse (and others) reduces Range for the whole attack (not just 1 figure), so discussions on them really should go somewhere else, at this point. I personally feel that we've managed to dismiss any analogies between Ironskin and any other ability, since it's pretty unique (Elevation is a separate, non-ability concept).

Just want to tell you that I love this discussion. Not because it has solved anything in the sorcery vs. Ironskin question (since it has not); but because it has made most participants think through every other attack/defence ability in the game; and it has cleared up quite a few uncertainties I've had

Thanks all!

Big Remy said:

Yes I mean one attack on multiple targets, however, you seem to consider this ability as if it is less powerful than using blast to attack a figure out of sight. I was emphasizing the fact that blast will damage multiple targets. Attacking one or two targets a turn is fundamental to the rules of descent. Being able to break this rule is very powerful. Please forgive my hyperbole.

I am not discussing a houserule. I stated that the attack rules for descent as a whole would be more robust if they targeted a figure instead of attacking a square. I hold no hope that FFG will actually do this.

granor said:

Actually, I think that the attack rules are quite robust as they are (appalling writing aside - the actual rules parts are pretty robust if you can get past things like accurately separating different functions with the same terminology). The main problem is that people are overly casual about applying them because most of the time it is not necessary to be careful. And then people don't like the way they work or don't seem to be able to understand applying them because they thematically want some different conclusion.


Targeting a figure rather than a space would cause issues with Sweep (which figure do you target), be confusing for Breath, and change a number of other rules significantly - such as multiple figures in the same space (you would presumably now hit/affect only 1 for example). It is not unmanageable, but it is no better than targeting a space. I see no reason why FFG would bother to change this having made a decision once, and backed up that decision with further interpretations in the FAQ.

Corbon, my biggest point about Soar and Ironskin is that you seem to wait to apply Ironskin and Soar until after range has been determined. Both entries are non-specific about when they are applied. Soar only states that it "the range both to and from it [the figure] is increased by four spaces." Using the targeting a space rule that would mean that this modification to range would happen when you apply non-descript abilities. Ironskin is also non-descript about when it is applied.

So for my comparison we have two abilities, both non-descript about when they are applied, and you seem to be treating them differently. In the event of Sorcery, anytime Soar can be applied to an attack Ironskin could also. Since soar MUST apply before the final range comparison and Sorcery range would have to apply before the final range comparison then Ironskin would be active too, so it would cancel Sorcery range.

Neostrider said:

But they are not at all non-descript. We have specifics for both.
Soar explicitly applies to the required range for the attack to affect the Soaring figure. So the only time Soar can be 'applied' is when you check, for that figure, whether the range of the attack is high enough to affect that figure. ie, before the figure is affected. This is basically at the end of step 5 (effectively also the beginning of step 6), after all affects and expenditures which can change the range of the attack have been resolved. The key point though, is that Soar, by its very definition, must be applied before we can tell if that figure has been affected.
Ironskin is explicitly applied to the 'defending figure' (not to the attack) and thus, logically, can only be applied after the attack has already been proven to have affected that figure.
So you can see that we do have specifics and the specifics we have clearly indicate different timing for their application and each must be treated differently.

FWIW, it works like this.
You do all of steps 1-5, targeting a space, applying effects which affect the attack, spending surges etc. That gives you the final attack components - X range, Y damage, Z specials. By this stage we know that the attack has failed if it has rolled an X or the range (X) is insufficient to reach the target space. We also have no mention of defending figures, though some of them (and also some that are not affected by the attack) may have abilities which affect attacks directly and may therefore have been applied at that stage. Then X/Y/Z is applied to each figure(s) in the space(s) affected by the attack. When we attempt to apply X/Y/Z to the soaring figure, we may find that X is no longer enough to affect that figure, so the attack fails against that figure - it fails without ever successfully affecting that figure - lacking the reach so to speak. It may still succeed against other figures though. If it succeeds then it has affected that figure, and then abilities which affect that figure will modify that figures 'response' to the attack. Ironskin is one of those. When we apply X/Y/Z against the Ironskinned figure we cannot use the Ironskin effect until we have already decided that the attack is a success, not a failure. At that point, the Ironskin 'kicks in'. Reducing the range of the attack is now not relevent as the attack has already been confirmed as successfully affecting that figure. So dropping the Sorcerous Range component has no practical effect - range is only an issue in order to initially affect the target and the target is already affected. Backdating the range introduces the loop, because if you backdate the range then the Ironskinned figure is not affected so the Sorcerous range cannot be removed so the range is enough and the ironskinned figure is affected... OTOH, the figure is only now having Y/Z (damage and specials) applied to it and Ironskin is 'activated' so some damage and specials may 'fall off' due to the ironskin.

angel1977 said:

I'm glad somebody is getting something out of this!
Its also been enlightening (well, clarifying) for me, to be forced to really parse down how attacks work.

Corbon said:

Soar 'indicates' that it is applied when counting range, and you're assuming that ironskin is 'logically' applied after the attack hits. I'd like to point out that this is a 'when does ironskin kick in' is asked. the target is obviously checked to have soar or not before determining the hit, so why not Ironskin? You say its because its applied to the defending figure, but we HAVE NO DEFINITION OF WHEN THAT MEANS ITS APPLIED.

It seems like this:

You say: Soar affects the attack. Ironskin affects the defending figure. These are two different steps.

However

Soar says "Any figure with Soar is considered to be flying above the ground, and the range both to and from it is increased by four spaces." Nowhere in the entire entry does it say when it is applied. Worse still for your case, the increase in range is applied TO THE FIGURE. This implies that the range required to hit could be different then the range required to hit the square. You interpretation of 'hitting' is having sufficient range to hit the square, because the square was the target. Saying you need to have range to hit the figure being affected by the attack would make Soar work, but with the fact that figures are considered before hit/miss resolution.

I say: Soar may affect the attack. Soar works such a way that it MUST have been activated before hit/miss resolution. Soar works on a per figure basis of range. Ironskin says "A figure with ironskin gets..." and so we have no clear definition of when that works either. It doesn't even say 'defending figure' it just says 'a figure with ironskin is immune to ...". So your basis on why these two abilities happen at different times is because you want it to be that way.

Neostrider said:

Indeed the range needed to hit the figure with soar is different than the range needed to hit the square. That's the whole point of soar. You count the range to the square for checking whether the attack hits or misses; but unless you got range + 4 the damage won't be applied to the soaring monster. If the attack was blast x it would be applied to neighbouring monsters though.

If we try to apply logic here (which I know we should not try to do) one could treat the soaring monster as being 4 "range" away from its square, thus any attack on it using blast x would not affect neighbours unless it was blast 4 (or they themselves were soaring). Breath and bolt attacks should probably not hit it (unless they target it directly). And so on.. would be a mess to write rules for

Neostrider said:

1. Ironskin is an effect on the defending figure . Therefore by definition it cannot be applied unless the defending figure has been affected by the attack. This has been pointed out to you a large number of times, in a large number of subtly different ways in the hope that one of them might get through... Having ironskin before the attack affects the figure doesn't matter, because Ironskin's affect is applied to the defending figure. It is not applied to the attack or its requirements to succeed, it is applied directly to the defending figure. Therefore, Ironskin 'activates' when the defending figure is affected. We don't need a definition for this, it is inherent in the language used. We don't have a definition for Red in the rules either, yet we know which monsters are Masters...
Soar is an effect on the range required for the attack to affect the figure. Soar is not an effect on the figure itself.

2. Subtle difference. Soar affects the range required by the attack, not the attack itself. But affecting the attack and affecting the defending figure are different steps.

3. The increase in range is not applied to the figure (unless you are incapable of understand abstract language), it is applied to the range required by an attack to hit that figure, or to hit another figure from that figure.
The range required to hit the Soaring figure IS different from the range required to hit the square. However, that does not invalidate the fact that the first (well, second - no X on the dice is the first) hit/miss resolution only requires that the range to the space be sufficient.

For your clarification there are really multiple ways and several stages an attack can fail/miss and some fail/misses are specific to individual creatures and some are generic/total for the entire attack.
i) if an X is rolled. Unless there is a reroll available stop right there. An attack can both succeed and fail against different creatures here due to the stealth die. This is step 4.
ii) if the range is insufficient to reach the target space (after rerolls, surges are spent and abilities etc which affect the attack are added/subtracted) at the end of step 5 (even though it is mentioned in step 4 - we are explictly given step 5 in which to achieve the requirements in step 4, so it is really an end of step 5 check). This fail is total, for the entire attack.
iii) if an affect which directly causes the attack to fail (Fear is the only one so far) does so. Currently that is in step 5 when surges are spent, and applies to the entire attack.
iv) if, when applied to a figure (therefore at the start of step 6), the attack is found to have insufficient range to affect that figure (even though it has already succeeded in having sufficient range to reach the target space. This failure is restricted only to that particular figure and is before that figure has been affected by the attack.
v) if, when an attack is applied to a figure successfuly (and thus getting to the stage of affecting that figure) an affect on that figure causes the attack to fail to affect the figure (eg Shadowcloak if the attack was from a non-adjacent space). Sorry about the mouthful in that sentence! This is in step 6, but later than iv), and the failure is restricted solely to that figure.

4. Soar does not affect the attack, it affects the requirements of the attack to succeed.
My basis on the timing of these abilities is the wording and the fact that to follow the rules and wording of the abilities the timing is required to be that way. Other timings mean that the wording of the abilities is not correct or the rules are being bent.

angel1977 said:

These issues (Soar with blast/breath) have been solved by a FAQ answer that effectively states that Blast and Breath ignore Soar.

I know. I was stating how this would look if we did it with logic, which we don't