Got some games in today on the preview weekend. Love'n it!

One thing came up…Stun is nasty now. The way we read the card "Must use an action to discard stun, and can't take any other actions the turn you have stun" seems fairly clear that basically anything stunned loses it's whole turn now instead of just a single action.

This was particularly nasty in our game as one of the heroes has an ability to stun all minions who start adjacent to her. So basically those monsters get locked down until she moves or gets knocked away or something.

One of the players thought the card could be read another way, so that you only lose a single action if you discard the card as your first action, but the rest of us weren't sure.

Any thoughts?

It's pretty strait forward. You're 1st action point has to be used to remove stun and after that you're forced to lose the 2nd action point. The only time I see this not being the case is if you some how get stunned on your 2nd action point.

OK, so here is the card in question.

www.boardgamegeek.com/image/1310671/descent-journeys-in-the-dark-second-edition

The wording on the card indicates that spending an action to discard the card is the only action your can perform while you have the card . If you are stunned to start your turn. The only action you can perform at this point is to discard the card. Once you discard the card however you no longer have the card and thus can use that second action.

That is how I would rule it and wat I believe makes most sense based on the wording.

Unclechawie: I like that better, as it seemed very powerful the way we were playing it as it's a passive hero ability which doesn't require spending stamina or anything.

And now that the bloody haze of combat has cleared, and upon re-reading the card (thanks for referencing the image) I think your reading makes the most sense.

If I remember correctly, Adam and Daniel also ruled that it only makes you lose one action at Realms of Terrinoth.

I never played the game but the english seems very straightforward to me. The only thing you can do on the turn where you posess the card is discard it.

That means that after you discard it, you are still in the same turn as you were when you had it and, therefore, you do not get a 2nd action. To interpret it the other way is just hopeful.

You had the card, you discarded it, it is the only action you get during the turn where you had the card. Just because the card isn't in your hand anymore, it doesn't change the rule as your discarding of that card was you final action for that turn.

1 action for removing card sound fine cause it whould be to powerful if it consumes all 2 actions and if you want have gaming group after game where you chain stun others to death that they cant do anything you might not have group at all soon(most likely what is going to happen in our game if i don't find all the fails of wording and possible misunderstandable wording before geting the game).

Edit: Referencing Schmoo34

If that were the case, the "while you have this card" is completely unnecessary. It would simply read, "-> Discard this card or token. This is the only action you may perform on your turn." By adding in "while you have this card", it further specifies when on your turn you are limited to this action. While you have this card on your turn, the only action you can take it is to discard it. Once that is done, you no longer have the card, and thus, if you have any actions left, you may take them.

Unclechawie said:

Exactly this. The rider of "while this card is in front of you" means that its effects only apply while the card is still around, and once it's discarded, it's like you never had it (although you're still out an action).

Btw can you have more then one stun effect(multiple stun tokens/cards on same model) or does the last done stun effect stand only?

A single figure can have multiple different conditions, but only one of each condition.

schmoo34 said:

It is the correct way to interpret it, so not as hopeful as you might think.

they should have write while you have this card or token on bold so its easier to understand correctly and same for some other things that might not be so simple as they thought it would be.

Well, I agree the wording could be made clearer, still there's no sense of ambiguity at all if you just read the whole thing and follow the rules.

It basically says: "The only action you can take on your turn while having this card, is to use an action to discard this card." It says nothing at all about what you can or can't do after that's done. You're still on the same turn, yes, but you don't have the card. It's not "while", thus trying to look at it differently is completely irrelevant.

A better wording might have been "(action) Remove this card/token. You can take no other actions on your turn until Stun is removed."

After rereading the card I have to agree with everyone else that you don't lose your 2nd action point. It works like it did in 1st edition where you lose the ability to do more things.

So yes, I also agree now that you get your 2nd action point after removing stun.

If you're stunned when you start your turn, your first action must be to discard the stun. If there are no further stuns remaining, then you are free to take your second action. If you have a second stun on you, then you must spend your second action to discard that stun token as well.

Someone above said you can only have one condition on you at a time - I don't see that in the rules - can you cite the location of that rule?

Nevermind, I found the rule that states "a figure cannot suffer from the same condition more than once at any given time."

However, I stand by the rule that Stun only consumes one action, leaving the target with a second action to perform. Otherwise it's just too powerful and would be houseruled if it were otherwise.

MasterBeastman said:

I'm inclined to agree, and not just because the FFG employees at Realms 2012 apparently said as much themselves (according to another poster.)

If being Stunned made the hero lose his whole turn it would pretty darn close to being Defeated, excepting that the hero keeps his health and fatigue and another hero can't stand him up. FFG has dropped hints that there are effects which can "defeat" a hero other than being directly KO'd by an attack, which to me begs the question why Stun even exists if it's effects are so similar. Having two effects that accomplish basically the same goal doesn't sound very streamlined to me.

If someone wants to go digging for an official answer, there's always the Rules Questions link down at the bottom of the page, of course.

I can verify that at RoT the designers stated that Stun only results in the loss of one action, not two.