There are certain effects that make enemies do an immediate attack against a player. If this happens before the combat phase, does the enemy still attack during the combat phase as well? What about if such an ability happens during the combat phase? I've been playing it that they make two attacks, but I was wondering if some rule limited enemies to one attack a turn. I'm guessing not because enemies don't exhaust to attack from what I know. Thanks in advance!

GongShowHost said:

yes they still attack. so in the case of the bear in road to rivendell it attacks twice.

rich

And what about an enemy which makes a normal attack and the shadow card instructs him to engage the next player and make an immediate attack? Does this enemy attack a third time when it is the next players turn?

Yes I believe so. However if there is only one player in the game then there is no next player, and the shadow effect will not trigger. This is described in the FAQ, which uses Pathless Country as an example.

if you are right, then we played it wrong. we played a 2-player-game and the example enemy only attacks twice, not a third time.

On 7/25/2017 at 5:20 PM, JanB said:

And what about an enemy which makes a normal attack and the shadow card instructs him to engage the next player and make an immediate attack? Does this enemy attack a third time when it is the next players turn?

Since you are supposed to resolve shadow cards first, I think the enemy would engage the other player before resolving its immediate attack. If the player with which the enemy had been instructed to re-engage and resolve an immediate attack had not already gone through its defend against enemy attacks step during the combat phase, then the enemy would end up doing an immediate attack against the newly engaged player, and then a second attack against that player once it was his turn to defend during the combat phase.

If there had also been an immediate attack against the originally engaged player during the quest phase (due to a treachery card or whatever), then there would have been one attack vs. the originally engaged player, then two against the newly engaged player (assuming that newly engaged player is not the "first player").

There can be all sorts of variations on the above scenario, depending on the exact nature of the cards involved.

Could you maybe give a bit more info about exactly what happened (i.e., which cards were revealed, who was first player, how far you were in the round/combat sequence, etc.)? Might be easier to give you an accurate answer then.

57 minutes ago, TwiceBornh said:

Since you are supposed to resolve shadow cards first, I think the enemy would engage the other player before resolving its immediate attack. If the player with which the enemy had been instructed to re-engage and resolve an immediate attack had not already gone through its defend against enemy attacks step during the combat phase, then the enemy would end up doing an immediate attack against the newly engaged player, and then a second attack against that player once it was his turn to defend during the combat phase.

I agree with this. When I replied originally I overlooked the fact that the original attack would not resolve, since enemy is now engaged with the next player.

14 hours ago, jnicol said:

I agree with this. When I replied originally I overlooked the fact that the original attack would not resolve, since enemy is now engaged with the next player.

The original attack would resolve, since it has already begun -- continuing to be engaged is not a requirement for an attack to resolve.

4 hours ago, dalestephenson said:

The original attack would resolve, since it has already begun -- continuing to be engaged is not a requirement for an attack to resolve.

In that case I retract my retraction! Three attacks it is! I think I should bow out before I muddy the waters any further

Disregard.

On 26/07/2017 at 0:20 AM, JanB said:

And what about an enemy which makes a normal attack and the shadow card instructs him to engage the next player and make an immediate attack? Does this enemy attack a third time when it is the next players turn?

In this case, the enemy would attack a total of two times - once from the normal attack against the player which resulted in the "Engage the next player and make an immediate attack" shadow card, and once from that shadow effect. An enemy does not make additional attacks as a result of becoming engaged with a different player unless specifically directed to by a card effect. This is made clear by the FAQ.

On 26/07/2017 at 7:10 AM, JanB said:

if you are right, then we played it wrong. we played a 2-player-game and the example enemy only attacks twice, not a third time.

You played it correctly (assuming that the second attack didn't reveal a shadow card that caused yet another attack).

For me .. it will still 2 attacks. The one the enemy initially made and the second the shadow card forces him. A third one because he now is engaged with the next player on the next players turn seems to be "canceled" by the current FAQ:

Quote

Q: When an enemy that has already made an attack engages a new player during the combat phase, does it make another attack?

A: Not unless it is directed to by card effect

With regards to the original question the online rules reference guide very clearly states:

6.4a The active player (starting with the first player) chooses an eligible enemy that he or she is engaged with to resolve its attack. An eligible enemy is one that has not yet attacked this round and is still able to attack.

Therefore an enemy that made an immediate attack before the combat phase does not make another attack. It has already made an attack this round.

.

I can't argue the rules reference says that, but I can guarantee it's wrong.

Anybody who wants to see the final ruling, here's the ongoing thread.

Official response from the developer:

"Each engaged enemy makes an attack during the combat phase regardless of whether or not it made an attack outside of the combat phase."