If a shadow card poisons the defending character and that character becomes unconscious is he still defending or is the attack considered undefended ?…thanks !

I wondered about that myself. I don't think there is a clear answer written in the rules.

We are told that characters who are unconscious cannot defend against attacks. Certainly that means that they cannot be declared as defenders. But does that mean that they are removed as a defender if the defense had already been declared at the time that they became unconscious? I don't know!

Without official clarification, I guess it has to be a "house rule" at this point. Unless someone else has a good argument one way or the other…?

If you strictly follow the rules, I understand you continue to resolve the attack as usual, including the defense value of the defender.

So far, being "unconscious" only prevent you to defend against a subsequent attack.

I also have this question….

So i play like this: attack is goin be undefended. I like when more challenge

wlk said:

I agree with you, i think that if by a shadow effect it becomes unconscious it continues to be the defender for that attack. At least that´s how i play it.

I agree with Glaurang here. Until there is an official ruling I will play the more difficult way. Plus, it makes more logical sense that if someone is knocked unconscious that they wouldn't be able to defend against anything precisely becuase they are unconscious!

I checked with Caleb, and he said that i f a defender becomes unconscious during an attack, the attack is undefended.

kennoastic said:

I was sure about it.

kennoastic said:

Well, I faced the situation in my last two games, and indeed it felt more logical to rule this way.

The thing is to consider that "defending" is not only the act of declaring a defender, but also resolving the defense.

This is pretty evil, because when you face a 5 attack and try to block with a weak ally (1 or 2 hit points), not only you lose the ally defender (unconscious), but then you have to deal 5 damages to a hero (undefended), and also add the extra poison to this hero (which usually turns to a dead or unconscious hero).

On a sligthly related topic, would you be able to choose an unconcious character as the target of a poison effect?

Since he can´t be poisoned as per the unconcious rules it wouldn´t affect him but I´m not seeing a rule against such a move, to spare your other characters (and maybe try and keep that fat spider manageable)

Nerdmeister said:

Unconcious charachters cannot take poison. This clearly explane in rule book.

Glaurung said:

Absolutely right. But I´m not asking wether an unconcious character can be poisoned (because he can´t). I´m asking wether he could be chosen as the recipient for an effect like "Old Tomnoddy"´s Forced: At the end of each round, each player must give a hero he controls 1 poison", and simply just avoid it by being immune to it.

I´m personally leaning towards the notion that an unconcious character cannot be chosen because it´s not an eligible target. I can´t seem to find a ruling to support this atm. Maybe such a ruling is there and I have overlooked it but a reference to where I´d be able to find that rule would be appreciated.

Nerdmeister said:

I agree with this. Kind of like Beorn in Watcher in the Water: if Beorn and one other character attacks Grasping Tentacle and it ends up as an attachment, it has to go onto the other character because Beorn is ineligible.

I guess it's covered by this:

GrandSpleen said:

While I agree with your conclusion, I still see a flaw in the FAQ quote: it does not define what an eligible target is, just how to choose from among those targets. Nor does the venom/poison ability define what is an eligible target for it´s effect.

Are we to merely assume that being immune to an effect is the same as being an illegible target?

that last part was supposed to be "ineligible" of course

Official response:

If a card is immune to the effect that is seeking a target, then the card with immunity would is ineligible to be targeted. For example, the hero Beorn cannot be chosen as a target for a treachery effect with the text "attach to a hero" because he has the text "cannot have attachments." That treachery must be attached to a different hero instead.
In the case of unconscious characters and poison: each quest stage in that scenario explains that unconscious characters cannot be poisoned, so each unconscious character is an ineligible target for poison.
Regards,
Caleb

So pretty much what I suspected. Nice to have it confirmed.