Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wispur

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is still broken. Could a staff member at least confirm that they're aware of the problem?
  2. The number of extra decks people buy hoping to get a banned name will waaaaaaay outweigh the 4 or 5 decks they'll have to replace. And I am serious about the 4-5, as I think the vast majority of players (like 99%) would rather have the collector's item.
  3. Duty. I want to watch these two clans fight it out. Preferably with chainsaws. Or the Rokugan equivalent.
  4. I just want Dragon to keep a Keeper roles so I can hold on to my sweet sweet influence.
  5. This should probably be updated with the 'Way of the Lion' change. This just caused some confusion in our group, with this page not having the new ruling for the card.
  6. If it does ignore LOS (which is what we've been going with at our store), does it still require the target to be in the front arc? why or why not?
  7. I had thought of this, but then thought that contradicted the engagement rule, until WWHSD just clarified that I was doing that rule wrong. Then everything else slides into place (literally, using a close in). Thanks guys/gals!
  8. Huh, ?I think we assumed that "contacted edge" meant they had to be in contact (or at least I did). ie, you could only ever get a max of 3 threat on a character because only 3 trays could contact him (if counting corners). It was not my interpretation that it meant the entire edge. We've been playing with such small units that bigger threats hadn't come into play yet. But I see what you are saying.
  9. Aha! We missed that enemies count as obstacles. That clears everything up nicely, thank you!
  10. See, that was my initial thought too. That when the dead tray was removed, you'd be back just a little bit from the corner thanks to the pegs. BUT, that line of thought took me down another dark path. If that doesn't count as being corner to corner, then it's impossible to ever get +threat from corner to corner trays, because they're never actually touching corner to corner, and obviously the intention IS for them to still count as touching corner to corner (even if they're not actually touching) for purposes of threat. So in that case, it gets very uncertain very fast.
  11. So, the other night, I charged Ardus out of terrain at Kari, who was standing just a couple millimeters outside the terrain facing it. To get Ardus to fit when he left the terrain, he essentially had to be placed so his side was touching Kari. (in order to keep his back edge touching the terrain) Does this count as a charge? We assumed so because it was a collison of sorts. Do I square up his side to her side? Or am I suppose to reform to face her side? Reading the rules for squaring up, I can't actually pivot "around the point of contact" without either ending up back in the terrain or being on top of Kari's base. If it were a normal picot around Ardu's center it could be done, but that's not the wording...
  12. I see people assuming that you close in when only a corner is touching, and I get that is based on the diagram in the back of the rules book, BUT engagement states that you can be engaged through corners (34.3, first bullet point) and closing in only allows you to square up if not engaged, but you ARE engaged if corners are touching. It seems to our play group that 34.3 and the diagram in the back contradict each other. Is there something other than the diagram that states corners don't count as engagement, because so far we've only found things that say it does count. Although, in all fairness, 34.3 doesn't make much sense in regards to which facing you attack when you have a single tray, I guess you get to choose?
  13. Of that list, only the Infantry upgrades are in the first wave. For Undead, the first wave is the Infantry upgrades and the archers.
  14. Well, I know you definitely don't get an extra die from attacking from your rear. That was actually the part of the rules I mentioned above (41.1, third bullet point). What I'm looking for is where it specifically says you can attack from the rear. ie, if an enemy is engaged with the rear of your unit, you can still attack them back.
  15. We have a member of our group who believes that units are not allowed to attack to their rear. I believe his thought is that there is nothing in the rules (that we've found) that explicitly says "Yes, you can do this." For some of us though, we see hints in other entries that mention it kinda secondhand as evidence that it is allowed. For example the third bullet point in 41.1 described how a flanked unit that is attacking does not get nay rerolls. So, is attacking from the rear allowed, and is there anything that very specifically says that it IS allowed?
  • Create New...