Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Halit

Skirmisher Card Precision

8 posts in this topic

Hi there. It's a feedback from France, so pleas, excuse my fresh default or my default of english.

I got a question about the card Unrelenting.

It say:

 

Exhaust this card after resolving an attack with a Melee weapon with 1 hand icon. Perform an attack that targets one of the same monsters with a different Melee weapon with 1 hand icon.

 

 

So, the question is: Is there to many word or not enough?

Perform an attack that targets one of the same monsters 

 

 

do it meen "perform an attack that targets one monster(sof the same monster group"

 

This way, you can attack any monsters from the same group in l.o.s.

 

or "perform a second attack that target (one of) the same monster(s)" (If your attack is able to affect various monsters as you were with the new crossbow)

 

That way, you can re-attack only the first targeted monster.

 

Edited by Halit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It means you perform a second attack targeting one of the monsters affected by the first attack. You may not target a monster that was not affected by the first attack, even if it is from the same monster group as another that was.

The word "second" is implied in English and is not really required, so the card is not missing any words, per se. The card is telling you to perform an attack and the triggering condition is "after resolving an attack" so obviously this is a second attack.

 

Note that it is conceivably possible that your first attack (with a 1H melee weapon) may have affected multiple monsters, depending on what weapon you were using and what other skills or abilities you may have at your disposal.  In this case, the target of the second attack could be any one of the monsters affected by the first.

 

If the first attack only affected one monster, then you would have to target the same one again.

Edited by Steve-O
Zaltyre likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok now it seem clear for me.

Thanks Steve-O for your help.

 

Rugal, nous jouons déjà enssemble :)

je suis venu "sneak" par ici pour confirmer ta version sur la question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Visiblement, j'ai raison.

 

Steve-O was never wrong in the past, even if I wish he did once. So, looks like I was right !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rugal, nous jouons déjà enssemble :)

je suis venu "sneak" par ici pour confirmer ta version sur la question.

So I guess Rugal is the OL. Never trust your local OL :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve-O was never wrong in the past, even if I wish he did once. So, looks like I was right !

Oh, I've been wrong in the past, for sure.

I'm just really good about cleaning up the evidence. =P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0