Mists of Bilehall - Troubled Waters

[Martozar 0]

Hello,

 

is it really needed to close the portals? Or heroes just can rush the lieutenant and kill her deallng more damage than she has HP? If I understand right, if Zarihell has (for example) 5 HP and someone deals 6 HP and the portals are still on the map, she is defeated and heroes win. If I am right, I don't really undestand the purpose of the portals.

[Gamer 14]

She cannot be defeated is there are any portals on the map. Per the quest: “If there are 1 or more portals on the map when Zarihell suffers [damage] equal to her Health, she is not defeated. Place a fatigue token on her base to indicate that she is unconscious.”
 

[Luckmann 112]

Gamer is correct. If there are portals still on the map, Zarihell cannot be defeated.

Also, note that if she is knocked unconscious on the heroes' turn, she'll recover completely by the start of the Overlord's turn. She does become Stunned, however, so she effectively loses one of her two actions - but given that only one of her actions can be an attack action either way, that is likely not as much of an issue for her. Generally speaking, monsters, especially lieutenants, do not suffer as much as heroes when they are stunned.

 

I haven't played the encounter, btw, I just remembered reading the quest text and pulled out my book to make sure I remembered correctly.

[Martozar 0]

It was more misunderstanding of wording,because it says when Zarihell suffers [damage] equal to her Health. But thank you all

[Luckmann 112]

It was more misunderstanding of wording,because it says when Zarihell suffers [damage] equal to her Health. But thank you all

 

Yeah, that's confused me a few times, too. However, there's another rule somewhere that states that you can never suffer more damage than your health. As in, if you've got 11 health, you can never take 15 damage.

 

If something has a health of 10, and you cause 20 damage to it in an attack, it still only suffers 10 damage. And then promptly dies.

Usually.

 

I was thinking to myself that wording it "greater than or equal to" would be good, just the other day, but that would imply that such a thing would be possible, which could end up being more confusing than it's worth. By saying "equal to", the implication is that you's (usually) die from it, and specifically relates to the fact that you cannot suffer more. Which is at least consistent.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Luckmann