Lord Hawthorne doubt

[Spagg2017 0]

How many dice does Hawthorne get on his 2nd attack if placed n a group of spearman? Just a white die, or the white die plus what the spear men add?

[Budgernaut 6,255]

14 minutes ago, Spagg2017 said:

How many dice does Hawthorne get on his 2nd attack if placed n a group of spearman? Just a white die, or the white die plus what the spear men add?

He adds a white die to every attack, so the Spearmen unit would roll 1W1R1B for each attack made with the Lord Hawthorne infantry upgrade.

[Darthain 1,747]

On 7/4/2017 at 4:53 PM, Tvayumat said:

All melee attack abilities that aren't stated otherwise fall under the "when" timing rule, as stated under Abilities.

When is also 'once per' (83.5), the twice is there as an exceptional allowance, opposed to once, not a limiter from 3+ times.

[rowdyoctopus 1,412]

5 hours ago, Darthain said:

When is also 'once per' (83.5), the twice is there as an exceptional allowance, opposed to once, not a limiter from 3+ times.

Yeah, once per attack.  So every time Lord Hawthorne attacks he can activate his ability once.

[Darthain 1,747]

2 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

Yeah, once per attack.  So every time Lord Hawthorne attacks he can activate his ability once.

Except the event is strictly forbidden from triggering another instance.  The refuted point here was the limit listed was to relax a rule, not give free reign, and they are completely different conditions.

[Darthain 1,747]

On 7/4/2017 at 3:42 PM, Bhelliom said:

I see no reason that it should need to be measured from his front edge or have anything to do with line of sight, unless we're putting this under the problematic "ranged effect" category, but let's ignore that possibility for now.

Let's break it down:

• "Your front edge is treated as touching the front edge OF..." - this is the effect of the ability. It does not change your position, it just lets you treat your front edge as touching the front edge of whatever meets the condition during a melee attack.
• "...OF all enemies at range 1..." - Since we have no indication that this ability requires line of sight, here is the relevant rule: RRG 64.3, second bullet "When measuring range for a game effect that does not require line of sight, a player chooses the two points (one on each component) that are closest to each other—this will ensure that the measurement determines the shortest range between the two components."
• "...that you are not engaged with." - This prevents Hawthorne from being treated as if he's touching multiple sides of an enemy, which probably isn't necessary but does keep the rules cleaner.

The condition for treating your front edge as touching the enemy's front edge is just that the enemy be at range 1 and not engaged with you. There is no facing limitation in any of the rules surrounding the interaction, so you are in fact required by the rules to measure from the closest point which could VERY plausibly be on his side or back edges.

It is one sentence. The subject of that sentence is'your front edge' not 'you'(Hawthorne).  

Edited July 6, 2017 by Darthain

[rowdyoctopus 1,412]

28 minutes ago, Darthain said:

Except the event is strictly forbidden from triggering another instance.  The refuted point here was the limit listed was to relax a rule, not give free reign, and they are completely different conditions.

Each attack is a completely separate instance.  You are wrong in your interpretation of the rule.

[Tvayumat 3,637]

35 minutes ago, Darthain said:

Except the event is strictly forbidden from triggering another instance.  The refuted point here was the limit listed was to relax a rule, not give free reign, and they are completely different conditions.

No, it isn't.

Each INSTANCE can only trigger one more, and each attack is quite distinctly another instance, so the attacks keep going.

[Darthain 1,747]

10 minutes ago, Tvayumat said:

No, it isn't.

Each INSTANCE can only trigger one more, and each attack is quite distinctly another instance, so the attacks keep going.

 

17 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

Each attack is a completely separate instance.  You are wrong in your interpretation of the rule.

Very possibly, but I stand by it until they clarify.  I've highlighted the why I feel that way, this further was pointing out that your counter example of a listed value max 2 was not relevant and why. 

Edited July 6, 2017 by Darthain

[Budgernaut 6,255]

83.8 "An “after” event occurs immediately after the specified event and cannot occur again for that instance of the event."

So let's look at the timing of an event.

Before Attack
Attack ("when")
After Attack

In Lord Hawthorne's case, we are adding another attack in the window of "after attack."

Before Attack 1
Attack 1
After Attack 1
     Before Attack 2
     Attack 2
     After Attack 2

What if you had a different ability that triggered after an attack? We would exit the second attack and go back to after the first attack, because both the second attack and the made-up ability had the same timing window.

Before Attack 1
Attack 1
After Attack 1
     Before Attack 2
     Attack 2
     After Attack 2
After Attack 1 (continued)
     Ability 2

The rule for not triggering again for a single instance prevents you from saying, ...

Before Attack 1
Attack 1
After Attack 1
     Before Attack 2
     Attack 2
     After Attack 2
After Attack 1 (continued)
     Before Attack 3
     Attack 3
     After Attack 3
After Attack 1 (continued)
     Before Attack 4 ....

... and infinitely chaining the attack as you loop back to "after attack 1" in the timing sequence. But Lord Hawthorne's ability isn't doing that. It's doing this:

Before Attack 1
Attack 1
After Attack 1
     Before Attack 2
     Attack 2
     After Attack 2
          Before Attack 3
          Attack 3
          After Attack 3
               Before Attack 4
               Attack 4
               After Attack 4

Each subsequent attack is triggering after the next attack, so it is a different instance of the event "melee attack."

[Bhelliom 602]

58 minutes ago, Darthain said:

It is one sentence. The subject of that sentence is'your front edge' not 'you'(Hawthorne).  

That clause describes the effect, not the condition. "At range 1" is a specific rules term, see RRG 64.3. It is no more conditional on your front edge than Ardus's ability to gain surge effects from allies. They both describe an effect and a condition, and the condition for each is a unit "at" range x, the measurement for which is clearly described and has nothing to do with facing. 

[WWHSD 9,273]

Attacks are not activations. Each unit has a single activation during each round. 

 

Hawthorne's ability chains until he runs out of targets to attack. If he had some way to take another attack action again during his activation, his ability wouldn't grant any additional attacks. If another unit grants him an attack during their activation he would be able to use his ability to chain attacks again because it is a different unit's activation.

 

 

[Zetan 175]

On 7/6/2017 at 0:53 PM, Darthain said:

It is one sentence. The subject of that sentence is'your front edge' not 'you'(Hawthorne).  

The subject is unclear. As with many instances of FFG rules, the English language leaves enough ambiguity that we need a ruling to know for sure.

[Govrek 57]

This appears to have been clarified by the FAQ, Page 3 "Lord Hawthorne can continue to perform additional melee attacks (fancy melee attack symbol) against enemy units that Lord Hawthorne has not targeted during the same activation (each {fancy melee attack symbol} is an additional instance required to trigger Lord Hawthorne’s ability)."