Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brown3

Rule Clarification - "Curse of Monkey God"

Recommended Posts

Playing a game last night, we ran into questions when "Curse of Monkey God" happened. I've been looking all morning, but no dice. Is there somewhere in the rules, FAQ or some other official disclosure that answers the following questions:

Can a hero attack another Hero?

Can a hero attack another Hero while both are in town?

When a hero cursed by "Curse of Monkey God" loses all their life, do they die or just return to the state they were in when the curse struck?

Situation: You have two heroes. During the first hero's turn, the second hero dies before he has his turn. The first hero then ends his turn. Does the dead hero get his turn as normal or does he have to wait until next round?

Any help would be appreciated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

brown said:

Can a hero attack another Hero?

From the FAQ, page 6:

Q: Can heroes willingly target and hit other heroes?
A: Yes, although they must roll their full compliment of dice. In these cases, hero players may opt not to spend all their surges to limit the damage they deal, but the heroes still must consider very carefully before deciding to use this tactic!

brown said:

Can a hero attack another Hero while both are in town?

From the rulebook, page 9: "Note that the attacking player designates a space to attack and not necessarily another figure."  Most people would argue that there are no spaces in town.

Also, note that heroes that are currently transformed into monkeys can't normally go to town, since using a glyph is a movement action, and monkeys can't perform movement actions.  Also, heroes in town cannot be targeted by overlord cards, so you couldn't be forced to attack in town with a Dark Charm or similar card.  So it would be very unusual to want to make an attack in town, even if you could.

brown said:

 

When a hero cursed by "Curse of Monkey God" loses all their life, do they die or just return to the state they were in when the curse struck?

A hero who loses all their health dies.  What would make you think that Curse of the Monkey God would change that?

brown said:

 

Situation: You have two heroes. During the first hero's turn, the second hero dies before he has his turn. The first hero then ends his turn. Does the dead hero get his turn as normal or does he have to wait until next round?

If a hero dies during their own turn, their turn immediately ends.  But each hero has a separate turn, and there's no rule about losing a turn if you die during an ally's turn, nor do I see any reason why there would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have a question concerning the Curse of the Monkey God and, for the life of me I can't find anything about it: when a hero is turned to a monkey, does he still count towards blocking line of sight? What about blocking monster movement?

Since the rulebook does not answer those two questions, me and my players assumed the following: being transformed into a little monkey, the hero is so short he does not interfere with someone's line of sight. Also, he can easily be shoved out of the way by a moving monster and thus should not block their movements. We treated the cursed hero just like you'd treat familiars & pets.

Did we do wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fenrick Marlowe said:

I too have a question concerning the Curse of the Monkey God and, for the life of me I can't find anything about it: when a hero is turned to a monkey, does he still count towards blocking line of sight? What about blocking monster movement?

Since the rulebook does not answer those two questions, me and my players assumed the following: being transformed into a little monkey, the hero is so short he does not interfere with someone's line of sight. Also, he can easily be shoved out of the way by a moving monster and thus should not block their movements. We treated the cursed hero just like you'd treat familiars & pets.

Did we do wrong?

While the monkey is still a hero, it is now a hero marker/token, rather than a hero figure. So it no longer blocks LOS, or monster movement, though it still has LOS and so prevents spawning.

Your thematic reasoning was not particularly strong. Kobolds are also very small and still block LOS and movement - it is mostly unwise to make rule choices based on thematics, as thematics change every time someone thinks of something new, and vary between players anyway, so you cannot have consistency.
But you got the right result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 What also made us think the cursed hero would not block movement & LoS was that he was not a figure any more but rather a token (like familiars), like you said.

Also, I only have vanilla Descent, and while I am aware of Kobolds, I have no idea how they actually look :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbon said:

 

 

While the monkey is still a hero, it is now a hero marker/token, rather than a hero figure. So it no longer blocks LOS, or monster movement, though it still has LOS and so prevents spawning.

Umm, what? Is your only argument for your claim that the hero is represented by a token instead of a figure while being a monkey?

Villagers and Lieutenants are represented by tokens as well.

Villagers were specifically classified as "figures" in the FAQ. So do they block LoS and movement? I always thought so.

Do Lieutenants block LoS and hero movement through them? I thought so as well. (If not, does that change if you use the metal miniatures for the Lt.s?)

What else makes you think that a monkey hero does not block LoS and allows monster movement through them (or even ending their move on them)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parathion said:

Corbon said:

 

 

 

While the monkey is still a hero, it is now a hero marker/token, rather than a hero figure. So it no longer blocks LOS, or monster movement, though it still has LOS and so prevents spawning.

 

 

Umm, what? Is your only argument for your claim that the hero is represented by a token instead of a figure while being a monkey?

Villagers and Lieutenants are represented by tokens as well.

Villagers were specifically classified as "figures" in the FAQ. So do they block LoS and movement? I always thought so.

Do Lieutenants block LoS and hero movement through them? I thought so as well. (If not, does that change if you use the metal miniatures for the Lt.s?)

What else makes you think that a monkey hero does not block LoS and allows monster movement through them (or even ending their move on them)?

Lieutenants are explicitly monsters (which are normally figures), "represented by" markers (so not actually markers), and given as an example of figures.
Villagers blocked movement and LOS even when they were tokens and have been clarified as being figures.

Monkeys are explicitly markers, and have not been clarified as figures. Only figures (and others with special rules) block movement and LOS, not markers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbon said:

Parathion said:

 

Corbon said:

While the monkey is still a hero, it is now a hero marker/token, rather than a hero figure. So it no longer blocks LOS, or monster movement, though it still has LOS and so prevents spawning.

Umm, what? Is your only argument for your claim that the hero is represented by a token instead of a figure while being a monkey?

Villagers and Lieutenants are represented by tokens as well.

Villagers were specifically classified as "figures" in the FAQ. So do they block LoS and movement? I always thought so.

Do Lieutenants block LoS and hero movement through them? I thought so as well. (If not, does that change if you use the metal miniatures for the Lt.s?)

What else makes you think that a monkey hero does not block LoS and allows monster movement through them (or even ending their move on them)?

 

 

Lieutenants are explicitly monsters (which are normally figures), "represented by" markers (so not actually markers), and given as an example of figures.
Villagers blocked movement and LOS even when they were tokens and have been clarified as being figures.

Monkeys are explicitly markers, and have not been clarified as figures. Only figures (and others with special rules) block movement and LOS, not markers.

I give the reason to Parathion this time gui%C3%B1o.gif It is obvious that an answer in the FAQ cannot include all things of Descent in a short par. It should be considered a figure because all markers represent figures (lt, villagers, etc), or that seems to be the intention of the designers. We "represent" the hero with a monkey token because there are no monkey figures, but I think that we cannot say that all markers do not block line of sight. If you do a question in the FAQ about the monkeys, I am sure that you will receive the same answer as villagers, but you cannot do a question for each token in the game! At least, thats my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will notice that the term "figure" is used throughout the rules and the FAQ in various instances, so if you strictly enforce monkey=non-figure you give the monkeys immunity to a vast number of effects, including even attacks.

Example: JitD, pg. 10, inflicting wounds after an attack: This is the total damage dealt to the figure in the target space.

I couldn´t find a reference that specifically allows monkey tokens to be attacked (or wounded if they are in an attacked space, to be precise)  - so are they safe from harm? Of course, this would balance out formerly extremely powerful cards like "Dance of the Monkey God", which merely costs the heros two complete rounds, which is not a good investment for the OL given the cost of the card. lengua.gif

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Parathion's argument here is strong. 

Corbon– is it safe to say that the only reason you believe monkeys don't block movement is because their token physically resembles that of a familiar? I can't see any other possible reason. If not, state your case. There's no rule that only figures block movement– there's just a rule that familiars specifically don't.  

-pw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gran_orco said:

Corbon said:

 

Parathion said:

 

Corbon said:

While the monkey is still a hero, it is now a hero marker/token, rather than a hero figure. So it no longer blocks LOS, or monster movement, though it still has LOS and so prevents spawning.

Umm, what? Is your only argument for your claim that the hero is represented by a token instead of a figure while being a monkey?

Villagers and Lieutenants are represented by tokens as well.

Villagers were specifically classified as "figures" in the FAQ. So do they block LoS and movement? I always thought so.

Do Lieutenants block LoS and hero movement through them? I thought so as well. (If not, does that change if you use the metal miniatures for the Lt.s?)

What else makes you think that a monkey hero does not block LoS and allows monster movement through them (or even ending their move on them)?

 

 

Lieutenants are explicitly monsters (which are normally figures), "represented by" markers (so not actually markers), and given as an example of figures.
Villagers blocked movement and LOS even when they were tokens and have been clarified as being figures.

Monkeys are explicitly markers, and have not been clarified as figures. Only figures (and others with special rules) block movement and LOS, not markers.

 

 

I give the reason to Parathion this time gui%C3%B1o.gif It is obvious that an answer in the FAQ cannot include all things of Descent in a short par. It should be considered a figure because all markers represent figures (lt, villagers, etc), or that seems to be the intention of the designers. We "represent" the hero with a monkey token because there are no monkey figures, but I think that we cannot say that all markers do not block line of sight. If you do a question in the FAQ about the monkeys, I am sure that you will receive the same answer as villagers, but you cannot do a question for each token in the game! At least, thats my opinion.

That is a fallacious argument. All markers do not represent figures. Only Lt markers (specifically "representing" and specifically given as example of figures) and villagers (who even as markers shared the rules in question with figures and have specifically been FAQed as being figures. Other markers (props, webs, familiars and companions) are not figures.
The FAQ clarification for villagers was a specific clarification, not a general clarification. It in no way implied that markers are figures generally.
Markers are markers and figures are figures - except for villagers, uniquely and explicitly by FAQ.

Parathion's argument, and yours by extension (you are agreeing with him by the way), is (as I understand it, at least) that monkeys are figures because heroes are figures. Followed by a couple of totally flawed examples or markers which are figures. That is all.
But the hero figure is literally replaced by a monkey marker. There isn't any way around this literal statement.
When a hero is transformed into a monkey, the player must immediately replace his hero figure with the monkey marker.
And heroes do not intrinsically block movement or LOS. Only figures intrinsically block LOS and movement. So if the hero 'figure' is replaced by a monkey 'marker' (but still referred to as a hero (but not as a figure), so it is a hero-monkey  marker), there is no longer a figure in that space, so nothing is there to block movement or LOS.

To turn it around, what evidence is there that a monkey does block movement or LOS?
The answer is none.

Parathion said:
You will notice that the term "figure" is used throughout the rules and the FAQ in various instances, so if you strictly enforce monkey=non-figure you give the monkeys immunity to a vast number of effects, including even attacks.

Example: JitD, pg. 10, inflicting wounds after an attack: This is the total damage dealt to the figure in the target space.

I couldn´t find a reference that specifically allows monkey tokens to be attacked (or wounded if they are in an attacked space, to be precise) - so are they safe from harm? Of course, this would balance out formerly extremely powerful cards like "Dance of the Monkey God", which merely costs the heros two complete rounds, which is not a good investment for the OL given the cost of the card.

Now this is a good argument. It doesn't change the monkey = token not monkey = figure, but it does show that the rules are inconsistent. Monkeys are given the heroes wounds, and are still considered heroes, so clearly some sort of attack or wounding effect on them is expected.
So either monkey should be figures (change needed) or attacks should affect more than just figures (change needed). If it was me, I'd rule that monkeys should become figures - it appears to be the simpler solution even though villagers could be attacked before they were figures, so the actual rules would lean the other way.

One for the FAQ? <Sigh> It never ends, does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

phelanward said:

 Parathion's argument here is strong. 

Corbon– is it safe to say that the only reason you believe monkeys don't block movement is because their token physically resembles that of a familiar? I can't see any other possible reason. If not, state your case.

No it isn't safe to say that. The rules explicit name monkeys as markers, replacing figures. As I have already stated. The physical resemblance is incidental.

But yes, Parathion's argument is strong and indicates a clear hole in the rules.

phelanward said:

There's no rule that only figures block movement– there's just a rule that familiars specifically don't.  

-pw

This is totally wrong.
DJitD pg10
Line of sight is blocked by walls, closed doors, other figures, and blocking obstacles.
DJitD pg9
Figures cannot move into or through closed doors, blocking obstacles, or enemy figures during their movement.

If you don't meet the criteria in those lists, or have a different specific rule saying you block LOS/movement (as villagers did before they were FAQed to figures) then you don't block LOS or movement.

Monkey markers don't meet any of those list criteria and don't have any specific rule saying they block LOS/movement. Therefore they do not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbon said:


Corbon said:
That is a fallacious argument. All markers do not represent figures.

That is why I do not enter to debate a lot of post, for my language limitation. I did not say that all markers are figures!. My intention was to say that there are a lot of markers that represent figures and they are not because FFG didn't want to include them in the box (I suppose for cost reasons), with the exception of the familiars. For exemple, lieutenants or villagers, and, in my opinion, monkeys.

Corbon said:

phelanward said:

 

 Parathion's argument here is strong. 

Corbon– is it safe to say that the only reason you believe monkeys don't block movement is because their token physically resembles that of a familiar? I can't see any other possible reason. If not, state your case.

 

No it isn't safe to say that. The rules explicit name monkeys as markers, replacing figures. As I have already stated. The physical resemblance is incidental.

But yes, Parathion's argument is strong and indicates a clear hole in the rules.

phelanward said:

There's no rule that only figures block movement– there's just a rule that familiars specifically don't.  

 

-pw

 

This is totally wrong.
DJitD pg10
Line of sight is blocked by walls, closed doors, other figures, and blocking obstacles.
DJitD pg9
Figures cannot move into or through closed doors, blocking obstacles, or enemy figures during their movement.

If you don't meet the criteria in those lists, or have a different specific rule saying you block LOS/movement (as villagers did before they were FAQed to figures) then you don't block LOS or movement.

Monkey markers don't meet any of those list criteria and don't have any specific rule saying they block LOS/movement. Therefore they do not.

 

However, there are no rules about the monkeys. They are not familiars, only tokens. So, according to your rules the figures can end their movement in the same space that a monkey marker or move through it; and, of course, the monkey could do the the same, because it is not a figure.

I will be absolutely literal with the rules: So, since now, a Monkey is immune to these lingering effects that explain explicitly that does damage to FIGURES: burn, stun, web. And another things like aura (only figures, again) and Knockback (beacuse the knockback says clearly "After inflicting at least 1 damage (before applying the effects of armor) to a figure".

There will be more examples, so you are changing a complete set of rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gran_orco said:

However, there are no rules about the monkeys. They are not familiars, only tokens. So, according to your rules the figures can end their movement in the same space that a monkey marker or move through it; and, of course, the monkey could do the the same, because it is not a figure.

I will be absolutely literal with the rules: So, since now, a Monkey is immune to these lingering effects that explain explicitly that does damage to FIGURES: burn, stun, web. And another things like aura (only figures, again) and Knockback (beacuse the knockback says clearly "After inflicting at least 1 damage (before applying the effects of armor) to a figure".

There will be more examples, so you are changing a complete set of rules.

Not my rules, and I'm not changing anything. I'm just reading, accurately, what is written. To claim that a monkey marker is a figure is changing the rules.

But I have already agreed that we have found a hole in the rules here that needs that needs closing. Either attacks should affect any marker or figure in the space that has wounds, or a monkey marker should count as a figure. Both would be changes to the rules, but one or the other is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Huh? What?? Are you just trying to be contrary?

 

"There is no rule that only figures block movement"   Completely true

"There's just a rule that familiars specifically don't". Completely true.

Therefore, your assessment = completely wrong. Bite it. 

 

The difference between us is that I'm not generalizing from any rule. Clearly, as per villagers, it's not reliable to consider that list exhaustive, so it shouldn't be rashly generalized. And the game wouldn't break either way, so there's no reason it needs to be one way or the other.

It's unclear. That's all. And there are good arguments for either generalization. FAQ it if you want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to side against corbon again about that. Corbon again seems to be making rules on the way and making assumptions. Just because it is a token it doesn't mean that it no longer blocks LOS and everything else he does to begin with. You can't really expect for the rules to cover anything and since it nowhere is implied anything like that a cursed hero retains everything that doesn't mentioned in the ruling of  a monkey. Corbon can make all the hero/marker rules he wants for his game but his logic ABOUT that is flawed. Tokens do block LOS and movement depending on what they represent and in this instance they represent a hero figure.

And as for Antistones answer about moving into town i will have to add that in RTL you can move the monkey into town as returning into town isn't a move action and doesn't need movement points to do so and there is nothing to prevent that. As you can move into town even webbed or even stunned as you don't need 2 half actions (full round action) or MP to do so you just spend your whole turn action (no matter what that is) to go to town and there you restock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbon said:

But I have already agreed that we have found a hole in the rules here that needs that needs closing. Either attacks should affect any marker or figure in the space that has wounds, or a monkey marker should count as a figure. Both would be changes to the rules, but one or the other is needed.

No one found a hole into the system you CREATED one by implying that tokens don't block line of sight and movement. You take that away and everything is right again. It would be really funny to start creating holes in order to plug them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drglord said:

 Corbon can make all the hero/marker rules he wants for his game but his logic ABOUT that is flawed. Tokens do block LOS and movement depending on what they represent and in this instance they represent a hero figure.

I have not made anything up at all.
Show me any rule that says (non-specific) tokens block LOS or movement as you claim.

You can't because there isn't one. Hoist on your own petard - you made it up.
I've already showed you the rules involved, but here they are again.

DJitD pg7
Line of sight is blocked by walls, closed doors, other figures, and blocking obstacles. Nothing about tokens there...
DJitD pg9
Figures cannot move into or through closed doors, blocking obstacles, or enemy figures during their movement. Nothing about tokens there...
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbon said:

 


You can't because there isn't one. Hoist on your own petard - you made it up.
I've already showed you the rules involved, but here they are again.

DJitD pg7
Line of sight is blocked by walls, closed doors, other figures, and blocking obstacles. Nothing about tokens there...
DJitD pg9
Figures cannot move into or through closed doors, blocking obstacles, or enemy figures during their movement. Nothing about tokens there...
   

 

 

And, since there is not any rule about the movement of the monkey (we only know that it cannot do any action), and only figures and familiars cannot move through closed doors, the monkey can move through closed doors, blocking obstacles and enemy figures bostezo.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does nobody except Corbon in this thread read the rules anymore? Seriously, what is this all about - can´t you accept that there is a hole in the rules that needs to be fixed? 

DJitD, pg.13:

Closed doors block movement, line of sight, and all
attacks (even those that don’t require line of sight). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am getting this feeling... that if someone claims something, that does not quite suit Corbon, he will find an archaic word,  that diplomaticaly describes the flaws in this persons logic (nicely said)... But if Corbon is clearly making some of his own interpretetions, and other people have good arguments against them ... then it is a hole in the rules...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...