Sleboda

As always, thank you.

The card reads "... defending against an attack this round..." It does not read "... defending against attacks this round ..." That wording means it applies to one ("an") attack. Is that the intention or should it worded differently so that it works against all attacks that round?

This tactic card says, in part, "when spider-man or venom targets an enemy character with an attack that is within range 2 of the other allied character..." We're confused as to what this means. How can an attack be within range of anything? Characters or terrain can be within range of an attack. An attack is not an object on the table, so how can it be within range of anything? How do you measure the distance to an attack? This then makes it hard for us to figure out what has to be within 2 of what. Are the conditions met if SM and Venom are within 2 of each other, or does the target of the attack have to be within 2 of both characters? Gah! Help us, Obi-Wan Kenobi. You're our only hope.

Yup! Thanks a bunch.

Hi team, We are lucky enough to be at Adepticon playing some MCP, and several of the tables have a quinjet. Nobody seems to be able to wrap their heads around how to integrate it into the LoS/Cover/chatacter placement rules. It's the first official MCP terrain kit with "levels" (as in, a model could be on top of it and another model could be on the ground directly under the model on the plane) and areas that can be seen through, in a way. I suppose we're just looking for guidance on how to handle these rules interactions with this new type of terrain. Could you please help?

I've recently noticed something odd in an online battle report and wanted to know if they got it wrong or if they just showed me something I had not considered. When it came time to choose a board edge from which to deploy, they chose the one to their right, not one of the two in front of them (the near side and the far side). I see that the rules just say "The player without the Priority token chooses a battlefield edge..." but it never occured to me that I could pick an edge other than the ones shown on the cards (or at least hinted at by the dark blue bar on the cards*). So, can I pick any of the four edges to be my edge? *BTW, just a note/thought for clarity - The deployment cards have dark bars on opposite sides, but there is no actual wording in the book to say that these are the deployment zones. When we first got into the game we just assumed, based on our experience with other games, that these bars are meant to show the deployment zones, but it is just that, an assumption. With no actual rule to show an opponent, he or she could easily claim that they want (for example on a D map) one of the two edges where the objective tokens are pretty much already in the deployment zones to be their edge. Or, to say it a different way, nothing indicates that the deployment map card is to be used only in 'portrait' format as opposed to 'landscape.' So, one could orient the map so that a Hammer (for example) is already inside each deployment zone. That seems odd, but there's nothing I can see within the rules themselves to guide the players about the orientation of the card. I'm the sort of player that never feels comfortable telling my opponents that they are not allowed to do something when they can find support within the rules for their opinion. In this case, I would not be able to deny my opponent their choice as nothing shows us that the dark bars are indeed the deployment zones.

Mystic Empowerment I saw a previous answer from Nov 2020 that says Doctor Strange can apply Mystic Empowerment to Beam and Area Attacks. I'm not understanding why, as Beam and Area Attacks never choose targets - a clear part of the requirements to use Mystic Empowerment. In order to help figure out what we are missing in our group, please consider the following: A player has a character (for ease of reference, we will say it is Loki) with a Beam or Area Attack. It is his turn, he decides to use that attack. Three enemy characters are under the measurement tool, thus in range of the chosen attack. For the purposes of this question, the three enemy characters have no special distinctions or rules that matter other than that they each have a defensive stat that is lower than the other two defensive stats. Loki (again, just a convenient reference - it does not matter that the charater is in fact Loki, only that the attacking character has a Beam or Area Attack) wishes to take advantage of Mystic Empowerment to make his attacks use the lower defensive stats of the enemy characters who will suffer his attack. The first part of Mystic Empowerment reads: "Once per turn, when an allied character declares an attack, before choosing a target it may spend one Power." The rules for both Area and Beam Attacks instruct the player to follow a different set of rules. The rules for Beam Attacks outright state "instead of declaring a target." The rules for Area Attacks say "The attacking character does't declare a target..." This would mean that Loki cannot take advantage of Mystic Empowerment to change the attack type, as it does not choose any targets. They are simply under the range stick and attacks are resolved against all enemies affected. Is this correct? If not, why not? As always, thanks!

If an attack is ended early, is the attack still resolved? For example: Iron Fist uses Flying Kick on Loki Loki uses Trickster to get out of range/los of the attack, so the attack ends. Does Iron Fist gain a power and get placed within 1 of Loki?

The rule under the Eye says Strange "may modify and reroll" Failures. My question isn't about Failures. I get that. The question is about the rule making a distinction for rerolls. Rerolls happen in Step 9 - Modify Dice. There is no need to call out rerolls as rerolls are a type of modification according to the rules. Is there a subtlety of the rules we're missing that makes calling out one type of modification and not others important?

Thanks!

Cool. Thanks again. I'm sorry if I'm just being dense (highly likely), but what I think is at the heart of my confusion is the seeming contradiction in the Beam/Area attacks rule. They say both that they don't target models and that they do. I'm really trying to get my head around the question of how to make sense of this. How can I, as a player on one side of the table, convince my opponent on the other side that his models are targets while he says they are not targets, and the very same rules passage to which we are both referring tells each of us that we are correct?

Thanks. So, what if one model is either within 2 or another model is within 4 (in this example) but other Shadowed models are touched by the Beam but are not within 2. Are all models hit by the Beam or only those within 2?

The rules for Beam and Area Attacks tell us that they do not target models and that they do target models. I find this very confusing, especially when considering Shadow Organization. In the case of Beam Attacks, in particular, it says to place the range tool and then attack each enemy hit by the template. Shadow Organization says that enemy characters must be within 2 in order to target the affected models. Since the Beam does not, as written, declare a target, what happens when the Beam attack is made (assuming a Beam length of, say, 4 and all enemies being over 2 away)? 1. The Beam still hits the enemies who have had Shadow played on them. 2. The Beam cannot be made at all as there are no enemies closer than 2, despite the Beam being 4 long. 3. The Beam is wasted.

A character is holding two cube fragments and has two Stamina remaining. That character will take two damage from the fragments it is holding. The first damage is done, and everything is fine. The second damage is done and this will Daze him, but Mission Objective allows him to pass on the fragment to another character because he "would" drop it. He passes it on to another character and is Dazed. It is still the power phase (Step 3). Does the character who received the fragment now also take damage from the same fragment?

In trying to resolve a different rules issue, we stumbled upon this older thread that is now closed: I'm not sure what we are missing, but this seems to be at odds with the rules (image attached). Struggle is a Crisis Card. The player with priority picks the order of resolution. Why can't that player resolve the damage to the non-priority player first?

I apologize in advance for even asking this, but I am unable to find actual wording in the rules or within my own vocabulary to resolve this question in a definitive manner. My opponent is using the Eye of Agamotto on Doctor Strange after shooting Bolts of Bedevilment at an enemy character. The initial roll for Bolts contained at least one Shield result. Using Shield of the Seraphim, she picks up all her dice and rolls them again. The rerolled dice also come up with at least one Shield. How much Power does Doctor Strange get? 1. One. It does not matter if only the reroll had a Shield or if only the initial roll had a Shield. "At least one" die, overall between the two rolls, had a Shield, so one Power is gained. 2. Two. Under the rule for Shield of the Seraphim, she gets one Power "whenever" Strange rolls dice, so he gets one on the dice rolled in the initial Bolt, and one for the dice rolled in the rerolled result. After all, "whenever" does not care if the dice rolled were in a reroll or not. Dice were rolled twice and a Shield was present in each roll. Now, what if the only Shield rolled was in the initial roll? If the reroll contained no Shields, would Strange get Power the moment the initial roll, which got rerolled, was evaluated? After all, there were dice rolled ("whenever"), and at least one Shield came up. We understand that Strange would not gain the power until the effect (which is Bolts) gets resolved, but would he get it at that point? Or, to put it another way, is there anything in the actual rules that says that rerolled dice have their initial rolls treated, essentially, as if they magically simply never happened?

Ah! Thank you. That makes much more sense now, and importantly, teaches me to fish rather than giving me one. Much appreciated.

The damage being discussed is listed under Area Attacks and tells us to damage each friendly in the area, but apply no other effects. How is that not the attack dealing damage? What is the consistent thought process we can apply to other rules involving damage that we can use to draw the line with damage from attacks?

Just a follow up. Per the included image from the original question, allied characters do suffer 1 damage from area attacks that reach them. Can you help me reconcile this with your comment "the attack can never deal damage to them" please?

If, for example, three characters are within 2 of Bob's Excessive Violence (in addition to the initial target of the attack), and Red Skull's Leadership is in effect, does Bob gain power for each damaged enemy (one + the three in the area), or just one?

So, turns out I did get it afterall. Ha! Thanks.

I'm sure I'm just missing a subtle rules interaction, but at the moment I'm failing to wrap my head around what the phrasing of the Hulkbusters Leadership means compared to how other Leaderships are phrased. It says that when the character is put into play, you are still using the Hulkbuster Leadership ability. The only thing I can think of is that this is meant to head off arguments over your Leader being removed, this ending use of the Leadership ability. That feels unnecessary to me though. Is there a rules interaction I'm overlooking?