Inquisitorial mandate and varying elevations

[Solarisp91]

I apologize if this has already been discussed. 

If my opponent has 1 character at elevation and contesting an objective and I have Fifth Brother contesting the same objective but at a lower objective, does Inquisitorial Mandate trigger and Fifth Brother takes the objective? 
 

Or would I need to have another character at elevation contesting the objective for this to trigger? 

[Blastoise86]

This may have been asked/answered already but I cannot find it.

How does inquisitorial mandate on a character like fifth brother work with models at varying elevations 

Example 1) if player 1 has a character at the same elevation as the objective, and player 2 has fifth brother at a different elevation, who will control the objective?

Example 2) if player 2 has fifth brother at the same elevation as an objective and player 1 has 1 character at the same elevation as the objective and 1 character at a different elevation, who will control the objective

3) are there any other situations with inquisitorial mandate and elevation which could be important? 

Thanks in advance

[Thoras]

This should answer your question, but if you want to confirm your understanding of those specific examples against this answer, let us know

 

[Blastoise86]

Thanks for the answer.

I had read this information, and just wanted to ensure I understand fully. I just wanted to know exactly where the line is, If both players have the same number of characters at each level, this seems straight forward to me, where I am struggling is with different numbers, at varying elevations.

If the objective is at elevation 2, where player 1 has a character, then player 2 brings fifth brother in range of the objective at elevation 1, what would happen?

and if (with the objective at elevation 2) player 1 has 1 character, and a second character at elevation 1, if fifth brother goes into range of the objective at elevation 2, what would happen.

I think this may also be linked into, when is an objective considered to be "tied"

Apologies for the fact that I do not feel my wording is particularly easy to read, just trying to understand this element of the game fully.

Thanks again,

 

 

[Thoras]

Happy to walk through specific examples

As a reminder for everyone

Quote

Inquisitorial Mandate

When determining control of an Active objective that a character in this Unit is contesting, if there is a tie, this Unit's controlling player takes control of the objective.

Then the rules around determining control of an objective

Quote

At the end of each Turn, the player with the most characters at the same Elevation as an Objective token and contesting that objective controls it. If there is a tie, control of the objective does not change. If there are no characters contesting the objective that are at the same Elevation as the Objective token, the player with the most characters contesting the objective that are at different Elevations than the Objective token controls it. If there is a tie, control of the objective does not change

Onto the examples

6 hours ago, Blastoise86 said:

If the objective is at elevation 2, where player 1 has a character, then player 2 brings fifth brother in range of the objective at elevation 1, what would happen?

The first thing I'd mention is that "elevation 1, elevation 2" etc don't strictly speaking exist. Elevation is a relative band based on the thing being measured from, where other things are either at a higher elevation, lower elevation or the same elevation. When determining control of an objective, all that matters are whether characters are at the same elevation as the objective or at a different elevation(either higher or lower)

The situation your describing is that player 1 has a character at the same elevation as the objective and player 2 has fifth brother at a lower elevation as the objective, but within contesting range of that objective.

So we check Inquisitorial Mandate and see that it only comes into play in the situation that a tie for control exists. We then check the language around determining control and see that a tie only exists if you have the same number of contesting characters. We also see that if there are any characters at the same elevation as the objective, we don't bother checking for characters at any other elevation.

Only player 1 has a character at the same elevation as the objective in this example, so Fifth brother's ability doesn't come into play and Player 1 gains control.

6 hours ago, Blastoise86 said:

if (with the objective at elevation 2) player 1 has 1 character, and a second character at elevation 1, if fifth brother goes into range of the objective at elevation 2, what would happen

In this example, Player 1 has 2 characters at a different elevation from the objective and Player 2 has 1 character at the same elevation as the objective, so this is actually the same situation as the first example. You don't look at other elevations if there are any characters at the same elevation as the objective.

6 hours ago, Blastoise86 said:

I think this may also be linked into, when is an objective considered to be "tied"

A tie for determining control of an objective occurs when both players have the same number of characters contesting the objective at the relevant elevation.

If there are any contesting characters at the same elevation as the objective, only characters at that elevation matter for determining control.

If there are no characters contesting it at the same elevation as it, all other characters contesting it are now checked(remember as well what i mentioned before, there is no "elevation 1, elevation 2" etc, its just same, higher or lower). This means characters that are either higher or lower elevation both mean the same towards determining control.

 

With all that said, let me give you a not straightforward example.

Both player 1 and player 2 have 1 character at the same elevation as the objective. Player 2 also has Fifth Brother at a different elevation from the objective, but within contesting Range.

We check for control of the objective. We see both players are tied for control of the objective, which means by the core rules, control doesn't change. We then check Inquisitorial Mandate though and see that all this ability cares about is whether Fifth Brother is contesting the objective and that its tied, it doesn't care about whether he himself is actually contributing to determining the control of the objective (he isn't in this case, since he is at a different elevation). His ability still allows you to win the tie in this scenario.

[Thoras]

@Solarisp91 I believe this should answer your question as well