Oathsworn: Into the Deepwood Rules Challenge
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 січ 2024
- Test your understanding of the rules of the board game Oathsworn: Into the Deepwood. 10 questions that will help you determine if you're ready to lead a play of this game.
1:47 #1 Using weapons
7:33 #2 Oathsworn selecting a target
11:22 #3 Encounter movement and facing
17:08 #4 Oathsworn facing and drawing cards from Criticals
21:45 #5 Targeting a broken location
24:03 #6 Oathsworn movement, and compulsory effects
29:04 #7 Determination rule
31:11 #8 More targeting a broken location
33:02 #9 Causing Battleflow
37:45 #10 Mob rule
Amazing video btw, really appreciate The thoroughness and accuracy, as well as the points of consideration. I had several wrong things corrected because of it
I _might_ have spotted a minor mistake in this video. @38:18 Even if there would have been a free hex next to Priest in SW, the 3rd rat should engage Warden... Distance between the 3rd rat and Warden and the distance between the 3rd rat and Priest is equally 4 hexes (before the movement). (I assume that the distance is counted through any hexes and not depending on if the hex is free or if there is already another character.) And because Warden is already attacked by other mobbing rats (the 1st and the 2nd) then the 3rd rat should join the party and not seek another target with the same distance.
I have only started my campaign, but I have already made many misplays. The rules are quite tricky in this game. :)
Thanks for the video. It was fun to watch. I believe it 's helpful for many beginners.
I think the last part of section #3 of Choosing a Target on Page 19 is the relevant part of the rules:
"3. If there is no target listed or the specified/reaction target is not
in range and line of sight (LoS), the closest Oathsworn in LoS
that the enemy can reach is the target. ‘Closest’ here means the
Oathsworn that requires the lowest amount of movement to
reach."
Each rat's target is determined at the time of their movement. At the time the 3rd rat was choosing a target, a couple of hexes were already occupied, making it a choice of MOVING 3 hexes to reach the Priest or MOVING 4 hexes to reach the Warden (based on the hypothetical that it was a valid space next to the Priest). Thus, if he had been able to occupy the space next to the Priest, I believe that should have been his target.
Good question. Thanks for the comment.
i think i spotted a minor mistake on Rule #7 the Determination Rule states "If, after redraws, one of your attacks misses (draws 2 or more
blanks)," but the ranger has 2 Redraw Tokens. I may have misunderstood that and thought that you'd have to redraw but i am not sure. So i just wanted to ask about that :D
Eihlo, I do not believe use of a redraw token is ever compulsory. I believe this wording of the Determination Rule is meant to clarify that you could not gain its benefit BEFORE having used any redraws. In other words, they don't want you to miss your attack, gain the Determination Rule benefit, THEN use redraws (and possibly turn it into a successful attack).
Wait, the rats minions don't attack on a reaction? I've been playing the first encounter much more harshly than it should have been, then! Thanks for the enlightening examples, I thoroughly appreciate that format. Subbed!
You say example 1 was legal but I think I have a nitpick with the timing of the hatchet play. As I read it you have to play the hatchet before you reveal the first critical card, you can't look at the crit then draw an additional card. Not a big deal in the grand scheme but if we're going to make a video like this. I might be wrong though.
I think your interpretation is reasonable, but I'm not ready to commit to a reading quite that restrictive. It comes down to how we read the word 'when' in "When you critical during an attack that hits". We can read it as "At the precise moment..." or "While you have met the condition that...". To me, Page 16 of the Encounter Rule Book seems to favor the latter interpretation:
"Item Cards, that are in your hand, can be played at any time during the owning character’s turn so long as the item’s conditions are met.""
Also, the "At the precise moment" interpretation suggests that the drawing of cards must be interrupted, which I'm skeptical about. For instance, if the Exile decides to draw 4 cards, and the very first card drawn is a critical, must he make a decision then whether to play a Hatchet? We know, though, that he cannot play the Hatchet then, because the attack also has to be a hit, which will not be established until the remaining 3 cards are drawn. If he is allowed to wait until the 3 remaining cards are drawn, though, I don't see much difference in allowing him to also first resolve the free draw from the critical. I suppose one could argue that the cards should be thought of as being drawn simultaneously, like the rolling of a handful of dice, rather than sequentially, but I'm not sure we can say anything definitive about that question either.
I also feel the more flexible interpretation seems more consistent with the purpose of the weapon abilities to provide a benefit to the character. For example, the Priest's Great Maul has the same "When you critical..." condition. It adds 2 damage and 2 knockback to the attack. It seems reasonable to me that the intent is for the Priest to see the result of his attack, then decide if he wants the additional 2 damage and knockback. Forcing him to play the card prior to seeing the full result of the attack could mean, for example, that he is wasting his one weapon on unneeded damage.
Even though I still lean in favor of my interpretation, I acknowledge that it is not unquestionably the right one, so maybe this wasn't a great element to add to a "Legal or Illegal" question.
28:42 feels a little wrong. I did some investigating, trying to find out where you found the ruling that ability cards can be done in a fashion of "only one part of the card needs to be resolved for it to be valid", but item cards have to resolve every single part of the item card when played?
That seems inconsistent with the game ruling in general. Can you link where someone clarifies this?
Thanks
Flarke, this was a tough question, and a good reminder to me that I need to make better notes about where my comments are coming from. I finally tracked it down in a response the publisher made 9/25/2022 in the BGG Rules Forum thread, "Are Ability Effects Mandatory":
"To perform an ability card you must be able to perform at least one of the effects on the card. I.E if you have an attack card with nothing else on it you must be able to attack. That means having a enemy in range to do so. If an ability has more than 1 effect such as move 2 then attack you can just do the Move 2 part and ignore subsequent effects if desired."
They later added, "If you had a Move 2 and attack you could choose not to move but then attack."
I hope that answers your question. Thanks.
I have a question about question number 9. You had the priest wait until the might cards were revealed to play his interrupt and then ignore the card that was the highest. However, the card specifically says that you play it after the character has damage drawn against them. On page 22 of the rulebook it lists the steps of an enemy attack. Step 2 is draw attackers might cards without revealing them. Step 3 is then Oathsworn get to play defense cards. Step 4 is then reveal the might cards. Per the text on the priests card, would he not have to declare which might card you are ignoring before you actually get to see it? The way you played it seemed to be a huge buff to the ability. Or perhaps the way I read the rules is a huge nerf. Am I missing something in the rulebook on this one?
I found a thread on BGG that says you played it right and my understanding of it was wrong. Thank you for this great video. I also have the first edition rulebook, so it appears this was changed in the 2nd printing.
38:01 isnt the 2nd rat LoS broken by the obstacle?
Yes. That rat still targets the Exile, but I should have explained why, because it's not evident from the close-up camera shot I used. Here's how I determined the target:
1. The second rat ("Rat2", I'll call it) looks for an Oathsworn in range AND line of sight, but finds nothing. It doesn't have LOS to the Exile because drawing a line from closest corner to closest corner, the line touches the tree. It doesn't have range to anyone in LOS, because all the other Oathsworn are more than 6 spaces away.
2. Since there are no valid targets, Rat2 moves as far as possible toward the closest Oathsworn whether or not it has line of sight (#6 in "Choosing a Target" on page 19 of the Encounter Rule Book).
I should have explained all that in the video, because you can't see that the other Oathsworn are out of range unless you go back to 33:06 of the video. Thanks for pointing it out.
@@ruleschallenge5573 thank you for the swift reply, that clears it up! Thank you for the nice video! (Will be playing my first session tonight)