Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Rules Discussion => Topic started by: ringkichard on July 11, 2013, 10:37:11 PM
-
My Warlord shares a zone with a Dwarf Panzergarde I control. The Dwarf is guarding.
My opponent plays a Tanglevine on my Dwarf.
My opponent then makes a ranged attack targeting my Warlord.
May my Panzergarde use its Intercept ability? Will it be able to redirect the ranged attack to itself?
Intercept's Codex entry says:
"Intercept: If this creature is guarding, and if a ranged attack targets a non-flying object in the same zone, this creature may redirect that ranged attack to itself, as long as it can be a legal target for that attack. The intercept is announced and occurs immediately after the Declare Attack Step (and before the Avoid Attack Step). It loses its guard marker at the end of the attack which it intercepts. Cannot intercept a zone attack."
Guard's Rulebook entry says:
"Guarding has 2 benefits:
• Counterstrike: As long as the creature is guarding, all of its quick melee attacks gain the Counterstrike trait.
• Protect the Zone: If a creature is in a zone with one or more enemies with guard markers (except for guards
he can ignore; see sidebar), that creature cannot make a melee attack against any object without a guard marker.
Important:Spells and other ranged attacks always ignore guards! Also, a creature may always attack itself, or an object attached to itself, ignoring all guards."
The Ignoring Guards sidebar in the Rulebook says:
Restrained Guards: A guard that is Restrained cannot protect its zone, and can be ignored by any attacker.
-
The "ignoring guards" sidebar is the answer. Being restrained means the dwarf cannot guard and can't intercept a ranged attack. It takes freedom of movement to throw yourself in front of an arrows path.
-
You're right that the ranged attacker can ignore the Dwarf. All ranged attacks ignore guards anyway, restrained or not.
If you are making a ranged attack, the target must be in range of the attack. A ranged attack ignores guards. All ranged attacks have a minimum and a maximum range. The target must be in a zone that falls within that range (see “Counting Distances” on page 10). Also, a ranged attack must make sure it has a clear LoS (line of sight) - see “Line of Sight”
A restrained creature can guard, though. It still gets the guard marker. And if you chose to melee attack a restrained guard, it still gets the counterstrike. Other creatures are just allowed to ignore it when chosing melee targets.
The sidebar says that the guarding creature can't use the "Protect the Zone" ability, and therefore the attacker, can "make a melee attack against any object without a guard marker." It doesn't say anything about Intercept, or redirecting a ranged attack. Intercept does not force the attacker to declare his attack at the Dwarf; it's not a taunt effect. Instead, it redirects an attack made against the Warlord so that it hits the Dwarf instead; it's like Reverse Attack.
As far as I can tell, a creature with intercept must be guarding to use its redirect ability, and it loses its guard marker after it uses its redirect ability, but the redirect ability is not a use of the guard ability. It is a use of the Intercept ability, and Intercept does not fail when the creature is restrained anywhere I can see.
I understand that the metaphor is weird. A creature that is tied to the earth shouldn't be able to leap in-front of an arrow, but I don't see support for this in the black-letter rules.
-
restrained (codex, p43)
"...the only advantage a restrained guard receives is counter strike....."
as intercept is an advantage of guard it is not given when restrained.
-
"...the only advantage a restrained guard receives is counter strike....."
Yeah, that part's tricky. The other day, I saw someone get caught up on that text; he thought it meant that all restrained creatures got counter strike. :) So that sentence has come up on the forums before.
I read it as explanation of which parts of the guard rule a guarding creature gets, not a blanket rule forbidding any benefit from guarding, but I can see how it might be read as a limiting rule.
Basically, I read that section as saying, "When you guard, you get to force attacks to the guards (protect your zone), and you get to counter strike. Unless you're restrained, then you only get to counter strike." But, again, I understand that this may be the softest part of my argument.
What I think is more robust, though, is that I don't think that intercept actually IS an advantage of guard. Intercept is its own ability that relies on it's own ability word, it's own codex rules, and a guard marker (which we both agree is present on a restrained guard), but doesn't actually depend on ANY of the other rules for Guard. Guard could be a blank and useless rule, and as long as it put a marker on the Dwarf, I think Intercept would still work. If there was some other way to put a guard marker on a creature without using the guard ability, Intercept would work with that, too.
-
Give official answer for this.....
With the current wording intercept still works while the guard is restrained which is a big joke.
The whole meaning lying behind the word "intercept" screams to the heavens that it would not be possible to use this ability while sinking down in Quicksand...
-
The Ignoring Guards sidebar in the Rulebook says:
Restrained Guards: A guard that is Restrained cannot protect its zone, and can be ignored by any attacker.
Can't > Can
-
What do you mean, exactly? I don't see how this is a case of "Can't" trumping "Can". We agree that the Dwarf can't Protect the Zone.
Protecting the Zone is one of the two specific abilities granted by Guard. The other is Counterstrike.
I don't think there's any question that a restrained creature loses PtZ.
"Guarding has 2 benefits:
• Counterstrike: As long as the creature is guarding, all of its quick melee attacks gain the Counterstrike trait.
• Protect the Zone: If a creature is in a zone with one or more enemies with guard markers (except for guards
he can ignore; see sidebar), that creature cannot make a melee attack against any object without a guard marker.
Protect the Zone is a melee rule. The issue here is that Intercept does not require the Protect the Zone rule, only a guard marker.
---
I should say that from a design and play perspective, I would support an errata that turned off intercept if the creature was restrained or could not otherwise Protect the Zone. Judging from Shad0w's reaction, Intercept wasn't intended to work if the Dwarf is restrained.
-
A restrained creature that is guarding can still intercept. (As long as it is a legal target)
Restraining a creature does not remove guard, nor does it stop the counter strike if it is attacked, nor does it stop intercept.
Restraining only stops the "Protecting of its zone" so attackers may ignore them.
Incapacitate is the only condition to remove a guard marker.
-
But it does allow the attacking creature to ignore the guarding creature. Intercept is an explicit (and expanded) function of Guarding (as far as I can tell). How can the Dwarf jump in front of the bolt from the Ballista with his shield if he is restrained?
-
Intercept is not guard, and does not act in the same way. It only uses guard as a sort of "Activation"
If you are looking for a thematic reason...the creature draws the spell to them. (Maybe the dwarfs shield is a magic shield of Redirect...
Looking at the rules, there is nothing preventing a restrained guard from using intercept.
I see what you are saying sIKE, and it makes sence but that is my best interpretation of how it is stated in the rules. And how it has been for my games.
-
Ok I am interested..
From the rules:
If this creature is guarding, and if a ranged attack....
No guarding no Intercept.
It looses its guard marker at the end of the attack which it intercepts.
After the Intercept, not "on guard" any longer.
"Intercept is not guard, and does not act in the same way. It only uses guard as a sort of "Activation""
So you play it as if it were not an "enhanced" feature of guarding? Then why do I have to remove the guard token if it is just there for "activation"?
-
If intercept is counted as "Protecting your zone", then it would bypass it. But as of right now, I see nothing that is stopping intercept.
It sounds like (In the rules) that Intercept "Actively" changes the target of the spell. And I don't see Restrained changing that.
Guard is part of the Attack Order, and does "not actively" change the target, you just have to look for guards (As stated in Step 1 of Attack Order).
I think a little clarification would go a long way here. I could be wrong here.
-
So you play it as if it were not an "enhanced" feature of guarding? Then why do I have to remove the guard token if it is just there for "activation"?
What I was trying to say is that it is different from guard, but uses it.
Obviously it is different from guard since you can Intercept Non-area ranged attacks. But I was trying to make it clear that it is different. It is its own thing.
-
To remove any ambiguity:
Intercept
If this creature is guarding, and if a ranged attack targets a non-flying object in the same zone, this creature may redirect that ranged attack to itself, as long as it can be a legal target for that attack. The intercept is announced and occurs immediately after the Declare Attack Step (and before the Avoid Attack Step). It loses its guard marker at the end of the attack which it intercepts. Cannot intercept a zone attack.
Restrained Guards: A guard that is Restrained cannot protect its zone, and can be ignored by any
attacker.
So the question is: Is Intercept a function of Guard or not. I can see it going to both ways, as they are both "Traits" which exist independently from each other. But this Trait appears to depend upon the other trait, the question is how much of the Guard Trait affects the Intercept Trait.
Clicking Ruby Red Chuck Taylors together and chanting: Oh mighty Arcanus can you please rule?
-
I asked for help.
That is just how I have been playing with it....for the reasons I gave above.
(I think it works outside of guard, but needs it for the trait to be active.)
ether way....intercept is such a cool trait! I love the new expansion!
-
Very much so, it really helps against temple builds....
-
I do not have time but IF I can find some time I will go over all the involved rules. >:(
-
I talked to Bryan about this and the decision he made was that Restrained creatures cannot use the Intercept ability. This will be clarified in the next FAQ update.
-
Makes perfect sense to me! (I was using my best interpretation.)
;D Thank you Alex319! ;D
-
Excellent! Thank you.
-
I talked to Bryan about this and the decision he made was that Restrained creatures cannot use the Intercept ability. This will be clarified in the next FAQ update.
Hurrah!
-
Seems like intercept should be a function of guarding, can you intercept without being "on guard" ie having a guard marker on? Otherwise what would stop it from attacking and still intercepting/guarding?
The only real difference I see with intercept is it is guard (that works for melee OR ranged attack). Blocking ranged is a HUGE benefit. So it is a better form of guard.
-
Like I said....I imagined the spell was being "Redirected" to the interceptor....not that the creature was "Blocking" it. So I just never thought about it! This came up a long time ago with my group, and thats just how we rules it.
This way does make more sense, so I am glad we went this way with it.
-
Intercept requires a Guard marker. This is already stated in the rules.
-
Intercept requires a Guard marker. This is already stated in the rules.
Restrained does not remove the guard marker....The creature is still guarding if it is restrained...its just that Attackers can ignore them. (Not trying to argue....Just to make it clear)
Like I said....I assumed the creature was "Absorbing the spell".
This would be the best way to show that intercept dose not work while restrained.
Rules Book Codex-Restrained- The only advantage a Restrained guard receives is the Counterstrike trait
(Which I dont think is in the 1st edition...that or I missed it. ether way, I should of checked the 2ed.)
Thanks for clearing that up Alex319. I think that was the way most of us thought it should go. ;D
-
I think that this ruling is a bit of a shame. All the people protesting that you obviously couldn't intercept while restrained based it on intercept being a leap in front of the attack approach. I agree that restraining should prevent intercept in this manner. However, a restrained guard can still cast spells, defend, attack or back chat... Why does it seem so inconceivable that they couldn't do something that distracts or interrupts a ranged attack? Throw that munty big shield for one? Or a stick from the tangle vine? A clump of dirt etc? Someone suggested a magical intercept/attract attack effect, but it doesn't even need to be that complex. There is no real spatial positioning in a zone, so while I accept that an attacker could just walk around a guard to get to another creature, it seems just as conceivable that a restrained guard with intercept is still able to block some part of the line of sight from a ranged attack coming from a distance...
Anyway, just my 5 cents, basically I think it's just as thematic to allow it as it is to prevent it while still allowing any other non move based action...