Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Rules Discussion => Topic started by: Sailor Vulcan on November 18, 2014, 08:31:29 PM
-
flyer making ranged attack against creature in same zone, but their attack's range is 1-2. Can they still make the attack? I checked the rulebook and if taken literally, it seems to be that the answer is no. However, if the ranged attacker is non-flying and it's the defender that's flying instead, then such an attack could be made. This does not make sense to me AT ALL. It's rather shocking to me.
Then again, maybe there's a rules clarification somewhere on this that I missed...?
Thanks!
-
No, there is not a clarification you've missed, because there is one coming soon.
-
Uh, boss?
Flying
A creature can ignore minimum range when making a ranged attack against another object in its zone if either the attacking creature or the defending creature (or both) have the Flying trait.
-
Uh, boss?
Flying
A creature can ignore minimum range when making a ranged attack against another object in its zone if either the attacking creature or the defending creature (or both) have the Flying trait.
Ah. Thanks.
Wait. "Another object," then it switches from "object" to "creature". Does this rule still apply for flying conjurations ranged-attacking nonflying objects, or flying objects ranged attacking nonflying conjurations? I'm guessing it does, but still. It looks like there's a typo might confuse people.
-
Or a conjuration with ranged attack against a flying creature?
-
Thanks for the catch, Kitch. This gives me a lot to clarify, but the intention is simple, if you can shoot a flyer in your zone ignoring minimum range, then that flyer could should you right back ignoring minimum range.
-
but what if one flyer shoots on another? with the current ruling it can shoot as flyers can always be shot independent of minimum range. But the idea of minimum range is like beeing hindered by the other creature on ground, so why not in the air!
-
The same thing applies that ringkichard mentioned:
Flying
A creature can ignore minimum range when making a ranged attack against another object in its zone if either the attacking creature or the defending creature (or both) have the Flying trait.
In this case, the creature has the Flying trait, so it can ignore minimum range when attacking any object in its own zone (whether the target is flying or not).
-
It's weird that two flying archers in the same zone can attack other...
-
How is that weird? It is using the same logic that says a creature on the ground can fire a ranged attack at one in the air. Different elevations. Not everything in the air is on the same elevation. There is a lot of wiggle room for one to be higher than the other.
-
Here goes my flying sniper! :)
-
that's the point by making a ranged unit fly, you can totally avoid the creature to be forced to use the melee attack. Of course you need the enchantment, but flyers shouldn't be able to shoot other flyers in the same zone. Just my point of few, the current rules are clear in that sense
-
I think, it feels natural that a ranged attack can target a flying creature in the same zone
and for me the other way round feels natural too.
And in the air is enough space to manoeuvre for a flying shooter attacking an other flyer.
For me the game should stay as intuitive as possible
-
There is enough room on the ground for an Archer to shoot someone else on the ground but that presumably doesn't work because the potential target moves close to you. A flyer doesn't want to move closer and that is why you can shoot him. But fliers can move close to each other.
It is unintuitive that you can hinder me but also be shot. That's not how it works on the ground. I imaging flying space to be another zone above the map and flying creatures can swoop down for melee as a 'free move with their attack'
-
It sounds like you're just imagining flyers on another 2-dimensional plane above the one on the ground, which is not realistic. If they can fly, they can be just as far from another flyer as they can be from a guy on the ground. They're not just standing on the roof, they can be above and below each other as well.
If they don't want to be close to a guy on the ground, why would they want to be close to a guy in the air? Either they're wanting to be distant, or not.
Regardless, the mechanical rules are quite clear that flyers can shoot each other with ranged attacks. If you don't like the thematic justification that I use, you are free to invent your own, but that is the way it works.
Edit: The hinderance statement is a good point though. I'm not completely certain how to justify two creatures being far enough to shoot each other yet still creating hinderance for one another.
-
It sounds like you're just imagining flyers on another 2-dimensional plane above the one on the ground, which is not realistic. If they can fly, they can be just as far from another flyer as they can be from a guy on the ground. They're not just standing on the roof, they can be above and below each other as well.
If they don't want to be close to a guy on the ground, why would they want to be close to a guy in the air? Either they're wanting to be distant, or not.
Regardless, the mechanical rules are quite clear that flyers can shoot each other with ranged attacks. If you don't like the thematic justification that I use, you are free to invent your own, but that is the way it works.
Edit: The hinderance statement is a good point though. I'm not completely certain how to justify two creatures being far enough to shoot each other yet still creating hinderance for one another.
Well they could if the shot was range 0-2 instead of 1-2. Just as you can shoot a gun even if it's touching your target, but you can't really do that so easily with a bow and arrow. At least I don't think you can.
So there's no conflict between using a range 0 ranged attack and being able to hinder. For the bigger minimum range take a few steps back, or in this case, flap your wings a couple times. For hindering, don't step back and don't flap your wings.
Kind of like how they have to swoop down to make a melee attack against a non-flyer.
-
By that logic why can't I shoot my bow in the same zone on the ground? Hindering an enemy while you shoot them with a range 1 minimum weapon doesn't make sense. The only reason is not a big deal is it comes up almost never since no current creatures have flying and a min range ranged attack naturally.
-
By that logic why can't I shoot my bow in the same zone on the ground? Hindering an enemy while you shoot them with a range 1 minimum weapon doesn't make sense. The only reason is not a big deal is it comes up almost never since no current creatures have flying and a min range ranged attack naturally.
Basically you have to take a step back to shoot something with a bow (min range 1) but not with a gun (min range 0) you can still hinder if you don't take that step back.
Now apply that logic to flyers, and don't forget to take into account the translation between the zone based game mechanics and the normal dimensional space in the story.
If this came up while I was trying to narrate a game, here's the kind of thing I would write:
The famous sniper watched from the audience as his likeness in the arena grew wings! Flapped once, twice, and thrice, then in that same instant downed the thunderift falcon in a single shot from above. He wished he had the chance to do that in real life...
-
I imagine flyers to be quite fast, so they are able to hinder another flying creature even when the distance between them is enough for a bow to shoot.