Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Rules Discussion => Topic started by: piousflea on March 24, 2013, 09:01:45 PM
-
A few questions about the way Reverse Attack is described in the FAQ:
Reverse Attack
Updated wording:
When this creature is attacked, you must reveal Reverse Attack during the Avoid Attack Step. The attack is avoided and then redirected back; this creature becomes the new source (although the attacker stays the same), and the original source becomes the new target (even if the original source would not normally be a legal target), for the next 2 steps (Roll Dice and Damage and Effects).
Then, destroy Reverse Attack. If the attack is Unavoidable, destroy Reverse Attack without effect.
This seems to suggest that:
1) The Reversed attack should ignore any Forcefields, Blocks, etc as there is no additional Avoid Attack step. It does not take off forcefield charges and it does not force mandatory reveals, and it is impossible to "reverse attack a reverse attack".
2) The wording of "source and target are swapped, but attacker remains the same, and the target can be attacked even if it would normally not be a legal target" seems to imply the following:
- Because the attacker remains the same, any bonuses like Bear Strength etc stay the same.
- Because the target is swapped, you'd use the new target's dice modifiers (Aegis, Marked for Death).
- Theoretically, if a nonliving creature had "+2 vs Nonliving", that bonus would apply for attacking itself.
- Because the source and target are both swapped, the range remains the same for calculating stuff like Grimson Deadeye's attack strength.
- Because Reverse Attack is allowed to attack "not normally legal targets", it is possible to reverse an attack from a Watchtowered sniper behind a wall, even though a normal ranged attack would be blocked by Line of Sight. Or hypothetically, if there was a ground-to-air specialist whose attack said "can only hit flying units", it could still hit itself with Reverse.
Am I correct on all of these points?
-
[strike]If you have both a Block and Reverse Attack on the same creature I would say you would have to reveal both. Other than that I think you're correct. [/strike]
I believe I misunderstood your first statement. You mean once an attack has been reversed it does not trigger a Block or or another Reverse Attack to be revealed. I think your correct on all counts.
-
All of the above are correct.
-
So reverse attack on a forcemage will penetrate a forcefield? that is frightening.
-
@Pious
your good.