Quantcast
Channel: Mage Knight Board Game | Official Rules FAQ Thread | BoardGameGeek
Viewing all 576 articles
Browse latest View live

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by DaviddesJ

andrei_nica wrote:

My friends say that if I group enemies, the group gains all defence bonuses from all of them. Is this correct?


Yes, that's correct. But that's not the same as saying that every enemy in the group gains any resistances that anyone else in the group has. E.g., if one enemy in the group has physical resistance and another doesn't, then you have to treat the entire group as having physical resistance. But the enemy without physical resistance didn't "gain" that resistance.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Ceti

Reading through that - I don't quite get the concept of grouping. Doesn't it make sense to treat each monster as a separate group?

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Fluxx

Ceti wrote:

Reading through that - I don't quite get the concept of grouping. Doesn't it make sense to treat each monster as a separate group?

Just look at a simple example. Suppose you have an enemy with armor 3 and one with armor 5 and you have 2 cards with attack 4. If you group them together you have to hit armor 8 so both cards together will kill both enemies. If you treat them seperately you will be able to kill only one of them. So smetimes it is a big advantage to group enemies. But sometimes it is not a good idea because of the rule about shared resistances.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Ceti

Fluxx wrote:

Ceti wrote:

Reading through that - I don't quite get the concept of grouping. Doesn't it make sense to treat each monster as a separate group?

Just look at a simple example. Suppose you have an enemy with armor 3 and one with armor 5 and you have 2 cards with attack 4. If you group them together you have to hit armor 8 so both cards together will kill both enemies. If you treat them seperately you will be able to kill only one of them. So smetimes it is a big advantage to group enemies. But sometimes it is not a good idea because of the rule about shared resistances.


But doesn't it say that each card can only affect one enemy? Or should it be one group?

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Kreuh

Attack
You can decide to attack a group of ennemies instead of taking them one by one.
You treat the group as one single token sharing all their individual resistances and adding their armor. (only for this attack).
In order to kill the group, you have to gather enough attack power to kill them all at once.

- Disadvantage 1 : the whole group benefis from each special resistance of each ennemy from the group.
- Disadvantage 2 : either you manage to kill the group in one big attack, either you don't kill anything.
- Advantage : no matter if your attacks comes from one single card or several cards / skills / units, the total just have to beat the group total Armor.

Example :
In order to attack them, you group 2 ennemies :
- Armor 2 with fire resistance, and
- Armor 6.
Now you are facing a group with Armor 8 with fire resistance. And your attack is going to kill the group, or do nothing.

- You could play cards : Attack 3 + Attack 5 = Attack 8. You kill the groupe. Note that with the exact same cards, you couldn't have killed them one by one.
- If you have only fire attacks, you need 8 of them 2 times = 16 Fire attack. (Because the group share special resistances).
- Like usual, any combination like : Attack 6 + Fire Attack 4 is enough to kill the group.
If you cannot gather enough Attack power kill the group at once, then they all survived. (In this case, you shouldn't have attack them as a group at all).

Block
On the other hand, when you block, you cannot make groups and you have to block each ennemy one by one.
Remaining blocks are lost between each ennemy.
Example : you have 3 ennemies, each one has Attack 1. so you have to block 3 different Attack 1, it's not like blocking Attack 3.
If you play a block 5 card, it can only block an Attack 1. Then you have to deal the two remaining attack with other blocks, or take wounds from them.

Last thing, any group you make exist only during your attack, so you could for exemple :
- Make a group and kill it in Siege / Range Attack phase.
- Then block remaining ennemies in block phase.
- Then make another group and kill it Attack phase.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by lucasd

What is the color of artifact?
Because sometimes you need to know the color for the action.
But with artifacts it is usually hard to tell

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by tumorous

lucasd wrote:

What is the color of artifact?
Because sometimes you need to know the color for the action.
But with artifacts it is usually hard to tell

Artifacts do not have a color.

When cards refer to the color of a card, note that the text will specifically mention Action cards (e.g., Decompose), Spell cards (e.g., Magic Talent) or both (e.g., Mind Read). Artifacts are not Action cards.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Kreuh

Is there any official setup instructions for playing the scenarios Mine Liberation, Druid Night, and Dungeon Lords solo ?

In The "Other solo missions" section of the Solo Conquest scenario, the rulebook says that "you may play any other mission as solo, just use similar Setup modifications and Special rules as this mission". (Rulebook p17)

So the solo version of any scenario is covered by the rulebook : I'm suposed to take any scenario, and apply the Setup modifications and Special rules of the solo conquest.
But actually it isn't working, especially regarding the core tiles :

- Mine liberation Setup says : red city tile.
If then I apply the Solo Setup modification, as the rulebook says, I would put 2 random cities instead.

- Mine liberation Setup doesn't specifically say it, but it seems to be : "non-city core tile : "1 less than number of player". So it would make 0 if I play alone.
If then I apply the Solo Setup modification, as rulebook says, I put 2 non-city core tiles instead.

It have to be wrong because it makes the solo mine liberation, not just hard but truely impossible.
I don't mind make my own setup rules for playing those scenario. But as it it writen in the rulebook, it seems that there is an official setup.
And if there is not, I believe this great game is played by many, many , MANY solo players, and so it deserve an official solo setup for those official scenarios !

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by tumorous

Kreuh wrote:

Is there any official setup instructions for playing the scenarios Mine Liberation, Druid Night, and Dungeon Lords solo ?

No. I think this is the closest we've gotten:

[q="karel_danek at http://boardgamegeek.com/article/8692972#8692972"]

rgalvan wrote:

I like to play this game as solo, I would like to try other scenarios, like Druid Nights for the score.

In the standard Solo Conquest the rulebook says "you may play any other missions as solo, just use similar setup modifications and Special rules as this mission."

It's quite clear, except for map setup.

Using Druid Nights as an example, how many countryside tiles shuold be used ? The rulebook says 8 for 2 players, should I go with 8 or 7 ?

And how about non-city tiles ? The rulebooks says "1 less the player number", so it's 1 for 2 players. Should I go with 1 or 0 ? I think 0 in this case ...

Not a big problem but I would like to play it in the "best" way :)

Regarding map, I would suggest to follow scaling of given scenario. So if it says:

Countryside tiles: 8, 9, 10, you use 7 for solo play.

If that's not possible (Druid night says to use 1 less Core tiles than number of players), I would recommend to go with 1. Having map without any Core tile but the one with revealed city is a bit blunt.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by nemodomi

Kreuh wrote:

...

In The "Other solo missions" section of the Solo Conquest scenario, the rulebook says that "you may play any other mission as solo, just use similar Setup modifications and Special rules as this mission". (Rulebook p17)

So the solo version of any scenario is covered by the rulebook : I'm suposed to take any scenario, and apply the Setup modifications and Special rules of the solo conquest.

But actually it isn't working ...


[bolding emphasis above is mine.]

in my opinion "it isn't working" because (in your second paragraph above) you are parsing the "Other Solo Missions" rule incorrectly. this rule instructs to use similar modifications and rules, not to apply the modifications and rules.

again in my opinion, the usage of the word "similar" implies that in at least some cases one may need to use one's imagination in a constructive fashion in order to transition multi-player rules into a satisfactory solo experience; i.e., literal/analytical translation may not suffice.

'hope this may help.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Mana Storm

$
0
0

by 360_Piranha

Can I use the basic action of this card (mana storm) for a basic color dice, although my inventory is full with this mana(color).

So, I only roll the dice? Or is it not possible, because I can not gain the cristal. (-> full inventory)

greetings from germany!

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Kreuh

In the rulebook : When you gain a crystal, but you already have 3 crystals of this color, instead you gain a mana token of that color.

So in your situation : you can use mana storm for chossing a basic color dice from the source, gain a mana token of this color, and reroll the chosen dice to the source.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by aurax

PaulGrogan wrote:

CMoor213 wrote:

Reposting again:
Q2: Does the "make everything a siege attack" ability of Altem Mages apply to attacks made by units as well?


Q2: Altem Mages.

Yes, it applies to Units. It makes all Attacks conducted by the player better.


Apologies if this has been answered before, I couldnt find it. The same reasoning of Altem Mages ability applies to the stronger effect of Sword of Justice? Are ALL attacks doubled, including units and skills?

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by DaviddesJ

aurax wrote:

... the stronger effect of Sword of Justice? Are ALL attacks doubled, including units and skills?


Yes, and this has been answered before.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by aurax

DaviddesJ wrote:

aurax wrote:

... the stronger effect of Sword of Justice? Are ALL attacks doubled, including units and skills?


Yes, and this has been answered before.


Thanks David! I couldnt find that answer. Good to know :)

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by DaviddesJ

OK, let me retract/clarify:

1. There is an "official response" that Altem Mage ability that refers to "All attacks you play" includes attacks generated by your units, skills, etc.

2. The Sword of Justice refers to "all physical attacks you play", and so many of us concluded from the previous answer that this would include physical attacks generated by your units, skills, etc.

3. None of the "official" readers of the thread disputed conclusion #2. Therefore I think it has come to be settled wisdom, even though it's only been explicitly stated in the case of the Altem Mages.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Rainstar

Toper wrote:

If you assault (at night) a keep or mage tower whose defender is unrevealed, do you choose to challenge adjacent rampaging enemies before or after seeing who the defender is?


PaulGrogan wrote:

Good question. I'm pretty sure you need to decide beforehand. Thematically, I couldnt understand it the other way.


I'd like to start by saying how much I appreciate your FAQ Paul. Mage Knight would be far less playable without someone clarifying the tough calls, which are plentiful in due to the complexity of the game.

That said, I think that either your interpretation here is incorrect or the rulebook is. According to the rulebook:

1. Combat at a fortified site is started by moving into that site (1a).

2. Combat starts with the drawing or revealing of any enemies there (3).

3. You may challenge adjacent rampaging enemies if your move started a combat (2c).
(emphasis mine)

Note the use of past tense for started in 2c. Combat has already started (i.e., enemies have been revealed) when you have the opportunity to challenge rampagers.

Certainly the order of the first 6 points in that section is confusing, but it is not an list of things to do in a specific order, it is 6 general rules about combat. Forgive me if I am being overly literal here, but the rules as written are pretty clear. It's possible that they are written incorrectly, or mistranslated, I don't know.

I also think this makes more sense thematically. We are discussing challenging enemies that are non-adjacent to the starting hex (otherwise including the rampagers would be compulsory): how do we challenge them before meeting the occupants of the assaulted hex? Cell phone them before we enter the fortification? It is only once the combat has been initiated that they are drawn in to participate.

Thank you for your attention. If there is some updated, more confident ruling regarding this, I'm sorry for missing it (despite searching) and would love to read it.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by DaviddesJ

Rainstar wrote:

Certainly the order of the first 6 points in that section is confusing, but it is not an list of things to do in a specific order, it is 6 general rules about combat. Forgive me if I am being overly literal here, but the rules as written are pretty clear.


The rules seem clear to me and they say what Paul said. Rule sections 1 and 2 describe how you select the enemies you're fighting. Once you've done that, rule section 3 says you start the combat by drawing and/or revealing all of the enemies. You don't (can't) do that until you have specified which enemies those are.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by Rainstar

DaviddesJ wrote:

The rules seem clear to me and they say what Paul said. Rule sections 1 and 2 describe how you select the enemies you're fighting. Once you've done that, rule section 3 says you start the combat by drawing and/or revealing all of the enemies. You don't (can't) do that until you have specified which enemies those are.


Thank you for replying David. I always appreciate your earnest analysis. However, if you interpret the rules in that way, you are saying that the terms initiate combat in point 1, start combat in point 2, and start combat in point 3 refer to different things. This is either terminologically or logically inconsistent.

Reply: Mage Knight Board Game:: Rules:: Re: Official Rules FAQ Thread

$
0
0

by DaviddesJ

Rainstar wrote:

However, if you interpret the rules in that way, you are saying that the terms initiate combat in point 1, start combat in point 2, and start combat in point 3 refer to different things. This is either terminologically or logically inconsistent.


I thought you were being hyperprecise? But the words "start combat" don't appear anywhere in either of those sections of the rules.

Section 2 says "If your move started a combat" and section 3 says "Combat starts by drawing and/or revealing all enemies". I guess your argument is that when your move starts a combat, then you must immediately perform the steps described as "Combat starts"? That doesn't make much sense to me and I don't think this would be a common reading. It's especially implausible here because of the ordering of the rules: first they describe how to determine what enemies you're fighting, and then they tell you to draw and/or reveal those enemies.

Your approach requires the following time sequence: first, draw and/or reveal all enemies you are facing; then, subsequently, determine which enemies you are facing. Isn't that problematical?
Viewing all 576 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>