Dungeon Command Rules Questions/Clarifications

238 posts / 0 new
Last post

Distance should be infinite, but LOS required, just from reading the cards. 
Yeah this came up for me in a game awhile ago but if you read the rulebook it's quite clear that whenever you're targetting anything you need to have line of sight to it unless otherwise stated. So for fireball you need los to the square you target, but not necissarily to the creatures being affected. One non-exception but interesting point is Terrifying Revelation which does not require los because it does not target anything on the board.
Yeah this came up for me in a game awhile ago but if you read the rulebook it's quite clear that whenever you're targetting anything you need to have line of sight to it unless otherwise stated. So for fireball you need los to the square you target, but not necissarily to the creatures being affected. One non-exception but interesting point is Terrifying Revelation which does not require los because it does not target anything on the board.



Just buy a DM screen, if they tap their Dracolich at a suspicious time dive for cover behind it.
Yeah this came up for me in a game awhile ago but if you read the rulebook it's quite clear that whenever you're targetting anything you need to have line of sight to it unless otherwise stated. So for fireball you need los to the square you target, but not necissarily to the creatures being affected. One non-exception but interesting point is Terrifying Revelation which does not require los because it does not target anything on the board.



Just buy a DM screen, if they tap their Dracolich at a suspicious time dive for cover behind it.


lol!!
Deathstrike reads:  When this creature would be destroyed, it can first make a melee attack that deals melee damage).

Player A and B both have 1 morale left.  Player A destroys Player B's Boar (level 3) but in the process, Deathstrike goes off and kills Player A's Drow Blademaster (level 3).  Assume they both have 12 levels of units on the board after these attacks go off.  Who wins the game, or is it a draw?

Thinking about how the stack works, I believe Player B would win the game.  Player A makes an attack that would deal lethal damage, so that goes on the bottom of the stack.  Deathstrike would then pop on top of the stack and resolve first.  This would cause the Blademaster to technically die first and Player A would go past 0 morale before Player B.  But then again, I've been plenty wrong about rules in this game before.
Deathstrike reads:  When this creature would be destroyed, it can first make a melee attack that deals melee damage).

Player A and B both have 1 morale left.  Player A destroys Player B's Boar (level 3) but in the process, Deathstrike goes off and kills Player A's Drow Blademaster (level 3).  Assume they both have 12 levels of units on the board after these attacks go off.  Who wins the game, or is it a draw?

Thinking about how the stack works, I believe Player B would win the game.  Player A makes an attack that would deal lethal damage, so that goes on the bottom of the stack.  Deathstrike would then pop on top of the stack and resolve first.  This would cause the Blademaster to technically die first and Player A would go past 0 morale before Player B.  But then again, I've been plenty wrong about rules in this game before.



I think it's a little different than this (the attack resolves first) but I think your conclusion is probably right, because of the wording of Death Strike - it makes the attack before being actually destroyed. 
I'd call it a draw. The end result is that both creatures are dead and thus both players end up with a morale of zero or lower.
I would also judge that match as a draw. Deathstrike power triggers after the drow blademaster attack resolves. DS places a new action at the top of the stack, ds resolves, both creatures are dead.

If the player controlling the blademaster cowers for the damage he or she should win, because they have more leadership deployed.
My Dark Sun Campaign "Shards of a Broken Crown" http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/shards-of-a-broken-crown

Huh, so in that case the idea is that the Death Striking creature dies as part of resolution, and the enemy creature does too?  That's not unreasonable, I think that's a defensible interpreation.  I'd go the other way because to me "it can first" implies you resolve the whole attack before it dies, but sadly added to the ambiguous list
It's not as ambiguous as it sounds.
Deathstrike triggers when a creature would be destroyed, in Ellerons example it's after blademasters attack resolves and the stack is clear. The boar would be destroyed at this point but it first can make a melee attack. Boom, both creatures die.

DS doesn't add an immediate trigger above the blademasters attack. It creates it's own stack when it would be destroyed.

In the previous example if both players had 1 morale and 12 levels of deployed leadership the drow player could cower for the 20 damage boar (or is it 30?) attacks for and still win.
My Dark Sun Campaign "Shards of a Broken Crown" http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/shards-of-a-broken-crown
In the previous example if both players had 1 morale and 12 levels of deployed leadership the drow player could cower for the 20 damage boar (or is it 30?) attacks for and still win.



I don't think you're allowed to cower if you don't have enough morale....don't have rulebook here, but pretty sure that won't work.

Aside from that, in any casual game I wouldn't have a problem regarding this a draw, but it would still be nice to find out what's the official ruling should this happen in a tournament setting.
Me and my friend have different opinions about what is a legal source and what is not, and if a source is required at all to use certain actions. So we'd appriciate if someone would help us clarify this. The more replies the better!

Can we use for example Riposte as an action eventhough there is no damage to be prevented? Just using it to make a melee attack for 10 points of damage?

Or could we use Parry just to draw a card eventhough there's no damage to prevent?

Or does these two cards (and some other cards alike) require a source of damage to be used, or else they have no legal target (source) and therefor they'd cancel. And due to multiple effects on cards rule the "melee attack for 10 pts", or the "draw a card" effect would also cancel?

Can we use for example Riposte as an action eventhough there is no damage to be prevented? Just using it to make a melee attack for 10 points of damage?

Or could we use Parry just to draw a card eventhough there's no damage to prevent?

Playing an immediate reaction requires a valid trigger. You cannot play them whenever you like. I don't have my rule book handy, but I'm pretty sure it's stated like that.
It says something like "whenever you are resolving an action you need to determine it's source". So does that mean i need a valid trigger to use Riposte or Parry?
It says something like "whenever you are resolving an action you need to determine it's source". So does that mean i need a valid trigger to use Riposte or Parry?



Correct, there needs to be a valid acation on the stack. What needs to be true for an action to be valid, on the other hand, is not totally clear.
Thanks for replying.

It also says in the next sentence that "Each source is a single effect from a creature, an Order card, a terrain square, or other game feature."

So could a hazardous terrain square be a source eventhough it has not dealt any damage to you yet?

Sorry if i go on about this...

Mar 25, 2013 -- 1:51AM, Cederborg wrote:


Can we use for example Riposte as an action eventhough there is no damage to be prevented? Just using it to make a melee attack for 10 points of damage? 

Or could we use Parry just to draw a card eventhough there's no damage to prevent?





Playing an immediate reaction requires a valid trigger. You cannot play them whenever you like. I don't have my rule book handy, but I'm pretty sure it's stated like that.

( I cant figure out how to quote properly....)

The rules say nothing about immediate actions requiring a valid trigger. This is what the rules say about playing immediate actions:

"Immediate actions are usually responses to other actions. They can be played on any player’s turn. Taking an immediate action taps the acting creature"

It simply says that it is an action that can be played on any players turn, and it taps the acting creature. That it happens to "usually" be in response to another action is not really important...

The source of an effect is determined first when the action is resolved, not at play time (When resolving an action, you need to determine its source).

If an action states that it needs a target, the target will have to be declared at play time though, but that target might be illegal once the action is resolved because of whatever else has happened on the stack. But in a case like "Parry", which prevents damage from 1 source (note: not target source), I interpret it like the source of which to prevent damage from is determined when the Parry action is resolved on that stack, at which time there might be no valid source to prevent damage from, but that would not stop the "Draw order card" effect from resolving properly, nothing stops that.


Consider the following Scenarios:

Scenario1:
Player1 makes standard action attack, statig the target of the action
Player2 responsed to that action with parry
No more responses
Stack is resolved, starting the parry.
Player2 determines that the source of which to prevent damage from is the standard action attack on the stack, which is a legal source. Parry is resolved and Player2 draws an order card.
The standard action is resolved, and the damage is prevented.

Scenario2:

Player1 is in the activation phase, and moves a creatures. Moving a creature is an action according to the rules.
Player2 decides to respond to that action by playing an immediate action: Parry. Now move action is on the stack, and parry on the stack.
No more responses
Parry is resolved, there is no legal source to prevent damage from. Parry is resolved, Player2 draws an order card (nothing prevents that)
Creature move is resolved, creature move

Scenario3:

Player1 is ending his turn
Before turn is ended player2 decides to play an immidiate action (remember, nothing stops that): Parry.
Parry goes on the stack
Player1 does not respond to parry
parry is resolved, no legal source to prevent damage from, but nothing stops Draw order card effect, player2 draws order card.
Player1 turns end.


For further clarification see the play example on page 9 of the rulebook:


"Chris doesn’t want to lose his Drider, so he responds to this action by playing the Uncanny Dodge card, letting him tap the Drider and discard an Order cardto prevent all damage from one source. Uncanny Dodge goes onto the stack above Killing Strike and resolves first: Chris discards a card, taps the Drider, and chooses to prevent the damage from Killing Strike. Then he discards Uncanny Dodge. When Killing Strike resolves, the Drider avoids taking
damage from it, and the Order card is discarded with no effect."


See, the uncanny dodge goes on the stack, without needing any target. Chris chooses target source to prevent from first at resolve time, not at play time. That means that at play-time there does not need to be a valid source present, first at resolve time this is determined.

Thats my 2c.

 

It says in the rulebook on page 8 that "When an action resolves, it checks whether the target is legal".

And it also says that "many actions specify a target, which require you to choose something". You could argue that the target on Parry ("Prevent 20 damage from 1 source") is the 1 source. Therefor you can't cast parry without having a target (source).

About the example on page 9. Chris is targeting the damage from the Killing Strike melee attack with Uncanny dodge.

You quoted it yourself but left out the whole example.

"Jennifer playes the Killing Strike card on her Dragon Knight tapping it to make a melee attack against an enemy Drider for 100 damage. Killing Strike goes on to the stack. Chris dosen't want to lose his Drider so he responds to this by playing the Uncanny Dodge".

MULTIPLE ACTIONS ON CARDS: Page number 9 states that when there are multiple actions on cards they go on the stack in reverse order they appear on card. So on the Uncanny dodge you place Prevent all damage first (just like on the example), and on top of that discard a card. Then you got discard a card on top which resolves first, then you have Prevent all damage. BUT on Parry you put Draw 1 Order card first on stack and then Prevent 10 damage on top of that which resolves first. So you first Prevent damage, then you draw a card. It's the same with Riposte and it's melee attack. This brings up the question whether or not you need a target source for Parry and Riposte like a Damage to prevent since that is the action on the card that comes first. Because when you resolve that first action on the Parry or Riposte card (Prevent damage) and no damage has been dealth, there is no source.

Sorry I was short last time, was just coming in quickly.  This is one of the questions I asked Chris Tulach, the head judge at the PAX tournament.  His answer was:

-You need to be able to pick a source to be able to play a card.  (Order of effects listed on the card isn't relevant - you can't play a card with a prevention ability without being able to pick a source.)
-He needs to check with the game designers about what, if anything, needs to be true of the source.

So right now it's clear that you can play it if there's a source that the damage prevention would do something against.  Where it gets tricky is whether the card has to have the potential to do something or not.  In other words, can I play it and target a "source" that doesn't even try to do damage (like a Behind Enemy Lines) just to play the card?  What about if the source would be able to do damage but that damage is unpreventable (Magic Short Sword etc)?  I think people are going to have gut-feeling ideas about these but we just need to wait on the official ruling.
If the the enemy has Piercing Strike or the Magic Short Sword and uses it against you, Can you use Savage Demise to do an Attack?
If the the enemy has Piercing Strike or the Magic Short Sword and uses it against you, Can you use Savage Demise to do an Attack?



You can certainly do that - Savage Demise doesn't have any damage prevention involved, so you can actually use it to make an attack more or less any time as long as your creature is untapped.  For example, you can use it on their turn more or less immediately, before they even start activating their dudes, if you want.

The more interesting question (which I'm hoping Chris will email me back about once he recovers from PAX) is whether you can use a card like Riposte or Defensive Advantage against a Magic Short Sword attack just to do the damage or draw the card or whatever. 


Sorry I was short last time, was just coming in quickly.  This is one of the questions I asked Chris Tulach, the head judge at the PAX tournament.  His answer was:

-You need to be able to pick a source to be able to play a card.  (Order of effects listed on the card isn't relevant - you can't play a card with a prevention ability without being able to pick a source.)
-He needs to check with the game designers about what, if anything, needs to be true of the source.

So right now it's clear that you can play it if there's a source that the damage prevention would do something against.  Where it gets tricky is whether the card has to have the potential to do something or not.  In other words, can I play it and target a "source" that doesn't even try to do damage (like a Behind Enemy Lines) just to play the card?  What about if the source would be able to do damage but that damage is unpreventable (Magic Short Sword etc)?  I think people are going to have gut-feeling ideas about these but we just need to wait on the official ruling.

My interpretation is:

1. Target and Source are two different things.

2. Actions that require a target needs you to explicitly choose that target when the action is played, based on:

Many actions specify a target, which requires you to choose something (such as a creature or an Order card). You choose the targets for an Order card when you play it, and you choose targets for a creature’s power when you use it. Once you choose targets, you cannot change your mind later. When the action resolves, it checks whether the target is legal (it’s still in play, is still in range, has the right keywords, and so on).

See, an effect (each source is a single effect from a creature, an Order card, a terrain square, or other game feature) does not even have the kind of attributes that we're talking about when we talk about target: Still in play, still in range, has the right keywords, etc..

3. Actions that require a source, determines the source when the action is resolved, not when its played. Based on:

When resolving an action, you need to determine its source. each source is a single effect from a creature, an Order card, a terrain square, or other game feature.

On the other hand, if a card like Parry ie, explicitly said "Prevent 20 damage to this creature from 1 target source", it would be a whole other bag of potatoes...

But based on what you're saying Ultiville, should we interpret the rules in a way that whenever it says 0..n source on a card, that actually means "target source/s", so that playing the Action requires that we state a target source?

That still leaves open for scenarios like this, no?:

Player1 plays Standard attack on Player1_Creature1, targetting Player2_Creature1
Player1_Attack1 goes on the stack
Player2 responds to the attack action by playing the Parry order card on Player2_Creature2 (In no way involved in the fight, might even be on the other side of the playing field) targetting the Player1_Attack1 effect as the source of the Parry (Valid target source as far as I can see from your interpretation)
No more responses.
Parry resolves, Prevents 20 damage from Player1_Attack1 on Player2_Creature2 (which will never happen), and Player2 draws an order card.
Player1_Attack1 resolves, dealing 20 damage to Player2_Creature1

Unfortunately unlike Magic, DC isn't great about explicitly using "target" when it means it.  I would say yes, that "a source" is indicating "target source" in this game.


The rules say nothing about immediate actions requiring a valid trigger. This is what the rules say about playing immediate actions:

"Immediate actions are usually responses to other actions. They can be played on any player’s turn. Taking an immediate action taps the acting creature"


Yep, sorry about this. I suppose we always played it like that because that's how Immediate actions work in D&D 4e.

Unfortunately, compared to other CCGs the Dungeon Command card templating and the rules explaining their interactions is pretty bad.

Do multiple copies of spawn of kyuss stack on the same creature.

Spawn of Kyuss: Level 1 CON, Minor -Requires Undead. Attach this card to this creature. Each enemy creature that ends it's activation adjacent to this creature takes 10 damage.

I'm hoping it does, imagine a tomb guardian dealing 30-40 damage when you end activation adjacent to him.
My Dark Sun Campaign "Shards of a Broken Crown" http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/shards-of-a-broken-crown
Do multiple copies of spawn of kyuss stack on the same creature. Spawn of Kyuss: Level 1 CON, Minor -Requires Undead. Attach this card to this creature. Each enemy creature that ends it's activation adjacent to this creature takes 10 damage. I'm hoping it does, imagine a tomb guardian dealing 30-40 damage when you end activation adjacent to him.



I don't see why it wouldn't.  As far as I can tell the only things that don't stack are "named" abilities, ie Block and Regeneration.
Yeah I was 99% sure it did. So far spawn of kyuss performs miserably against a squad of adventurers with defenders but I'm mulling over ideas on a control/defense deck.

I wish call to battle worked as an immediate and delthrin wasn't soo balanced. He would look alot more attractive with a +1 bump in order,creature hand or leadership, just one category. Or a +2 in morale. Maybe even making his ability trigger out of your own turn, he could rival tarkon in a 3-player game. Tarkon is godly, your opponents can't cower against themselves nevermind you.
My Dark Sun Campaign "Shards of a Broken Crown" http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/shards-of-a-broken-crown
Hi all!!! I have a question..played Dungeon Command two times, The Orc Barbarian : "Whenever an adjacent creature is destroyed, untap this creature".
If i make a melee attack with Orc and kill adjacent creature, untap Orc Barbarian, Can i make a new melee against other creatures?
Thanks
Yes, you can.  Same thing with the level 4 Bugbear Berserker (Goblins set), who has the same special ability.

You can actually go crazy with these guys:
Things like Quick Shot and other Minor Action attacks, along with a Magic Short Sword (unpreventable damage, not even Cowering will work) and movement cards like Into the Fray and Spring Attack can turn these guys into cyclones of senseless destruction if you can set them up right.

And if you start adjacent to an enemy piece, remember that you can spend your Standard action to make a kill on the adjacent piece, then un-tap, THEN move and attack another piece with Minors and such, and then spend your Standard action for the kill, and keep going with more Minor actions (Into the Fray, etc).   It's pretty fun! (for you)
Pretty cool!!! Very Thanks for the answer. I have played many years ago at D&D minis , but Dungeon Command is very strategic game , i like it!!
I'm agree with u Tyrion!!!
Yes, you can.  Same thing with the level 4 Bugbear Berserker (Goblins set), who has the same special ability.

You can actually go crazy with these guys:
Things like Quick Shot and other Minor Action attacks, along with a Magic Short Sword (unpreventable damage, not even Cowering will work) and movement cards like Into the Fray and Spring Attack can turn these guys into cyclones of senseless destruction if you can set them up right.

And if you start adjacent to an enemy piece, remember that you can spend your Standard action to make a kill on the adjacent piece, then un-tap, THEN move and attack another piece with Minors and such, and then spend your Standard action for the kill, and keep going with more Minor actions (Into the Fray, etc).   It's pretty fun! (for you)



The minor action / tap / move + standard aspects work so immensely well in a miniature game setting. Not to preach to the choir but I really hope thy make one more set. Then six of us can do tournaments each with a different faction. That would keep me pleased for a long, long while.

Rule Question regarding the summoning circles:  does a large creature that takes up four spaces have to be fully within the circle, or just a portion of its base touching to deploy legally there?
My apologies if this has been asked -- I'm working through the 2o pages. 
Hi all.
Here's a puzzler from a friend of mine so I'm asking on his behalf.

If I deploy an adventurer 4 times with Behind Enemy Lines (i.e. attach it to the said adventurer), does it mean that I gain 16 Morale when it reaches my start zone?

Thanks to everyone who can help and I would also like an "official" answer. 
Once it's deployed, you can't deploy it again. There is no way to get multiple instances of that card attached to one creature. To use more than one copy of behind enemy lines you would have to deploy a new adventurer each time, so each would only have one copy attached.
Okay thanks ComradeOne, but on a related note, "When exactly can I play the BEL?"

Since it's a minor, I'll assume I can only play it on my adventurer during its activation (as stated in rulebook). If that's so, wouldn't it have to be in play first? Which means I'd already have deployed it in my start zone.... which would mean your answer above has wierd interactions/repercussions.

Thanks for the help. I just need to wrap my head around this.
You play it on using any creature you already have deployed. It doesn't have to be an adventurer, only the creature you deploy has to be an adventurer.

Eg. A goblin cutter moves, makes an attack, and then uses the minor action behind enemy lines to deploy a dragon knight. Then the cutter finishes its activation. Then the dragon knight can activate. The dragon knight starts in the enemy deploy zone with BEL attached. 
You play it on using any creature you already have deployed. It doesn't have to be an adventurer, only the creature you deploy has to be an adventurer.

Eg. A goblin cutter moves, makes an attack, and then uses the minor action behind enemy lines to deploy a dragon knight. Then the cutter finishes its activation. Then the dragon knight can activate. The dragon knight starts in the enemy deploy zone with BEL attached. 



Thanks ComradeOne. This reply has been extremely helpful!

Hi Guys, a question: Lokar of the stonelands : when you deploy starting orc creatures, you can deploy one of them in any unoccupied Treasure square on the board.  


Only for your First Turn (starting) , or is possible every turn in deploying phase?
Thanks
Hi Guys, a question: Lokar of the stonelands : when you deploy starting orc creatures, you can deploy one of them in any unoccupied Treasure square on the board.  


Only for your First Turn (starting) , or is possible every turn in deploying phase?
Thanks

Only first deployment of the game (during setup). Not every turn.
Sign In to post comments