Savage requires you to move if that movement will result in you ending up next to an enemy fig. There's no optional about it.
Savage does NOT require you to move. It requires you to end any movement you have adjacent to an enemy, but no-where in the ability (and I've quoted it a lot today) does it say, "this character has no choice but to move."
Asking us to "Please point out the text in Savage that says that you must move," indicates that, quite possiby, you've missed the point.
Or other people are reading more into it than is there.
Movement was possible, up until you decided to trade it away to use an ability.
That is not correct. Look at the four options again, and then read the "Replace Turn" section on page 17. If you replace your turn, you cannot move, even if you want to.
You don't activate a character like this: "I'm activating Kyp. Now I have to Move and Attack. But I'm skipping that step because I want to use FP5." It would be, "I'm activating Kyp. Now I am spending his turn to use FP5." Movement isn't even an option.
You activate the character, and then you choose what you want to do with them, be it "Move and Attack," "Attack and Move," "Double Move," or "Replace Turn."
This is a unique character because this is the first character with "Savage" who has a "Replaces Turn" ability that does not generate movement.
It's no different than the Acklay using Triple Attack.
Actually, it is very different. Read the definition of Triple Attack - it points you to Double Attack (I know, I looked it up today), and when you want to use Double, you attack and then you sacrifice your movement to make another attack (or two more in the case of Triple). So your choice is "Attack and Move."
Movement was possible until it gave up its move to attack two extra times.
Yes- as part of an "Attack and Move" activation.
Movement was possible until Kyp gave up its move (and some other stuff) to use FP 5.
Read "Replacing Turn" on page 17 - it specifically says that you CANNOT move, you spend your turn just using the ability that replaces your turn.
Yes - that's exactly what Savage does.
Read Savage again - Savage affects how you end your movement. That's it. If you don't have movement, then you CANNOT end your movement (which you don't have) adjacent to anyone. Savage addresses this: "this character must end ITS MOVE next to an enemy IF IT CAN."
Yes, the more restrictive takes precedence, and in my book CANNOT (as in cannot move because you "Replace Turn") is more restrictive than "move next to an enemy if it CAN.
You have four options every time a piece's turn comes up:
[list=1]
Attack and Move
Move and Attack
Double Move
Replace Turn
Having Savage forces you, the player, to sometimes select one over the other, even if you'd rather not. If the only enemy piece is 8 squares away from the Acklay, it cannot choose 1, 2, or 4.
Yes - Let's look at the Acklay. Normally, it's options are 1, 2, and 3 - 4 does not even exist for it. What do 1, 2, and 3 all have in common? Move. So the Acklay is bound by Savage regardless.
Kyp (with Savage and 5 F. Points) is different. He has options 1, 2, 3, AND 4 (Force Push 5). One of those options is not like the others - which one? 4. it does not involvement movement (in this case).
The thing is, the Acklay is not allowed to even pick "Attack and Move" in this case.
Oddly, when an enemy is 2 away from an Acklay, it can pick "Attack and Move" if the enemy has 50 hp or more - in that case, there is no way that the Acklay can kill it and not end it's move adjacent to an enemy (which it must make because it has a Move action and it is not adjacent to an enemy). If the enemy has 40 or less HP, then the Acklay must use "Move and Attack" because there is a chance it can roll a crit, in which case it would not be able to fulfill Savage. But why does it have to fulfill Savage? Because it has a Move action.
Savage absolutely affects which of the four activation options are available as the Acklay activates.
Yes, because the Acklay does not have option 4. It only has options 1, 2, and 3, and all of those involve Movement.
You're arguing that you can choose to use an ability which limits your available movement in order to get around the limitations of Savage.
No, I'm arguing that when you have no movement (no Move action), Savage isn't even an issue. Savage absolutely affects your character's actions if all you have is 1, 2, and 3. If you have option 4, everything changes.
We know that this isn't allowed.
Mayhaps this is the root of the problem?
The Acklay cannot choose "Attack and Move" in this case unless there is absolutely no chance that its attack could prevent it from ending adjacent. The only time it could elect to "Attack and Move" with the closest enemy 2 squares away is if there is another enemy within 6 squares, or if the enemy 2 squares away has more HP than the Acklay can deal with its single attack.
Yeah, I just said that - so we're in agreement.
So:
. . . . . . . . 1 . A . . . . 2 . . . . . . . .
In this case, the Acklay can attack enemy 1 because, even if it defeats the enemy, it can still end its move adjacent to enemy 2.
Agreed.
It could not Triple Attack enemy 1.
Correct - because, when it uses Triple Attack, it is actually using the "Attack and Move" option. Because it has a "Move action" it must end adjacent.
The Acklay does have another option, though. It could Double Move, as long as it ended adjacent to another enemy.
In fact, in this case, the Acklay not only can choose "Move and Attack," but must choose "Move and Attack."
That depends on the HP of enemy 1 - as we've already agreed on. If enemy 1 has 50 or more HP, the Acklay could chose "Attack and Move."
this references Kyp's option to use FP5. No, he doesn't, because he is not allowed to select that option when he activates, any more than the Acklay above is allowed to select "Attack and Move."
Except the Acklay can choose "Attack and Move" if enemy 1 has 50 or more HP.
Selecting that option does not give him enough movement to base an enemy
Exactly - because he has no movement at all, as per the definition of use a "Replaces Turn" on page 17 of the Rulebook.
However, he could have had movement, but he elected to change it to 0 by using FP 5, instead.
No, when he chooses "Replaces Turn" he has no movement. The choices are not an 1-->2-->3-->4 progression. It is not linear, where you move through your options one at a time. It is multiple choice, or choose one out of 1, 2, 3, or 4. You don't have to progress from "Move and Attack" through "Attack and Move," then "Double Move" to get to "Replaces Turn."
When you Replace Turn, you cannot move even if you want to.
This is different than the Acklay because the Acklay does not have a "Replaces Turn" option at all. Chewie EW does have a "Replaces Turn" option, but according to your logic than if an enemy was 8 squares away he would HAVE to use a "Double Move" to get adjacent - he could not use "Charging Assault" because that replaces his turn.
The Acklay could have had movement, but it elected to change it to 0 by using Triple Attack, instead.
Re-read Triple (Double) Attack. If you use Triple/Double, you have a Move action because Triple/Double is a modification of the "Attack and Move" option. If you have Savage, that means that you must use that Move action to satisfy Savage. If you Replace Turn, you do not have a Move action.
If one is legal, they should both be legal. And if one is illegal, they should both be illegal.
Except for the Acklay, one is not an option (specifically 4 is not an option). For Kyp, 4 (Replace Turn) is an option, and when you Replace Turn you do not have any movement.
And it also means that, if you can move adjacent to the enemy, you must.
Agreed.
You aren't allowed to select things on your turn which prevent you from moving adjacent.
If you cannot move at all, then there is no choice. When you Replace Turn, you have no movement at all, so Savage has no effect.
He's not using any movement. He had a movement portion of his turn, but he cashed it in for two extra attacks.
Again, read Triple (Double) Attack. There is no option 5 "Use Multiple Attacks." Triple/Double is a modification of the "Attack and Move" option, and because that option includes the "Move" section, Savage must be satisfied. When you Replace Turn, you do not have a "Move" section - see page 17 (I feel like a record player at this point...)
Now he has no squares of movement available, and therefore doesn't have to follow Savage's restrictions.
Re-read Triple/Double, then see above.
Similarly, Kyp had movement available, but he cashed it in for FP 5.
Read "Replaces Turn" on page 17. There is no "movement to cash in", he spends his entire activation using FP5 - movement does not figure in at all.
And Charging Assault is only an option specifically because it allows you to end your turn adjacent, if you could have done it with a double move.
Completely agree - because "Charging Assault" specifically has a movement component, and because part of your "Replace Turn" ability requires you to moving you must satisfy Savage.
Let's add a 4th option:
[list=1]
Attack and Move Up to 6 Squares
Move Up to 6 Squares and Attack
Double Move Up to 12 Squares
Move Up to 0 Squares and Do Something Else
Are you allowed to select Option 4, suddenly, when you had to select Option 3 before?
If so, why?
Why? Because you are changing the definition of option 4. Option 4 specifically says you are not allowed to move. It does not say you have a move of 0, it does not say "move up to 0 squares," it says that you CANNOT move.
If you CANNOT move (example: you replaced your turn by using FP5), how does Savage have any impact on your options?
Simple, you cannot choose that option. You cannot voluntarily remove the figs ability to move if you can reach an enemy. The Chewie precedent is pretty clear on this.
I'm saying You choose what you will do with your activation, THEN you see if Savage will affect it.
Chewi EW 8 squares away from an enemy. His options when he activates are: 1) Attack and Move 2) Move and Attack 3) Double Move 4) Replace Turn
Now, we examine each option. He cannot choose 1 because he would, AFTER HE MOVED, not be able to satisfy Savage. He cannot choose 2 - same reason. He could choose 3 and end adjacent. He could choose 4.
Options remaining: 3 and 4
Option 3 is obviously ok. Let's look at option 4 - Charging Assault. He chooses, from his starting position, before he does anything else, to use Charging Assault. Now that he has chosen that, he looks at what Charging Assault does. "Double Move, make an adjacent attack." Hmm, Charging Assault involves movement. Because I'm moving as part of my "Replaces Turn" ability, I have to make sure I satisfy Savage. Move, attack, turn finished. -------------------------------------------- Now let's look at Savage Kyp with 5 FP and an enemy 8 squares away.
Same 4 Options: 1) Attack and Move 2) Move and Attack 3) Double Move 4) Replace Turn
What can he do? Option 1 - out if there is no one already in base to attack. Option 2 - If Kyp spends a FP to move faster, he can make it, so available. Option 3 - available. Option 4 - out of range, so out.
Options remaining: 2 and 3. ----------------------------------------------
Now move Savage Kyp's enemy to 5 squares away. Same 4 Options: 1) Attack and Move 2) Move and Attack 3) Double Move 4) Replace Turn
What can he do? Option 1 - out if there is no one already in base to attack. Option 2 - If Kyp spends a FP to move faster, he can make it, so available. Option 3 - available. Option 4 -He's in range, so Replacing your turn to use FP5 is an option.
Let's look at Option 4: I've decided to Replace Turn to use FP5. What does that mean I do? It means that I spend 5 FP, do 50 damage, and cause pushback.
Something is missing in Option 4....Oh, yeah, Movement. It doesn't exist in that option. If movement doesn't exist, then I don't have to worry about Savage.
Savage does affect what your character can do, but not in the way that some people seem to indicate.
You cannot voluntarily remove the figs ability to move if you can reach an enemy.
Savage does not say that. It says, "this character must end ITS MOVE next to an enemy IF IT CAN..." It does not say that the character must choose to move. If the character CANNOT move, then Savage has no effect.
There is no precedent for this - we've never had this combination of abilities before. I've said my peace, now we just have to wait for a ruling.
I'm saying You choose what you will do with your activation, THEN you see if Savage will affect it.
By your logic here, a character with the Mercenary SA and Charging Fire SA could choose to use Charging Fire even if it can make an attack from it's starting position.
I'm saying You choose what you will do with your activation, THEN you see if Savage will affect it.
I understand the logistics of your argument headache (an apt name to be sure in this discussion as my head is bouncing with the rule ). I understand the limit to the wording of the rule and I understand that within the language of the rules taken literally it allows what you state to appear true.
However, the fact is its a penalty.
You ALWAYS go with the most conservative ruling in the event of a contention. Here the rule is contended but things tend to prevent rather than allow.
You are not going to get an awesome force power that just happens to override the one drawback that is meant to prevent it. He's 26 points.
Ozzel is always 1 turn per phase even with Tarkin GM, its a penalty. Gonks don't move 8 with K3PO. you don't override penalties.
there are definite designs to the game.
Some of them need clarification and aren't worded specifically but it tends to go conservative.
I'm arguing that when you have no movement (no Move action), Savage isn't even an issue.
I think this where you missed it. A replacing turn requires giving up both your attack action and your move action. You did have one, you gave it up.
You have arbitrarily argued that Savage does not affect the initial choice to do so. While its true, there is some ambiguity here, what's also true is that in the past examples, every time savage has been ruled to affect your choice of actions. Just because one doesn't have a move portion doesn't change the equation. You keep arguing that Triple attack is different, but its essentially the same concept. The character has a move, you give it up to use triple.
In this case, Kyp has a move action, you have to give it up to use a replaces turn action. I think you are quite wrong in thinking it won't be ruled this way for many reasons.
I can't really argue with your statement that the choice to replace turn comes before you have movement and therefore before savage takes place, because that is simply made up in your head. That has never been ruled before, nor is it listed in the rulebook anywhere.
You have the four options for a turn. The choice happens at one time. Replaces Turn is not a special case in anyway. In the past, that very choice is affected by savage, so the most logical conclusion is that the choice to replace turn will work the same as the others and be affected by savage. Its consistent, follows precedent, keeps the spirit of the rule/penalty, and makes Kyp's cost seem appropriate. For all of those reasons, I am 99% sure this is right.
The only reason I might be wrong is if Rob changes the rules.
Before you do anything, you have to activate the character. Once you have activated a character and intend to do anything is when you would check for savage. You cant do anything that would interfere with the requirements for savage. This would include any replace turn/replace attack options. If you have savage full-filled you would then be able to use a replace turn/attack option.
The replace turn option doesnt mean that you have nothing else outside of that ability. It means, as Bill is saying, you are giving up your options to move and/or attack.
I think this where you missed it. A replacing turn requires giving up both your attack action and your move action. You did have one, you gave it up.
I'm almost done, just because I can't add much that I havn't already said :D
You are saying that you arbitrarily start with an attack and move action, and you have to replace those when you replace your turn. I disagree.
sithdragon13 wrote:
Before you do anything, you have to activate the character. Once you have activated a character and intend to do anything is when you would check for savage.
Savage does not say that. It says that you "must end your move adjacnt, if you can."
Think about it this way:
You have Sly Moore and Chewie EW. Sly Dominates Chewie, and there is an enemy 8 squares away from Chewie. Because Chewie has a turn, he has to think about fulfilling Savage, right? But he CANNOT satisfy Savage. Why not? Because when he is under Dominate, he CANNOT move. When Kyp replaces his turn to use FP5, he CANNOT move because FP5 does not generate any movement.
I know I could be wrong, but that's the truth - from my point of view
). I understand the limit to the wording of the rule and I understand that within the language of the rules taken literally it allows what you state to appear true.
