Jump to content
MechMage

Escaping Fate off a Parting Blow

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Henry said:

Similar ruling have been made with regards to declaring a charge being an Attack but not being the same as declaring an attack.

But that's neither a ruling nor how it actually works. What you're referring to is actually in the core rulebook charge rules. It explicitly states you skip the Declare Attack step when performing your post-charge Attack. If not for that then you would be able to wait until after the opponent has moved to determine if you're going to counter-attack.

That's actually nearly ironclad evidence that a Parting Blow can in fact be counter-attacked because it lacks that bit of rules. It does not skip that step. Unless you interpret the "is an Attack" line in the other manner I presented.

Edit: To make another point, the other type of Attack that can't be counter-attacked are counter-attacks themselves. Counter-attacks actually explicitly state that they cannot be counter-attacked. So every other form of non counter-attackable attack has some rule that explicitly explains why they can't be counter-attacked -- except for Parting Blows.

Edited by Khift

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Khift, is there any reason you're bringing your old thread back to the fore?

You already got a ruling, created a new thread questioning it, got another answer from the Lawyer's Guild, and now question it again. If you absolutely need it to be errata'ed, fine, but otherwise, isn't this beating on a dead horse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Spinsane said:

@Khift, is there any reason you're bringing your old thread back to the fore?

You already got a ruling, created a new thread questioning it, got another answer from the Lawyer's Guild, and now question it again. If you absolutely need it to be errata'ed, fine, but otherwise, isn't this beating on a dead horse?

For one, it directly matters in the side examples brought up halfway through this thread, and for two, when a ruling directly contradicts the rulebook it actually has no validity, at least not until Steamforged decides to make the Lawyer's Guild the primary source for Guild Ball rules and not the core rulebook. The rulebook outranks the Lawyer's Guild. And so yes, until it's resolved I will continue to bring it up every time it matters -- such as now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Khift said:

 And so yes, until it's resolved I will continue to bring it up every time it matters -- such as now.

OK, at least now we know it isn't worth discussing any further. The Lawyers Guild have given us enough rulings to explain how it works. The rulings given do not contradict the rulebook (though they do add extra limitations). The Lawyers Guild are the direct contact with Steamforged for clarifications and errata. I suspect the reason we haven't seen a ruling on the whole parting blow causing repositions saga that's been bought up recently is because it is a difficult issue and the Lawyers Guild have had to wait for an answer from Steamforged (who are themselves probably working through as many permutations as they can think of before giving a complete answer).

That you don't consider the Lawyers Guild answers official is up to you, but it doesn't add anything to the discussion if you pick an argument on something that everybody else agrees has already been settled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems pretty clear and seems like Khift is the only person who thinks there's a contradiction. 

Declaring a Parting Blow is not the same as Declaring an Attack - the "declaring" is not in the rule book, and Lawyer's guild ruled on that outside of the rule book..  The rule book only says:

Parting Blow is an Attack.  Which we all agree on.

Done. 

Now we just wait for the Escaping Fate part, which is definitely unclear.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the purpose of the phrase "except while making an advance" if not to exclude the use of the entire escaping fate rule from applying due to a parting blow? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Frankanelli said:

What is the purpose of the phrase "except while making an advance" if not to exclude the use of the entire escaping fate rule from applying due to a parting blow? 

Idk if the thread moved on since but originally it was about vOx moving away from a vSiren, giving vSiren a parting blow which triggered lashing out to drop vSiren to 0 HP. Which is not affected by that clause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Frankanelli said:

What is the purpose of the phrase "except while making an advance" if not to exclude the use of the entire escaping fate rule from applying due to a parting blow? 

It prevents Escaping Fate triggering if Siren was damaged by a Parting Blow which isn't the situation in question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×