|
Post by superflytnt on Jul 21, 2007 20:52:03 GMT -5
New topic! The question on the table is: How should the Stun play mechanic come into effect?
<ARGUMENT 1 - How should the Stun play mechanic come into effect?>
There have been 3 competing ideas about this and I'd like to restate them: 1. Stunned figures may not move but may rotate to shoot or strike. 2. Stunned figures may not move but may attack in the direction they're already facing. 3. Stunned figures may not move, nor may they attack.
I believe that stunned figures may not be moved at all, for any reason for the purposes of shooting or striking, but if the opportunity arises to attack an enemy directly in their line of sight/fire they are allowed to attack as normal. This is basically my view because I feel a stunned figure is concussed and they may only essentially swing blindly or shoot in the direction they're facing as a defensive or 'snap' shot, and shouldn't be allowed to rotate in any way (except in the physical act of pulling back the sword or arm to attack) that would allow them to change point of aim.
I argue for point #2.
|
|
|
Post by ionicdesign on Jul 21, 2007 20:57:01 GMT -5
Agreed. If stunned they can still attack in the direction they were facing, but not move or rotate. If a character was "stunned" they wouldn't be able to do much, but could still perhaps pull a trigger.
|
|
|
Post by grievous on Jul 21, 2007 21:01:43 GMT -5
I believe that Stun simply is applied to "Tixing" and not actual figure movement. The reason for this is simply that I don't like the other options . Well, that and there's my last point . I don't like option two due to this hypothetical question: what if one wishes to attack with a Stunned figure that is currently tripoding? Sure, one could argue that they're the ones who put themselves into such a position. However, what is the difference here between the act of aiming a gun and pulling back a figure to strike? It's a double standard that I really don't care for. As such, I dislike option 2. Second, I see absolutely no reason to vote for option 3. It is abundantly clear that this is a ban on movement and not attacking. "Jam" is a case of a power nullifying attacks and I don't think Stun is meant for this. Therefore, I dislike option 3. Finally, I believe that the "No Movement" applies strictly to the movement and attack phases. I believe that Stun applies when you Move, not when you Attack. I think that this is a power that operates during these separate stages of the turn, much like one cannot (presumably, don't think we have a ruling on this) use Luke as Stormtrooper before the movement phase, then move, then attack with two more figures ("Hey, it's not an attack action and the movement phase only ends when you attack so..."). In the same vein, I think that Stun applies during the Move phase and never the Attack phase.
|
|
|
Post by Radar on Jul 22, 2007 1:16:02 GMT -5
I tend to think 1 or 3 make the most sense. #2 seems a little vague/subjective to me. If #2 was the case, a figure could fire directly in front of them, but what if their weapon was pointed some where else? Can he move...just a little...maybe like 1 or 2 degrees? Who is to say that the figure was moved at all? Can a figure aim? It seems difficult to quantify all the possibilities.
I've always felt that stun was a weak play mechanic, so I will vote #3 to try to give it a little more power. It would be more fun when it comes up.
I vote #3.
|
|
|
Post by malform on Jul 23, 2007 8:34:03 GMT -5
Im am majorly leaning toward option #3 here... I think a stunned figure should not move at all. I think if you allow movement at all you are creating a large grey area.... "Why can he move like this but not like this?" kind of thing.... Where do you draw the line? And why do you draw it there? So I say you dont draw a line at all, movement is movement, and there shall be none!
Its allot like the old street fighter games, where you get your opponent all stunned for just a few seconds... And while they have the stars twinkling around their head you can pound the crap out of them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2007 9:23:54 GMT -5
I agree with Grievous, #1 makes most sense to me. I believe that not allowing the figure to "move" is actually referring to movement of the Tix variety.
Stun= sans movement phase, Jam= sans attack phase.
Stun in this form is not very powerful, but changing it to include a lack of aiming/attacking is, IMO, making it too powerful.
|
|
|
Post by YodaBreaker on Jul 23, 2007 10:59:51 GMT -5
I'll argue for number 1. Typically, it would seem that a figure's movement is divided into three phases:
1) The Tix phase - Figures may change their positions on the playing field via the Tix wheel, move their joints, and 2) The "swivel" phase - Figures can only move their joints around and rotate around the axis of their bases to get a better position, aim, etc. They may not change their positions on the playing field. 3) The attack phase - In preparation for an attack, a figure may move its unused attacking surfaces. 4) The post-attack phase - After a figure has exhausted its attack actions, it can no longer move in any way, shape, or form.
The quickstart guide generally seems to consider "move" to be synonymous with phase 1) as described here. I've considered "Stun" to act only on that sort of movement, inasmuch as it seems that the single game mechanic that's being targeted here is phase 1) - phases 2) and 3) seem to be treated agnostically with respect to special powers and most other game mechanics. I've also thought of it as figures being essentially "stunned" at the end of the movement phase of each turn, in which they're still allowed to reposition themselves.
In short, I think that there is a gameplay distinction between "move" (phase 1) and "reposition" (phases 2 and 3). I also think it would be interesting if Hasbro were to write a special power that did not allow you to reposition your figures but allowed you to move them - that is, you'd have to move in a straight line forward or backward (or a combination thereof) and could not otherwise alter the position of your figures.
|
|
|
Post by greyelephant on Jul 23, 2007 17:04:23 GMT -5
These are all good arguments.
It doesn't say "Stun, only from the waist down". It doesn't say "Stun, you can't aim or twist your figure".
Very weak explanation on Hasbro's part on this special.
I feel this special was never thought out very well from the start. It was too specific toward who gets stunned, but not enough information on to how the special really effects the stunned.
With that said, we have always played that you can rotate and shoot, but not move. That is going to remain as my choice.
1. Stunned figures may not move but may rotate to shoot or strike.
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jul 23, 2007 17:41:09 GMT -5
I see no reason for rebuttals on this particular subject, we're all pretty much of two opinions.
So, unless someone raises objection, please cast your ballots for one of the following, or add your own option: 1. Stunned figures may not move but may rotate to shoot or strike. 2. Stunned figures may not move but may attack in the direction they're already facing. 3. Stunned figures may not move, nor may they attack.
|
|
|
Post by YodaBreaker on Jul 23, 2007 19:22:53 GMT -5
As a point of clarification, then, does that mean that in option 2, a Destroyer Droid's arms could still swivel around, but no figure would be allowed to twist at the waist (or approximation thereof, in the case of the AT-RT), and no base rotating would be allowed?
|
|
|
Post by malform on Jul 24, 2007 10:06:10 GMT -5
I vote for option 3! No movement at all!... You are stunned... You cant move when you are stunned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2007 10:54:07 GMT -5
Option 1 gets my vote.
|
|
|
Post by grievous on Jul 24, 2007 10:56:12 GMT -5
1. Stunned figures may not move but may rotate to shoot or strike.
|
|
|
Post by greyelephant on Jul 24, 2007 16:24:40 GMT -5
#1 for me.
1. Stunned figures may not move but may rotate to shoot or strike.
|
|
|
Post by superflytnt on Jul 24, 2007 16:31:07 GMT -5
As a point of clarification, then, does that mean that in option 2, a Destroyer Droid's arms could still swivel around, but no figure would be allowed to twist at the waist (or approximation thereof, in the case of the AT-RT), and no base rotating would be allowed? Well observed, my friend. This would certainly cause issues, so I've removed the disclaimer - #2 is now to be understood that no movement is allowed other than the trigger finger or to strike. Your logic is sound - if we allowed it we'd get into too many dabates down the road. So, we've 3 votes for #1, 1 for #3.
|
|