NA 2nd Edition errata suggestions

[Kurgan]

iKarith: the question of when a hero dies and who gets his loot thing is explained. If he dies in a room or corridor with monsters (and no allies), the monsters claim the gear and it's removed from the quest (artifacts re-appear as special treasures early in the quest quest or in the replay in the remixed version of this one if it ends in failure for the heroes). The only ambiguity between versions was whether a monster had to actually be in the place to claim the stuff (and it was a race to see who got there first) or if it just automatically went to "the monsters" if no good guy was present there too. Dropping gear was covered with a tile rule in Mage of the Mirror.

You're right that it's much easier to cover the mistakes than the ambiguity and the more we get out into that, the more threads exist for it... so far our asking for clarifications haven't.


Edit: I should clarify that in the case of a "total party kill" It is assumed that all of the gear/treasure of the heroes is lost, period (other than Artifacts which can re-appear as quest treasures, even if they are not essential to victory in the campaign, early in the replay of the quest which is expected to be remixed by Zargon). Obviously anything required to complete the quest will be back the next time they replay it (for example the Crystal Key or the Star of the West).

Gear stolen by Ice Gremlins is in theory recoverable, if Zargon places these in the "Ice Gremlin Treasure Room" tile provided in Frozen Horror. Some have pointed out that the text stating this fact is abbreviated in the remake edition, implying that if this theft occurs a quest or more before the room is discovered, Zargon isn't required to remember and record that this gear is there and recoverable (only implying it applies to gear stolen within the same quest, while the original implied it was stuff stolen at any time in the campaign up till that point). A few artifacts are found a second time but mostly only in the Mythic books (or else in the case of Artifacts that can be "used up" like the Spell Scrolls or Elixir of Life), so you could end up with duplicates, which is fine. Who is to say Borin didn't create more than one suit of magical armor, or there's more than one Wizard's Cloak out there? (plus, though it's rare, some Artifacts CAN be destroyed sometimes)

[Bareheaded Warrior]

The Hasbro Q&A told of a fan-suggested LOS rules clarification the developers plan to implement. It regards placement of monsters when Hero movement reveals a new room or corridor and the Hero looks into it. So it will be officially said monsters won't block what a Hero "sees" when placing said monsters. Good.

What other rules clarifications (not house-rules) do you think Hasbro should include the new rulebook? Keller's Keep and Return of the Witch Lord clarifications/errata are also welcome.

This is an interesting comment as the distinction between the line of sight rules for the purposes of targeting missile attacks (where LOS is blocked by other figures) and the line of sight rules for the purposes of placing monsters (that ignores other figures) isn't a fan-suggested LOS rules clarification, it is an existing official rule.

I have added italics to the existing text to highlight the difference, the first piece of text relates to line of sight rules for the purposes of placing monsters, which are blocked by walls and closed doors only (and not other figures), the second block of text refers to line of sight rules for the purposes of spell casting and specifically includes walls, closed doors AND other miniatures. The third block of text confirms that missile attacks use the same LOS rules as spells

What can be seen?
Deciding what can be seen by a player character is very important in determining what should be placed onto the board. Miniatures in passages or in different rooms are only visible if you can trace an unobstructed straight line between the two miniatures. If the line passes through a wall or a closed door then the miniature is not visible.

Casting a Spell

Miniatures in passages or in different rooms are only visible if you can trace an unobstructed straight line between the two miniatures. If the line passes through a wall or a closed door or another miniature then the miniature is not visible.

Missile Fire

Your opponent must be visible, as with casting a spell.

The confusion seems to have been introduced by the North American Edition which removed the relevant text from the first section and replaced it with a link directly to the line of sight rules under spell casting, presumably they failed to recognise the difference between the two pieces of text or failed to appreciate the significance of that difference.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

In EA Second Edition, secret doors are open when found, under NA edition secret doors are closed when found, but can later be opened, but in both editions, there is only one tile type for secret doors and that depicts them as open. You could argue, what does a closed secret door look like (presumably you can’t see them, which is fine in SE, problem in NA), maybe just use open and closed standard doors (after all once you have found a secret door, then it is just a door) but then you might not have enough doors in some published quests.

Maybe you are just supposed to point and remember the location of closed secret doors like "found but unsprung traps' but in both cases, tiles would be appreciated.

[Kurgan]

It is interesting to know that the core map design in the Hasbroquest version is inspired by the EU version of the game. Now I know it

I haven't seen the evidence of that. Whenever there is a discrepancy between the EU 1st or 2nd edition of a quest map and the NA edition, the Remake chooses the NA edition, even preserving any errors from that edition. Can you show me some counter examples?

Several things are clearly drawn from the EU editions and imported into the remake of HeroQuest, but these are the exception (see equipment deck, treasure deck artwork). Yes, the Ogre design in MOTM remake more closely resembles the "Ogre Chieftain" from ATOH, but beyond that I don't see it...?

[Daedalus]

The Hasbro Q&A told of a fan-suggested LOS rules clarification the developers plan to implement. It regards placement of monsters when Hero movement reveals a new room or corridor and the Hero looks into it. So it will be officially said monsters won't block what a Hero "sees" when placing said monsters. Good.

What other rules clarifications (not house-rules) do you think Hasbro should include the new rulebook? Keller's Keep and Return of the Witch Lord clarifications/errata are also welcome.

This is an interesting comment as the distinction between the line of sight rules for the purposes of targeting missile attacks (where LOS is blocked by other figures) and the line of sight rules for the purposes of placing monsters (that ignores other figures) isn't a fan-suggested LOS rules clarification, it is an existing official rule.

I have added italics to the existing text to highlight the difference, the first piece of text relates to line of sight rules for the purposes of placing monsters, which are blocked by walls and closed doors only (and not other figures), the second block of text refers to line of sight rules for the purposes of spell casting and specifically includes walls, closed doors AND other miniatures. The third block of text confirms that missile attacks use the same LOS rules as spells

What can be seen?
Deciding what can be seen by a player character is very important in determining what should be placed onto the board. Miniatures in passages or in different rooms are only visible if you can trace an unobstructed straight line between the two miniatures. If the line passes through a wall or a closed door then the miniature is not visible.

Casting a Spell

Miniatures in passages or in different rooms are only visible if you can trace an unobstructed straight line between the two miniatures. If the line passes through a wall or a closed door or another miniature then the miniature is not visible.

Missile Fire

Your opponent must be visible, as with casting a spell.

The confusion seems to have been introduced by the North American Edition which removed the relevant text from the first section and replaced it with a link directly to the line of sight rules under spell casting, presumably they failed to recognise the difference between the two pieces of text or failed to appreciate the significance of that difference.

Looks like my OP could have been clearer. That fan was looking for clarification on the monter-placement question, but hadn't supplied a house-rule call. The Avalon Hill design team came up with the ruling in response.

I think its also worth visiting the NA Instruction Booklet (with added italics and bold lettering) to further explain the the NA confusion:

How Zargon Reacts
To Hero Movement
When a Hero “looks” down a corridor,
place on the gameboard any closed doors,
blocked square tiles and monsters that are
directly within the Hero’s line of sight. (See
page 15 "SEE" for clear line of sight.) . . .

I don't feel we can be sure if the NA author(s)/designers intentionally altered the text for a new game effect or failed to recognise the difference or significance of the EU 2nd Ed. text. I do think it is fair to say that ambiguity of the NA placement of corridor monsters could have been worded better. It is nice to see that Avalon Hill looked back to return the EU distinction for clarification:

". . . (If the a line passes through a wall
or a closed door then the miniature or
tile is not visible.) . . .

The official guidance for monster placement (through omission) is now restored rather than choosing a new rule that might feel arbitrary otherwise.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I think your OP was fine, placing monsters in corridors is based on LOS so it matters whether LOS is blocked by other monsters or not, for the purposes of looking.

I agree it is good that the resolution was to restore the SE approach, or correct the NA version (depending on your viewpoint), but the aspect of the monster placement rule that I never really understood is the same in both editions and isn't the one that is being pointed out here.

If miniatures in passages or in different rooms (i.e. not the room you are in) are only visible and therefore only placed on the board if you have a LOS to them (ignoring other miniatures), then how is it that if you are stood in a corridor, outside of a room, you open the door, and the rules tell you to place ALL monsters, furniture and so on, on the board that are in the room, even though you are NOT in the same room and may NOT have LOS to them even ignoring other miniatures. It makes me suspect that the "reveal rules" actually intended are not quite the ones that are documented!

[Kurgan]

For the longest time when a hero would open a door that leads into a (horizontal) corridor, I would only reveal the few squares in front of the door, reasoning they were "looking" through the door. The Companion App treats it as the entire Corridor (at least until you hit a stone block square) being revealed instantly. I hadn't been playing it that way, but HispaZargon showed me that a few weeks ago. You could reason that the hero is "peeking" his head through the doorway both directions. But if you treat the corridor the same as a room (it is instantly revealed in its entirety when you open the door, even if you don't actually move into it) that is very easy to remember.

Granted, the App isn't always 100% correct to the NA rules,* but it is interesting.

Perhaps it would have been easier to understand to use terms like "aiming" to explain the difference between knowing things are on the board, vs. being able to target (or be targeted) by them, with spells or missile weapons. If seeing/sight/line of sight and looking were the same thing, then it would make sense that if you can see it, you can hit it, but not always the case. If I am in the doorway but the monster is 9 squares down the hallway, I know he's there, but I can't shoot him with my crossbow or Genie Spell until I take one square movement into the hallway (and the same for him hitting me with his ranged weapon if he happens to have one). The NA rules are more strict about this sort of thing than the EU.



* for instance if a hero is standing in front of a closed door, another hero can't move into that square to open the door, and potions work just like spells, allowing you to "throw" the potion so it smashes over the head of an ally and they get the benefit, plus there's some weirdness with not being able to search when you can "see" a monster who is in a different room or corridor from where you are actually searching sometimes but not always.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

For the longest time when a hero would open a door that leads into a (horizontal) corridor, I would only reveal the few squares in front of the door, reasoning they were "looking" through the door. The Companion App treats it as the entire Corridor (at least until you hit a stone block square) being revealed instantly. I hadn't been playing it that way, but HispaZargon showed me that a few weeks ago. You could reason that the hero is "peeking" his head through the doorway both directions. But if you treat the corridor the same as a room (it is instantly revealed in its entirety when you open the door, even if you don't actually move into it) that is very easy to remember.

I have always played it so that when you open a door to a room then all the contents are laid out (even though you haven't yet stepped into it), but only because the rulebook (SE) clearly states that when a hero opens a door then EWP lays out all the contents (nothing to do with targeting for ranged weapons which are entirely separate). By the same logic if you can see everything in a room from a square adjacent to the room (outside the door to the room) then you can see everything in a passageway from a square adjacent to the passageway. This always struck me as simple, logical and easy to remember, but then there are other rules within SE and even more in NA that appear to contradict this simplicity, but for me if two rules in the rulebook directly contradict each other (and it isn't clear that one is intended as a special exception in certain conditions) then you cannot obey both of them but have make a call. I think that this is perhaps an errata that could be corrected in SE and NA (officially).