Defending against the Orc's Bane

[Fullork345]

Aaah... I don't know the US books by heart!

It's ok, I've been playing the game for 20 years and never knew. THough in my defense I don't own the barbarian or elf quest packs and only read them a few days ago.

[Fullork345]

ut in that case I would say you roll two separate attacks. A complete miss would not trigger a roll in my opinion, so the defender can still defend from the second attack.

Well the reason I thought of the interpretation I did is because the last barbarian quest has two polar warbears as the wandering monsters.

I can't imagine to many characters surviving 4 sets of 4 dice attacks, when they can only block two of them.

So I figured they might have ment you roll both attacks toghether, but only roll once for defense.

But I could be wrong after looking at how badly setup the elf quest pack is.

[Blackthorn]

I've always let the monsters roll defend dice for each attack, including orcs who are facing two attcks from the Orc's Bane. As mentioned earlier in this thread, getting a second attack is enough of an advantage. I've never allowed a hero with the Orc's Bane to attack two adjacent orcs as both the rules and the artifact card seem to state that a hero can attack only one monster during his turn. I can see now how this could be interpreted differently (Deadelus always does a good job of interpreting the rulebooks).

I only came to own a copy of the Barbarian Quest Pack last month, so the concept of defending only one time against two attacks from the some monster strikes me as odd. I don't think I'd apply this to the Orc's Bane and when we finally get around to playing the Barbarian Quest Pack I'm not sure I'll observe that rule. I realize the heroes are quite powerful by this point, but as Fullork pointed out, not many heroes would survive an attack from two Polar Warbears no matter how well equipped.

[el_flesh]

Depends how amazing the Hero is! I would allow the elf or even the sorc (assuming he were allowed Orc Bane) to attack two different targets - as some kind of slashing or rolling combo. Something like the Barb / Dwarf would be a massive attack with an upswing after representing the second roll.

[knightkrawler]

We play like this:
1st attack - defend - 2nd attack - no defend.

The reason being this: When Black Orcs in heavy armor come into play (4 AD, 4 DD), the heroes are going to throw away Orc's Bane. Simple as that.
I want that ARTIFACT (I don't want it to become a Shortsword to toss aside) to have some appeal to the heroes, even if it's - after the heroes maxing out on equipment -
just hanging in the Elf's sheath for special cases, when he can choose between his 3 AD (Longsword) or 2 AD (Orc's Bane) plus a bonus 2 AD.

[Sjeng]

Hmm.. that's actually not a bad idea... It always felt a little weak. We also used to roll two attacks vs. 1 orc, which could both be defended against. Your rule makes it a much more attractive weapon.

[drathe]

We allow two attacks against a single Orc with only the first attack defend-able, or two single attacks against two different Orcs that are adjacent to the hero.

#1
#1
#1

or

#1
#1
#2
#2

[knightkrawler]

Hmm.. that's actually not a bad idea... It always felt a little weak. We also used to roll two attacks vs. 1 orc, which could both be defended against. Your rule makes it a much more attractive weapon.

I'm very very convinced it's the way to go.

We allow two attacks against a single Orc with only the first attack defend-able, or two single attacks against two different Orcs that are adjacent to the hero.

Exactly.
And in the second option, both Orcs get to defend themselves.

[Goblin-King]

I like this. I think I'm gonna do this.

Too bad it's only good against orcs... Still kinda weak...

[Daedalus]

Yeah, I remember thinking, "Why wasn't it made to be effective against Goblins, too?" Another thing, it wasn't awarded until towards [edit] the end of the first 14 Quests, so it really didn't see much use until Kellar's Keep. It should have had a showcase Quest, such as Lair of the Orc Warlord.