Incorrectly Played Rules

[BlackJax]

Onan,

You are right, reading through the first edition rules with an "opening the door moves you through onto the square behind the door" hat on and it seems to me to be as clear as it possibly can be that this is the intent without at any point actually stating it!

You move to the square in front of the door (as The Admiral says that is the only side that you approach it from as you can't pass through a closed door), you can then choose to open or not open the door (and you would have to state this out loud or the evil wizard player wouldn't know), if you choose to open it then the evil wizard player replaces the closed door with an open one, moves your figure through the door into the square on the other side (so that you are now in the room or passageway) and then lays out the contents of the room or passageway.

And, in that edition at least, because you may not move through the same square twice in one move, if you move through a door, you may not pass through it again until your next turn.

So whilst we starting playing the game incorrectly, without this rule, it was pointed out to us by a more experienced player (who I guess now was originally a first edition player) and we played that way ever since, with only a minor tweak in that we counted the "move through the door" as a move (cost one movement point) unless you opened a door with no movement points remaining in which case it was free, but that tweak was just to make counting the squares you had moved easier, you know when you get the frequent situation when someone does the ... no, I started in that square and rolled a seven so one, two, oh yes I do have one move left.

And thank you for that HTML version, it is handy.

And I love these icons

[Onan]

we played that way ever since, with only a minor tweak in that we counted the "move through the door" as a move (cost one movement point)

I think this is also the intention of the rules.

Opening a door does not count as a move.

I don't think "move" is meant as "1 movement point" here. I think they wanted to say that it doesn't count as an action, but the term "action" was invented in 2nd Edition (defined at the beginning but not used further) or US edition (used systematically). 1st Edition never talks about you being able to "move and take an action" on your turn, it always says "instead of attacking" to allow you other things.

Here is another example of "move" used in another meaning:

Each player moves in turn, starting with the player to the left wizard player and continuing clockwise.

So in the context of opening doors, I think "does not count as a move" simply tells you that you can attack afterwards, and that your "move" (your turn) doesn't end, as is further explained by the next sentence:

Having opened a door, you can keep moving, if you have any spaces left to move.

And thank you for that HTML version, it is handy.

Glad to hear it's useful. I created the 3 HTML versions to have a way to text search the rules and be able to quote them. So many rules discussions on this forum that made me think a lot.

[BlackJax]

It is clear to me that opening a door and moving through wasn't considered an action as it states that you can move, open a door and then continue to move after doing it, whereas if it counted as an action then you wouldn't be allowed to do that so agreed on that point.

You are right the term "action" wasn't used until later editions, and the term "move" was used to refer to your turn in general and the part of your turn relating to movement specifically, so maybe it was also used in that context to refer to what later editions would call an action.

I'm happy to discover that we may have been playing the official rules, at least for this part of the ruleset, all along back in 1999 (at least after it was pointed out to us) apart from the minor point that we allowed a hero to open a door even if they had no points of movement remaining, and move-through-the-door for free which now I suspect may not have been allowed in the official rules but I can't remember why we made that exception back then, it may have been something to do with secret doors or possibly another house rule that we added, but I'll have a think about that more as it was a long time ago.

[Onan]

I'm happy to discover that we may have been playing the official rules, at least for this part of the ruleset, all along back in 1999 (at least after it was pointed out to us) apart from the minor point that we allowed a hero to open a door even if they had no points of movement remaining, and move-through-the-door for free which now I suspect may not have been allowed in the official rules but I can't remember why we made that exception back then, it may have been something to do with secret doors or possibly another house rule that we added, but I'll have a think about that more as it was a long time ago.

This was a good catch by you and your group! We have always been playing with opening doors while standing still. I've been trying the "move through to open" rule during the last few weeks, and it works very well. We haven't established it as a fixed rule yet, but nothing prevents me from doing it nevertheless. It feels very heroic!

I've also stopped peeking around corridor corners and boldly place my hero onto the junction square.

[The Admiral]

Onan,

You are right, reading through the first edition rules with an "opening the door moves you through onto the square behind the door" hat on and it seems to me to be as clear as it possibly can be that this is the intent without at any point actually stating it!

Possibly..

"If you are the first player to enter a new room or passageway, you should give the evil wizard player enough time to consult the Quest book and place onto the board any visible monsters and furniture."

This suggests the Hero is already in the room when its contents are placed

But why, if the move through the door is automatic, would the rules include this sentence?

"Note that, because you may not move through the same square twice in one move, IF you move through a door, you may not pass through it again until your next turn."

The IF suggests it is a choice to move through or not. Not the choice to open the door, but the choice to move through it.

The rule also specifically states that opening a door does not count as moving. This implies to me that the act of door opening is a static procedure, which makes sense, and no movement is involved, and also that no movement is expended to open the door i.e. it is free.

Now, I'm not saying that it wasn't the designers intention to have the Hero automatically go through an opened door, but if it was, they did not convey that intention very well. But then the first rulebook was not written very well. It also makes sense to me. Opening a door is a stationary act. You have to stop, turn the handle and push the door open. It's full of Orcs! I now have choices, which all make sense considering those circumstances: Run away if I can, hold my ground, or charge in if I can.

But hey, you could be right. Fortunately I have not played by those rules for a loooong time .

[Onan]

But why, if the move through the door is automatic, would the rules include this sentence?

"Note that, because you may not move through the same square twice in one move, IF you move through a door, you may not pass through it again until your next turn."

The IF suggests it is a choice to move through or not. Not the choice to open the door, but the choice to move through it.

I think the automatism is the other way round. It's not like you say "I open the door", and Zargon automatically moves you 1 square and reveals the room. But you simply move your model through the door (place it on the other side), thereby opening the door.

Opening a door is a stationary act. You have to stop, turn the handle and push the door open. It's full of Orcs! I now have choices, which all make sense considering those circumstances: Run away if I can, hold my ground, or charge in if I can.

You would still have the choices when you step in, but delayed by one turn during which you might get a beating. That's the risk of opening a door. The "move through to open" rule combined with "no square twice" forces you to commit yourself to the encounter, plunge into the unknown instead of scouting it. Both rules are a bit naive and cheesy, as is roll for movement, but they achieve something good I think. If you want to know what is inside without dealing with it, use a genie spell.

If you don't have to enter, the rule of "no square twice" is completely irrelevant. You move in front of the door, wait one turn, then open it before moving, and you can go wherever you like.


But, I guess everyone and their mother (including me until I thought about the rules) plays it with opening doors while standing still. So I would say this is the widely accepted rule, and "move through to open" is a variation.

"move through to open" can also lead into a problem: If the other side of the door has already been revealed from another entry, Zargon might move a monster in front of the door, blocking it forever.

[The Admiral]

I think the automatism is the other way round. It's not like you say "I open the door", and Zargon automatically moves you 1 square and reveals the room. But you simply move your model through the door (place it on the other side), thereby opening the door.

But it doesn't say this in the rules. They say some things that imply you do go through and some things that imply you don't.

Some quests put a monster in the doorway making it impossible to go through.

[Agente Cooper]

I'm pretty sure there isn't a single quest in the European edition with a monster stuck to the door square, if you follow the correct path of the adventure.

[BlackJax]

This was a good catch by you and your group! We have always been playing with opening doors while standing still.

Whilst I'd love to claim credit, our group played through the whole game system campaign with "opening doors while standing still" until we played a few homebrew quests with a different evil wizard player who pointed out our error and we never looked back as it is a far better experience, it really makes opening a door or stepping onto a new passageway square and revealing what lies beyond more exciting, especially when combined with the 1st edition rule of not being able to backtrack, so I'm thinking of restoring that rule too!

But why, if the move through the door is automatic, would the rules include this sentence?

"Note that, because you may not move through the same square twice in one move, IF you move through a door, you may not pass through it again until your next turn."

The IF suggests it is a choice to move through or not. Not the choice to open the door, but the choice to move through it.

The rule also specifically states that opening a door does not count as moving. This implies to me that the act of door opening is a static procedure, which makes sense, and no movement is involved, and also that no movement is expended to open the door i.e. it is free.

Now, I'm not saying that it wasn't the designers intention to have the Hero automatically go through an opened door, but if it was, they did not convey that intention very well. But then the first rulebook was not written very well

I interpret this as opening a door and moving through a door are the same thing, so it doesn't matter whether you use the text "IF you move through a door" or "IF you open a door" as they are the same thing, the IF references the rule that states that you don't have to open a door, it is a choice.

"The rule also specifically states that opening a door does not count as moving" the text actually says "Opening a door does not count as a move" but it isn't clear to me what is meant by "a move" it was suggested elsewhere in these many threads that it might be a reference to the later term "action" which isn't used in the 1st edition.

That said I agree that the designers' intention wasn't conveyed very well, but then I would expect that to a certain extent. I've written these type of instructions myself, and what you have in your mind when writing them rarely translates when someone follows the written instructions only without the benefit of your own knowledge, even playtesting, unless it is "blind", may not reveal this as the playtesters are often co-workers or family and friends of the original designers so they get shown how to play by someone who already knows. This is why I'm now looking at the 1st edition rules carefully and comparing them to the 2nd edition to see if I can work out what changes have been made and which of those are a result of the designers watching players play the game using the rules as written and thinking...that wasn't how we intended it to be played, something has been lost in translation, let's clarify and republish.

Where there is doubt, and there is plenty of doubt, I'm going with whatever I think is the simplest and the most fun to play!

[The Admiral]

I'm pretty sure there isn't a single quest in the European edition with a monster stuck to the door square, if you follow the correct path of the adventure.

Not in the base quests. Ogre Horde has one. I haven't looked beyond that.