forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

How do you interpret Shadow Bane (AB130) description? "When you are fighting in a Forward stance (page 158) against servants of the Shadow".

Do you consider every adversary in this category or do you exclude those who don't serve the Enemy directly (i.e. Spiders of Mirkwood)?

Thanks.

Shadow Bane works vs. Everything that has a Hate Score, as I read it.

Then again, it's kind of a weak ability. It mostly serves as weary insurance, because in Forward stance, you'll almost always hit anyway.

Angelalex242 wrote:Shadow Bane works vs. Everything that has a Hate Score, as I read it.

Then again, it's kind of a weak ability. It mostly serves as weary insurance, because in Forward stance, you'll almost always hit anyway.

How does a +3 bonus to an attack roll serve as weary insurance?

The problem here is tbat there never has been mention as to what creatures are/aren't servants of the shadow. Some are obvious like the Nazgul, but some are a little blurry. The LM that ran our campaign wouldn't allow Shadow Lore rolls to gain an understanding of the spiders when we fought them. As Ungoliant broke with Melkor and became her own mistress I would say that the Spiders of Mirkwood, though wholely evil, are not servants of the Shadow.

Beran wrote:

Angelalex242 wrote:Shadow Bane works vs. Everything that has a Hate Score, as I read it.

Then again, it's kind of a weak ability. It mostly serves as weary insurance, because in Forward stance, you'll almost always hit anyway.

How does a +3 bonus to an attack roll serve as weary insurance?

The problem here is tbat there never has been mention as to what creatures are/aren't servants of the shadow. Some are obvious like the Nazgul, but some are a little blurry. The LM that ran our campaign wouldn't allow Shadow Lore rolls to gain an understanding of the spiders when we fought them. As Ungoliant broke with Melkor and became her own mistress I would say that the Spiders of Mirkwood, though wholely evil, are not servants of the Shadow.

Good point for clarification in this summer's release.

I've been wondering about this one, too.

Where's Francesco when you need him?

+3 to the attack roll in forward stance serves as an extra d6 that always rolls a 3 (or 4, at Valor 4, all the way up to 6 at Valor 6). That might be the difference between hitting and missing if and only if you're weary. Otherwise, forward stance is pretty much can't miss anyway.

I agree with Beran, spiders are not servants of the Shadow, nor are other animals or creatures who are not actively plotting against the Free People.

Does 'actively plotting' really apply to creatures/animals?

Does a crebain or gorecrow count as a creature or a Servant of Shadow because they act as spies and lookouts?

Yusei wrote:I agree with Beran, spiders are not servants of the Shadow, nor are other animals or creatures who are not actively plotting against the Free People.

The giant spiders are not natural creatures, though, are they? They are demon-spiders descended from Ungoliant and Shelob. I would definitely count them as servants of Shadow.

Ungoliant, let's not forget, poisoned the two trees of Valinor. Even if she doesn't work for Melkor, personally darkening the world makes her a 'Shadow' in her own right, and spiders technically serve her, so Shadow they remain.

Mmmm, as I see, sadly there is not a definitive answer. I don't want to sound arbitrary with my players (specially that elf that picked Shadow Bane) and tell him everytime: yes, this is a servant; no, this not. There should be a rule of thumb around this.

Beran wrote:The problem here is tbat there never has been mention as to what creatures are/aren't servants of the shadow.

There's just a mention on Spiders of Mirkwood in LM75: "Unlike Orcs, they are not direct servants of the Shadow, but their own machinations often find them in league with it".

It seems that statement further complicates things. But since they are not servants of the Shadow, RAW +3 bonus shouldn't be applied.