Locke, nice scenario, but I don't think you can declare an attack with illegal attackers. From Alex Charsky's post:

1. Before proposing a set of attacks you have to check for legality of that set of attacks. For example I can't have a character without range attack from the back row, or an exhausted character attacking. Neither player has priority during this.

Again... I would prefer the cancelling of team attacks to be just one way, no matter when it's done, but it just needs to be clarified due to my perceived ambiguity of the rules.

I don't care if I'm wrong... I just want to know what the right answer is.

ALEX?

Exactly. And yes, it seems I misread that. I took it to mean all that would be checked in the effect that went on the chain, sort of as a fail safe.

Word back from Alex is that Zaxx's most recent post is mostly correct.

The following are the parts that aren't fully correct.

"*3) Make all of the attackers illegal.* "

>>After attackers are exhausted making the attackers illegal does nothing to affect the Attack Outcome.

"The rulebook flatly states "once an attack has begun, it is too late to make the attack illegal." Any now-illegal attackers simply do not contribute to the team's ATK value and everything proceeds as normal."

>> After the second check for legality it is too late to make an attacker illegal to affect the Attack Outcome. If the attacker is not present(stunned, returned to hand) then it will not affect the Attack Outcome. But removing flight from a character attacking a protected character will not remove their ATK value from the Attack Outcome.

I'm not sure if I'm more confused now...

or now...

or now...

no, I'm sure it's now.

Alright. There are _two_ opportunities during an attack where you may generate effects. One _before_ the attacker(s) exhaust and one _after_. So...if I make a _single_ attacker in a team attack illegal _before_ it is exhausted, will that cancel the _proposed_ team attack?

I'm quite clear on the _after_ part. Doesn't matter what happens to a single attacker _after_ it is exhausted; as long as one attacker in a team attack can go on, the attack continues. It's the before part that we are looking for a straight answer...thx

Hehe.

This is actually going on in my Mini-FAQ thread.

According to Mitchell, before exhaustion, team attacks remain team attacks unless ALL attackers are removed or made illegal

"Removing a single attacker from a team attack will cancel the attack. " - Me

This is indeed incorrect.

Let me make sure I'm understanding this:

Before the team attack begins:

1) All proposed attackers must be able to legally target the proposed defender. Otherwise, the attack is immediately canceled.

2) Removing a single attacker from the attack will cancel the attack. (really?)

After the team attack begins:

1) Making an attacker illegal does not prevent it from adding its ATK to the team's ATK value.

2) Removing an attacker prevents it from adding its ATK to the team's ATK value.

Well, it is not that it is cancelled, but rather never declared. When you declare a team attack all proposed attackers must be able to legally attack the proposed defender. If you attempt to declare a ilegal attack, it just doesn't happen.

Mitchell already stated that he was incorrect when he wrote that.

Well, that statement while mostly true, does not clearly represent what really happens. After the declaration resolves, (ie Attackers are exhausted) you CAN'T make the attack illegal. So it is not that they ignore the illegality of the attack but rather they can not be made illegal after declaration resovles.

I misread Mitchell's clarification.

So then making a single attacker illegal upon declaration makes the entire attack illegal. Got it.

Other than that and removing all attackers from the attack (either before or during the attack) there is no way to cancel a team attack, correct? (Please note I said "cancel", not negate)

And once started, you will be hit with the total ATK value for all attackers still present regardless of their legality, correct?

[So then making a single attacker illegal upon declaration makes the entire attack illegal. Got it.]

No, that is not what I said, let me try again. When I declare a team attack, all attackers must be legal. If when I delcare the attack all are legal (Attack declaration goes on the chain) but before the attack declaration resolves my opponat makes one of them illegal, he is no longer part of the attack, but the rest continue.

I'm going to have to disagree with you, Chad. A proposed team attack with an illegal attacker cannot start, let alone proceed without the offending party.

It is only after the attack commences that legality is a moot point.

I think there is a missunderstanding, because you say you disagree, but then repeat almost exactly what I said.

You say

I say


Seems to be the same thing. What specifically are you disagreeing with?

This is what I'm disagreeing with:

Just because the attackers are legal when you declare the attack doesn't mean the attack effect automatically gets added to the chain.

The entire team must be legal in order to begin the attack. If it is not, the attack is canceled and you may try again.

Sorry. new to this thread and Im at work so I cant really go back and read all the posts. but a ? for you.

Once the team attack has been declared and the attackers have been exhausted, how would the situation change if I play reign of terror bouncing one of the attackers? would he still be considered attacking? or is he removed from combat and the rest of the attack is continued with the other paticipating attackers exhausted.

The attack would continue with the remaining attackers.