"Two attacks instead of one" ?

[Kurgan]

So there are a few ways for Heroes in HQ to attack twice instead of once, mostly through the use of Potions (but also certain artifacts like Orc's Bane). Now normally I have interpreted this rule to mean:

You get to attack TWICE during your action phase then move, or move then attack TWICE. And of course you either attack the same enemy (who gets to defend each time) or two different enemies within range (who each defend normally).

But does anyone think it is within the rules to attack, THEN move, then do your second attack? Imagine if a character with a ranged weapon could attack, move, then attack again, targeting two different targets within his line of sight. Or is that cheating (according to the original rules)?

Feedback welcome.

[Jalapenotrellis]

I play as listed above. Move then attack adjacent twice and defend each as normal (Orc's Bane and heroic brew), or vice versa. Splitting it up makes it more powerful than it already is. The witch lord got one shot ( 3 hits then 1 hit ) in quest 14 because of heroic brew even playing with these rules. Didn't get a chance to summon anything.

[Kurgan]

You're right, maybe it would just be too OP the second way. Sometimes I forget about the stacking ability of those power-ups/items.

[Jalapenotrellis]

Yes, think potion of strength with heroic brew and the potion of battle. Something big usually does from that, and all are easy to get to power up with.

[Daedalus]

So there are a few ways for Heroes in HQ to attack twice instead of once, mostly through the use of Potions (but also certain artifacts like Orc's Bane). Now normally I have interpreted this rule to mean:

You get to attack TWICE during your action phase then move, or move then attack TWICE. And of course you either attack the same enemy (who gets to defend each time) or two different enemies within range (who each defend normally).

But does anyone think it is within the rules to attack, THEN move, then do your second attack? Imagine if a character with a ranged weapon could attack, move, then attack again, targeting two different targets within his line of sight. Or is that cheating (according to the original rules)?

Feedback welcome.

The turn rule prohibits splitting movement, but not actions; only one action is discussed (ATTACK in our case.)

On A Hero's Turn
As a Hero, you may move and then perform an action, OR you may perform an action and then move. You may not, however, move part way, perform an action, and then finish your movement. You may perform any one of the following actions:

▪︎ ATTACK
▪︎ . . .

The cases where two actions are discussed on a card also don't prohibit splitting the actions/attacks:

. . . If you drink its contents before you attack, you can make two attacks instead of one.. . .

. . . It grants him 2 attacks per turn as long as there are monsters in sight.. . .

. . . You may attack twice if attacking an Orc.. . .

After some consideration, I'd say yes, a Hero may attack, move, and then attack again in the same turn. I'm following the principle that specific rules on cards trump general rules in the Instruction Booklet. As such, I think the organization reads: two attacks are two actions (turn rule adapts to card), NOT the action is two attacks (card adapts to turn rule.) As such, if attack AND attack again of a card is imposed on the turn rule, the clauses are rearranged, and redundancy is eliminated, you get:

As a Hero, you may perform an action attack and then move OR you may move and then perform an action attack again.

Attack/attack/move OR move/attack/attack options still apply since two attacks are two actions from the card is still satisfied; the card and Instruction Booklet rules are open enough to cover both interpretations in my opinion.

Finally, the Elf spell Time Stop can enable another Hero to attack, move, then attack again, but I don't think this is what you were driving at in regards to splitting a turn. Time stop instead creates a bonus turn. The Orc Shaman spell Orc Berserker does the same for an Orc.

[Kurgan]

Next question... would you allow the two attacks be with different weapons? Imagine you had a battle axe and a crossbow. Could you smash the monster in front of you with the axe, then switch to the bow and shoot another monster across the room? Up until now I would have thought "two attacks with the same weapon" but now I'm not so sure. After all, switching weapons is a "free action" (if you call it anything at all). In the above example if you think the Battle Axe as a two handed weapon is somehow a special case, swap it out for a longsword then (only the Staff and Battle Axe are considered two-handed, since they interfere with the shield, in the basic rules, but substitute any other weapon if you want).

Could those "two attacks" be throwing two daggers?

Yes, I would think with multiple potions (stack potion effects, but not multiple instances of the same spell) and the Orc's Bane, you could wreck havoc on some Orcs, no doubt.

[Daedalus]

I'd say no to attacking with two weapons.

Important: You may only attack with one weapon at a time.

That said, throwing two daggers should be okay since it's effectively the same as shooting twice with a crossbow.

[Kurgan]

Or some combination of Hand Axes and Spears (both throwable)?

[Daedalus]

The Spear and Hand Ax are EU weapons, so a special ruling is necessary. For me, I'd probably stick to one weapon type only. However, the rule seems to be in place to prevent other combos, such as a Crossbow and Battle Axe.

[Kurgan]

The remake has the throwable Handaxe now... so could be some combination of Hand Axe and dagger/magical throwing dagger possibly... IF Zargon allows it.