Ye Olde Inn

The NA text;

You are surprised to find a leather
bag hanging on the wall. If you drink
its contents before you attack, you
can make two attacks instead of one.
This may only be used once. Do not
return this card to the deck.

It was used last night and the question was asked if he could attack two different monsters. In the interest of consistency, I said no and even though I think the wording is more ambiguous than Orcs Bane, the original game is about taking on one monster at a time.

Thoughts?

Certain situations require falling back on the "Rule of Cool" and I think this is one of them. The rule doesn't specifically allow nor disallow attacking two different monsters, so I'd allow it because it's pretty awesome cinematically.

There's nothing to imply that you cannot attack two monsters. It works exactly as described--its not D&D. All you have to know is what an "attack" is, and then do it twice. "Cannot" always trumps "can." Its more important to specify things you "cannot" do as a conditional clause.

I have always interpreted the card that you could make 2 attack actions in the turn. Each attack would be separate and independent from the others. This leads to the obvious conclusion that you can attack different monsters.
Just my .

-JasonMCM

JasonMCM wrote:I have always interpreted the card that you could make 2 attack actions in the turn. Each attack would be separate and independent from the others. This leads to the obvious conclusion that you can attack different monsters.
Just my .

-JasonMCM

Exactly correct. Unless it says you cannot attack two different monster, you should assume you can.

JasonMCM wrote:I have always interpreted the card that you could make 2 attack actions in the turn. Each attack would be separate and independent from the others. This leads to the obvious conclusion that you can attack different monsters.

Yes. Moreover, you can split your attacks around your full movement if you decide to attack before moving. Drinking - 1st attack - movement - 2nd attack

Here's a re-wording for the "only one monster" purpose:

You are surprised to find a leather
bag hanging on the wall. If you drink
its contents before you attack, you
may make a second attack against
the same monster immediately.
This may only be used once. Do not
return this card to the deck.

It is a huge difference in wording and ultimately in interpreting.

knightkrawler wrote:
You are surprised to find a leather
bag hanging on the wall. If you drink
its contents before you attack, you
may make a second attack against
the same monster immediately.
This may only be used once. Do not
return this card to the deck.

I vote we call this the 'Watered Down Sort of Heroic Brew'. New treasure cards are fun to make.

-JasonMCM

JasonMCM wrote:

knightkrawler wrote:
You are surprised to find a leather
bag hanging on the wall. You may drink
its contents instead of attacking normally
to make two attacks against a single monster.
This may only be used once. Do not
return this card to the deck.

I vote we call this the 'Watered Down Sort of Heroic Brew'. New treasure cards are fun to make.

-JasonMCM

FTFY

Yup. Two attacks allowed, no restrictions, so 2 monsters is OK, as long as you don't need to move if you have already done so.

It's not exactly the original game, but the Barbarian Quest Pack includes rules for the Polar Warbear, which has 2 attacks. The monster description at the end of the Frozen Horror specifically states that those attacks can either be directed against one or two opponents. Since Hero Quest is expandable, I'd say extend this official expansion rule to a Hero who is granted 2 attacks from Heroic Brew.