by grayes
So I THINK I've been playing it incorrectly for months; as far as I can tell this isn't explicitly stated in the rulebook, but when you explore, I've been treating it like you move INTO that space. You spend 2 movement points... which implies that you get to move. You also typically would need to be IN an area to see what's there... so moving ONTO the tile you explored would make sense. At least, that's the way I've been treating it; exploring and moving onto the explored square at the same time.The rulebook only says that you must be adjacent to the tile you are exploring; the orientation is determined by the symbols on their corners; no tile can be added behind the coastline; it costs 2 move points to reveal a new tile.
This meant that exploring would potentially allow you to enter a tile that would cost greater than 2 move points to enter normally, at the cost of not knowing where you were going; seemed to make sense as a game mechanic to me! Promotion of exploring new areas of the map, because it was a more efficient way of movement than spending 5 move to get into that swamp.
This did, however, cause some problems, depending on the square you explored into when moving:
a) rampaging monsters
b) lakes, mountains
c) keeps, mage towers
.... obviously you can't move into a rampaging monster; so did this count as provoking the monster? I felt so. The lakes and mountains, obviously you just forfeit your move; but what about keeps and mage towers? Do you HAVE to assault them? I imagined so; I spent many turns blocking attacks from mages, orcs, dragons, etc. when I inadvertently moved onto their squares.... only now i realize that it wasn't necessary.
In any case, after exploring the issue, I realized that nowhere in the rules does it explicitly state that you get to move when you explore; it just seemed heavily implied to me.
Anyone else confused by this?