Blizing/blocking with Pass Block Vs Dump Off.

[NorthernMonkey]

I know this works. As in you can activate pass block (PB) for a dump off(DO). But what if the player with PB is the one making DO activate in the first place?

Eg I declare block against adjacent ball carrier with D.O.
D.O. activates and they declare reciever.

Can I use Pass Block to:

1.Move around the DO guy (dodging etc as required) to get an interception chance with the PB guy. What about to simply move to a better square to hit from if it doesn't offer intercept pass (as starting in a legal PB target square anyway) Then complete block against DO player as originally declared (just from a different square).
2. Move the pass block guy to next to the reciever (if close enough) and after DO is complete hit the reciever instead of DO guy?
3. Move away to reciever but not block him as he wasn't the original target for the action.
4. Nothing. Already in a valid square for PB so doesn't trigger.
5. wtf are you talking about, it's none of those but "x" instead.

[dode74]

The way I read the PB and DO rules:

1. Yes. PB allows you to move up to 3 squares. You *may* stop when in a legal destination, but don't have to. Your ultimate target must be a legal destination, though.
2. No. You've already declared you are throwing a block *at him*.
3. No. You've already declared the target of the block so have to block him. That's not the same thing as declaring a Block Action then not blocking.
4. You may move.
5. Possibly

[Vanguard]

3. No. You've already declared the target of the block so have to block him. That's not the same thing as declaring a Block Action then not blocking.

Yes, but at this point the Blocking player is no longer adjacent to the originally declared target. I'd agree that you cannot change the target of the block, but would assume that if the block was no longer possible it wouldn't happen.

The alternative view would be to treat it along the lines of Interception, so although the process is:

1. Declare Block
2. Declare Dump Off
3. Resolve Pass Block
4. Resolve Dump Off
5. Resolve Block

we accept that the order of resolution does not dictate the order of events and resolve them all even if not normally possible. That would presumably mean resolving the block as if the blocking player was in his original square.
Although that could then lead to the situation of the blocking player chain pushing the opponent into himself. Which might cause the game to implode... Better not risk it.

[dode74]

3. No. You've already declared the target of the block so have to block him. That's not the same thing as declaring a Block Action then not blocking.

Yes, but at this point the Blocking player is no longer adjacent to the originally declared target. I'd agree that you cannot change the target of the block, but would assume that if the block was no longer possible it wouldn't happen.

I'm not sure that if the block doesn't happen that the DO player has to DO any more. So I guess you *could* use the blocker with PB to move out of contact with the BC, thereby cancelling the block, which in turn cancels the DO, which then cancels the use of DO and subsequently PB does not trigger meaning you can't move the blocker out of contact with the BC. But then we all end up in a space-time eddy and the pitch gets sucked into a rift and Chaos Daemons are declared the winner. I suspect the best way to avoid any such incursion is to say that the blocker must end up in contact with the BC for DO, and subsequently PB, to be used, but I have no idea what any "official" ruling might be. What if he fails a dodge?

[Wifflebat]

From the FAQ (edited to include only the relevant bits):

Q: If you blitz or block an opponent with Dump-Off
with a player that has Pass Block can you use Pass
Block to move after he declares his use of Dump-Off?

A: No, once a block is declared as part of a Block or
Blitz Action, you must attempt to complete it before
moving again.

[dode74]

Hah, there you go. Note to self: read the FAQ...

At least there's no chance of an incursion.

[NorthernMonkey]

Cheers guys.

Totally missed that. Clears up nicely.