Here comes the flood and location decks

[h4ppy]

Planning to play this scenario tonight but had a quick question first.

When choosing a location deck for this scenario's special effect do you randomly select from...

a) Just OPEN location decks that contain cards in them

b) ANY location deck that contains cards (e.g. might include the closed General Store)

c) any OPEN location, including decks with NO cards (e.g. if you've explored all the cards but not closed the location, is it still a valid 'target' for the effect, even though the 'location deck' contains zero cards)

d) ANY location deck, including closed ones with no cards in them

(a) is going to be the hardest and (d) the easiest but let me know what you guys think (or the official line).

Thanks!

[Vic Wertz]

See the "Cards Do What They Say" metarule: "Let the card tell you what to do, and don’t impose limitations that aren’t there."

If we'd wanted A, we'd have said something like "random open location deck with cards in it".

If we'd wanted B, we'd have said something like "random location deck with cards in it".

If we'd wanted C, we'd have said something like "random open location deck".

We want D, so we said "random location deck".

[h4ppy]

Thanks Vic. Thought it was D but hope you don't mind me double-checking!

Was a close one - we saved 9 and Magga ate 9. Not helped by Magga rolling 4, 4, 3 in its first three bites... but at least it ate four of the serpents too.

Quite liked the randomisation of henchmen in this one and was interesting to find several in one location.

[Mike Selinker]

Also: The answer being D is the only reason you don't always lose this scenario.

[xelissa]

We have been playing under A, and we actually won once (two players only)!! Very lucky, I guess =] Glad to here that we can do D from now on. Thanks for asking the question, OP, and the clarification, paizo guys! <3

[Mechalibur]

Oh, this scenario makes a bit more sense now. I was wondering how you were supposed to win (she eats up 2.5 each turn on average), but now it seems slightly more doable since she has a chance to whiff.

[Dave Riley]

Mike Selinker wrote:

Also: The answer being D is the only reason you don't always lose this scenario.

I come from the blood-soaked flood fields to say we triumphed over Magga (though only barely) despite playing under assumption A. For our reading of the rules, we assumed to take cards from a location DECK required the deck to be extant. We did question it our second time around because it seemed a little harsh (as was the enormous pile of cards under Magga by the end of the scenario), but still we soldiered through and claimed victory. Good to know we were doing it wrong!

[Ohnomycoco]

Vic - can I ask why you feel the term "random location deck" makes your intentions with this rule clear here ? I had exactly the same confusion when playing this for the first time yesterday.

If you say a "random location deck" this kind of implies there actually has to be cards there for the magga to target it - after all in English a deck is a collection of one of more cards.

I think you have a wording problem here (unless you have defined a location deck somewhere in the rules to be an empty location which I can't spot). I think what you wanted to go for was something like "a random location" which doesn't imply (confusingly) the presence of cards.

[Mike Selinker]

Ah, I finally see the problem. By the above read, "location deck" implies that there are some cards there, and when they're gone, you don't think there's a deck there.

OK, we will discuss this.

[Hawkmoon269]

We all just need to remember: {}

[Ohnomycoco]

Thanks Mike - stunning game by the way.

[Vic Wertz]

Ohnomycoco wrote:

Vic - can I ask why you feel the term "random location deck" makes your intentions with this rule clear here ? I had exactly the same confusion when playing this for the first time yesterday.

If you say a "random location deck" this kind of implies there actually has to be cards there for the magga to target it - after all in English a deck is a collection of one of more cards.

I think you have a wording problem here (unless you have defined a location deck somewhere in the rules to be an empty location which I can't spot). I think what you wanted to go for was something like "a random location" which doesn't imply (confusingly) the presence of cards.

We certainly don't want "a random location." Location (without the word "deck") means the location *card* (which is an abstraction for the place itself). Location deck means the stack of cards (an abstraction for the resources present) at a location—even if that stack is empty.

Also, your character deck is your character deck, even when it's empty; the blessings deck is the blessings deck, even when it's empty; your discard pile is your discard pile, even when it's empty; your hand is your hand, even when it's empty, and so on. This prevents us from having to say things like "put a card in your discard pile, unless you don't have one yet, in which case start one." That way lies madness.

[h4ppy]

I guess that's a FAQ waiting to happen?

"Q. Is a deck still a deck when it has zero cards in it?"

"A. Yes. Any game effect that targets a deck or 'random deck' of a certain type should also target empty decks of that type. (Then give an example)"

[Bidmaron]

It needs to be in the rule book. Random location would work in this instance, I think , although I do understand Vic's point about madness in other contexts of deck. One of the great things paizo has done in this game is to try to update the rule book. People ought to have a chance to play correctly in a future box set without having to read faqs and surf these boards.

[h4ppy]

That's assuming a new rule book is printed and put into the box of RotR. The updates should still go into the FAQ.

[Bidmaron]

Definitely in FAQ. They will have new rules in S&s and that's why it needs in rule book.

[Beargram]

Nerco bump!

I played this scenario for the first time over the weekend, and can I just say I love the mechanics at work here. Taking the bottom 1d4 cards out of a random location deck each turn actually feels like a flood rising, down to the fact it is the cards on the bottom (first to get wet) that are being taken away. Very thematic!

[Zenarius]

That's one of the cooler scenarios :)

[Samuel Reichert]

Just one other Question concerning this scenario: Do you meet the condition to win only if there are no cards left in the blessings deck, or also if all the location decks are empty? Or do you even lose, when all cards of the location decks are gone before you turn the last blessing? Hope this question is not too stupid. Thanks in advance for answers!

[elcoderdude]

You win this scenario if you acquire at least as many allies as Black Magga eats.

The blessings deck is just there to indicate how much time you have to collect allies. If all the cards are gone from the locations before the blessings deck runs out, end the scenario and see if you won.

I admit I don't quite understand your questions.

[Vic Wertz]

The text on the card says:
When there are no cards in the blessings deck, if the number of allies under this card is at least equal to the number of allies under Black Magga, you win the scenario.

So as printed, if the location decks empty out before blessings deck, technically you have to keep playing until you empty the blessings deck... but that really just means each player's turn consists of advancing the blessings deck then immediately ending her turn.

For Obsidian's Pathfinder Adventures game, we've adjusted it so you can skip those turns:
When either the blessings deck or all of the location decks have no cards remaining, if the number of allies under this card is at least equal to the number of allies under Black Magga, you win the scenario.

[Samuel Reichert]

Thank you so much for the quick answers. I was, in fact, asking because of the "When there are no cards in the blessings deck"-part of the scenario card. But your explanation makes sense and deep inside I was suspecting something like this. So, thanks again.