This may have been covered already but I couldn't find the answer to my specific question. I know you cannot use a spell and a weapon on a check because it changed the skill used for a check and what not, however the wand of scorching ray only adds dice to a combat roll it doesn't change the skill being used. With that wing said couldn't I as Ezren whack a goblin with my horsechopper+1 and also blast him to bits with my wand since the grindy low makes it a strength roll and the wand only adds dice to the combat check. I see no reason why this is wrong. Is it? Please explain.
I'd argue that it changes the skill it to nothing, but I can see your point. We'll discuss.
I think the clearer idea is you can only play 1 card/power that defines your combat check. That is what I took the words "For your combat check..." to mean. So if the the Horsechopper + 1 defines your combat check, another card can't come along and define your combat check as something else. After all its only 1 check. Was I wrong in assuming that?
I get what you are saying, that the rule is 1 card per person per step and that the reason spells don't mesh with weapons is because they use different skills. But I guess I thought there was more to "For your combat check..." than maybe there is.
Right in my party of five. We know that you can't use a spell and a weapon. When I drew the wand of scorching ray we were all excited. We tried finding an answer and resolved o treat it like a blessing so to speak. Blessing allows you to add a die to any check, so we just treated it similiar except in adding a die it just adds it's specific dice.
I don't have the cards with me (and maybe you don't either) but doesn't it say "For your combat check, bury this card to roll 4d6 with ..."?
Blessings allow you to "add a die to a check". The Wand doesn't say anything about adding. And its not like the Amulet of Mighty Fists, which again say "add".
So that is why I felt it defined the combat check. And it is defining what you are doing on this particular combat check. So no other card can define what you are doing on this particular combat check. They can add to it, but they can't define it.
Maybe I'm remembering the wording wrong though.
It's nothing major I just wanted clarification. I can see the argument for both sides. I just thought it possible since it doesn't define a skill it only adds dice. I didn't take the "for your combat check" part into consideration. Still I don't see it as wrong but an official ruling would put our groups dilemma to rest.
I wouldn't say its not major. It kind of is. Because it would be awesome if Ezren could do just what you said. I mean, 4d6 extra dice on any combat check would be great.
But if that worked, you could probably technically also use your strength and the wand of scorching ray at the same time as well.
And I can't find anything that says I'm right other than what I said about how I interpret the "For your combat check..." phrase. But its a bit murky since that is my interpretation. So I can see you wanting an official ruling.
The wand doesn't say "add" dice; it says "For your combat check, roll...". That is a card that drtermines your base die, and only one such card may be played per check.
I think Fallenzealot's point was that rule is about determining the base skill. And the wand says nothing about the base skill it uses. And the rules say you can only play 1 card that changes the skill for the check. Spells and weapons don't work together because no weapon uses Arcane or Divine as its base skill. And so you'd have to change the base skill twice. But if the wand has no skill, it doesn't change the skill.
Mike was saying, well the wand does change the skill, it changes it to the "no skill" skill. But I understand why Fallenzealot would ask.
It has already been ruled that these types of wands determine your base die and only one such card can be played.
That is how I play it. But there is no skill mentioned on the card, so its not determinate the skill. That is where I think the problem lies with understanding it. There is nothing on the Wand that indicates it changes the skill. And the rule is only 1 card that changes the skill. And then with in each step only 1 card of each type.
So you get to the "Determine the which die you are using" step and say, "I'll play this weapon, so strength." Then you look and say, "Hey I also have this wand. And it doesn't say anything about a skill. And it isn't a weapon. So maybe I can play it right now too."
There is no explicit rule of "only 1 card that says "For your combat check." At least not that I can see. My reasoning was based off the fact it only made sense to play 1 "For your combat check" card per check.
Even Mike seems to think this worthy of discussion. Can you provide a post to where such a ruling was made?
Right. I agree. But it could be clearer to maybe say on the determine the die you're using step, "You can only play 1 card or power during this step." Unless there is some good reason not to.
Here is the rule:
Weapons and many other cards that can be used during combat generally tell you what skill to use when you attempt a combat check; if you don’t play such a card, use your Strength or Melee skill. (A few items that can be used in combat don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll.)
Some cards may allow you to replace the required skill for a check with a different one; as part of this action, you may play only 1 card or use only 1 power that changes the skill you are going to use.
So the rule doesn't say you can only play 1 card for a combat check. It says you can't change the skill more than once. So your weapon changes the skill. But does the wand? When it lacks a skill, does it count as changing it to no-skill? That is where the clarification is needed (for some, I'm reading it the same as you).
Well...the step is "determine your base die". There's nothing that says it has to be based on a skill. It USUALLY is...but doesn't have to be. The wording on a spell, for instance, is not "roll your Arcane skill"; it is "roll your Arcance die".
I think this is the meat of the debate and the answer. Defining a check is defining the DIE used, not the SKILL. The wand defines the check by saying that instead of whatever you would normally use for a combat check (usually strength or melee), you get to roll 4 d6 instead.
Also, looking at it from the RPG inspiration, a character could make and attack with a weapon, a spell, or a wand, not multiple of them.
Yeah. I think you guys (J Scot Shay and csouth154) are on the same page as me, but (and I think you are seeing this too csouth154) it could be more clear to help people not even raise the question in the first place.
Now, on another note, does anyone have a recommendation for an over the counter medication that can be taken to help with PACG withdraw for the next 2 months? I felt such joy and then such sorrow when my second group got to the end of Hook Mountain Massacre and realized I'd have to go somewhat cold turkey for a while.
I see it's not like say the amulet of mighty fist that let's you add a die but a means of attack in and off itself. I can see the difference between changing the skill and changing the die. I guess the critical part of the wand is that it doesn't add die to the check just instructs you to roll 4d6. That's the kicker I guess. Well thank you guys :)
Now, on another note, does anyone have a recommendation for an over the counter medication that can be taken to help with PACG withdraw for the next 2 months? I felt such joy and then such sorrow when my second group got to the end of Hook Mountain Massacre and realized I'd have to go somewhat cold turkey for a while.
Lord of the Ring LCG may provide some sort of weak methadone for your problem.
Chief Technical Officer
|
A few items that can be used in combat don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll.
This category of cards includes that wand; this means it gets used during the "Determine Which Die You’re Using" action, and the "you may play only 1 card or use only 1 power that changes the skill you are going to use" rule applies to it.
Or, as Mike pointed out, you could realize that the wand is changing the skill you're using to "no skill," which would also trigger that rule.
Yes, yes he does.
This category of cards includes that wand; this means it gets used during the "Determine Which Die You’re Using" action, and the "you may play only 1 card or use only 1 power that changes the skill you are going to use" rule applies to it.
Or, as Mike pointed out, you could realize that the wand is changing the skill you're using to "no skill," which would also trigger that rule.
Then how does a blessing work in card like Wand of Scorching ray? It does not define die, it defines a group of dies... It even does not have a skill... So a blessing can give another 4D6, 1d6 or 1D? or even 1D0...
Lets say that we have a card thats name is: "Wand of wonders: For you combat check, bury this card to roll 1D8, 1d6 and 2D4"
What happens, when someone plays a blessing to that check?
Then how does a blessing work in card like Wand of Scorching ray? It does not define die, it defines a group of dies... It even does not have a skill... So a blessing can give another 4D6, 1d6 or 1D? or even 1D0...
A blessing adds d6s to a combat check using the Wand of Scorching Ray. A Gorum would add 1d6. A Zarongel would add 2d6.
Blessing cards often allow you to explore or add dice to checks attempted by any player, including yourself, at any location. The dice added are normally of the type associated with the skill the character is using for the check; if a card instead specifies the exact dice to roll for the check, the added dice are of the type specified by that card.
As for your hypothetical Wand of Wonders: the dice a blessing would add to that is currently undefined. We'd need a ruling.
But in anyway it seems to be one die if not having the right trait?
Ok. Then it most likely would be the biggest die, if multible Are mentioned. Or the first, but if They ever release that kind of wand ruling would be needed. Many thanks!