|
In the Wardstone Patrol scenario when you have Sir Ilivan as a cohort, there appears to be some potential weird timing issue that can happen.
The last scenario power on The Wardstone Patrol reads:
If the criteria to banish Sir Ilivan are met, when do you encounter the Corrupted Soldier? Is it before you fight the original monster or does it happen after?
Do you still get to add dice from Sir Ilivan to the check against the original monster?
1) Before you fight the original monster.
If you're told to summon and encounter a card, this immediately starts a new encounter. If you're already in an encounter, complete the encounter with the summoned card before continuing the original encounter.
2) In my opinion, yes. It does not have the magic word "would" that indicates the banishing happens instead of you playing Sir Ilivan, as such Sir Ilivan was played on the check and his powers activate. If the power had the word "would" then it would indicate that banishing Sir Ilivan happens instead of you playing him, and thus you do not get to add his dice. Remember that banishing a cohort removes them from the game permanently (as if they died), so you cannot use him again in future scenarios even if they specify Sir Ilivan on the scenario card.
Sorry, I was editing my post to clear up a couple things and you snuck in a reply. If you refresh it should have the relevant quote from the rulebook as well as some other things :)
|
|
Remember that banishing a cohort removes them from the game permanently (as if they died), so you cannot use him again in future scenarios even if they specify Sir Ilivan on the scenario card.
I knew this. The situation came up the other night and my solo character died during the scenario. I started a new game some I figured that Sir Ilivan was back in play (until something happens to him again).
Chief Technical Officer
|
If you're told to summon and encounter a card, this immediately starts a new encounter. If you're already in an encounter, complete the encounter with the summoned card before continuing the original encounter.
This bit of rules text was made to ensure that cards that are summoned before a check stay outside of a check instead of nesting.
However, if the card is summoned *during* a check, this text forces the new encounter to nest inside that check.
Example: I'm playing the Wardstone Patrol, and I'm in the middle of a check to defeat a bane with the Outsider trait, and I reveal Sir Ilivan to add 1d8 to that check. The top card of the blessings deck is corrupted, so I banish Ilivan and summon and encounter the Corrupted Soldier, and that rule says I have to complete the encounter with the Corrupted Soldier before continuing the original encounter with the Outsider. I now have a nested check, which allows for many unanswerable questions. (Example: I already played a weapon on my check with the Outsider—can I play a weapon against the Corrupted Soldier?)
I think the rulebook should really say this:
If you're told to summon and encounter a card, this starts a new encounter. If you're already in an encounter, but you are not attempting a check, immediately encounter the summoned card before continuing the original encounter. If you're currently attempting a check, complete that check and then immediately encounter the summoned card.
Troubleshooting?
I can't think of any scenario outside of this Sir Ilivan one where you'd be making another encounter while inside of a check, so that wording seems mostly fine to me. It also makes it more clear whether or not Ilivan gives you the d8 on the first check (in that it makes it clear that he does).
The one thing I'm not sure of is how you want to handle encounters with multiple checks (say the bane having 2 checks to defeat or you played a spell or item with a recharge check on the first check). With the wording proposed above, the sequencing would look like so:
1. Attempt first check against bane
2. Summon and encounter the card
3. Attempt second check against original bane
or
1. Attempt check against bane, playing a spell or item that can be recharged
1.5. The spell/item is set aside as part of playing it and isn't in any zone
2. Summon and encounter the card
3. Attempt recharge check for spell/item played in step 1
The latter scenario in particular seems off and would mess with character powers like Class Deck Radillo's by not resolving the recharge check before the next encounter.
I can't think of any scenario outside of this Sir Ilivan one where you'd be making another encounter while inside of a check, so that wording seems mostly fine to me.
The second organized play scenario for Season of the Righteous has allies that can turn into demonlings when you play them. Since many allies can be played during a check, this is an issue there too.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
The one thing I'm not sure of is how you want to handle encounters with multiple checks (say the bane having 2 checks to defeat or you played a spell or item with a recharge check on the first check).
Note that we're telling you to complete the *check* you're in, not the encounter. Does that clarify it for you?
The one thing I'm not sure of is how you want to handle encounters with multiple checks (say the bane having 2 checks to defeat or you played a spell or item with a recharge check on the first check).Note that we're telling you to complete the *check* you're in, not the encounter. Does that clarify it for you?
Yes, it is very clear to me that you finish up the current check only, however that leads to the wackiness I outlined in my post above about things with recharge checks, where they're in limbo until after the summoned card is dealt with. Recharge checks fire off a new "Attempt the next step, if needed" step of the encounter, which means that will be postponed until after the summoned card is dealt with. At the very least, this has odd interactions with Class Deck Radillo and I can see it having issues with other characters as well. For example, WotR Seoni can't rely on the spell she just played on the first check to be in her discard so she can use it on the summoned card, so hopefully she has 2 attack spells in hand or a different attack spell in her discard! My comment was more of "I'm not sure if having the summoned card be the immediately following thing to happen the current check is necessarily the best idea" rather than "I'm not sure what the wording is trying to say." That said, I can't think of anything better while also keeping the rule simple and understandable (making exceptions for recharge checks imo starts a messy business of saying "X and Y do this one thing but A, B, and C do this other thing, and nowhere is this really made clear outside of this sentence and is certainly not something intuitive to grasp."
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
We are leaving the rules alone, and the designers will avoid summoning during checks, which requires adjustments to the two places we know of that we've done that:
The Wardstone Patrol is changing via FAQ.
Instant Inquisition (Season of the Righteous 1-1B) will eventually be updated with the following text:
"When a character would play an ally, roll 1d6. On a 1 or 2, she instead buries the ally and, after resolving any check she is attempting, summons and encounters the henchman Demonling."