Two unrelated questions, though both shared in that they are rare to mean anything except when very specific cards are played with very specific characters.
Plus a third question that came up in a PbP I'm participating in, if only because I was struck with how incredibly underwhelming a card was.
Question 1: Codex of Conversations
When you would discard for its power an ally that lists Diplomacy in its check to acquire, reveal this card, then attempt the check to acquire that ally. If you succeed, you may recharge that ally instead of discarding it.
Codex of Conversations is possibly my favorite boon in any of the Ultimate Decks, interestingly enough, but it raise a particular question for me. When you attempt the check to acquire an ally with it, are you making a check against the Item (Codex of Conversations) or against the Ally you're trying to recharge with its power?
On a related note, it says to attempt the check to acquire that ally, but is it treated as a check to actually acquire the ally for the purposes of other card effects?
These could generate different interactions with different powers and cards. For example, you could discard an ally to explore, then reveal the Codex to make a check to acquire it, then use the Bloodblade for your "check to acquire it" and then banish the ally to heal yourself. Also, whilst you are clearly making the 'check to acquire' listed on the ally, since you're not actually acquiring the ally as a result is it counted as a "Diplomacy check to acquire an ally", therefore enabling you to use the Menacing Backsword +1 on that check?
Question 2: Raise Dead (and variants)
Discard this card and choose a dead character. That character shuffles 10 of his buried cards at random into his character deck and draws a new hand. That character is no longer dead.
After playing this card, if you do not have the Divine skill, banish it; otherwise, you may succeed at a Divine 14 check to recharge this card instead of discarding it.
Various variants of the spell, like Mythic Hierophant and Breath of Life, almost always work the same way; "shuffle 10 cards in, then draw a new hand. The character is no longer dead". So when, or how 'frequently', does the game check for someone dying, because what if a character has an 11 card hand size, like Tup?
It seems like it would go...
"That character shuffles 10 of his buried cards at random into his character deck and draws a new hand." -> Tup tries to draw 11 cards, and dies. -> "That character is no longer dead." -> Um?
Does that last part become an impossible instruction and is ignored, or does it then take effect, leaving Tup alive with 10 cards, doomed to die on his next hand reset if he can't get an 11th card? I think it's the latter, because he's still dead, even after the hand redraw, until that sentence "That character is no longer dead" occurs.
Question 3: Holy Phylactery
The difficulty of the check to acquire this card is increased by the scenario's adventure deck number.
During an encounter, bury this card to ignore the Corrupted trait on a boon until the end of that encounter.
After playing this card, you may succeed at a Divine check with a difficulty of 5 plus the scenario's adventure deck number to discard this card instead of burying it.
If a corrupted weapon has a consequence for playing it ("before playing this card, discard the top card of your deck" and the like), you can't actually use the Holy Phylactery to prevent the downside, it seems. You have to play something like a weapon (or whatever defines the skill you're using) prior to playing other cards that effect the check, which is clearly outlined in the rulebook. Everything from Sacrificial Dagger, Rod of the Viper, Stalker's Crossbow, Traitor's Blade and plenty of other Corrupted weapons will never gain a benefit, and an extremely small number will ever get any upside.
However, does this line up with the rules as intended? Whilst there are other advantages to the card - notably you can ignore the corrupted trait on top of the blessing discard pile - it is overall an extremely restrictive card when it no longer helps with utilizing a good majority of Corrupted weapons, which in turn make up a very, very large portion of all Corrupted boons in the game that can be used during an encounter (blessings aside). Especially for a card that has to be discarded (at least) for its effect; it's power level is so low that I feel like it must be a case of the RAW not lining up with the RAI.
Note that almost the only effect I can see being half-useful (ignoring the Corrupted trait on top card of the blessings deck) is still incredibly weak, because the most common consequence that could ever have is a corrupted blessing forcing you to discard a card... when this item is being buried or discarded anyway, that makes using this item weaker than literally doing nothing at all. Kyra can turn a single one of her blessings into non-corrupted ones, but would that ever be worth an item that you're discarding to do so?
The first one seems simple ”attempt the check to acquire that ally” say that check is against the ally. Not sure of those others things though...
The second. Tup is alive again and he has 10 cards. He indeed die again in his next end of turn unless someone give him a card so that he has 11 cards again (or more).
Third... no clue. Interested to see other ansvers :)
My humble ques to the third is that you Name a boon that you temporary redeem. Lets say that you redeem a cursed weapon. Then you use that cursed weapon that has been redeemed in you combat checks Until the end of the turn and so you use the ”safe” version of that weapon in those combat checks.
Question 1: Codex of Conversations
I think it is a check against the ally. It might also be a check against the Codex.
If a card refers to a check against another card, that refers to any check required by that card, whether it’s a check to defeat, a check to acquire, a check to recharge, or any other check.
So, question seems to be which card is requiring the check? You could make an argument they both are.
And I think it is a real check to acquire the ally. After all, it is called a "check to acquire" and it is an ally that has it.
Question 2: Raise Dead
You aren't alive until after you've drawn your cards. Someone better get you a card before you have to draw another. I feel like this was discussed and maybe even
Question 3: Holy Phylactery
This seems similar to the Mythic Archmage conundrum.
On question 3, we interpreted the "during the encounter" part of the sentence as "you may play this card anytime during an encounter, even if not directly impacting a check". Hence you can play it before playing the weapon.
It's the only way we see that card having any value.
Question 1: Codex of Conversations
I think it is a check against the ally. It might also be a check against the Codex.If a card refers to a check against another card, that refers to any check required by that card, whether it’s a check to defeat, a check to acquire, a check to recharge, or any other check.So, question seems to be which card is requiring the check? You could make an argument they both are.
And I think it is a real check to acquire the ally. After all, it is called a "check to acquire" and it is an ally that has it.
I wonder if there's any cards or powers that would work weirdly with. "For your check to acquire an ally, do X. If you acquire that ally, place it on top of your deck." In that hypothetical situation, would you put the ally on top of your deck or would you recharge it as instructed by the Codex of Conversations? I would imagine you'd ignore the second sentence and just recharge it, because though it was a check to acquire, you did not actually acquire an ally.
It drives my literal thinking a bit crazy that we can call something a "Check to acquire an ally" when you don't actually acquire the ally by passing, but I recognise there's not really a good alternative wording option.
Anyway, being a check against both the Codex and the Ally could lead to some interesting situations. For one thing, that could invoke a number of relevant traits. This is actually seriously important for one of my characters; so I'd like to ask you directly, as the GM for a table where this will certainly come up.
Question 3: Holy Phylactery
This seems similar to the Mythic Archmage conundrum.
I'd not come across the discussions about the Mythic Archmage; I'll have to look them up once the forums work properly. Looking at the card, I see the issue, though. You'd have to, for example, use an attack spell to make a combat check an Intelligence or Charisma check... but you can't legally play an attack spell that the target would be immune to, so you'd almost never be able to make use of its ability. Was there ever an official conclusion on that?
I think I'd lean towards the check you are making not being against the the codex, but only against the ally. That would mean it doesn't invoke any traits because of the codex.
As for the Mythic Archmage, I would have linked it when I first posted but the instability of the forums made it hard enough to post, let alone find the the other thread. Here it is.