Nojh's page

So I've been wandering the boards trying to figure out if I cheated when I used caltrops to help another player defeat a monster that was summoned for them to encounter on a third players turn.

The answers I have put together is yes, because I can't use a power (via card playing or not) which allows another player to defeat a monster (or evade, etc) according to the meta rules.

I believe I will have a difficult time convincing some of my fellow players of this given how the card (and others like it) is written without a "you/your" when compared to other cards which explicitly uses the word "you". I think the meta rules added to the FAQ do alleviate the problem but only if the meta rules are explicitly excepted from the "Golden Rule" where cards over right rules.

Additionally I do not feel that the meta rules are explicit enough to help new players see the distinction between powers that can't aid another character but don't use the word "you" in their description effect. Perhaps with the inclusion of the following sentence in the No One Else Can Take Your Turn for You section. I welcome criticism regarding if it is worded correctly or is even needed:

"Other players may not play cards or use powers to aid you in evading, defeating, acquiring, failing, or deciding what to do with an encounter or closing locations, unless the card explicitly says it can."

Or alternatively

"You may not play cards or use powers to aid another character in evading, defeating, acquiring, failing, or deciding what to do with an encounter or closing locations, unless the card explicitly says it can."

My biggest worry is that someone might construe this to mean you can't aid a check (to defeat an encounter for example). But I feel this wording is clearer and will help someone new to the game looking at caltrops realize they can only play it to aid themselves.

I also suggest adding a explicit example of not being able to use the card/power in this context. This alone might preclude the need to include one of the above sentences.

Thoughts?

I would be fine with POD errata cards. However i do like the idea actual errata cards with the next big box.

Hi. I was curious what the major clarification was, if it has happened?

Also not to throw oil on the debate again but if the outcome of this is effectively "the rule book tells us if a card's effect can be used to aid a player or only yourself" wouldn't that conflict with the golden rule on page 2, making an argument for erattaing the cards to be clearer?