Skeleton Horde: "Each character at an open location summons and encounters an Ancient Skeleton henchman" No change. Each character summons which we would understand to mean expose and then either evades or encounters.
Interpreting the card through your suggestion, I would argue that the statement "Summon and encounter" would explicitly deny you the ability to evade because the card is explicitly instructing you to encounter. If you want to retain the ability to evade monsters that are summoned, I believe it would require updating any card that says "summon and encounter" to simply say "summon."
Blessing of the Gods: "If you encounter this card, you automatically acquire it" No change. You expose the card and then either evade or encounter it. You have the choice of evading it and leaving it for someone else.
That entails a change to the current mechanics. Currently, you cannot evade a Blessing of the Gods, which has ramifications at the Shrine of Lamashtu.
Bruthazmus: "Encounter Bruthazmus twice. Bruthazmus is defeated or undefeated based solely on the results of the second encounter." Possible change if you rule that you can Encounter him once and Evade him the second time. If you only get one chance to Evade him then no change.
Again, this entails a change to the current mechanics. Consider the situation of Bruthazmus at the Warrens (don't have the scenario cards in front of me, so I'm not sure if this is hypothetical or could actually happen). Currently, when you run into him at the Warrens, you trigger the location effect twice, regardless of whether you evade once, twice, or not at all.
If you changed the Warrens effect to be "When you expose a monster at this location...", you would only ever trigger it once when you run into Bruthazmus.
If you kept the Warrens effect to be "When you encounter a monster at this location...", evading Bruthazmus once would the trigger the location effect only once, and evading him twice would not trigger the effect at all.
Either way, it would not sync up with the current mechanics.
Tangletooth: "Each character at this location encounters Tangletooth." This one you got me. You'd need something like "Before encountering each character at this location must chose to Evade Tangletooth if they can. Each character that did not Evade Tangletooth encounters him."
That still wouldn't agree with the current mechanics. Again, consider something like Tangletooth at the Warrens. In this case, it makes everyone at the Warrens add a monster to a random open location, regardless of whether or not they choose to evade Tangletooth.
If the Warrens effect was changed to "When you expose..." then Tangletooth would only trigger the effect once when exposed.
If the Warrens effect was changed to "When you encounter...", then Tangletooth would not trigger the effect for characters that evade her.
Just to clarify, in the current terminology any evaded card is an encountered card. So the Shrine's power is activated on any blessing you encounter, BotG or otherwise, whether you evade it or not.
The fact that BotG's are acquired the moment they are encountered and therefore cannot be evaded is correct.
Also, keep in mind, I believe none of this is being discussed as changes in Rise of the Runelords because any change would require an errata for too many cards. What Paizo is working on is what to do with this issue in future adventure paths like Skull and Shackles.
Point conceded on the Shrine to Lamshtu and Warrens. While I think there could be some elegance to the game in the end all with the idea of a term like "expose" I concede that it would change the game as it currently works.
Going back to the X and Y consideration from earlier in this thread.
Variation of Suggestion #2 (version 2.1):
Refer to X using "Before resolving"
Refer to Y using "After resolving"
What it entails:
-Define the act of Attempting to Defeat or Acquire a card as “resolving” it.
-Globally rename/errata all “Before you encounter” instances with “Before resolving.”
-Globally rename/errata all “After you encounter” instances with “After resolving.”
-Change the Encountering a Card sequence as follows:
* Apply “When you encounter” effects, if needed
* Evade the Card (Optional)
* Resolve the Card
* Conclude the Encounter (formerly Resolve the Encounter… name changed for obvious reasons.)
-Create a Resolve the Card sequence that looks like:
* Apply “Before resolving” effects, if needed
* Attempt the check
* Attempt the next check, if needed
* Apply “After resolving” effects, if needed
Possible Strengths
-"Before resolving" is more intuitive than "before the encounter"
-"After resolving" is more intuitive than "after then encounter”
-Makes is clear that Evade the Card is part of the Encounter but occurs before Resolving the check to Acquire or Defeat.
Possible Issues
-Seems like a bit of an overhaul but ultimately it uses many of the parts that are already in place with cleaner definitions.
-??? (Sure there are more. Hit me with them)
Point conceded on the Shrine to Lamshtu and Warrens. While I think there could be some elegance to the game in the end all with the idea of a term like "expose" I concede that it would change the game as it currently works.
I didn't mean to deflate your idea, because I think it does have its merits. I just wanted to point out that it would have more far-reaching consequences than you might have realized. Mechanics changes aren't necessarily a bad thing, but they do require additional play-testing and re-analysis of card interactions. I could see the designers being hesitant about doing something like that so late in the game.
Going back to the X and Y consideration from earlier in this thread.Variation of Suggestion #2 (version 2.1):
Refer to X using "Before resolving"
Refer to Y using "After resolving"
What it entails:
-Define the act of Attempting to Defeat or Acquire a card as “resolving” it.
-Globally rename/errata all “Before you encounter” instances with “Before resolving.”
-Globally rename/errata all “After you encounter” instances with “After resolving.”
-Change the Encountering a Card sequence as follows:
* Apply “When you encounter” effects, if needed
* Evade the Card (Optional)
* Resolve the Card
* Conclude the Encounter (formerly Resolve the Encounter… name changed for obvious reasons.)
-Create a Resolve the Card sequence that looks like:
* Apply “Before resolving” effects, if needed
* Attempt the check
* Attempt the next check, if needed
* Apply “After resolving” effects, if needed
Possible Strengths
-"Before resolving" is more intuitive than "before the encounter"
-"After resolving" is more intuitive than "after then encounter”
-Makes is clear that Evade the Card is part of the Encounter but occurs before Resolving the check to Acquire or Defeat.
Possible Issues
-Seems like a bit of an overhaul but ultimately it uses many of the parts that are already in place with cleaner definitions.
-??? (Sure there are more. Hit me with them)
Off the top of my head, another issue is the possible ambiguity of the words "before" and "after" (and this applies to all suggestions that use those words). In the same way that "meet me before noon" is fairly vague about when you should actually meet me, "before resolving" is potentially vague about when exactly the effect might occur. Yes, you could spell out exactly when the effect is intended to trigger, as you have done. But why use a potentially vague word in the first place?
For this reason, my preference would be to use something like "At X" (e.g. "At the start of your turn") or "When X" (e.g. "When encountered"). "Meet me at 11 AM" or "Meet me when the clock strikes 11 AM" are explicitly less vague than "Meet me before noon".
Chief Technical Officer
|
Here's the current plan for Skull & Shackles:
We're adding a new concept called "acting" in an encounter. Acting is the process of dealing with the encountered card after you have had a chance to evade it, and before you resolve it (banish it, shuffle it, whatever). It includes all the checks you'll make to defeat or acquire the card, and things that happen when you do, such as taking damage from failing to defeat it, and checks to recharge cards you play during those checks.
If you evade, you do not act on that encounter.
There is a phrase called "before you act," which replaces "before the encounter" in the powers block. It means that before you make any checks to defeat or acquire the card, you must do whatever it says.
There is another phrase called "after you act," which replaces "after the encounter." It means that after you make all checks, including recharge checks on spells you played, and have gotten to the point where you could resolve the card, you must do whatever it says. When you reach the resolution step, such as determining if a card is undefeated, you are no longer acting.
There is yet a third, far less frequently used phrase called "while you act," which replaces certain occurrences of the rare "during the encounter." This will define things that are true only while you're acting. For example, a card may do Poison damage before you act, and Fire damage while you act. ("During the encounter" is still used for things that are true for the entire duration of the encounter, from the moment you turn over the card until you evade or resolve it.)
Thanks for the update Vic. I know you all worked long over this. It is appreciated.
I just want to chime in that I like the extra "Act" term being used.
I know it's already been said, but one of the major things that is confusing many people is the use of a single term for multiple separate meanings. Like you "Encounter" a card, which is when you flip it over and read it and apply any effects that happen when you "Encounter" a card.
Then, after you "Encounter" a card, if you do not evade it, you have an "Encounter" which is when you deal with the before/during/after effects of dealing with the card along with any other effects the card, itself, does during that "Encounter", such as checks. So you end up having an "Encounter" after an "Encounter."
Multiple meanings for an actual game term can confuse people greatly.
Another one that is confusing some people is the use of "Step" because your turn is made up of "Steps" (Advance the Blessing Deck, Give a Card, Move, Explore, Close a Location, Reset your Hand, End Your Turn), and also, Encountering a card is made of up "Steps" (Evade the Card, Apply 'Before the Encounter' Effects, Attempt the Check, Attempt the Next Check, Apply 'After the Encounter' Effects, Resolve the Encounter), yet the rules specifically state that each player may play one card per type per "Step".
So you end up having "Steps" within "Steps", and even those second set of steps (The Check) has its own steps, but they were named "Actions" in the Attempting a Check section of the rules.
The "One per type per step" has been moved to sections about an Encounter specifically (thus fewer people are confused) but it still uses the actual game-related term of "Step" so some people are still led to believe that this means that you can only play one and only one blessing and one and only one ally to explore extra times on your turn since it's the "Explore 'Step'," thus limiting you to one card per type.
So, sometimes, however much it might be dreaded, adding a new game term can improve people's understanding instead of confusing them more, especially when the added term takes over one of the multiple meanings of a game term already in place that is causing confusion all on its own.