Ambush question.

[csouth154]

Not sure if this has come up:

If undefeated, you are instructed to examine the location until you find a monster, then encounter it, subtracting 1from each die rolled in "your check".

My question is: Does "your check" mean ANY check required by that card, or just the check to defeat?

Intuitively, it seems that "your check" is referring solely to the check to defeat, since it seems to imply a singular check, Ambush doesn't know what monster is going to be encountered, and the one check guaranteed to be required by any monster is the check to defeat. If it wanted you to subtract from any check required by the monster, I feel it would say "any checks" or "all checks". Has there been a clarification on this?

[Firedale2002]

I'd agree with you in that to me it also seems like the intent of the card was that the subtraction to each die happens for the main check(s) to defeat, but the lack of the text "to defeat" leaves that open for interpretation, as does the "to your check" not being "to all checks against it" or "to your check(s)," etc.

I suppose the easiest counter would be "What if you encounter a villain with more than one check, by your interpretation, you'd only apply the penalty to just one of them and not both." so the wording should perhaps be read as "to your check(s)" by default, which would then imply that it counts for all checks and not just the check to defeat.

So this is a perfectly valid question to me that can use some clarification, as I can see both sides of the argument easily being correct.

[csouth154]

It SEEMS to me that they were referring to the check to defeat, and that they intend for it to apply to all checks to defeat in the case of monsters that require more than one, but they just didn't consider those when composing the card text. Basically, I think what they wanted to say was "check to defeat", but they left out the "to defeat" part. Definitely need a clarificarion on this one.

[Captain Bulldozer]

I tend to agree, I'm fairly certain the check being described is the "check to defeat. However, even if we can all agree on that, there is still another related question: what about a monster with multiple checks to defeat, like a villain? If they had used the phrase "the check" rather than "your check" they'd have been specifying a unique check which receives those modifiers, so in that case I would tend to lean towards it applying to just the first check to defeat, but what if the character who encountered the ambush does not attempt that check? The phrase "your check" does imply a singularity, but that may not be the intended interpretation.

Thematically, an ambush would mean you're weaker against the initial onslaught, not necessarily against later attacks.

Good catch on this one csouth! Should make for an interesting discussion.

[Mike Selinker]

Noted.