I'm curious how often "I die after someone else exhausts the blessings deck" would actually occur. As far as I can tell, it only happens like this:
T-1: The current player encounters the villain. The next player unloads her hand to help, but the villain is undefeated. The current player ends his turn.
T-0: The next player has fewer cards in hand than her hand size, and fewer cards in her deck than needed to draw up, and the blessings deck is empty.
Is that common? Because I can't say for sure that I've ever seen it happen. I'd be curious to find out if people have seen it happen a lot.
|
I'm curious how often "I die after someone else exhausts the blessings deck" would actually occur. As far as I can tell, it only happens like this:
T-1: The current player encounters the villain. The next player unloads her hand to help, but the villain is undefeated. The current player ends his turn.
T-0: The next player has fewer cards in hand than her hand size, and fewer cards in her deck than needed to draw up, and the blessings deck is empty.Is that common? Because I can't say for sure that I've ever seen it happen. I'd be curious to find out if people have seen it happen a lot.
I have seen this twice while playing. And one time it was me that discarded everything until I had just blessings and cards I needed to close my location. And I was sitting in the next position. And we won the scenario in both occasions but now I wouldn't help out if there was the potential I could die from helping if that person rolled bad.
And both times it was a ton of fun throwing everything at the big baddie.
It's also hard to say how often it may have happened in the past because it wasn't something that we really needed to look out for. Now it's something we'll need to make sure we remember since it could kill someone without them even getting a "turn" on the turn in which they die.
They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.
T-0: No cards left in the blessings deck. The next player starts her turn, which begins with "Advance the blessings deck." She goes to flip that last card in the deck, but there isn't one there, so she resets her hand and ends her turn; the scenario ends and the party loses.Why?
So you potentially penalize the person after the last turn of the game? I guess I'm not seeing the reason why this would happen. If she goes to flip the blessing card and there is none, why doesn't she get an actual turn if she's going to take the consequences of taking a turn? Why wouldn't someone be able to cast a Cure on her so that she doesn't die?
This is a potential deal-breaker when helping someone on the very last turn of the game.
Someone could have used Cure on the previous turn. Why didn't they use it then?
As far as why don't they get their entire turn: it's because the rules say so. The game is over and they have to reset their hand. That's that. The party failed to achieve victory and that last person failed to heed the warning of the gods that their blessings were running out.
The player knew the end of the game was near and knew what the consequences would be if they played everything and didn't have enough cards to draw it back, so why should they NOT be penalized?
|
|
They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.
Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
I'd rather play with the way the rulebook is written and allow people to take a chance at the end rather than be scared to try because they could suffer for it without getting a turn.
They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
You play it after the previous player resets their hand. Not so much "before you advance the blessings deck" as "before that guy ends his turn."
|
|
Someone could have used Cure on the previous turn. Why didn't they use it then?
As far as why don't they get their entire turn: it's because the rules say so. The game is over and they have to reset their hand. That's that. The party failed to achieve victory and that last person failed to heed the warning of the gods that their blessings were running out.
The player knew the end of the game was near and knew what the consequences would be if they played everything and didn't have enough cards to draw it back, so why should they NOT be penalized?
(The Cure was a for instance. Let's throw that out because there isn't one available.)
Actually, the rules were just changed. Someone wanted to avoid dying on their turn by advancing the blessings deck. Now it not only affects the person who's turn it is but the next. And they don't even get a turn! They get the effects of the turn end.
You play it after the previous player resets their hand. Not so much "before you advance the blessings deck" as "before that guy ends his turn."They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
Except that they have to be at the same location. Which is a bit less likely than normal since they may be spreading out to close locations.
Now if the doomed character got a real turn, they could move to the cleric and get healed.
To me it seems a bit odd that if both Y and Z empty their decks to help X try to defeat the villain on the last turn, only Y will die if X is unable to defeat the villain, just because Y's turn comes after X's.
|
|
The FAQ was created to stop that specific loophole but it seems to be creating another problem that was not originally in the rules.
Yes, this can be planned for and played against and hopefully these cases are at least somewhat rare.
And honestly, I'd rather have the loophole than have a potential situation where people are afraid to use resources because you might not win. Isn't that the point of co-operative playing? That you want people to throw everything into the pot to try and kill the villain. And maybe the dice gods are laughing this time and you fail.
The person who has the last turn is okay. But hey, you're next in line ... you don't really get a turn but because you don't have enough cards left to draw, you die.
DUDE! Why didn't you tell me that beforehand? I wouldn't have played any blessings to help you.
NOTE: This isn't the normal way things go but I can't say it won't happen on the last turn. Especially in organized play. And sometimes we will measure out tactically so that the challenging happens on a certain turn.
You play it after the previous player resets their hand. Not so much "before you advance the blessings deck" as "before that guy ends his turn."They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
You can't play Cure once you get to the "Reset Your Hand" step of the turn. The only cards you can play there are "end of the turn" effect kind of cards, and Cure isn't one of them.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
Nope. The Advance the Blessings Deck rules say the first thing you do is flip the blessing; that happens before you even apply other effects that happen at the start of your turn. And once you've tried to act on the card that's not there—both before and after this FAQ change—you immediately proceed to the endgame.
This also means that—again, both before and after the FAQ change—if there are no cards in the blessings deck, that last player does not apply effects that happen at the start of her turn. But she will, post-FAQ, apply effects that happen at the end of her turn.
You can't play Cure once you get to the "Reset Your Hand" step of the turn. The only cards you can play there are "end of the turn" effect kind of cards, and Cure isn't one of them.You play it after the previous player resets their hand. Not so much "before you advance the blessings deck" as "before that guy ends his turn."They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
But you have time in between your final exploration and the reset your hand step right?
Valeros explores (cant cure)
Turns over a bane and is now in a encounter (cant play cure)
Go through the encounter step sequence (cant play cure)
Lets say Valeros defeats the bane but can't explore again, can he not play cure here before heading on to the reset your hand step?
But you have time in between your final exploration and the reset your hand step right?
Valeros explores (cant cure)
Turns over a bane and is now in a encounter (cant play cure)
Go through the encounter step sequence (cant play cure)
Lets say Valeros defeats the bane but can't explore again, can he not play cure here before heading on to the reset your hand step?
In that situation, you can play Cure, so long as nothing forced you to reset your hand and end your turn.
You can't play Cure once you get to the "Reset Your Hand" step of the turn. The only cards you can play there are "end of the turn" effect kind of cards, and Cure isn't one of them.You play it after the previous player resets their hand. Not so much "before you advance the blessings deck" as "before that guy ends his turn."They could cure her before she advances the blessing deck. It really isn't much different than going all in before the end if the blessings deck. You're taking a risk and could end up dead as a result. If you aren't comfortable with that, don't take the risk. How often do you not find the villain before turn 30 and not lose due to running out of blessings? In my experience it happened maybe twice.Can you cast Cure prior to Advancing the Blessing Deck?
Huh, I thought there was an "anytime" step there.
Not that it matters except in this specific situation (otherwise you can do it immediately after advancing the blessings deck). But I stand corrected.
...
This also means that—again, both before and after the FAQ change—if there are no cards in the blessings deck, that last player does not apply effects that happen at the start of her turn. But she will, post-FAQ, apply effects that happen at the end of her turn.
Hi Vic,
I'mp confused : the FAQ says that if you start your turn and there is no blessing left, you go to end of turn step directly... shouldn't it be you go to the reset your hand step rather in order to avoid the original issue (i. e. make sure whoever should die because she intentionaly emptied the blessing deck indeed dies)?
And if indeed you reFAQ the FAQ by replacing "end of turn" by "reset your hand", then indeed the "last" player (the one who start her turn with an empty blessing deck) can still play cards at the beginning of the "reset your hand" step (e. g. Cure)... which is nice.
Unless I got something wrong?
|
No, you can't play Cure during the reset your hand step. If something forces you to reset your hand and end your turn, you are done playing cards until after the next player has flipped their blessing, unless a card specifies being used at the end of your turn.
I definitely feel like this shouldn't be how the start of turn flip works. I agree with it for powers and effects, but feel like the FAQ should specify those and exempt the SOT flip. It really does seem wrong that people would be discouraged from helping on a final turn fight, just because it may kill them at the end of their next turn that they effectively don't even get to take.
Rare or not, that shouldn't happen. The ultimatum of "Guaranteed loss, or guaranteed death if another player rolls poorly" should never exist in my opinion. At least, not if the death is the result of you playing cooperatively. Tell me the options are cooperate and lose, or don't and die, I'm ok with that as a rare scenario. You shouldn't have to choose between losing because you didn't play cooperatively, or dying because you did.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?
Playing cooperatively can already kill you. If you burned all your cards on a villain check on the next to last turn, the check fails, and you are the next player, you can die (assuming nobody has a cure handy). This really isn't significantly different. Sometimes you have to take risk and live with the consequences.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
...
This also means that—again, both before and after the FAQ change—if there are no cards in the blessings deck, that last player does not apply effects that happen at the start of her turn. But she will, post-FAQ, apply effects that happen at the end of her turn.Hi Vic,
I'mp confused : the FAQ says that if you start your turn and there is no blessing left, you go to end of turn step directly... shouldn't it be you go to the reset your hand step rather in order to avoid the original issue (i. e. make sure whoever should die because she intentionaly emptied the blessing deck indeed dies)?
You would be correct... except that this makes "end your turn" equivalent to "reset your hand and end your turn" (unless, of course, you are instructed otherwise).
|
|
Playing cooperatively can already kill you. If you burned all your cards on a villain check on the next to last turn, the check fails, and you are the next player, you can die (assuming nobody has a cure handy). This really isn't significantly different. Sometimes you have to take risk and live with the consequences.
Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?
Outside of this though, you have a turn to try and make up for any consequences of not having the cards you just played last turn.
Part of it too is that it never worked this way before, and it's quite a huge change.
Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?
I was thinking this as I was catching up in the thread. I have no problems with something that makes us have to think about how we use our resources, even if it is more of an edge case. It adds one more thing that we have to be mindful of, there is nothing wrong with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?
My thought on it is why, in say a 5 or 6 player game, is it okay for the two people which have their turns directly after the person who comes after the player who drew the last blessing card can freely blow all of their resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, but that unlucky person that comes right after can't? They "start" their turn just to end it and become collateral damage when they just did the exact same thing as the two players who would have come after him.
By this logic, shouldn't all players be forced to reset their hands once no more blessings can be drawn?
Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?
Probably because that is how the game has worked until now. Not saying that is right, but everyone has become accustomed to it being that way.
And I don't agree that it is without consequence. I've seen a situation where people who know that this is the last turn for them will use every blessing/ally to get extra turns to try to find the villain before time runs out. Then they don't have anything left to help the other players with, so they discard their weapon and/or armor to get a better chance to draw a blessing. This isn't without consequence though, you might not draw that blessing you hoped for, or the next player might encounter a skeleton horde, then you fail an easy fight against a summoned skeleton and lose that blessing that you planned to use to close your location or help in the villain fight.
I think it comes down to the mechanic of losing on time is a bit contrived and everyone knows exactly when they will get no more turns. So it seems strange to give consequences to just one of the players. In a six player game, there are 4 other players who can still do this. Seems to me the fix is to change it to :
If you cannot advance the blessings deck, immediately end your turn and ALL players must reset their hands.
This seems more like the correct way to address the issue of using all your resources at the end of the game.
Shhhh....Stop giving them ideas!!!
Shhhh....Stop giving them ideas!!!
Oops, sorry, won't happen again :-)
Shhhh....Stop giving them ideas!!!Oops, sorry, won't happen again :-)
What? I LOVE to give ideas to Mike. And it's free!
I guess an idea that Mike could be given (and then it's his choice, I'm not-not-this-Mike) :Manage so that no one knows when it will be too late (maybe towards the end of the game, rather than just discard 1 blessing per turn from the blessing deck, it could be discard d3-1 during each turn... Guess what, we are gonna try to play it this way, seems fun and more roleplay since it adds some stress and avoid building up min-maxing strategical last turns).
This said, nice FAQ Vic to answer my concerns on reset your end vs end of turn steps. I'm SO happy I am ahead in the contest of "find the can of worms that doesn't kill the game, indeed produces mimimal change, but forces Vic to make the longest errata ever in the FAQ".
Just kidding Vic, I know you guys have been working on the end of turn issue for quite a while...
This said... so proud the little frenchman is ahead in the contest :-)
|
|
I don't like the new FAQ ruling but I feel if the next player is going to be penalized, shouldn't everyone be penalized...the above seems more appropriate...Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?I think it comes down to the mechanic of losing on time is a bit contrived and everyone knows exactly when they will get no more turns. So it seems strange to give consequences to just one of the players. In a six player game, there are 4 other players who can still do this. Seems to me the fix is to change it to :
If you cannot advance the blessings deck, immediately end your turn and ALL players must reset their hands.
This seems more like the correct way to address the issue of using all your resources at the end of the game.
Yeah, I don't agree with the new FAQ ruling and luckily we didn't run out of blessings on either table last night. I am not sure how to explain the new End of Scenario ruling as I don't understand the reasoning behind it nor agree with it. Instead of just closing the loophole that originally caused this, you've stirred something else up. So if you are going to penalize the player after the last actual turn then you should go around and penalize everyone.
On my side I really do like the combine effect of the two new improvement-erratas (blessing desk empty=goto end of turn + reset hand is same step as end of turn) because :
A) It simplifies (one less step to go through is always a simplification, even if we do not count down steps as such).
B) It simplifies (being asked to reset = being asked to end turn).
C) It solves many other issues in addition to the simple "can I run out the blessing deck to avoid dying" in one ruling.
D) It really doesn't hurt anyone once everybody has understand it. If you don't want to die stupidly before the scenario ends, just make sure you don't stay in a situation where end of turns effects could kill you (which you should already be doing even before the new ruling).
E) If you really want to empty the blessing deck (we would never do that since it's so anti-roleplay, but I guess some players do prefer to "play the rules " rather than to "play the game"), there is still many ways to do it.
... And as I said earlier, just add a non predictable end of scenario clock and it will be perfect.
Its all a matter of how you look at it. Say in a 4 player game where there are no effects that allow you to discard a card off the blessing deck, in that case players 1 and 2 will get 5 turns, players 3 and 4 will get 4 turns. The experience for player 2 and 3 under the old system are different. Player 2 can not exhaust their resources the same way player 3 could in the pre FAQ world. I really have no issue with making player 2 and player 3 have to play the same game. The problem now is that players 1 and 4 still get to play under the old rules.
I really like the idea of making all players have to reset their hands at the conclusion of a failed scenario. It makes it so that everybody has to play the same game and that last ditch efforts to finish a scenario before time runs out are risky. Anything that provides a little more risk in this game I am up for.
|
|
If everyone had to reset their hands after the blessings ran out and you fail, I'd support that. That at least makes sense and can be explained. "You lost, so you all take a hit and potentially die, be careful!" as opposed to "You lost, player X is going to take a hit and die because they helped player Y. Player Z and player W have no penalty for helping though, because X drew the short straw".
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its all a matter of how you look at it. Say in a 4 player game where there are no effects that allow you to discard a card off the blessing deck, in that case players 1 and 2 will get 5 turns, players 3 and 4 will get 4 turns. The experience for player 2 and 3 under the old system are different. Player 2 can not exhaust their resources the same way player 3 could in the pre FAQ world. I really have no issue with making player 2 and player 3 have to play the same game. The problem now is that players 1 and 4 still get to play under the old rules.
I really like the idea of making all players have to reset their hands at the conclusion of a failed scenario. It makes it so that everybody has to play the same game and that last ditch efforts to finish a scenario before time runs out are risky. Anything that provides a little more risk in this game I am up for.
I'm with you that if you're going to introduce that risk, then introduce it to the entire party and not just the person who follows the player with the last actual turn. Everyone else should need to have a quasi-turn. (I'm not saying I like this but if this is the way the game is going then it should be everyone or no one.) If you're saying we should manage the risk at the end and not try for that last ditch effort, then it shouldn't be just that next player that has to be careful but everyone.
But here's the thing. I want players to make that last ditch effort. I want them to try to win the game if they can even on that last turn. If they have to spend every card in their hand, I'd rather they do that then hold back and decide to lose instead. But now, it's not worth the risk. I'd rather give up while we have the bad guy cornered than attempt it, fail, and suffer the after-game effects.
And I know it doesn't happen often. I know that encountering the villain and potentially cornering him on that last turn of the blessings deck is rare. But I'd really rather advise them to go for it than tell them to hold back and be safe because the rules just changed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you guys think you should you be able to use all your resources regardless of consequences at the end of the game, when that applies to no other part of the game?
I think that last ditch effort is part of the fun. We're all out of time, this is our last play, its all or nothing, the clock is ticking down... This is the big finish and it should be worth committing every resource you can. Holding back to play it safe should not be your last move.
Our previous instruction from the rule book was that the scenario ends immediately if you need to advance the blessings deck but there are no cards remaining in it. This gave us that freedom to make that last dramatic push and throw all of our resources into the battle. If we win, great! If we lose, I think everyone expected that the current player could perish if they did not save enough resources to be able to end their turn, but no one interpreted the next player to go would also have to complete a turn, without actually being able to do anything. Its that last part that really gets me. I have to take my turn, but I am not able to actually take my turn...
The change that was made seems to be a reaction to someone trying to avoid dying by causing the blessings deck to advance at a time other than the "Advance the Blessings Deck" step. While the change fixes that, it also introduces a very radical change in that all or nothing "last stand" approach.
My suggestion would be to change the scenario end to "If in the Advance the Blessings Deck step you need to advance the blessings deck but there are no cards remaining in it, the scenario ends immediately and your party of adventurers loses." Follow this with "If in any other step you need to advance the blessings deck but there are no cards remaining in it, immediately end your turn." (This would also need to be changed in the "Your Turn" section, currently page 8 in the S&S rulebook.)
This suggested change would have the same effect on cheating the end of turn death for the current player, while keeping the ability for all other players to go all in.
I think what I like about the concept most... especially everybody resetting... is that it really makes that pile of cards that make up your deck even moreso your life. But I do agree that one player should not be arbitrarily told "NO... this is how the game works for you and only you!"
My suggestion would be to change the scenario end to "If in the Advance the Blessings Deck step you need to advance the blessings deck but there are no cards remaining in it, the scenario ends immediately and your party of adventurers loses." Follow this with "If in any other step you need to advance the blessings deck but there are no cards remaining in it, immediately end your turn." (This would also need to be changed in the "Your Turn" section, currently page 8 in the S&S rulebook.)
This suggested change would have the same effect on cheating the end...
This wording is much more specific and, imo, handles the situation a little better.
But if we make the FAQ change apply to all players as opposed to only the next player, it makes there be a punishment for running out of time, making the game more intimidating. Now the person just hiding with no cards waiting for the time to tick out is at risk. This might make the game a bit more challenging than it used to be, which could be either a good or bad thing.
But the rule only affecting a single player just feels unfair, because only one player out of up to 6 is getting hosed. "Everyone go all in for this and we might win! Except you Ezren, you just chill in the corner because you'll die if you play any cards at all even though you're not the only one with a 0 card deck."
Its singling out one player for no reason other than they are next in line, and I don't know of any cards off the top of my head that directly punish someone for simply being the next player (Though I've only played RotR so maybe that's just my inexperience showing). If nothing else in the entire game punishes a player for going next, it would seem like inconsistent design.
That's just my two cents on the issue.
Maybe it would be better to have "Advance the Blessings Deck" as its own out-of-turn procedure. This way, when the next player goes to flip to blessing and there isn't one, then the game immediately ends with no one resetting their hand as it technically is not anyone's turn.
This removes the "unfairness" of singling out the next player, but keeps the danger of a blessing being flipped DURING a players turn (by other effects, of course) and forcing them to reset their hand before the end of the game.
|
|
I think making actions that aren't during any turn is even worse. It just needs to excluded, we don't need to add more parts to the game.
Really, here's the biggest problem. When your character dies in OP, you do to. So now, we're saying if you cooperate and get unlucky, your fellow players have the right to murder you. I feel like that defense won't hold up in court. I want my murder defenses to hold up in court you guys.
I like the idea of "Advance the Blessing Deck and then start your turn," myself.
My main objection to the current wording is that it's an extra little bit of end-game worry. After struggling to make something work out at the last minute, one more character (beyond what feels natural with a 30-turn game), has to check to see if they died. (And, this will be Damiel 95% of the time with our group, since we rarely tweak the blessings deck during the game.)
But, in the end, I can't come up with any better objection beyond "it just feels *weird*," and I'm sure it's such an edge case that it will essentially never make a difference.