Hi everybody - as a "shadowy lurker" I usually just lurk around here and read through all your posts - so far I never had to ask anything, the rules seemed clear or if something was unclear was answered here on the forums shortly after anyway. So thank you for that, all of you PACG-players!
I have a question regarding the discard/recharge power of Harsk as Arbalist (role card).
One of my friends plays Harsk in our round and on the card it says "When you would discard a weapon that has the Ranged trait for its power, recharge it ([]or put it on top of your deck) instead."
So, since you have either weapons that you have to discard at some point and some that you may recharge, from my understanding the discard power is a more powerful one, since you have to discard the weapon and not recharge it.
But I'd also say that it is more powerful or useful if you can put a card on top of your deck instead of discarding or even just recharging it.
The recharge-power on the role card is clear: instead of discarding a card, put it on top of your card (or recharge it - but I'm interested in the "put on top-part".)
Why is it, that I can put a card on top if I use the discard-power (which I'd say is most of the time the more powerful option) than if I use a "weaker" recharge power - where my power doesn't help me at all, I just recharge the card normally.
I don't really understand it. Is there a reason behind it that I haven't realized yet? Or does the card suggest that you can put every (ranged weapon) card on top as soon as you recharge it?
I mean, the card or the rule is clear: instead of discard, recharge/put on top of your deck. I don't have a problem with that, we can use it like that. But I have a problem understanding the reason why I shouldn't be able to put a card on top if I only would recharge it.
Thanks in advance for your input!
I'd say that if the ranged weapon instructed you to discard it, you can't put it on top of your deck. That seems pretty clear.
As for why, well, I can't say for sure. Are there many ranged weapons that recharge? I know the return throwing axe does. But nothing else is coming to mind. Maybe there is more, but it seems most of them have to be discarded. That means the power would work with most of the ranged weapons.
I'd say that if the ranged weapon instructed you to discard it, you can't put it on top of your deck. That seems pretty clear.
You mean recharge?
Well, the wording is clear, yes. So that's the way we handle those weapons/that power.
The Allying Dart, (Venomous) Dagger and Returning Throwing Axe do have recharge powers.
But I don't really see a pattern regarding the weapons.
For example: Allying Dart + 1. It says "you may additionally discard this card to add another 1d4".
Or Venomous Dagger +2: "you may additionally recharge this card to add another 1d12 with the Poison trait."
Returning Throwing Axe +1: "you may additionally recharge this card to add another 1d6."
Shock Longbow +1: "you may additionally discard this card to add your unmodified Str. die...".
Helping others with those weapons also doesn't follow a clear pattern.
Allying Dart: "You may recharge this card to add 1d4+1 to a combat check made by another character at your location."
Shock Longbow: "If you are proficient with weapons, you may discard this card to add 1d4 with [...] to a combat check at another location."
Venomous Dagger can't help other characters but yourself: "When playing another weapon, you may discard this card to add 1d4+2 with the Poison trait to the combat check."
So with some weapons you can help other characters and have to recharge it - or discard it (and in this case put in on top of the deck instead). Other weapons help you with extra damage - again some by recharging your card, others by discarding it (and again putting it on top of your deck).
I'd say that if the ranged weapon instructed you to discard it, you can't put it on top of your deck. That seems pretty clear.You mean recharge?
Yup, it's a bit confusing.
Card says recharge - can't put it on top of your deck.Card says discard - can put it on top of your deck.
I'd say that if the ranged weapon instructed you to discard it, you can't put it on top of your deck. That seems pretty clear.You mean recharge?
Yeah. Typo on my part. If the card's power is recharge, it can't go on the top of the deck.
|
For starters, it mostly limits it to only working on the base power of the weapon, instead of the special features like assisting other players and adding dice when playing a weapon. I can count on one hand I believe how many ranged and non ranged weapons use recharge for their base power, and probably on two hands how many use recharges at all.
Honestly, the amount of text might be part of it. The base feat would still be there, and the extra feat would go from "([] or put it on top of your deck)" to something like "([] whenever you recharge a ranged weapon for this power, or for that card's power, put it on top of your deck instead)"
You'd have to basically rewrite the entire feat a second time to account for powers that recharge by default. That's more text than is needed for to account for powers that aren't that common.
For starters, it mostly limits it to only working on the base power of the weapon, instead of the special features like assisting other players and adding dice when playing a weapon. I can count on one hand I believe how many ranged and non ranged weapons use recharge for their base power, and probably on two hands how many use recharges at all.
Honestly, the amount of text might be part of it. The base feat would still be there, and the extra feat would go from "([] or put it on top of your deck)" to something like "([] whenever you recharge a ranged weapon for this power, or for that card's power, put it on top of your deck instead)"
You'd have to basically rewrite the entire feat a second time to account for powers that recharge by default. That's more text than is needed for to account for powers that aren't that common.
Or phrase it like this:
"Put a weapon that has the Ranged trait at the bottom ([] or top) of your deck when you discard ([] or recharge) it for its power."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it, that I can put a card on top if I use the discard-power (which I'd say is most of the time the more powerful option) than if I use a "weaker" recharge power - where my power doesn't help me at all, I just recharge the card normally.
I don't really understand it. Is there a reason behind it that I haven't realized yet? Or does the card suggest that you can put every (ranged weapon) card on top as soon as you recharge it?
I mean, the card or the rule is clear: instead of discard, recharge/put on top of your deck. I don't have a problem with that, we can use it like that. But I have a problem understanding the reason why I shouldn't be able to put a card on top if I only would recharge it.
The answer you don't want:
You can't because it doesn't say you can. It's a card game. Things like that happen.The answer you want:
Because the things that recharge like that are not crossbows, which is what we think Arbalists use most of all. So we didn't feel a strong need to make that exception available.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't because it doesn't say you can. It's a card game. Things like that happen.
It's only monday and we have a candidate for Mike's quote of the week.
How many time in the old D&D RPG had I to answer questions like "why can't I...". Bad answer : it's the rule. Less bad answer : cause the DM said so. Pretty good answer : it's magic. Good answer : you lose one round holding that thought, and the monster rolls a 20. Best answer : cause it's fun.
The answer you don't want:
You can't because it doesn't say you can. It's a card game. Things like that happen.The answer you want:
Because the things that recharge like that are not crossbows, which is what we think Arbalists use most of all. So we didn't feel a strong need to make that exception available.
Ah, excellent! Thank you for your answer! I really appreciate it.
I clearly want both answers, although I already knew the first one - and I don't have a problem with it - or (almost) any rules in a game that is.Though the second answer now also makes it comprehensible for me, thank you Mike.
Happy to help!