If potion is used and discarded instead of banished, what is recharged first?
I don't know that it particularly matters much, but you resolve the potion first I believe. You banish it. Then the Tankard says don't banish it, recharge the potion instead. Recharge the tankard as a cost of saving the potion.
That's how I would interpret the order of operations since you can't "play" the tankard for that power until you have used a potion (first action, resolve what happens to that card first).
I think I'd recharge the Tankard first.
When you would banish a card that has the Liquid trait, recharge this card to recharge that card instead.
The order is on the the card. Recharge this to recharge that. The action is performed before the effect of the power. So the Tankard has to be recharged before you get the benefit, which is to recharge the Liquid boon.
You know something crazy? The Tankard says when you would banish "a card" not a boon. First, it has the "Damiel problem," in that you could use it to acquire a boon you banish for failing to acquire it. I'm not sure that is a problem with this Tankard, since there should only be one in the whole game and you can't do it every time, just when you have it in hand and since you'll have to recharge it, you'll have to get it back around again to be able to to use it again.
But even more interesting, are there any banes with the Liquid trait? If so, Aquamancer Lini could use it to keep Liquid monsters in her deck, (she banishes them for her power). And you could even use them to add defeated boons and banes to your deck, even if just for "health."
I almost wonder if there should be a general rule that, unless you have a power that specifically says you can add banes to your hand or deck, you can't add banes to your hand or deck. Though I guess there isn't too much harm in the Tankard potentially adding Liquid banes to your deck. It might give you "health" but it would also clog your hand with useless cards if you weren't one of the few characters who could use them.
|
I'd actually recharge the potion first. I think it falls under the same discussion we've had recently about kooky replacement effects like recharging a card you just shuffled into your deck.
It makes you recharge instead of banish the potion. You played the potion first, which now essentially says "Recharge this card to...". You played the potion first, it gets recharged first.
Better text for this card would to display it to recharge the potion, then recharge the tankard (which is basically what would happen from the suggested rules addition from that other discussion)
Hawkmoon vs. Challenger Andrew...
... Who will win this tough rules duel?
Lets wait for Vic or even Mike, the referees :)
I think I'd recharge the Tankard first.
When you would banish a card that has the Liquid trait, recharge this card to recharge that card instead.The order is on the the card. Recharge this to recharge that. The action is performed before the effect of the power. So the Tankard has to be recharged before you get the benefit, which is to recharge the Liquid boon.
You know something crazy? The Tankard says when you would banish "a card" not a boon. First, it has the "Damiel problem," in that you could use it to acquire a boon you banish for failing to acquire it. I'm not sure that is a problem with this Tankard, since there should only be one in the whole game and you can't do it every time, just when you have it in hand and since you'll have to recharge it, you'll have to get it back around again to be able to to use it again.
But even more interesting, are there any banes with the Liquid trait? If so, Aquamancer Lini could use it to keep Liquid monsters in her deck, (she banishes them for her power). And you could even use them to add defeated boons and banes to your deck, even if just for "health."
I almost wonder if there should be a general rule that, unless you have a power that specifically says you can add banes to your hand or deck, you can't add banes to your hand or deck. Though I guess there isn't too much harm in the Tankard potentially adding Liquid banes to your deck. It might give you "health" but it would also clog your hand with useless cards if you weren't one of the few characters who could use them.
There are no banes with the Liquid trait - not even water elementals, which are literally made of liquid, have that trait.
I'm going to have to agree with Andrew.
The card clearly says "recharge instead", meaning the word Banish on the card gets replaced to "Recharge".
Since you played the boon (that you would've banished) before the Tankard, that card gets Recharged (and not Banished) and then the Tankard gets to be recharged.
I'm on Andrew's side on this one as well. "Finish one thing before you begin another". The banish is replaced with the recharge, which finishes before you can do the recharge on the Tankard.
OK now we have to build a contest to come up with the best Liquid villain ever... :-)
On a side note, I have the feeling that this "in which order do I position numerous cards in a single deck as a result of a single application of a given power" is a recurring debate on many entries in this forum.
IMHO I would suggest to Mike and Vic to add a generic golden rule such as :
"Anytime you get to add cards in specific position (top, bottom, just under the top one...) in a given deck as a result of a single application of a given power (e. g. : recharge this to recharge that), then [unless instructed otherwise as per the generic Not-this-Mike reminder] the cards must be positionned in a random order at that position (top, bottom...)."
OK this needs to be rephrased in good english, but you get the idea.
I see a TREMENDOUS triple benefit from that rule :
A) Generic, applies everytime, stops all debates.
B) Kills any Damiel-type non-thematic combos by adding a bit of randomness without changing the underlying effects of the involved cards/powers.
C) No FAQ on cards.
... but that's just me (as usual) :-)
Based on the new rule proposition that Vic has mentioned elsewhere concerning the adjustment of cards ( LINKY ), I believe the order of things would be as follows:
1: Banish the potion for its effect
2: Recharge Tankard for its effect
3: Go find the potion that was banished and recharge it (per the effect of the Tankard)
You can't do the effect of using the Tankard unless you've recharged it, so it has to be recharged first before you even start considering the effect whatsoever.
1: Get speeding ticket
2: Go to court to plead your case that you shouldn't get speeding ticket
3: Get speeding ticket rescinded.
Gotta go to court before the speeding ticket goes poof, the speeding ticket doesn't go poof until you're done at court.
I'm in agreement with Hawkmoon on this one. I think the issue is covered by this rules FAQ, which would mean the Tankard is recharged first, then the Liquid card.
Who's to say there won't ever be a Liquid monster in a future deck? I would love that for my necromancer Darago. Hmmmm.... *gets idea for community created card*
There are no banes with the Liquid trait - not even water elementals, which are literally made of liquid, have that trait.But even more interesting, are there any banes with the Liquid trait? If so, Aquamancer Lini could use it to keep Liquid monsters in her deck, (she banishes them for her power). And you could even use them to add defeated boons and banes to your deck, even if just for "health."
I almost wonder if there should be a general rule that, unless you have a power that specifically says you can add banes to your hand or deck, you can't add banes to your hand or deck. Though I guess there isn't too much harm in the Tankard potentially adding Liquid banes to your deck. It might give you "health" but it would also clog your hand with useless cards if you weren't one of the few characters who could use them.
Drat! My second attempt to make Liquid the most powerful trait in the game is foiled, just like my first one.
I'm also with Hawkmoon. "Recharge this card to..." on the Tankard means an immediate recharge to do whatever follows, which in this case is to recharge the potion.
My disagreement stems from the change in cost. The change in the cost is triggered by the Tankard - ergo the cost cannot be paid until the tankard properly resolves.
...This is why cards resolving in the middle of other cards is so much more complicated than the chain/stack method.
But recharging the potion does follow the tankard. Otherwise it's not recharged. Its cost without the tankard is banish.
The bit on the Tankard text that says, "When you would banish ..." refers to when you are allowed to play it. The instruction is still essentially "Recharge this card to recharge another card" and the FAQ is quite clear on that.
Just think about it physically...
When you use a healing potion alone you banish it.
When use a cup such as the tankard, you first play the tankard, get you cup ready, put the liquid in the cup, drink it and recharge the empty flask after the tankard is recharged... The flask is magically refilled!
|
|
"Instead" is a very specific word in PACG.
Sure, you'd banish otherwise, but that never happened. You recharged the potion to play it, as far as the game is concerned the banish cost never existed in the first place. So, it becomes a very simple question - did you play the potion or tankers first? Even if we disagree on the order, we can all agree the potion played first.
MyFly - You can't think about the physically, it doesn't apply. Have you tried going after a skeleton with Caltrops? No chance it works, but it does in PACG because mechanics != reality.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From the FAQ:
Always perform the first action required by a power before performing any other action. For example, if a card says "Recharge this card to recharge a card from your discard pile," recharge the card you're playing before recharging the card from your discard pile.
(The "Tidepool Dragon" FAQ-in-progress doesn't change that—it just ensures that the Potion of Healing is set aside until the Tankard has a chance to affect it.)
So Tankard is recharged first and then the Potion... first you take the cup out, put the potion in there, drink, recharge cup and then the empty flask... as I said...
"Instead" is a very specific word in PACG.
Sure, you'd banish otherwise, but that never happened. You recharged the potion to play it, as far as the game is concerned the banish cost never existed in the first place. So, it becomes a very simple question - did you play the potion or tankers first? Even if we disagree on the order, we can all agree the potion played first.
I see what you're saying: it's as if the instruction on the potion is changed to say "recharge the potion". And of course you're not playing the Tankard first.
I would say that if anything, they are both played at the same time. Going by Vic's Tidepool Dragon FAQ-in-progress, they are both "set aside" as you process their effects. This is how I think of it: in order to recharge the potion at all, you play the Tankard. Now they are both in play. To resolve their effects, follow the instruction on the Tankard: Recharge this card to recharge potion.