Personally, I think I'd say that attempting to close in that situation is all happening during your first exploration. Each exploration doesn't end until all the things that happened because of that exploration are fully resolved.
I think that's correct. That's how we played it for that card, and for blessing of baphomet too.
If the close attempt was triggered by defeating a henchman, yes: the close is part of resolving the henchman encounter, and therefore part of the same exploration.
If the close attempt was triggered by an empty deck... I don't know if that even counts as an exploration.
|
If the close attempt was triggered by an empty deck... I don't know if that even counts as an exploration.
It doesn't count as an exploration if the location is empty and you're attempting to close. If you had explored and encountered the last card of the location, the exploration step gets finished. Then you would move onto the Attempt to Close an Empty Location step. (The exploration step is voluntary so if the location is already empty but not closed, you can't actually have an exploration step. However, a healer might use that exploration step to use an innate healing power.)
If the close attempt was triggered by an empty deck... I don't know if that even counts as an exploration.
Attempting to close your empty location is a separate step of the turn, after the exploration step(s). I can see how a summoned henchman might be your first encounter of the turn but there's no way it would count as an exploration.
If the close attempt was triggered by an empty deck... I don't know if that even counts as an exploration.It doesn't count as an exploration if the location is empty and you're attempting to close. If you had explored and encountered the last card of the location, the exploration step gets finished. Then you would move onto the Attempt to Close an Empty Location step. (The exploration step is voluntary so if the location is already empty but not closed, you can't actually have an exploration step. However, a healer might use that exploration step to use an innate healing power.)
That's all I needed. Thanks! :)
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you're attempting to close because on your first exploration you defeated a henchman that immediately allows you to close, that close attempt is still part of your first exploration.
If you're attempting to close because the deck is empty, that's not part of an exploration at all.
I agree. The group I played organized play with over the weekend disagreed with me though, and we just went with the majority vote. But yeah, I feel like it would count as the first explore still.
I was one of those people that got it wrong at PaizoCon. Not sure if it was your table or not. Thankfully 1-1A's first explorations are helped instead of hindered now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering ThreeEyedSloth was at KublaCon and not PaizoCon...
So that'd be a no, then. Got it. :)
Also, do the "who you are" rules apply to other players in the case of "your first exploration"?
I'm thinking of Blessing of Baphomet on a check where multiple people have to defeat it (eg TREES) or the Cultist if the non-exploring player encountered it.
I ran into both situations at PaizoCon I believe. I think in the situation where the non-exploring player encounters a Cultist of Baphomet, they're not even exploring so it can't be their first explore.
Blessing of Baphomet says "Discard this card to add 2 dice to any check attempted during the first exploration of a turn" (as opposed to "your turn") so it would apply no matter who was making the check, as long as it was during the first exploration. So if someone encountered Crazed Cultists during their first exploration, Blessing of Baphomet is adding 2 to everyone's check to defeat their Cultist.
The Cultists of Baphomet cares about whether it is your first exploration, so I'd say others encountering one during someone else's first exploration don't apply that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Blessing of Baphomet says "Discard this card to add 2 dice to any check attempted during the first exploration of a turn" (as opposed to "your turn") so it would apply no matter who was making the check, as long as it was during the first exploration. So if someone encountered Crazed Cultists during their first exploration, Blessing of Baphomet is adding 2 to everyone's check to defeat their Cultist.Wow! That seems unintended :D
Oh. To be clear, I didn't mean 1 Blessing of Baphomet would get everyone 2 dice. A Blessing of Baphomet would still need to be played during each actual check in order to apply to that check. It probably would have been more accurate to say "So if someone encountered Crazed Cultists during their first exploration, on any check to defeat a Cultist, Blessing of Baphomet would add 2 dice."
Yeah, I was gonna contradict you with the "any" but I figured that was just some ambiguous phrasing, not that you thought it was some kind of super blessing. :D
My Adowyn has almost exclusively Baphomets right now (3x and 1 Shelyn). It's not exactly Hrushuha, but it's versatility is pretty high (even given it's exploratory restrictions). I assume it's a little more valuable in our two player games, where using Blessings on explorations is less necessary (as I understand it? though truthfully, we play allies/blessings for explorations pretty aggressively)