You may bury a card to add 1d10 and the Electricity or Force trait to your Strength, Melee, or Arcane check; if the check has the Attack trait, you may recharge the card instead.
The way I read this, this means Crowe can only recharge the card if he is actually playing a spell, as I think that is the only way to get the Attack trait on a check. So, basically the recharge only really comes into play after Crowe has added the Arcane skill with a power feat (or if he really wants to banish his spells).
The other players interpreted it in a way that the recharge can be used if the buried card has the attack trait, because "otherwise the ability wouldn't make sense". That doesn't fit the reading of the power, though, I think.
So, what is it?
And are there ways to get the Attack trait on a check other than playing a spell?
You are reading it correctly. The check you are adding 1d10 to must have the attack trait. The traits of the card you are using to pay the cost of the powers doesn't matter.
Off the top of my head, I'm not sure if anything can add the attack trait to a check, but I wouldn't count it out.
There are some spell-like items that have the Attack trait and call for an Arcane check, such as the Ring of Force Missiles. Attack is something you usually get off combat spells, though.
Also, don't underestimate the banish; as Chad reminded me, 1d10+3d4 (or 1d10+1d4+2d6 if it's Scorching Ray) isn't bad in a pinch.
What the other players are trying to do is actually something on the Mauler role card: "if the check ([] or the card) has the Attack trait, you may recharge the card instead."
Don't believe Chad's lies! 1d10+3d4 (cost - Banish 1 card, Recharge 1 Card) is pretty awful compared to 1d12+1+1d10 (cost: bury one 1 card). And that's with no weapons.
Unless you need the Magic trait. You can punch Karsos for 1d12+1d10+1 Electric Force Melee all you want, but you won't defeat him that way. (Unless you also recharge Sacred Prism.)
But yeah. It's actually situational as to which is preferred. Maybe you want to banish the spell so that you can shuffle other spells around or something.
If I have a spell and no weapon, I'd rather take the 1d10 + 3d4 with associated costs. Banishing a basic spell is typically no worse than burying it, and I don't mind recharging cards if I need to cycle my hand (for instance, if I don't have any weapons in my hand and want to draw one).
Also: 3d4's average of 7.5 is exactly the same as the average roll of d12+1, and 3d4 has much less variance. You know what you can't do with 3d4 that you can do with d12+1? Roll a 2.
If I have a spell and no weapon, I'd rather take the 1d10 + 3d4 with associated costs. Banishing a basic spell is typically no worse than burying it, and I don't mind recharging cards if I need to cycle my hand (for instance, if I don't have any weapons in my hand and want to draw one).
Also: 3d4's average of 7.5 is exactly the same as the average roll of d12+1, and 3d4 has much less variance. You know what you can't do with 3d4 that you can do with d12+1? Roll a 2.
- If you start a sentence with "if Crowe has a spell but no weapon," you are already ignoring a major weakness. the 3d4 assumes you have a specific card in hand.
- 3d4 is only better than 1d12+1 if variance works in your favor. If you need a DC of 10 or 11, then you would rather have 3d4. If you need a 14 or 15, you want the 1d12+1.
- 3d4 also assumes you wont use blessings. Because once you throw in a blessing, it isn't even close.
- The spell option can only be used once, the other option is repeatable.
There are a few corners cases when Crowe might want to use an attack spell without the arcane skill, but they are incredibly few and far between.
3d4 is any 2d4 spell (ie, all Basic damage spells) plus 1d4 Arcane - just a slight correction.
I guess none of them ever played Amiri, ...
That is certainly true, we've previously played through RotR without using Amiri, and have just started on WotR yesterday.