I thought it'd be an easy thing to scrounge up a little information on this subject. Failing that, I hope that it hasn't already been addressed a thousand times over somewhere.
Blessing of Pulura allows for a recharge to ignore the Abyssal or Corrupted trait on a card until the end of your turn. The wording, however, makes me believe that only the character playing the blessing gets to treat the targeted card as if it did not possess the Abyssal or Corrupted trait. Yet I recently heard a convincing argument that has instilled some doubt--and perhaps just a tiny amount of insanity (see below).
Who gets to do the ignoring in a party? And for that matter, what're legally targetable cards? Cards in others' hands? Cards removed from the game? Or even in other peoples' box sets? What about cards that haven't yet been released? (For personal reasons, I'd prefer to leave alternate realities out of this.) But really, what is Pulura's deal?
Thanks,
Spiritually Confused
if a card tells you to ignore something, the thing you’re ignoring never has any effect.
I am pretty sure the targeted card can be any card you can see at that moment. So, in your hand, in someone else's hand, displayed in front of you, displayed in front of someone else, the top card of the blessing discard pile, a card being encountered, pretty much anything.
And given Mike's quote of the golden rule, you ignoring it means it has no effect on anyone.
Pulura is the CG angel empyreal lord of constellations, homesickness, and northern lights (Chronicle of the Righteous p20). Not really sure flavor-wise how you'd get the ability to ignore Abyssal/Corrupted from her as none of her boons really do anything related to that (closest is the ability to cast interplanetary teleport once per day), but maybe it's just due to her being an angel or something.
Flavor aside, it seems to me that the ability would only impact you, e.g. you get to ignore those traits but nobody else does. I say this because the sentence is worded as an imperative statement, which means the implicit subject of the sentence is the 2nd-person "you" and not "everyone". Ninja'd by Mike which seems to indicate otherwise, so this card is better than I first anticipated as it lets someone else ignore a corrupted card in their hand or play a corrupted blessing when the top card of the blessings discard is corrupted. This reading makes sense flavor-wise (only impacting you is a rather selfish thing and something I'd expect out of a corrupted blessing, not a blessing by an angel) but I just couldn't come up with a rules reason to make it work that way. Seems there is one after all :)
As for scope, I'd say it impacts any card that makes sense to target with the ability. Targeting a card in someone's hand, a location card, or the top of the blessings discard pile makes sense. Targeting a card in the box or the 3rd card down in the location deck does not (except maybe if you examined the top 3 cards so you know what they are, but even then if you had to shuffle the deck how do you know which is the card you targeted and which is possibly a 2nd copy of that same card in the location deck).
However, Vic might have a different answer. The Golden Rule would just be where I'd look first. (It always is.)
As for targeting cards you can't see... well, I'm guessing that'd open up a whole barrel of goblins.
maybe it's just due to her being an angel or something.
This right here.
...As for targeting cards you can't see... well, I'm guessing that'd open up a whole barrel of goblins.
Hi Mike, hope you had a nice GenCon.
This is where I realize that we are really playing it the hard way on our side of the pond :
... any card you can see at that moment... in someone else's hand
CHEATER! You are not supposed to see in someone else hand!
As for targeting cards you can't see... well, I'm guessing that'd open up a whole barrel of goblins.
Absolutely! OK, seems legit that I can target a card displayed...
But can I target a card while it is revealed (shouldn't you finish what you started first, hence the card is not revealed anymore?)?Can I target a card that was discarded (or only the one on the top of the discard pile)?
One that is being played (e. g. about to be discarded/banished)?
As you say Mike, very good candidate for the weekly can o wormygobs contest...
Holding some more thoughts on this one...
I feel confident you can target any card that's being played (revealed, discarded, whatever). I do not think you can target a card that was previously discarded or buried.
...As for targeting cards you can't see... well, I'm guessing that'd open up a whole barrel of goblins.Hi Mike, hope you had a nice GenCon.
This is where I realize that we are really playing it the hard way on our side of the pond :
... any card you can see at that moment... in someone else's handCHEATER! You are not supposed to see in someone else hand!
I just know what is in everyone else's hands when they play. Even without looking, being in the same game, or even the same room or country with them. I just know...
As for targeting cards you can't see... well, I'm guessing that'd open up a whole barrel of goblins.Absolutely! OK, seems legit that I can target a card displayed...
I think that, if ignoring the Corrupted trait would have an impact at that moment, you can target that card. So...
But can I target a card while it is revealed (shouldn't you finish what you started first, hence the card is not revealed anymore?)?
Sure, the amount of time that it takes to put it back in your hand is up to you. So do it slowly and let me have enough time to play Pulura.
Can I target a card that was discarded (or only the one on the top of the discard pile)?
If something said "If the top card of your discard pile has the corrupted trait, discard 1 card" then I'd say you could play Pulura right then to ignore the trait. (EDIT: Though maybe I'm wrong on that given what Mike just said.)
One that is being played (e. g. about to be discarded/banished)?
I'd say "I'm going to play this card, but it has the corrupted trait. Anyone got a Pulura to help me out here?" And hopefully you'd say "Sure. I've got one."
Thanks both of you for the quick answer. Especially as you must be tired.
Interestning points on this one.
I can see pros and cons on a few cases so I'm certainly not the one to propose a definitive answer. I guess it's up to Vic at some point and until them, whatever is fun will do.
Our group has been 'blessed' to end up on the same side of most rulings, but this one generated some interesting opposing arguments. Most importantly, we wanted to be sure about who in the party gets to join in on the 'trait snubbing'.
skizzerz, my own feelings are kinda just like yours: I was leaning the one way due to how I was interpreting the wording, but if it is meant to operate the other way...then it seems like an impressively swell blessing. Especially activating the ignore effect on a recharge. Perhaps I'll have a better feel for its usefulness after seeing how often the situations come up throughout the AP. However, with the way our group plays, it's already going to be pretty useful.
For example, sure there are some decent arguments that the game can feel a bit stacked against large parties. Yet, having experimented with both large and small groups, we're discovering distinct advantages in our group of 5. In our large group, the freedom and willingness to specialize seems to add enough weight to more than counter what typically ails big teams. Most of our characters, in fact, are designed to fair pretty poorly as solo characters. Our Enora carries no attack spells and no evasion spells; only buffs for the real heroes. This has been working great, too. She actually seeks to explore as little as possible, even giving away blessings to Crowe in exchange for his arcane spells to boost her spell cycling and self healing. Her given exploration is generally used only in areas without barriers and monsters, or when the party examines for her.
Therefore, the threat of Carrion Golem ambush remains nil save for special conditions. And Fiendish Trees present less hazard than one might expect. For, attack and evade spells are considerably more 'conditional' than buffs, and the former can sit in your hand. However, with 4 other party members, Enora can so liberally cast (/heal herself) on teammates that there is usually little left in her hand for the trees when they come out. In fact, if the group begins to anticipate that a blind explore in a location with barriers is imminent that round, she knows to cast away in advance, and can legally do so. Yet, as nice as this is, the Demonic Hoards remain an issue. This is chiefly because, if they group up on her, even if she can withstand the damage, the barrier remains undefeated. And this has gotten in the way of progress. Early on, our party leader had thusly ordered her to carry 2x--in case of hoard--holy water grenades. Yeah, that sounds like a waste of item slots, but it ends up more cost effective than the party blessing her through a demonic fistfight. Still, even this waterlogged effort sees Enora shying away from Abyssal locations. Pulura, Goddess of Grenades (among other things apparently), might have some welcome input here.
(Incidentally, our Enora admittedly has a weak turn of her own, but she's always a big part of everyone else's, so it seems more fun than it might sound. Our divine-types certainly don't mind E's x2 Sagacity spells for recharging their cures, among other buffs. And overall, even considering the price of having to look out for her, she still seems to bring party performance up to be hugely worth it.)
Also, thank you kindly Mr. S, and Mr. s, and everyone, for that bit of clarity. It is appreciated. I suppose that we will be playing Blessing of Pulura as if the party may ignore the traits, unless, as you say, Vic, or perhaps yourself, Mr. S, return with a different ruling.
I just know what is in everyone else's hands when they play. Even without looking, being in the same game, or even the same room or country with them. I just know...
Now knowing this, I'll try to be more considerate. Sorry for before.
Sure, the amount of time that it takes to put it back in your hand is up to you. So do it slowly and let me have enough time to play Pulura.
Reading this made me laugh even more than reading the above, for some reason...
Edit: After rereading this post, that sounded worse than I intended. Imagining Hawk's satirically meta-y solution of slowing down the rate at which the card is played (complete with super slowed down sound fx), just so that a legal enough window is presented to get the most out of the B.o.P., was what I thought was pretty funny; serving also as a too perfect symbol of the odd abstractions that can occasionally happen with these kind of fun games. Of course, not so funnily put as Hawk's way. But I'm working on it. >.>
Why am I know under the impression when I play PACG that there is always an invisible hawk on my shoulder spying on my cards?
Strange and weird....
I feel confident you can target any card that's being played (revealed, discarded, whatever)...
Can someone at Paizo immediately attend to the very ill person formerly known as NotThisMike?
GenCon seems to have exhaust him: he spent the last 3 years explaining to me that PACG was nothing like MTG and especially that cards werE resolved one after in order with no notion of stack or interrupt.And then suddenly YES WE CAN interrupt something being revealed.
Cool...
But get well soon Mike, you are scaring me...
:-)
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mike and I will need to chat about this, but I'm on the other side of it. That power of Blessing of Pulura has an implied you. So you get to ignore the trait, but other people don't.
Imagine that the top card of the blessings discard pile has the Corrupted trait, and you encounter a monster that says "If the top card of the blessings discard pile has the Corrupted trait, you may not play a spell on this check." You play Blessing of Pulura to ignore the Corrupted trait on the top card of the blessings discard pile, so you get to play a spell. And then your buddy plays a Blessing of Abraxas ("After you play this card, if the top card of the blessings discard pile has the Corrupted trait, discard a card"). He doesn't get to ignore the trait, so has to discard a card.
It's possible that the wording in the Golden Rule should be adjusted to "if a card tells you to ignore something, the thing you’re ignoring never has any effect on you."
Interesting argument. Well, it shall be sorted out apace.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
And for that matter, what're legally targetable cards? Cards in others' hands? Cards removed from the game? Or even in other peoples' box sets? What about cards that haven't yet been released?
The rules say "You may not activate a power or play a card that doesn’t apply to your current situation," so you can't play it to ignore something you're not actually able to interact with.
Cool.
Thank you for working on this.
Our people are very curious about this one.
Exactly like Jimmy said... this is indeed a VERY interestning one.
I must admit that Vic's version, although it limits the capability of Pulura, seems to me more easy to rule and play.
This said, we may still need something to clarify the perimeter of cards that can be affected (may not need to change the wording of any card but an example in the FAQ would be welcome):
- card displayed?
- face-up cards in a deck (and what about discards?)?
- card currently being played by you or another?
Thanks again guys to work on this one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vic already answered the scope question with the rules quote "You may not activate a power or play a card that doesn’t apply to your current situation,"
What does apply to your current situation you may ask? I'd say it'd be anything where ignoring the Abyssal or Corrupted trait would have a game effect, wherever that may happen to be. These examples are assuming the eventual resolution for "who does it affect" is going to be "only you" -- further cases are valid if everyone gets to ignore the trait.
- You can play it on a Corrupted card in your hand so that you can later play said Corrupted card without having the corrupted downsides.
- You can play it on the top card of the blessings discard pile if it is a Corrupted blessing to ignore that fact, which can have impacts on playing your own Corrupted blessings or other powers that care about the top card of the blessings discard.
- You can play it on a location card with the Abyssal trait to make it no longer Abyssal, which means any cards with the Outsider trait that you encounter there retain that trait.
- You can play it on a card you are encountering such as the Monkey's Paw which says "If you fail to acquire this card, and it has the Corrupted trait, bury a card."
- Anything else where there would be a gameplay impact by you personally ignoring the Abyssal or Corrupted trait on a card, no matter where that card may be. This could be a card in another player's hand that they are about to play, a card in a discard pile, a buried card, etc.
As to whether or not you can "interrupt" a card with the blessing, I'd lean towards no. PACG doesn't have any notion of a stack but it does have the "finish one thing before you start another" rule, so I'd say you'd need to play the blessing on the card before you play the card itself in order to ignore the traits on it.
Thanks skizzerz.
I suppose I was being a bit silly and overboard about the legally targetable cards issue. Sorry if that wasn't obvious; plus that point is just a fun concept to ponder, perhaps even for future mechanics. But our main concern that we're excited to have resolved is about who gets to do the ignoring. As I understand it, this matter is still under consideration.
As for the verdict, we are happy either way. We just wanna play it in accordance with the intent of the power, and usually we can determine this fairly well on our own. This one was tough for us, however.
In some cases that came to mind, being able to recharge Pulura so that a teammate can also ignore the Abyssal or Corrupted trait seemed to align well with the 'spirit' of the blessing's power. Yet in other cases, allowing it to work this way felt a bit odd or even more powerful than was intended. Vic addressed some of these concerns well in above posts.
So unless I misunderstood something, my curiosity remains...curious.
Thx. =D