I'd just like to preface this by saying I'm pretty sure I understand the Rules as Intended here, but I'm a little dubious on the wording.
Meligaster's Egositist Role allows him to modify one of his powers thusly:
"On your first ([ ] or any) check on any turn to acquire an ally, add 2; you may instead do this if that check is to defeat a monster."
I'm pretty sure "Or any" is supposed to allow Meligaster to use that power on any of his checks to acquire an ally or defeat a monster, but I don't understand how it works grammatically.
"On your first check on..."
-> Becomes? ->
"On your any check on..." (nonsense grammar)
"On any check on..."
"On your first, or any, check on..."
"On your first, or any check on..."
I feel like most of those interpretations actually come to a different conclusion. That it either applies to his first check, or it applies to any check. As in, "Any" check, not "Your any check", which makes no sense, but any check by any player.
Can Meligaster really add 2 to any check, on any turn (which implicitly means by any character) against every monster and ally? I'm pretty certain that's not the intent, but that's how it reads to me by most grammatical rules, unless I'm overlooking something.
P.S. This role card also has a spelling mistake. "When you would recharge, discard, or bury an ally from yor hand for its power..."
I agree it's ambiguous.
It's not clear if the power with the feat is:
"On any of your checks on any turn to acquire an ally...[or] to defeat a monster."
or
"On any check on any turn to acquire an ally...[or] to defeat a monster."
The first would add +2 to every check Meligaster makes to acquire an ally, and grant Megalister the option to add +2 to any check he makes to defeat a monster. The second would grant the same powers for any such checks made by any member of the party.
Note that contrary to your "Can Megalister..." question, there's no indication the power applies to "any check...against every monster and ally"? The power only applies to checks to acquire allies and to defeat monsters. That's certain. But exactly whose checks the power with the feat applies to - that's not certain.
Note that contrary to your "Can Megalister..." question, there's no indication the power applies to "any check...against every monster and ally"? The power only applies to checks to acquire allies and to defeat monsters. That's certain. But exactly whose checks the power with the feat applies to - that's not certain.
Sorry, I miswrote that. I was caught up in the hyperbole of the possible table-wide significance of the power feat (that I believe does not line up with RAI), and I didn't catch my own wording.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems pretty clear to me.
I don't see how you get "on your any check". The check boxes always add extra text, they never replace text. That knocks out a bunch of your sentences. The final text is:
"On your first or any check on any turn to acquire an ally, add 2."
and the intended grouping is:
"On your (first or any) check (on any turn) to acquire an ally, add 2."
A second trick to interpreting it, is that adding the extra words cannot change the parsing of the sentence to something inconsistent with the original parsing. I think that knocks out some of your other possible interpretations.
I think the only alternative that's still plausible then is this:
"On ((your first) or (any)) check (on any turn) to acquire an ally, add 2."
But, if that was the intention, they would have written this:
"On your first ([ ] or on any) check on any turn to acquire an ally, add 2."
I'm quite confident that it only works on Meligaster's own encounters is the RAI, but I still think the wording is grammatically invalid, where "OR" should allow for a replacement of terms.
"On your (first or any) check.."
Means that "On your any check.." should be grammatically correct, but it is not.
"On (your first or any) check..."
Means that "On any check..." is at least grammatically correct, but I'm certain is unintended.
I think you're being too mechanical with your grammar. Yes, as a general rule of thumb, each member of an "or" (or "and") group should make sense on its own, but if you're just going to apply it mechanically then you'll find it's not a hard and fast rule. For example:
"A ten or higher of diamonds would win the trick."
->
"A higher of diamonds would win the trick."
"An eight o'clock alarm or earlier would wake me up in time."
->
"An earlier would wake me up in time."
As another example, I think the following wording would be unambiguous but still has the problem you describe:
"On your first ([] or any subsequent) check on any turn..."
I think the current grammar is a little awkward but I'd still consider it valid.
I stand corrected. Don't know what I was thinking, really. Irgy's right, choosing a feat should just add the feat's text to the sentence.
Clearly, sometimes that works better than others.
The bottom line is a request for official input: after Meligaster takes this power feat, is +2 added to every check the entire party attempts to acquire allies, or just to every check Meligaster attempts? Same question for the optional +2 buff to checks to defeat monsters.