RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
1) I would say you generate the amount of damage first (it's WHEN you take damage, not BEFORE you take damage) so you would roll the 1d4+1, and then you can choose to increase it by 1.
2) You would finish everything needed for the check first, so if you failed against a monster you would take any needed Combat damage, then you'd draw the card. This would happen BEFORE any "after you act" powers and BEFORE any "if undefeated" conditions, though.
3) You would be able to use it once for each check that a character at your location is making, so you could potentially use this power six times if all six of you at the location failed the check and were dealt damage as part of that.
No wonder you're struggling, as the power itself is ambiguously worded (imho).
A) The first reading (yours), is that it applies to ANY damage, that would not be dealt if Urgaz hadn't failed whatever check (such as BYA powers).
B)The other reading is, that it specifically refers to CHECKS TO DEFEAT A MONSTER (CtDM) (with possible other corner cases that work like the CtDMs) - i.e. checks that specifically deal as damage the value difference between their target and your roll. Your Q2 and Q3 are part of the reasons I subscribe to this reading (see below)
That said, the possible answers to your Qs are:
1A) What cartmanbeck said. Not that there is an *express* rule saying so, but my reading is - before you roll that d4, you have NOT yet generated the damage to be dealt - so you have nothing to add the +1 damage to.
1B) You would never run into this, as you'll always be dealt a specific amount of damage by a failed CtDM
2A) This question is only an issue in reading A), as this reading includes failed CtD against Barriers, or failed BYA checks and the like;
The problem is, those checks don't DEAL damage. You roll the check, see the result, determine succeess/fail, the check is OVER! Only THEN you get dealt damage, as a *consequence* from failing the check.
Hence, you're not dealt damage "WHEN you fail a check" (which implies some simultaneous occurrence), but only after the check is done - which is my argument for reading B)
Still, IF we go with reading A) - again, you must first "generate teh damage" (say, roll the d4) so you can "increase it by 1". At this point, you must finish resolving the damage (playing damage reduction powers, etc.), before you proceed to resolving the "draw a card" power.
2B) "Taking damage" (from a failed check to defeat) is very specific Step that is PART of the check itself! So, obviously, "after the check" you have already been dealt the damage - and you're only left with the "draw a card" to resolve.
3A)As always in PACG, when events occur simultaneously - YOU choose the order of resolving! HOWEVER, do note that this means: pick a character, determine the damage, increase-or not- the damage, draw a card; Then pick the next character, etc..
It does NOT mean: you roll damage for all characters, the select the order in which they'll take that damage, you'll apply your power, etc..
3B)In reading B), the only way this power works with other characters is with monster powers like "Damage dealt is dealt to each character at this location." If that is the case, you still get to pick the order of characters, just like above.
I'll quote Urgraz's power here for posterity to resolve Longshot's claim of ambiguity:
When a character at your location is dealt damage when you fail a check, you may increase the damage by 1 to draw a card after the check.
I view this to be very similar in templating to (e.g.) Damiel's power that lets him recharge Alchemical cards instead of banishing them if they were played for their power. In the Damiel case, it was a two-part test:
1. Was the card played for its power?2. Was the card banished?
If both are "yes" then Damiel's power applies. It does not matter whether the power itself has you banish the card or whether some other effect has you banish it.
In this regard, I view Urgraz's power as a two-part test as well:
1. Did you fail a check?
2. Was a character at your location dealt damage?
If both are "yes" then Urgraz's power applies and you can increase the damage dealt by 1.
This means that Urgraz's power applies to powers such as "Before you act, succeed at a Dexterity or Acrobatics 10 check or be dealt 1d4 Electricity damage."
If it was intended otherwise, I would expect that Urgraz's power would specifically mention "check to defeat" to remove any doubt that it is limited. The phrasing right now is too similar to other powers such as Damiel's for me to view it as limiting.
Given that, cartmanbeck is largely correct. I'll go into a bit more reasoning behind his answers:
1) You roll first before deciding whether or not to use Urgraz's power or any other powers that impact the amount of damage you're taking. For example, if you are dealt 1d4+1 Combat damage, do you decide whether or not play your armor before you roll or after you roll? In every table I've seen, it's after you roll and therefore after you know exactly how much damage you'd be dealt.
2) You draw the card after the character taking damage finishes resolving whatever dealt that damage, but before anything else happens. I'll go through two scenarios here to illustrate:
2A) Urgraz is fighting a Carrion Golem and fails his Check to Defeat by 3. As a result, he would be dealt 3 Combat damage. Urgraz uses his power to increase the damage to 4 so he can draw a card. He first discards cards to the damage, and then draws afterwards before handling Carrion Golem's after you act power.
2B) Urgraz is fighting a card with the power "Before you act, succeed at a Wisdom or Perception 8 check or you take 1 Poison damage and this card is evaded." He fails this check, so he can increase the Poison damage to 2. He draws the card after dealing with the 2 Poison damage and shuffling the card back into the location deck, as Finish One Thing Before You Start Something Else instructs us to finish dealing with the full consequences of failing that BYA check before we do something else (draw a card with Urgraz's power).
3) When things happen simultaneously, the table chooses the order that they're applied. So you can order people simultaneously taking damage from the same effect to give you the most beneficial outcome. Longshot is correct in that you fully resolve the damage for one character before moving on to the next.
Well I saw this yesterday but had no idea how to answer. But, that's not going to stop me sniping at details in other people's excellent answers...
I'll quote Urgraz's power here for posterity to resolve Longshot's claim of ambiguity:
When a character at your location is dealt damage when you fail a check, you may increase the damage by 1 to draw a card after the check.
so you could potentially use this power six times if all six of you at the location failed the check and were dealt damage as part of that.
It says "when you fail a check", so other people at your location failing checks of their own would not trigger this ability.
I'm also dubious about the idea of using it multiple times from one failed check, even in cases where there's one check but it deals damage to each character at your location. Because it says "when you fail a check", and "when you fail a check" only happens once. But, this templating of "When X when Y" is unique as far as I know (it probably isn't really but first I've seen it) so there's no clear precedent for how to interpret it.
The power also seems terrible to me but that's a whole other story :) I can see that it interacts with armour it's just that "draw a card" has never excited me a great deal (I'm sure Yewstance loves it though).
[...]The power also seems terrible to me but that's a whole other story :) I can see that it interacts with armour it's just that "draw a card" has never excited me a great deal (I'm sure Yewstance loves it though).
*Swoops in*
I'm touched that you thought of me. :)
I'm currently playing an Urgraz in AD5 of Season of the Righteous, and I've used the power probably about once an adventure, if that. Too contextual on things happening to him, rather than him doing something to exploit it. Too reactive, rather than proactive, which usually massively limits a power's usefulness. Especially since his other power is so helpful for preventing him from failing checks in the first place, by adding a bonus 1d6+X to all of his checks, if he's capable of sufficient healing (pretty easy in Hell's Vengeance 1).
As a complete aside, however, he's one of the most issue-laden PFSACG characters, in my opinion, since it's trivial for his Tyrant role to break the game post-role. After Redemption; hand off Book of the Damned to someone, have them shuffle back Xd4 blessings into the blessings deck (where X is the number of players), then bury any card in your hand to retrieve the Book of the Damned with your role powers. Also combos with Suurlahetas to freely search an entire location deck and take your pick of boon every turn in a similar manner.
If you want, he can combine the Book of the Damned trick with Desecrate and you can finish an entire scenario without the party ever needing to encounter a card (besides the villain).
And even without those problem cards, his ability to ignore banishment/bury costs over and over is still incredibly exploitable with dozens of cards, from Holy Candle to Consecrate to Emerald Codex and many similarly templated cards (both Loot and nonLoot).
Onto the topic at hand, though, I also feel it's a slightly unclear power. I share the consensus of the forum thread, but I feel like I'm a little unsure on how it interacts with corner-case BYA checks, ones that can cause damage to you if you fail, but not always. I can't think of a good example right now (though I definitely remember thinking about this when I saw some particular bane), so let's present a hypothetical. If a henchman said "Before You Act, succeed at a Wisdom 10 check. If you fail, you are dealt 1d4 Combat damage or this henchman is evaded." then are you taking the damage from failing the check or from making a choice that's presented to you after it?
Or failures that can involve multiple instances of damage, even to a single player, like Toxic Geyser. Can you increase the damage of each instance of damage by 1 apiece for a draw after each? With Stone Skin up, that's a lot of potential draw power. It's been ruled before (see Valeros) that powers that list "When" are not limited by the once-per-check rules of normal powers, but there's a certain leap from 'multiple instructions being carried out amidst a check' to 'taking 2 damage X times'.
Link to card as shown in this blog post: https://static2.paizo.com/image/content/PathfinderACG/PZO6823-UrgrazCharact erFront.jpg
When a character at your location is dealt damage when you fail a check, you may increase the damage by 1 to draw a card ([]or by 2 to draw 2 cards) after the check.
I think y'all are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. I'm sure that my thoughts below won't clear things up any. ;)
1. Urgraz fails a check.
2. A character at Urgraz's location (it could be Urgraz, it could be someone else) takes damage as a result of the failed check. Interrupt the normal sequence of events with the following...
3. Increase the damage by 1 ([]or 2)
4. Resolve the (increased) damage normally.
5. Urgraz draws 1 ([]or 2) cards.
6. If multiple characters at the location are dealt damage as a result of the failed check, perform 2-5 for each character.
7. ...continue with the normal sequence of events.
To directly answer Richard Cox 502's questions:
When do you decide whether or not to increase the damage? I'd say that's up to the group to decide. Personally, I'd play it iron man and make the decision before a random damage roll is made (but I'm kind of a jerk that way ;) ). If your group would prefer to make the decision after the roll, I don't see anything wrong with that (my wife, the other half of my usual playing group, would probably prefer that solution).
When do you draw the additional card(s)? After the increased damage is resolved.
Do you get to increase the damage and draw cards if multiple characters take increased damage as a result of the check? I'd say yes. The wording of the power is "when a character at your location" so applies "when" (which is multiple times in this instance). If the power were worded "When you fail a check and any characters at your location are dealt damage..." I could see limiting it to one time since you're only failing one check. As worded, though, the power applies when a character is dealt damage as a result of the failed check.
Ultimately, this is a power that provides for some very interesting tactics, allowing a group to take advantage of situations (characters with immunity/resistance to damage, characters able to deal with damage through reduction, characters with few/no cards in hand) to allow Urgraz to draw a card or two. Say Urgraz is at the Guard Tower and has to encounter the Bandit henchman (Rise of the Runelords). First, he has to recharge a card. If you're not playing Brigandoom!, you're down a card. Let's say that for whatever reason, Urgraz only has a weapon and an armor in hand. Normally, you might want to recharge the armor and keep the weapon, hoping to defeat the henchman. With this power, though, you can recharge the weapon with a plan to fail the check. You then increase the damage by 1 ([]or by 2), recharge the armor to reduce the damage, and draw 1 card ([]or 2 cards). You then continue on with your turn. And this works great if, for whatever reason, Urgraz doesn't have any cards (either at the start of the turn or after recharging the card BYA when the Bandit henchman is encountered). There are also plenty of ways to get healing to mitigate increased damage (for those times when you actually have to get rid of cards as a result of the damage).
I gave a combat check result as an example (since failing a combat check results in damage). There are plenty of other failed checks that result in damage (lots of barriers, BYA powers on monsters, etc.). Urgraz provides a neat way to make lemonade out of lemons.