| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Suffering Damage" on p13 brings us the following quote:
Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same source, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit.
This is all well and good, but how does this work when multiple characters suffer damage during an encounter or a check? Reading just that passage, it would seem that each character has their own limits on the damage instance. So, if a monster caused all local characters to suffer 1 Fire damage before acting, Valeros could use an armor to reduce his damage and Seelah could also use an armor to reduce her damage. Or, if fighting a monster that did damage to all local characters (such as the Cyclops in Skull & Shackles), Valeros and Seelah could again each play an armor on themselves to reduce it.
However, we have the following rule as well, in "Suffer Damage, If Necessary" on p12:
(Remember that collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon during a check, so if someone already played a spell on the check, a spell can’t be played to reduce damage.)
This seems to contradict what was stated on page 13. Note that this is a "reminder," so the same logic would apply whenever playing cards is restricted (such as the restriction during each step of an encounter). Let's take the Cyclops example from earlier, and say that Valeros is fighting such a monster, and fails his check to defeat by 4. This means that if Valeros plays an armor to reduce his own damage, Seelah is unable to play an armor to reduce her damage and is required to take the full amount. It would also mean in the before acting example, only one player total could play an armor, since it would be the one armor allowed in the Before Acting step of the encounter. Everyone else would be forced to take full damage (unless they have other means of reducing it such as a spell or item).
Can we get some insight into how this is supposed to happen?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you for this thread, Skizzers. This issue had been a bugbear of mine for ages and I had frankly given up hope that it will be resolved definitely.
Let's hope it get caught in the revisionist wave and this time get fixed :)
A good post, and good thread. I'm in support of more clarity.
My reading is that the "one card type per check/step" limitation is meant to apply separately to each instance of damage, with 'each instance' defined as something like "damage from the same source, to the same character, in the same step". Once you change who's receiving the damage, dealing the damage, or the step that it takes place in, you can use armor (and other card types) once again, or in some cases even re-use an card that was used beforehand (because we can consider it equivalent to a new step).
If 2 people take damage from a dragon's firebreath Before Acting, they can each raise a Shield of Fire Resistance to allay it. If a Dragon then damages one of the characters in combat or After Acting, armor can be played again.
However, if it's the same card doing the damage, the same character taking the damage, and it's the same step of play, then even if there's multiple different points of damage you could not (by my reading) play multiple armors non-freely. Basically, I read you can't re-reveal the same Shield over and over to prevent the different elemental damage dealt by the Elemental Arachnid. Nor would you be able to reveal 4 different non-freely shields to prevent the 4 individual points of damage because you've played your one-armor-per-check limit (it's still the same source, same target, same step) except that the Elemental Arachnid has a power that lets you do exactly that.
Actually it raises another remark. After rereading the Core rules I realized that the whole "Attempting a check" (pages 11 & 12 of rulebook) is a single step (for purpose of the one boon of each type limitation partywise).
This means for example that if I had a location/scenario/hour power that says "When you attempt a check, suffer 1 damage; if you fail to defeat and acquire during that check, suffer 1 damage", both would happen during the same step so I would not be able to benefit of an armor for both of them. It seems.
Now the fun fact is, if it was worded as : "When you attempt a check, suffer 1 damage; if you fail to defeat and acquire during that check, suffer 1 additionnal damage", I'm pretty sure my players would argue that a single use of an armor reducing by 2 points would be possible.
Anyway, bottomline is skizzerz's question in OP has to be answered.
My reading is that the "one card type per check/step" limitation is meant to apply separately to each instance of damage, with 'each instance' defined as something like [i]"damage from the same source...
Actually, one of the things I want solved in a resolution is an official definition of "source of damage":
- is it a single card?
- is it a single power?
- is it a single instance of "suffer" within the same power (so "Before acting, suffer 1d4 Combat damage, then 1d4 Poison damage" would be TWO sources of damage)
I want to point out something that people (I, certainly) seem to have missed, which actually radically changes the game on damage, RAW - the game currently actually DOES have TWO definitions of "source". However, they are:
Glossary, p.31:
"Source: A thing that makes you suffer damage or a scourge. See Suffering Damage on page 13."
- the definition as a "thing" is so ridiculously nebulous, it's useless.
So, let's see what Suffering Damage, p.13 says:
"When you suffer damage from a source such as a monster or a location..."
So, the current Rulebook, in no uncertain terms specifies that "source of damage" is a CARD - with all the repercussions of not being able to play the same boon types for BA, failed combat and AA damage. I'm willing to bet that's not the INTENT - but there it is.
Actually, one of the things I want solved in a resolution is an official definition of "source of damage":
- is it a single card?
- is it a single power?
- is it a single instance of "suffer" within the same power (so "Before acting, suffer 1d4 Combat damage, then 1d4 Poison damage" would be TWO sources of damage)
So, the current Rulebook, in no uncertain terms specifies that "source of damage" is a CARD - with all the repercussions of not being able to play the same boon types for BA, failed combat and AA damage. I'm willing to bet that's not the INTENT - but there it is.
I would argue there's no difference between your first two suggestions. Whether card or power, I struggle to think of a pre-existing bane where the distinction would somehow have a relevant ruling - unless there's some bane with multiple powers that all affect you during the same step.
To be clear - I stand by my previous reading, that the only time you'd be limited from playing two non-free cards of the same type is if there were two incidences of damage from the same source, to the same player, and in the same step. Which also means you'd absolutely be able to play armor BA, on the check to defeat, and AA.
That said, there's some deep RAW analysis here - I like it, and I'd love further clarity. I think the intent is clear, if not the wording.
I would argue there's no difference between your first two suggestions. Whether card or power, I struggle to think of a pre-existing bane where the distinction would somehow have a relevant ruling
It would matter in conjunction with skizzer's rulebook quote above:
"Suffering Damage" on p13 brings us the following quote:
Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same source
So if "source" is defined as a CARD as opposed to a power - that means you get a *single* Armor against the entire card - BA, CtD, AA.
We both know that can't be the intent, but it's certainly what the rulebook is telling you right now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rulebook defines source as a card. So if the same card does multiple instances of damage in a single step, the party can only play one card of each type across all of those instances. It is not per instance. Nowhere do the rules say that each instance of damage is a separate “step” that resets the “which type of cards have already been played” track.
Indeed, the rulebook indicates the opposite due to the reminder on p12. It says if a spell easy played on the check, a spell can’t be played to reduce damage from failing said check. This means you do in fact look at what cards were already played during the same step, even if they were played outside of the instance of damage affecting you.
As such, the RAW very clearly disagrees with Yewstance’s claim. However, I feel that cannot possibly be the intent (it’s nonintuitive and needlessly punishing), so that is why I’m pushing for an official FAQ to correct the rulebook. If the RAW is indeed what was intended, the rulebook could still use more clarity in that regard in the p13 paragraph.
My ideal resolution would be something like the following:
On page 8, replace "powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit." with "powers that can be played freely and boons played while suffering damage do not count toward this limit."
On page 12, replace "(Remember that collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon during a check, so if someone already played a spell on the check, a spell can’t be played to reduce damage.)" with "Boons may be played to affect this damage even if a boon of the same type was previously played on the check."
On page 13, replace "When you suffer damage from a source such as a monster or a location" with "When you suffer damage from a source such as a power on a monster or a location"
On page 31, replace "Source: A thing that makes you suffer damage or a scourge." with "Source: A power or effect that makes you suffer damage or a scourge."
The rulebook defines source as a card. So if the same card does multiple instances of damage in a single step,
Genuine question: where do you and Yewstance get that the rules, as currently written, even *care* about steps? Way I see it, if "source" is defined a card (as opposed to powers - and powers are what happens in different steps of the encounter!) - then, if you're allowed "no more than one boon of each type... for the same source" - that's 1 in TOTAL - for all the BA, CtD, AA, Resolve the Encounter and any other step that could be invoked by the same card?!?
The rulebook defines source as a card. So if the same card does multiple instances of damage in a single step,Genuine question: where do you and Yewstance get that the rules, as currently written, even *care* about steps? Way I see it, if "source" is defined a card (as opposed to powers - and powers are what happens in different steps of the encounter!) - then, if you're allowed "no more than one boon of each type... for the same source" - that's 1 in TOTAL - for all the BA, CtD, AA, Resolve the Encounter and any other step that could be invoked by the same card?!?
That is part of the same paragraph of "When you suffer damage from a source such as a monster or a location, you and other characters may only do things that reduce or otherwise affect the specific damage type you’re suffering." So, the context of that restriction that you quoted is "When you suffer damage from a source", indicating that the restriction applies each time you suffer damage, not once across multiple damage powers. I edited my previous post to add some suggested rulebook changes, and more cleanly addressed this as part of that to make it less ambiguous as well. That being said, I think the rules are decent enough here to argue that RAW lets you play an armor against a before acting power, and again after an after acting power.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, I've been unexpectedly distracted by non-game life since last Wednesday (and will continue to be until next week). And Mike and some other folks are already off to Origins.
I've pinged to get some attention on this, hopefully faster, but it might not be until next week for both Mike and Vic to do the rules arbitration. (As always, I am not the rules arbiter for this game. That way I can just chat freely... _except_ for issuing statements that might be taken as official rules ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks Keith.
Note for self: Keith has a non-game life. Who would have guessed ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We’ve received confirmation from Vic elsewhere that it’s being discussed. From past experience with rules issues like this, it may be some months before we get an official resolution, as there are a lot of things to work through to ensure any new wording sufficiently addresses this issue without introducing any new ones.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My current theory is that anytime you are suffering damage, you need to be absolved of any per-step limits and held only to the limits imposed by the Suffering Damage rules.
Feel free to try that out and report back.
Speaking only for myself (and similarly muddled individuals), it might be useful to know how the designers want armor - and other sorts of damage prevention, if needed - to actually work in practice. With a handful of brief examples, if possible.
My rules-parched brain has trouble parsing the suggested phrasing, so knowing the intention would be useful to me personally. If nothing else, just so I can tell other people how we should be playing.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is still being worked out, but I think the only limit we want while suffering damage is something like this: "Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same effect, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit."
So if a monster says "Before acting, suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage, then 1 Electricity damage, then 1 Fire damage," that would be four effects, so you could use the same card type (or even the same card) to prevent each.
And if a monster says "Before acting, each character suffers 1 combat damage," each character could use armor to reduce their damage.
Are there any other situations that aren't obvious from that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[...] "Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same effect, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit."
So if a monster says "Before acting, suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage, then 1 Electricity damage, then 1 Fire damage," that would be four effects, so you could use the same card type (or even the same card) to prevent each. [..]
It solves all issues raised in this thread, though I would personally prefer that your listed example would describe one effect, not four.
For me, if it's all damage caused by a single power on a card (even the same sentence); then it's intuitive to me to treat it as a single effect.
This appeared to be the design intent in Mummy's Mask, since Elemental Arachnid had that same power with the caveat of "You may play any number of armors during this encounter", which presumably was meant to allow you to play, for example, an armor, a helmet and a shield to reduce some of the instances of damage (since it certainly didn't let you play the same armor multiple times).
I also think it slightly limits possible future design. If a Before-Acting effect is trying to demonstrate something with the same power as a Firebreath attack, but comprised of multiple elements (prismatic spray, etc), then I would assume that the design would look something like Elemental Arachnid, for simplicity's sake.
"1d4+1 Fire Damage" becomes "1 Fire, 1 Acid, 1 Cold, 1 Electricity", or something like that.
The difference is that a mere level 0 helm can entirely nullify the latter, but provide little protection to the former, even though from a 'story' sense, they may be trying to portray attacks of a similar magnitude. By the numbers, the 4 total prismatic damage is bigger than 1d4+1 on average, in fact; but it's trivial to ignore with a variety of armors or items that let you reveal or draw them to reduce incoming damage by 1 (or more).
That's mostly just me complaining about an absolute edge-case, though - effects that do multiple instances of damage in the exact same power are exceptionally rare and will likely always remain so. By and large, I am happy with what you're suggesting, though I consider that edge-case to be unintuitive to treat as 4 distinct effects.
This is still being worked out, but I think the only limit we want while suffering damage is something like this: "Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same effect, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit."
So if a monster says "Before acting, suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage, then 1 Electricity damage, then 1 Fire damage," that would be four effects, so you could use the same card type (or even the same card) to prevent each.
And if a monster says "Before acting, each character suffers 1 combat damage," each character could use armor to reduce their damage.
Are there any other situations that aren't obvious from that?
Hum... Indeed that really reduces the impact of encountering a nasty card like Elemental Arachnid and I somehow regret it. Especially now (I mean post-Core) that you can display a bunch of armors. If I can do with a single one, it seems something is missing (Yewstance said it differently but I think we point in the same direction).
Elemental Arachnid and the like were the main reason you wanted to add armor card feats. With that new ruling, I fear armor card feats will lose interest (I mean as soon as you already have one).
Except maybe for Valeros :-). Something I really enjoy in post-Core is as I play Valeros, a key part of my game is to distribute armors to the other characters. Now if they only need one armor each, any character can pretty much avoid anything... That feel too strong...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same effect, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit."
So if a monster says "Before acting, suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage, then 1 Electricity damage, then 1 Fire damage," that would be four effects, so you could use the same card type (or even the same card) to prevent each.
To me, this doesn't seem "obvious" at all. Indeed, these two sentences -to me- seem to directly contradict each other.
The issue being - "effect" (as well as "source" formerly) isn't defined *anywhere*. Only from your example I can infer you mean "effect that deals damage" to equate with "instance of damage" (which is the best and clearest wording I can come up with), as opposed to a whole "power that deal damage". So, basically what Yewstance said.
Despite the Elemental Arachnid pointing to the intent being different before, I'm perfectly OK with this rule change - I just believe it should be spelled out very clearly, not leaving players with another conundrum, to ponder what an "effect" or "source" is.
Yeah... was so in old when before you act damage and after your act damage required different way to be reduced... or Are we asuminen that the redusing armor is Display to reduce type and because of that can be used multible times?
All in funny thing. This vs only one card / step rule seems to contardict each other but what I know ;)
So official ruling and a catecismusm how to interpret these ruling would be nice!
I’m with Longshot in that I wouldn’t necessarily interpret “effect” to mean “single instance of damage.” I’d interpret it to mean either a power as a whole or an instruction/sentence within that power. I’m not overly worried about the above concerns with making such banes easier as it’s always possible to make use of grammatical differences like “suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage” as two effects vs “suffer 1 Acid and 1 Cold damage” as one effect, but I think whatever terminology you end up using should be unambiguous as to intent.
...it’s always possible to make use of grammatical differences like “suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage” as two effects vs “suffer 1 Acid and 1 Cold damage” as one effect...
In my face-to-face PACG groups (OP and non-OP), I can guarantee that these two sentences would be treated identically. It wouldn't occur to the average PACG player that the intent might be otherwise, I don't think.
These are the types of fine distinctions that are lost on non-expert players, which is why examples in the rulebook can be so valuable.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
The issue being - "effect" (as well as "source" formerly) isn't defined *anywhere*. Only from your example I can infer you mean "effect that deals damage" to equate with "instance of damage" (which is the best and clearest wording I can come up with), as opposed to a whole "power that deal damage". So, basically what Yewstance said.
See the Glossary: "Effect: Anything that happens in the game. Powers often cause multiple effects."
What you are thinking of as an instance (which is not a game term) is an effect (which is a game term). Coupled with the example, that seems pretty clear to me...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is still being worked out, but I think the only limit we want while suffering damage is something like this: "Collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect damage to the same character from the same effect, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit."
This solution (as well as basically every other one I've seen floated so far) still doesn't cover the situation of failing a check to defeat a monster, where you're still supposed to be held to the restrictions from the check. I'm kinda starting to think that'll have to be either a special exception or changed.
Other than that, I think it works.
|
He may be thinking about things like this:
Discard this card to roll a 1d10 instead of your Dexterity die.
Let's say I play that on my check against a bane. I fail to defeat the bane, so it does 1d4 of damage to every local character.
If the only limit on damage reduction is what you quote above, then it looks as though I would be able to play a different Armor to reduce the damage I was taking. Presumably that's not what you intend. (Or maybe it is ..)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
John has the right of it except my gender but let me give a clearer example.
Say you're fighting a monster (any monster, it doesn't matter) and you have a Spiked Breastplate and a Half-Plate displayed. You recharge the Spiked Breastplate to add a d4 to your check, roll, but still fail by 2. You are therefore taking 2 damage, and if you are absolved of all other limits when taking damage, you could draw the Half-Plate to reduce that damage to 0. My understanding has always been though (and the Core Set rulebook confirms) that since you used armor during the check against the monster, you are not supposed to be able to use another armor to prevent damage resulting from failing the check.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
See the Glossary: "Effect: Anything that happens in the game. ... Coupled with the example, that seems pretty clear to me...
Please don't take this as a personal jab, but I really think "X is ANYTHING" is the opposite of "clear". When -as also evidenced by Yewstance and Skizzers' posts above- it's enough to trip up experienced veterans, what hope is there for casual players to get it right?
Yes, the second sentence of the Glossary definition tells us that powers "often" cause multiple effect - but when we lack proper definition of effect - how are we to know what's a singular effect and what are multiples??
I guess what I'm looking for is a definition of the sort:
"Effect: A single attempt at manipulation of a card, hand, pile, deck, location or character pawn. Powers often cause multiple effects, which are separated by a comma or semicolon and the word "then". For example, the power "Before acting, suffer 1 Acid damage, then 1 Cold damage, then 1 Electricity damage, then 1 Fire damage." is comprised of four effects" .
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"A single attempt at manipulation" isn't any more meaningful, nor is it anywhere near accurate.
An effect really is "anything that happens in the game." Every single thing you are told to do or that you choose to do is an effect. An effect can be the result of any rule that causes anything to happen, any power or part of a power that causes anything to happen, any action that causes something else to happen, any inaction that causes something to happen, and even the result of the result of any action that causes something else to happen. It can even be a thing that causes other things to specifically NOT happen. Really, any thing that happens in the game.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
John has the right of it except my gender but let me give a clearer example.
Say you're fighting a monster (any monster, it doesn't matter) and you have a Spiked Breastplate and a Half-Plate displayed. You recharge the Spiked Breastplate to add a d4 to your check, roll, but still fail by 2. You are therefore taking 2 damage, and if you are absolved of all other limits when taking damage, you could draw the Half-Plate to reduce that damage to 0. My understanding has always been though (and the Core Set rulebook confirms) that since you used armor during the check against the monster, you are not supposed to be able to use another armor to prevent damage resulting from failing the check.
That will be useful for our discussion. Thanks!
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Now I’m thinking the answer is that when you suffer damage, you need to be absolved of the per-step limit (so you can play the same card type to reduce damage during different steps of Encountering a Card, or against multiple instances of damage that happen during your move step), but the per-check limit still needs to apply (so you can’t play a spell to prevent damage when you played a spell to buff the check).
Now I’m thinking the answer is that when you suffer damage, you need to be absolved of the per-step limit (so you can play the same card type to reduce damage during different steps of Encountering a Card, or against multiple instances of damage that happen during your move step), but the per-check limit still needs to apply (so you can’t play a spell to prevent damage when you played a spell to buff the check).
How does that interact with Giants or other monsters that damage multiple characters on a failed check?
Ok we spent the week-end debating and trying things and our feed-back on the whole "limitations" case is that we would really like this:
Sorry for the long post - we wanted to be precise.
GOLDEN RULE ON LIMITATIONS: there are 4 limitating rules:
- When a character is suffering damage, the "damage rule" (see #1 below) and only this one applies.
- When a character is attempting a check, but no one is suffering damage, the "check rule" (see #2 below) and only this one applies.
- During a step except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage, the "step rule" (see #3 below) and only this one applies.
- Between steps except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage, the "between steps rule" (see #4 below) and only this one applies.
By construction you are at any time in one and only one of those 4 cases above.
#1 DAMAGE RULE
When a character is suffering damage:
"If a character power automatically applies when a character is suffering damage, it happens each time; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once to reduce or otherwise affect the different damages resulting from the same SINGLE POWER. Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect EACH INSTANCE OF damage to the same character from the same source, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit. You cannot play the same card twice to reduce or otherwise affect the different damages resulting from the same SINGLE POWER".
Note : The second sentence above allows the party to play a SINGLE DIFFERENT armor against each damage caused by the Elemental Arachnid to a single character. The third sentence ensures the party cannot play the SAME card against each damage caused by the Elemental Arachnid to a single character or against the same damage done by a Giant or Dragon to multiple characters. Note that this contradict the last post from Vic. You could play a spell to protect yourself against the giant and ANOTHER one to protect a local character against the same damage from the giant. Which for us makes sense since it's one of the few reasons why you want more than one armor in your deck.
#2 CHECK RULE
When a character is attempting a check, but no one is suffering damage
"If a character power applies when a specific thing happens DURING A CHECK, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once PER CHECK. Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon PER CHECK; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit."
#3 STEP RULE
Anytime you explore, you start a new exploration step.
Anytime during a step except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage:
"If a character power applies when a specific thing happens, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once PER STEP. Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon PER STEP; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit. During any turn, unless the power or card say so, players cannot play cards or use powers before they start managing the effects of the new hour during the Advance the Hour step. During any turn, unless the power or card say so, players cannot play cards or use powers after the player whose turn it is starts resetting his hand during the End Your Turn step.
Notes: There is a "between steps" between 2 exploration steps (so you can use any number of buuf/cure spells between exploration).
But if you get an opportunity to close your location during your explore, it is still the same step. So unless a check or some damage suffering are involved (see above rules), whatever type of boon was already played during the explore step cannot be played again during the closing part.
#4 BETWEEN STEPS RULE
Anytime between steps except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage:
"ANY PLAYER can play cards and use powers without limit in BETWEEN STEPS, as long as they OR THE RULES don’t say they can only be played at certain times."
Not as simple as I would have wished for, but I guess it covers it all. It will be posted on my gaming room wall until proven guilty.
A few tweaks I would make to Frencois's suggestion, although I like it overall:
* Add to the damage rule "If the damage was caused by failing a check to defeat a monster, no character may play a boon if it is of the same type as a boon THAT CHARACTER played during the check; power that say they can be played freely do not count toward this limit. In addition, no character may play the same boon to reduce damage as they played during the check (even freely)."
This is less strict than the limitations Vic is currently talking about, but still represents a risk involved with using armor to boost checks (or spells, if you have defensive spells).
That one is debatable, but the other ones are just wording fixes.
* "If a character power automatically applies when a specific thing happens, it can be used each time it happens; if this power is on a boon, it does not count as playing a boon of that type. Otherwise, each character power may be used only once [per whatever]" (Spells that display, for example, should also be allowed to trigger multiple times.)
* "You cannot play the same card boon twice to reduce or otherwise affect the different damages resulting from the same SINGLE POWER."
(Obviously though, we are only players and will defer to any rule Vic comes out with.)
Thanks foxof,
Good tweaks that I immediately take into account.
Hum.
"If the damage was caused by failing a check to defeat a monster, no character may play a boon if it is of the same type as a boon THAT CHARACTER played during the check; power that say they can be played freely do not count toward this limit. In addition, no character may play the same boon to reduce damage as they played during the check (even freely)."
Does this mean I cannot play the same armor to reduce BYA and AYA damage?
I don't think we want that.
So I'll take your point but will not write it as such.
This is what is currently posted on my wall:
This house rule modifies what card you can play at any time. 30 July 19
LIMITING RULES
There are rules that apply at any time that are not rewritten here. Example:
At any time, you may not use a power that doesn’t apply to your current situation. For example, you may not play a card to reduce damage when damage isn’t being suffered, and you may not play a card to evade a monster when you are not encountering a monster.
Furthermore, there are 5 "rewritten" limiting rules. One and only of them applies at any time
- The DAMAGE LIMITING RULE applies when a character is suffering damage.
- The CHECK LIMITING RULE applies when a character is attempting a check, but none of the characters is currently suffering damage.
- The START AND END OF TURN RULE applies during any round before the end of the Advance the Hour step or after the start of the End Your Turn step, except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage.
- The STEP LIMITING RULE applies during a step, between the end of the Advance the Hour step and the start of the End Your Turn step, except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage.
- The BETWEEN STEPS LIMITING RULE applies at any other time.
1) DAMAGE LIMITING RULE
When a character is suffering damage:
If a power automatically applies when a character is suffering damage, it affects each instance of damage suffered (if this power is on a boon, it does not count as playing a boon of that type.); otherwise, you may use each power no more than once to reduce or otherwise affect the different damages resulting from the same single power.
Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one boon of each type to affect each instance of damage to the same character from the same source, although powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward that limit.
You cannot play the same boon twice to reduce or otherwise affect the different damages resulting from the same single power.
If a character is currently Attempting a Check, you cannot play a boon of the same type as a boon you previously played during the check when no character was suffering damage. Powers that say they can be played freely do not count toward this limit. In addition, you cannot play a boon you previously played during the check when no character was suffering damage, even if the power says it can be played freely.
The party can play a single armor against each instance of damage caused by the Elemental Arachnid to a single character.
The party cannot play the same card against each instance of damage caused by the Elemental Arachnid to a single character or against the same damage done by a Giant or Dragon to multiple characters.
A character can play a spell to protect himself against the giant and another one to protect a local character against the same damage from the giant.
The party cannot play a spell (or armor) to reduce damage if one was already played to boost the check, but they can if the spells (or armors) were only played during previous damage suffering.
2) CHECK LIMITING RULE
When a character is attempting a check, but no one is suffering damage:
If a character power applies when a specific thing happens during a check, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once per check.
Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon per check; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit.
The party cannot play a spell (or armor) to boost the check if one was already played “Before acting”, whether it was during damage suffering or not.
3) START AND END OF TURN RULE LIMITING RULE
Anytime in a turn before the end of the Advance the Hour step, except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage:
Unless the power or card says it can be played at the start of the turn, players cannot play cards or use powers.
Unless the power or card says so, even powers or cards that say they can be played at the start of the turn cannot be played before the players start managing the effects of the new hour.
If a character power applies when a specific thing happens, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once. Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit.
Anytime in a turn after the start of the End Your Turn step, except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage:
Unless the power or card says it can be played at the end of the turn, players cannot play cards or use powers.
Unless the power or card says so, even powers or cards that say they can be played at the end of the turn cannot be played after the players start managing their recovery piles.
If a character power applies when a specific thing happens, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once. Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit.
4) STEP LIMITING RULE
Anytime during a step, between the end of the Advance the Hour step and the start of the End Your Turn step, except when a character is attempting a check and/or suffering damage:
If a character power applies when a specific thing happens, you may use it each time that happens; otherwise, you may use each power no more than once per step. Each character may play any number of cards, but collectively, the party may play no more than one of each type of boon per step; powers that can be played freely do not count toward this limit.
If you get an opportunity to close your location during your exploration step, it is still the same step, so unless a check or some damage suffering are involved, whatever type of boon was already played during the explore step cannot be played again during the closing part.
If the party already played a certain type of boon during the step (even if it was during damage suffering or during a check), it cannot be played again (except maybe during damage suffering or during a check since some other rule then apply).
5) BETWEEN STEPS LIMITING RULE
Anytime not covered by the previous rules:
Any player can play cards and use powers without limit in between steps, as long as they or the rules don’t say they can only be played at certain times.
Anytime you explore, you start a new exploration step.
There is a "between steps" between 2 exploration steps (so you can use any number of buffs ore cure spells between exploration).