The Dunes location from Crimson Throne says the following:
TO CLOSE OR TO GUARD
Acquire the top blessing of the hourglass.
What happens if the top card of the hourglass isn't a blessing?
Is it: (a) closing/guarding the Dunes automatically fails, (b) you keep flipping hourglass cards until you find a a blessing, then put the other cards back, or (c) something else?
This happened to us yesterday in scenario 4A, which has proxies in the blessings deck.
Either it is a card you can acquire (typically a boon), and then you have a chance to close. Either it isn't a card you can acquire and then you cannot close the Dunes during this turn - or you need to find a way to get a boon on top of the hourglass (I just love the candle to mess with the hourglass!!!).
3) if you fail to acquire the blessing, then it seems it is banished (returned to the vault) - rulebook, p. 10, Resolve the Encounter.
I agree on the rest of the points, but I'm not sure about this one. After all, nothing tells you to *encounter* the top blessing (in contrast with a "summon and acquire new blessing" instruction, where the Summoned Cards rule explicitly tells you to encounter the summoned card). RAW, nothing seems to tell you what to do with when attempting to acquire outside of an encounter, so it can be judgement-called either way.
(I do agree intent is probably "encounter and acquire" though; and it can't say "summon" because summoned cards come from the box)
On the spot, we decided that if the top card of the hourglass is a non-blessing you would find the first blessing and put the other cards back. Seems like our guess was correct.
I agree with Longshot, if you fail to acquire the blessing, it would stay on top based on the current wording.
Dang. We initially lost the scenario (timed out), because we were banishing the blessings if they weren't acquired. We don't have anyone with the divine skill in the party (Hakon is our healer), so we repeatedly failed to acquire the "closing" blessings. Over and over and over...
The fact that checks to acquire blessings are now increased by # made the Dunes closing pretty rough. The Dunes was empty of cards; we just couldn't close it.
The fact that checks to acquire blessings are now increased by # made the Dunes closing pretty rough. The Dunes was empty of cards; we just couldn't close it.
Don't get me started on the lick of sense it makes that now friggin' CLERICS struggle to acquire Blessings and it's almost impossible for anyone else... >:(
Ooops indeed I went too fast. It has to be a blessing. For the rest I stick yo my point: you do not SEARCH for a blessing (else the power would tell you to SEARCH for it).
And yes if you fail to acquire it, it stays on top of the hourglass.
Apologies for bringing this thread up nearly a month since the last post, but I happened to be reading through it and noticed some people mentioning "failing" to acquire the top blessing.
There's no check, right? The Dunes says to just acquire the top blessing, so it just goes straight into your hand. How is anyone failing to acquire it?
edit: Okay, I see. Some people feel there should be an "Encounter and" before the acquire.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Acquire = make the check to acquire
Draw = take it into your hand without making a check
You're not doing an encounter. You can't evade it or use other encounter powers. You're just making a check to acquire against the card. If you fail the check, it's not banished (because it's not an encounter)
Acquire = make the check to acquire
Draw = take it into your hand without making a checkYou're not doing an encounter. You can't evade it or use other encounter powers. You're just making a check to acquire against the card. If you fail the check, it's not banished (because it's not an encounter)
Can you quote exactly where the rules say "acquire = make the check to acquire"? I did a search in the pdf rules and found nothing that stated that.
The only thing even close is the phrase "encounter and acquire", which of course means to make the check because that's what you do when you encounter something. Simplying acquiring something means to put it in your hand though. Hence "check to ACQUIRE"... check to put it into your hand.
I'm not trying to be contrary here for the sake of being contrary. I legitimately would like some official evidence that states this is the way it's meant to be played, not just the gut reaction of other players. The other gamers I play with (and I also for that matter) won't be satisfied with a simple, well this guy on the forums says so...
|
Summon and Acquire/Summon and Defeat:
The To Close or To Guard section on some locations requires you to do this.
Summon and encounter the card; if you do not acquire or defeat it, the location is not closed.
While that is speaking specifically about checks to close or to guard, it does spell out that "summon and acquire" means you have to encounter the card.
If a card’s check says “None” or “See Below,” the card’s powers will tell you what to do. If the check is listed as “None” and the power does not state the requirements to acquire or defeat, the card cannot be acquired or defeated.
So to acquire a card,
A) That card needs a check to acquire that isn't "none" or {"see below"+ a below that doesn't state the requirements to acquire}B) and you must succeed at the check (see relevant rule).
Only exceptions are clearly explained in the rules, like for example:
If a power allows you to automatically defeat or acquire a card, you may use it instead of attempting the check. Doing so counts as succeeding at all checks and requirements to defeat or acquire the card. You may not use such a power against any card that does not have a check to acquire or defeat, or against any card that has a check you’re not allowed to succeed at.
Note that if acquire didn't mean succeeding at the check to acquire (as you propose), the first sentence of the above quote would be meaningless. It spells "a power that allows you to automatically acquire a card" not "a power that allows you to automatically succeed at a/all check to acquire a card". Hence "acquiring" isn't automatic and always request a check (unless a specific power tells you otherwise).
As explained above "draw" is used instead when the rules don't want you to roll a die.
Where would be the challenge to close/guard if it was just to simply gain the card?
There would only be indirect "costs":
-A player would lose a turn later in the Scenario because there is one less card in the hourglass.
-If you were on the last turn and there are no cards left in the hourglass (which is still something you need to be aware of in general anyway).
So yeah, if they want you to gain it, it will say Draw :)
So based on the last 4 responses, it seems nobody really knows how to handle this but is handling it the way they want to...
While that is speaking specifically about checks to close or to guard, it does spell out that "summon and acquire" means you have to encounter the card.
It doesn't say "summon and acquire". Just "acquire".
Only exceptions are clearly explained in the rules.
Rulebooks aren't the only source of exceptions. Cards make exceptions to the rules all the time.
Note that if acquire didn't mean succeeding at the check to acquire (as you propose), the first sentence of the above quote would be meaningless. It spells "a power that allows you to automatically acquire a card" not "a power that allows you to automatically succeed at a/all check to acquire a card".
Why would it be meaningless? It's referencing POWERS that let you automatically acquire, not location card effects. The word "acquire" by itself means to put into your hand. Hence "check to acquire".
it is implied
This is the best answer out of the past four, but unfortunately I am playing with a RAW group. They're not much into RAI. And I can't really blame them. This game goes through leaps and bounds to make sure everything is well defined in the rulebook with an extensive FAQ to cover mistakes and other ambiguous situations. But nowhere is "acquire a card" by itself given specific instructions, but "summon and acquire" is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It has to mean "attempt to acquire".
If they wanted to just let you close for free and get a blessing as a bonus, it would be "You may close this location automatically" and then "When closed: Draw the top blessing of the hourglass." Or, since technically that isn't exactly the same (since it doesn't include guarding), I guess the To Close or Guard could say: "Draw the top blessing of the hourglass." That would make it clear that you just take the blessing without attempting to acquire it.
"Acquire" means (when it is an instruction) "attempt to acquire". "Summon" only tells you where to get that card (from the vault), just like Dunes does (top ... of the hourglass).
In contrast, the game uses the "draw" instruction instead of "acquire" instruction when it wants you to gain a card for free.
Examples:
Salvator Scream: Discard to draw the top card of the hourglass. If it is not a blessing, shuffle it into the hourglass.
Blood Pig Bout: If defeated, draw the top card of your location; if it is a bane, banish it.
Charm Person: On your turn, banish to draw a new ally that lists Diplomacy in its check to acquire.
So based on the last 4 responses, it seems nobody really knows how to handle this but is handling it the way they want to...
The definition of "acquire" in the Core glossary is: Gain a boon and add it to your hand. This actually does make it sound like you get the card automatically, but I'm certain that's not the intention.
I'd have been happier with "successfully acquire" on Dunes and similar cards to prevent misunderstandings, but unfortunately I don't have final editing rights. :)
Just for the fun of it.
If a location closing condition is « Summon and defeat the danger » is anyone here translating that by you automatically defeat it?
I guess no.
So why (since acquiring and defeating have totally similar wording, checks....) would it be different for acquiring?
Just asking....
Just for the fun of it.
If a location closing condition is « Summon and defeat the danger » is anyone here translating that by you automatically defeat it?
I guess no.
So why (since acquiring and defeating have totally similar wording, checks....) would it be different for acquiring?
Just asking....
Well that's an easy one. "Summon and defeat" is specifically defined in the rules:
Summon and Acquire/Summon and Defeat: The To Close or To Guard
section on some locations requires you to do this. Summon and encounter
the card; if you do not acquire or defeat it, the location is not closed.
If the location says "SUMMON and acquire", then there wouldn't be a problem since that's also defined. But it just says "acquire".
Also, those in the boat that this makes the location too easy, there have been locations in the past that said to close the location automatically.
Add one word to the "To Close or Guard" requirement for that location and that should clear it up :)
"Successfully acquire the top blessing of the hourglass."
This just came up in our game as well. Was there ever a consensus?
Nope, that would be too easy... :-)
The location Reading Room has the following text for its To Close Or To Guard section: "Summon and acquire a blessing; if it is a Harrow blessing, you acquire it automatically."
If the word 'acquire' was synonymous with 'draw' then the idea of automatically acquiring something instead would be impossible. The word 'acquire' is used to mean the check to acquire just as the word 'defeat' is used to mean the check to defeat.
The reason the Dunes does not say 'summon and acquire' is because you summon cards from the vault. There is no term for taking the top card from the hourglass so it was simply written 'Acquire', meaning to succeed at the 'Check to Acquire'.
'Successfully acquire' is redundant as there is no way to unsuccessfully acquire. You either acquire or banish a boon when you roll the check.
'Successfully acquire' is redundant as there is no way to unsuccessfully acquire. You either acquire or banish a boon when you roll the check.
True, it may be redundant. But it's much, much clearer to new players. Sometimes redundancy is a good thing.
This same issue popped up in Wrath of the Righteous, and it caused problems there, too. There were more than a few "summon and acquire" checks to close - particularly in the early scenarios - which again confused new players. They thought they received free boons.
Paizo has done a fantastic job in the Core of simplifying and stripping away unnecessary language, but occasionally that comes at the expense of understanding.
But hey, that's what the rules forums are for.
If a few more words doesn't cause an issue, simply change 'summon and acquire' to 'summon and attempt to acquire'. Could even do the same for 'summon and defeat' to keep things parallel.
The location Reading Room has the following text for its To Close Or To Guard section: "Summon and acquire a blessing; if it is a Harrow blessing, you acquire it automatically."
If the word 'acquire' was synonymous with 'draw' then the idea of automatically acquiring something instead would be impossible. The word 'acquire' is used to mean the check to acquire just as the word 'defeat' is used to mean the check to defeat.
The reason the Dunes does not say 'summon and acquire' is because you summon cards from the vault. There is no term for taking the top card from the hourglass so it was simply written 'Acquire', meaning to succeed at the 'Check to Acquire'.
'Successfully acquire' is redundant as there is no way to unsuccessfully acquire. You either acquire or banish a boon when you roll the check.
Note that you only banish the boon on a failed roll if you encounter a boon. There is no indication that this particular To Close or To Guard requirement actually creates an encounter, because "Acquire" by itself is defined in the glossary as just automatically grabbing it.
RAW, I'd have to say that due to the presence of the glossary entry for "acquire," that you just automatically get the boon. That 100% is not the intent though because if it were the requirement would simply be "You may automatically close or guard this location." I feel that "summon and acquire" is the closest to what is wanted here, however summon and acquire means that you banish it on failure (losing a turn), whereas just making the check to acquire outside of an encounter means it stays put on failure (not losing a turn). Not sure which is intended.
'Examine the hourglass until you find a blessing. Encounter it, then shuffle the hourglass. If you fail to acquire the blessing, reload it.'
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That has its own complications because now you're introducing an examine and a shuffle into the mix, whereas neither of those were there before. Examine means that you'll hit any Triggers in the hourglass, and the current wording does not have any shuffles afterwards.
The wording "Summon and acquire the top blessing of the hourglass" would mean:
1. You look through the top cards of the hourglass one-by-one until you find a blessing (you are not examining and will not trigger any powers that happen when cards are examined).
2a. If you do not find any blessings in the hourglass, the instruction is impossible and the location does not close.
2b. If you find a blessing, summon and encounter it. If you successfully acquire it, draw it. If you fail to acquire it, banish it. Otherwise (e.g. you evaded it), put it into the vault (you are not banishing it and will not trigger any powers that happen when cards are banished).
3. Put all of the other cards you looked at back at the top of the hourglass in the order you found them.
How I think the current wording "Acquire the top blessing of the hourglass." is supposed to work is:
1. You look through the top cards of the hourglass one-by-one until you find a blessing (you are not examining and will not trigger any powers that happen when cards are examined).
2a. If you do not find any blessings in the hourglass, the instruction is impossible and the location does not close.
2b. If you find a blessing, attempt its check(s) to acquire. This is not an encounter; do not process any powers on the blessing you are attempting to acquire. If you succeed, draw it.
3. Put all of the cards you looked at back at the top of the hourglass in the order you found them, including the blessing if you did not successfully acquire it in 2b.
Should there ever be a situation in the game where it is impossible to close a location? That seems like a whole other issue of design.
Should there ever be a situation in the game where it is impossible to close a location? That seems like a whole other issue of design.
If it's impossible to close, it's usually a temporary situation. Because you can chase the villain to that location and close it that way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally had played that if the very top card of the hourglass wasn't a blessing, then you couldn't close or guard the location. However, on reading this thread and discussing it with others, I'm thinking I was wrong and instead I should have been find the next blessing of the hourglass.
I will say, however, that I've essentially played it as "encounter and acquire". I think "summon and acquire" was avoided the card is technically in use already and the intent isn't for you to pretend like you have a copy of it.
I added shuffling because I personally believe that if you look through a deck that you are not supposed to know what cards are coming, you should shuffle it afterwards. If shuffling is a problem, though, it can be removed. This also excludes the use of the keyword 'search' though since whatever you search is shuffled by default.
If the intent was to avoid shuffling and banishing the blessing upon failure, then the process would have to be spelled out on the location. This situation doesn't happen often from what I've seen. In fact, I can't think of another example where you look through a deck (without examining) and then don't shuffle it afterwards.
I personally had played that if the very top card of the hourglass wasn't a blessing, then you couldn't close or guard the location. However, on reading this thread and discussing it with others, I'm thinking I was wrong and instead I should have been find the next blessing of the hourglass.
I will say, however, that I've essentially played it as "encounter and acquire". I think "summon and acquire" was avoided the card is technically in use already and the intent isn't for you to pretend like you have a copy of it.
Yes, I too have been playing it like you, but I'll take the easier route of finding the next blessing. And wording-semantics aside, you do have to have to encounter the card to acquire. Dulcee is ignoring the fact that they couldn't say "summon and acquire" since the card is already there and you aren't getting a copy of it. Thus they just say acquire. However, each to his own, simply taking the blessing seems counter-intuitive, but if that's how you want to play it...
To me "the top blessing of the hourglass" unambiguously means "of all cards in the hourglass which are blessings, the topmost". If there are no blessings at all in the hourglass then there's no such card, but otherwise it exists regardless of what the "top card of the hourglass" is.
It's not the same as "acquire the top card of the hourglass if it's a blessing" at all. To me it's quite carefully worded to not mean that.
The fact that you can't find it without physically looking through cards in the deck (from the top) doesn't mean you're searching if it doesn't use the word "search". Similarly if it doesn't say summon or encounter then it's not summoned or encounter it. Just acquire it. If you pass it's yours if you fail leave it where it is.
That said I'm out of touch with the latest in technicalities :) This is just my natural language parsing at work here...