1. I coudn't find it in FAQ and in the forum, so I will ask here. It is strange to me that noone asked, because it is very common and very important question - it happened twise in 10 games here. I found some discussions in boardgamegeeks, but there was nothing official and I feel unsatisfied :)
So, player enters city with new vampire encounter.
- Dracula wants to play "Seduction" - direct byte, encunter not considered as encounter
- Player wants to play "Forwarned" discarding encounter
(Our house rules - none so far)
2. Additional question:
Dracula has several encunters on one city (e.g. one normal and one on hide location card). Which is engaged first. It is vital, for example "new vampire" and "fog" encounter.
(Our house rules - Dracula choice)
3. It is strange when does Dracula play False tip off? It is too early before the player is certain he wants train and too late if the die is rolled (it is not correct to see if it will be "X" or "0" for example and then not play the card, or is it?).
So it seems the only proper ways are:
A. While the die is in the air (tough stuff). Dracula must be very concentrated, some hunters roll quick and it is messy.
B. Every time a player will move with train he awaits Dracula approval - "Dude, will you play False tip-off?"
(House rules - B.)
|Page 1 of 1 (6 messages)||1|
Assuming you don't need an official ruling - here is my input.
1. "Forewarned" states that the encounter needs to be revealed before the card can be played. "Seduction" does not have that restriction. My opinion then: is that Dracula would need to play Seduction before (or as) the new vampire is revealed, and in doing so transforms the encounter into a card play. Thus only "Good Luck" can be used to cancel the Seduction card played in this manner, Forewarned could not. If Good Luck were played the Seduction card would be cancelled, and only then could Forewarned then cancel the encounter.
If Drac did not play Seduction before the new vampire was revealed, then it is a race. Forewarned if played before Seduction would cancel the encounter and Seduction could not then be played on the cancelled encounter.
I would give ties or ANY benefit of the doubt on any card-play-race to the "Forewarned" hunter, as Drac, if he really meant to play the Seduction card - had plenty of time.
2. I would go with the rules paragraph "If There Are Encounters" under the Hunter Action Phase. Here it clearly implies that the Drac player orders the encounters as he likes. But the rules needlessly adds a bit of fog by stated the Dracula player "reveals" the encounter - begging the question - "what if the encounter is already revealed." I think the spirit here is that the Dracula player orders any encounters (revealed or not) as he likes.
3. This is simply game manners, the rulebook can't get into that without giving us an inch thick rule book. It should be no problem for a player to clearly state "I am taking the train," take a second to glance make sure the Drac player is not distracted, while reaching for the die. This should be enough time for the Drac player to say something like "card" or "wait."
Now if you have an enthusiastic player in the game (not a bad thing) who is so excited he is impulsively quick. The Drac player should simply hold the train die in his hand or his side of the table - awaiting people to ask to take the train.
Thank you, you have been very reasonable about all three situations.
I still have doubts about playing seduction before showing the players you can play this card - the encounter and so on, even though it is not strictly written on the event card (just because I usually do the things the other way around) but I agree that it is possible solution of the problem and certainly better than pure card race. In fact to avoid card race I would prefer either that or simply giving a priority to one of the cards.
About the 3d point I agree with you - such things can hardly be covered by rulebook and of course there are always rare situations (like 1.), so no disrespect to FFG team meant, I'm a fan :)
First, I am not a guru, just someone bouning ideas back and forth with you. So in terms of a revealed vampire-
The card wordings are poorly done in terms of covering this situation, leaving one to wonder if the designers really want one to work thru the mechanics/definitions of "reveal," "encounter," etc. and what these words imply, or if the card wordings were just a slip of tongue (pen?). I think the latter.
A. Game mechanics: Notice in a prior reply, I said that I would give any benefit of the doubt on any "race" to play a card in this situation (Bite vs Forewarned) - to the Vampire Hunter. More to the point, I think the Hunter knowing there is a revealed vampire in the city has the right to play forewarned as he moves in and can thus beat Dracula to his Seduction card play. I cannot envision the Dracula being allowed to play the card "in case" a Hunter moves in. (But if the hunter hesitates to play the card, and Dracula does, then I think the hunter gets bitten.)
B. "Real Life:" In my mind the fact that the vampire is already revealed, lends weight to the Forewarned card taking precidence. If in "real life" you know a vampire is waiting for you on the other side of the door, you are likely to be on your guard against anything - seduction especially; unlike if you walked into a situation not knowing. (I mean a danger - the Vampire - already being revealed is almost the definition of the word "forewarned.")
Thus somewhere between real life common sense and how I view the game mechanics, my opinion is the Hunter should win the card race between a revealed vampire's bite vs forewarned.
So seduction trumps forwarned UNLESS the encounter is revealed in which case it's the other way around. Once one of the card is played it immediately takes effect and cannot be countered by the other one, but the player with advantage must have enough time to react and when it is obvious that he will not play the card, then his adversary. (just as the false tip-off)
I concur with everything Craterous said, for what that's worth. Barring official FAQage to the contrary, I think his rulings are quite fair-minded and balanced.
MP3 killed the radio star
|Page 1 of 1 (6 messages)||1|