Hi all...

I've noticed two conflicting statements in The Woodland rules, pg 3. Could you help me?

• "A player may only spend dark fate to reroll a die that another character just rolled." (The dark fate spender is the reroller.)
• "The player who just made a roll has the option to spend light fate to reroll his own die before another player spends dark fate to force him to reroll his die." (The dark fate spender is not the reroller.)

This seems conflicting, but it's important to decide which one is right, especially since many effects refer to the fate spender and the reroller. Until dark fate was introduced, the spender and reroller were the same, but now it becomes complicated. Examples:

Twist of Fate: Cast after you pay a fate but before you reroll the die. You choose which die result you will use instead of rerolling it. If the dark fate spender is also the reroller, then you could cast this spell when you pay a dark fate to choose the result of the reroll. If the dark fate spender isn't the reroller, then I don't know what to do.

Orb of Destiny: When you pay a fate to reroll a die, you may roll 2 dice and choose which result to use. If the dark fate spender is also the reroller, then you could use this object when you pay a dark fate. If the dark fate spender isn't the reroller, then I don't know what to do again.

So...considering that all cards previous to The Woodland assumed that the fate spender is also the reroller, do you think we should also assume that the dark fate spender is also the reroller? I think that would be cleanest, but I'd like to hear your views too.

Thanks!

They do not conflict. All it is saying is that you using light fate trumps someone trying to use dark fate on you.

They do not conflict. All it is saying is that you using light fate trumps someone trying to use dark fate on you.

I think I caused confusion by including the "light trumps dark" part! I'm actually not concerned about that; it just happened to be part of the sentence I needed to quote.

My confusion is actually whether the "dark fate spender" is the same person as the "die re-roller."

• "A player may only spend dark fate to reroll a die that another character just rolled."
• "The player who just made a roll has the option to spend light fate to reroll his own die before another player spends dark fate to force him to reroll his die."

See, if those three words ("force him to") were eliminated, then both sentences would imply the dark fate spender is also the die re-roller, which would be nice, as this meshes well with all previous effects when they were always the same person.

So I'm basically saying that "force him to" should probably be ignored, and just wondering if anyone else agrees or disagrees. So for example, if you spend a dark fate, you can cast Twist of Fate as you re-roll the die (which happens to be your opponent's) and select the result to use.

(It has nothing to do with light-dark trumpage, sorry!)

The original roller of the die is the one that rerolls in both cases.

The first sentence would perhaps have been better if it had said something along the lines of -

"A player may only spend dark fate to have another character reroll a die that they had just rolled".

...or similar.

The original roller of the die is the one that rerolls in both cases.

Ah, thank you, Jon. I trust your judgement!

I understand why you are right. I now see that it's important to keep the original die roller. For instance, the Poisoned Dagger's ability activates if you roll a 1, not if a character rolls a 1! There are obviously many of these cards in Talisman.

A few cards assume the same character ( i.e. "you") are both the fate spender and die re-roller. For instance, the Twist of Fate Spell says it can be cast after you pay a fate but before you roll the die, not before a character rolls a die. There aren't too many of these cards, so if they don't work with dark fate, it's not a big loss.

So in light of this new information, it seems that effects which refer to the same person as the fate spender and die re-roller (e.g. Twist of Fate, Orb of Destiny) can't be used with dark fate.

Is this right?

Yes.

Great, thanks to both of you!

"The player who just made a roll has the option to spend light fate to reroll his own die before another player spends dark fate to force him to reroll his die."

This i also important when you are rolling several dice if I'm not mistaken (mines/crypt especially..)

You have the option to use light fate and chose one die to reroll before someone else chooses to spend dark fate (which would allow them to chose which die you are going to reroll) ..since still only die can be rerolled in total. Correct?

"The player who just made a roll has the option to spend light fate to reroll his own die before another player spends dark fate to force him to reroll his die."

This i also important when you are rolling several dice if I'm not mistaken (mines/crypt especially..)

You have the option to use light fate and chose one die to reroll before someone else chooses to spend dark fate (which would allow them to chose which die you are going to reroll) ..since still only die can be rerolled in total. Correct?

Interesting, because I was under the impression that if a player rolls muti dice and used a light fake to re-roll one of them, then dark fate could not be used to re-roll any of them because it says on page 8 of the woodlands rules that light or dark fate can can only reroll one of the die in muti rolls?

Yes I believe both Nioreh and Uvatha are right and saying the same thing. But I believe Nioreh is also saying, suppose you are at the Crypt and rolled 4, 2, 2 and you have a Strength of 9. Seems pretty good, but should you light-fate your 4 to prevent someone from dark-fating a 2? I think he was talking more strategy/tactics.

Yes I believe both Nioreh and Uvatha are right and saying the same thing. But I believe Nioreh is also saying, suppose you are at the Crypt and rolled 4, 2, 2 and you have a Strength of 9. Seems pretty good, but should you light-fate your 4 to prevent someone from dark-fating a 2? I think he was talking more strategy/tactics.

Exactly.