So I've been seeing people mention using the Rune Golem as a sort of "Inspiration Battery" by rallying when turning isn't necessary. The logic used is that "nearby units can spend the inspiration."
However, I don't see how that is possible. Everything I have seen in the rules allows you to spend inspiration on the activating unit to affect the activating unit and the activating unit only.
Am I missing something?
People are misinterpreting the Boons and Banes reference card which says: "Spend an inspiration token from an ally before revealing command tool to remove 1 bane or ready 1 upgrade." They think it means that an activating unit can spend the token from an ally in order to remove its own banes or refresh its own upgrades.
I agree that this interpretation is not supported by the rules. The reference card, in my opinion, does not count as rules and should only be a reminder of the effect of inspiration tokens. To find out how they work in the context of other rules, one must consult the rules reference.
Ahh. I see now. It's a shame, really, but I see why they had to use that form of shorthand to get everything on a reference card.
7 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:People are misinterpreting the Boons and Banes reference card which says: "Spend an inspiration token from an ally before revealing command tool to remove 1 bane or ready 1 upgrade." They think it means that an activating unit can spend the token from an ally in order to remove its own banes or refresh its own upgrades.
I agree that this interpretation is not supported by the rules. The reference card, in my opinion, does not count as rules and should only be a reminder of the effect of inspiration tokens. To find out how they work in the context of other rules, one must consult the rules reference.
"Allied unit" is defined in the reference book as unit controlled by the player. So although the reference doesn't specify the unit spending the bane needs to get the benefit, the word "Ally" doesn't imply that it can be a second friendly / allied unit.
2 minutes ago, Cultiststeve said:"Allied unit" is defined in the reference book as unit controlled by the player. So although the reference doesn't specify the unit spending the bane needs to get the benefit, the word "Ally" doesn't imply that it can be a second friendly / allied unit.
But inspiration in the RR doesn't include the term allied unit
1 minute ago, Klaxas said:But inspiration in the RR doesn't include the term allied unit
Sure, but the reference card does. I was just saying I dont think the text on the card is contradictory or misleading, when you use the definitions found in the book.
Just now, Cultiststeve said:Sure, but the reference card does. I was just saying I dont think the text on the card is contradictory or misleading, when you use the definitions found in the book.
It is contradictory because the reference card is flat out wrong
Just now, Klaxas said:It is contradictory because the reference card is flat out wrong
What do you mean?
Just now, Cultiststeve said:What do you mean?
The reference card has the wrong definition of inspiration. It contradicts the rules.
3 minutes ago, Klaxas said:But inspiration in the RR doesn't include the term allied unit
Right. But all the entries on the reference card under Banes and Boons use the phrasing, "Spend from an allied unit," or "Spend from an enemy unit."
It's not so much contradictory as it is ambiguous because of how much they wanted to fit onto a single card. If you're familiar with the rules in the rules reference, the reference card is a good reminder. If you're reading about boons and banes for the first time from the card instead of the rules, you could be led astray.
2 minutes ago, Klaxas said:The reference card has the wrong definition of inspiration. It contradicts the rules.
But what part do you mean? Its more ambiguous but the card is not at all incorrect, when you take into account the proper definition of "ally".
1 minute ago, Cultiststeve said:But what part do you mean? Its more ambiguous but the card is not at all incorrect, when you take into account the proper definition of "ally".
Ok I see your point now. They could have worded it "spend from an allied unit to have that unit X"
Just now, Klaxas said:Ok I see your point now. They could have worded it "spend from an allied unit to have that unit X"
Yea totally, the card is just missing "from that unit".