Sweet dreams "timing issues".
Misfortune. What rerolling really means
@DomaGB - I am getting it. I am just saying that I am not 100% sure that you can apply it without any possibility of any ability or card getting in between.
@Warlock - no I don't think there is concept of first in last out as such, but then I don't think there is a concept of Instants where you have to say something really fast either.
@Uvatha - well @Everyone really:
Let's assume we have this character:
Sweet Charmer
6 Fate
Abilities
a) You are lucky and can add one to all die rolls
b) When you are about to make a roll, you can use your current Fate level instead
Okay - Sweet Charmer current has his full compliment of 6 Fate.
Person A's turn.
Person A (Prophetess): Cast Toadify
Person A: Cast Misfortune (very fast after declaring Toadify)
Person B (Sweet Charmer): My ability allows me to bypass the roll and use my current Fate level instead.
Person A: No - actually you can't. I cast Misfortune super fast before your ability can react and the die has rolled thus you cannot use your ability. I shouted loudest and the roll has already happened.
Is that how you interpret it?
How would the rule apply to ability a) instead (more general and no reference to 'about to make a roll'.
@Warlock - no I don't think there is concept of first in last out as such, but then I don't think there is a concept of Instants where you have to say something really fast either.
Sorry, I'm not saying that you're a fan of LIFO, I've only quoted it as a way of thinking that is often automatically applied to games that don't feature it. Perhaps DomaGB guessed what you were meaning better than I did.
I don't like the "who shouts loud first gets priority" way of resolving effects, it's horrible if applied between hostile and fussy rules-lawyers. For this reason I've stressed the concept of mutual agreement and etiquette between players, it's quite important in a game that can get tense sometimes.
The problem behind your way to resolve the situation (i.e. Lucky Charm may cancel the roll and force a result at any time) it's that if it worked this way, Lucky Charm would be a passive protection against Misfortune and many other game-breaking effects. Who's going to cast Misfortune on you if you can trump it with a Lucky Charm whenever you wish? Moreover, who will cast Toadify/Vindication/Random on you, if there's no way to get around that Lucky Charm of yours? There should be some way to catch you off guard.
Let's assume we have this character:
Sweet Charmer
6 Fate
Abilities
a) You are lucky and can add one to all die rolls
b) When you are about to make a roll, you can use your current Fate level instead
Okay - Sweet Charmer current has his full compliment of 6 Fate.
Person A's turn.
Person A (Prophetess): Cast Toadify
Person A: Cast Misfortune (very fast after declaring Toadify)
Person B (Sweet Charmer): My ability allows me to bypass the roll and use my current Fate level instead.
Person A: No - actually you can't. I cast Misfortune super fast before your ability can react and the die has rolled thus you cannot use your ability. I shouted loudest and the roll has already happened.
Is that how you interpret it?
How would the rule apply to ability a) instead (more general and no reference to 'about to make a roll'.
Yes, this is how I would interpret it and it's very unlikely that a character like this will ever be published. Being able to twist any roll to a (2) predetermined result(s) is way too powerful. With this set of abilities he would be immune to almost everything, without the need to spend fate.
But we are just speculating here, so if I had to resolve abilities like those of the Sweet Charmer I would go this way. If he's about to make a die roll and someone casts Misfortune, before he declares he's using his b) ability, then he's screwed and cannot use his b) ability. However, he can use his a) ability to add 1 to the roll, obtaining a 2 if it's better than the 1 (usually it is).
You've worded the Charmer's a) ability in a very generic way. It does not specify whether it is activated before or after rolling. Normally such abilities are applied after rolling, when calculating the score (see Walking Stick, praying abilities, etc...), so I assumed this one worked like the others.
I wouldn't be so arrogant if I were the Prophetess of your example. She just turned herself into a Toad by casting Misfortune on the Toadify roll SHE was about to make...
Haha! Oops - I meant Random!
That's interesting. You're probably right that the wording might not ever be like that on a character card. However, I'm pretty sure that if something like that did happen, most would believe that character attributes would take effect.
I would say 'never say never' with cards - there are ones that seem to get pretty close. Take the Highlander for example -
- Whenever you are about to engage in battle, you may charge and add 2 to your attack score. If you charge, you must miss your next turn recovering your wits.
Player A (Highlander) moves and reveals - Dragon Strength 12
Player B (Prophetess) - Casts Misfortune
Player A - I want to use my charge ability
Player B - Sorry, you're too slow to lay on 5.
Is that how you'd see it play out?
If so, you might even argue that the text doesn't stop 2 being added to Misfortune. But you could also argue Misfortune made the roll for you and if you were going to roll you'd have to declare that you were going to charge rather than seeing the result of the die roll first.
You might also apply this to the Dragon Hunter when he reveals a card before he declares he's going to do a Deathblow?
I'm pretty sure that sooner or later, this will become an issue and I can't imagine many people agreeing that their special abilities are no longer so special. In Talisman, its the special abilities along with the attributes that balance the character - its one thing if the ability does not apply (e.g. rolling a one never happens because you roll 2 dice for movement, but it's another thing to say that a spell can get in the way of it.
Highlander question: attack roll and attack score are two different things. Misfortune makes your attack roll a 1, the Highlander ability adds 2 to his attack score. This means both happen. Read the Rulebook some more...
That's interesting. You're probably right that the wording might not ever be like that on a character card. However, I'm pretty sure that if something like that did happen, most would believe that character attributes would take effect.
You seem to have this concept that character Special Abilities or possessions (Objects/Followers) should take effect regardless of what is played before you use them. Having cards is not the same as using them, as the rules state; having abilities is not like using them.
That's interesting. You're probably right that the wording might not ever be like that on a character card. However, I'm pretty sure that if something like that did happen, most would believe that character attributes would take effect.
I would say 'never say never' with cards - there are ones that seem to get pretty close. Take the Highlander for example -
- Whenever you are about to engage in battle, you may charge and add 2 to your attack score. If you charge, you must miss your next turn recovering your wits.
Player A (Highlander) moves and reveals - Dragon Strength 12
Player B (Prophetess) - Casts Misfortune
Player A - I want to use my charge ability
Player B - Sorry, you're too slow to lay on 5.
Is that how you'd see it play out?
If so, you might even argue that the text doesn't stop 2 being added to Misfortune. But you could also argue Misfortune made the roll for you and if you were going to roll you'd have to declare that you were going to charge rather than seeing the result of the die roll first.
No, Misfortune is not fast-forwarding the game to a condition that it has not happened yet. Highlander chooses whether to do or not to charge when he's about to engage in battle; other characters cannot cast Misfortune until he is about to roll a the die for the combat roll. He has all the time in the world to declare he's using his ability
I'm not contradicting myself. In the previous examples, we were talking about a character casting Toadify/Random/Vindication and another one rushing to cast Misfortune before any Lucky Charm could be used. This is not fast-forwarding, because a Spell requiring a roll has already been cast, is in effect and has to be resolved. So, it's the right time for effects that work "when you are about to roll".
You might also apply this to the Dragon Hunter when he reveals a card before he declares he's going to do a Deathblow?
It's impossible to cast Misfortune before the Dragon Hunter declares he's making a deathblow. As for the Highlander example, the character chooses whether to do or not the deathblow when he's about to engage an Enemy in battle; other characters cannot cast Misfortune until the Dragon Hunter is about to roll a die.
I'm pretty sure that sooner or later, this will become an issue and I can't imagine many people agreeing that their special abilities are no longer so special. In Talisman, its the special abilities along with the attributes that balance the character - its one thing if the ability does not apply (e.g. rolling a one never happens because you roll 2 dice for movement, but it's another thing to say that a spell can get in the way of it.
The issue of your character not being able to use an ability because another player was faster, smarter, clever than you in using another ability, effect or Spell, it's not an issue with this game, but an issue that you have with this game. I used to have similar issues with Talisman over time and I've solved them by agreeing with friends on our behaviour when playing this game, especially when playing Spells. They are the most troublesome part because they are kept secret and must be played properly.
Hello, so I sought some help regarding this spellcasting debate. Normally I would seek answers from FFG, but in this case, regarding how to prioritize spellcasting, I asked the developers of the digital edition. Their spellcasting system is intricate and faithful to the details of the board game rules, so I thought it would be best.
In summary, they use a shout first approach too! Just like Warlock uses. But here is a summary of the overall debate as well.
Q1. Can multiple effects be played in response to the same triggering condition?
We believe the answer is "yes." Common triggering conditions are "start of turn before movement," "rolling a die," "drawing a card," "about to encounter" (after cards are drawn but before they are encountered), "about to engage in battle or psychic combat" (after the encounter but before the attack roll), "casting a spell," and "end of turn."
As an example, it is possible for Player A to cast Temporal Warp at the start of his turn, and then Player B to cast Immobility immediately afterwards, removing the first of his three turns. You can see that if the situation were reversed, Player B would cast Immobility causing Player A to miss his turn and not cast Temporal Warp at all. Which brings us to the next point...
Q2. What happens when multiple players want to respond to the same triggering condition?
You just have to develop your own prioritizing system for this. The digital edition uses a "shout first" approach. For those familiar with the game, even if multiple people have spells queued (ready to go), he who queued it first casts first. We have always used a different approach, but since I have seen rules experts (Warlock and now Digital Edition) use the shout first approach... we will try it too.
Q3. We've "prioritized" it; how do we "categorize" it?
a) Nonconflicting. "Shatter" and "Temporal Warp" are both triggered by the start of the turn. Both spells can be cast because they are nonconflicting, although the order is often important. You must develop your own prioritizing system, though.
b) Conflicting, non-overruling. Two players who want to cast "Immobility" cannot do so (one spell cannot overrule another), so only one player may cast it. Again, you need a prioritizing system.
c) Conflicting, overruling. Here is the heat of the debate. The debate is whether this category actually exists in the first place . For example, if someone uses Lucky Charm, can someone cast Misfortune to overrule it? I don't know the answer.
Edited by ArtaterxesI took out a lot of my original post because much of it was wordy and subjective, and also not actual rules (they were a set of house rules we used to resolve the problem of priority and overruling). Now it's a bit shorter and just summarizes the problem, and provides a solution for only one point (the prioritizing), but still leaves the final question open (about overruling).
Edited by Artaterxes
Sorry if I was long-winded XD.
This was just such a hot topic that I really wanted to summarize it...
At least my post was not directed towards anyone in particular.
At least my post was not directed towards anyone in particular.
Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, I think the best solution is to simply apply the Simultaneous Effects rule from the FAQ in a situation such as this. Whereas "shout first" is nowhere to be found in the printed rules, this actually is and is the best way to resolve such sticky situations. When 2 or more effects with the same triggering condition occur, the person whose turn it is decides the order they are processed. If something becomes invalid due to the order in which they resolved (ie the target is no longer there, etc), it simply does not happen and was treated as though it never was attempted (especially important in the case of a spell being cast). This follows the rules established that things can only be attempted when a valid target is present.
So, let's take for example the Misfortune spell and the Lucky Charm. Both have the triggering requirement of "about to roll a die", so when they are both declared, they must follow the rules for Simultaneous Effects. Depending on whose turn this is can result in 2 different outcomes.
Example 1:
It is Player A's turn.
They roll a 1 and send the Reaper to visit Player B, who holds a Lucky Charm.
Player A casts Misfortune on Player B.
Player B uses the Lucky Charm.
As it is Player A's turn, they get to decide the order in which they are resolved.
Player A chooses to resolve Misfortune first, the roll becomes a 1 and the die cannot be rerolled.
The Lucky Charm is now invalid, since a requirement for choosing the result requires that the dice can still be rolled, which has already been done by the Misfortune spell. Misfortune also forbids a reroll, so there is no way for the Lucky Charm to be used. Player B dies.
The Lucky Charm is never used as it did not resolve, so it remains on the table for others to pick up later.
Example 2:
It is Player B's turn.
They roll a 1 and send the Reaper to visit themselves, Player B, because they have a Lucky Charm.
Player A casts Misfortune on Player B.
Player B uses the Lucky Charm.
As it is Player B's turn, they get to decide the order in which they are resolved.
Player B chooses to resolve the Lucky Charm first, they choose to have the die result become a 6 instead of rolling the die.
Now that the Lucky Charm has resolved fully, the Misfortune spell has no valid target anymore, since the die roll was replaced by a chosen result and Misfortune requires a die to be rolled. Misfortune is not cast and remains in the hand of Player A.
I know I've had the debate before that Simultaneous Effects doesn't cover things like this, but I contend that just because the example given in the FAQ doesn't show 2 conflicting effects being resolved this way doesn't mean that they can't. I also contend that this is the closest we have to official rules regarding these situations, so I find it best to use the official rules as often as is possible.
Very well said sanityismyvanity I have to admit the Simultaneous Effects would be a good way to fix the prob. And you state it so well. It wouldn't take much to make the rule cover all effects that happen at the same time choosen or otherwise.
Plus it wouldn't interfere with other timing issues. Mind you I would only use this IF both spells were cast at the sametime (no time inbetween before action or reaction). But its a good solver indeed,
Not a bad idea but it sacrifices spell secrecy!
Not a bad idea but it sacrifices spell secrecy!
How so?
If all players understand before hand they can easierly work out what effect would come first in a players turn. Unless two hidden spells are cast in the same turn and one is discounted then yes... But tough thats life
.
I find this all totally derailed.. the problem hardly even exists.
Unless you are all playing the game in a totally different way than we are around here it's mindbogglingly extremely exceptionally rare that two players announces at exactly the same time that they each want to do an action that comes in conflict with the opposing players action. If that ever where to happen.. fine, I guess the active player would choose.
In
all
other cases one of the players announced before the other and he therefore gets to resolve the action before the other player.
Pay attention and act, if you don't then boohoo..
Not a bad idea but it sacrifices spell secrecy!
How so?
If all players understand before hand they can easierly work out what effect would come first in a players turn. Unless two hidden spells are cast in the same turn and one is discounted then yes... But tough thats life
.
The problem I see in the Simultaneous Effects rule applied as a tie-breaker is that it makes the game predictable, especially in the few critical situations that may decide a game.
Example 1:
It is Player A's turn.
They roll a 1 and send the Reaper to visit Player B, who holds a Lucky Charm.
Player A casts Misfortune on Player B.
Player B uses the Lucky Charm.
As it is Player A's turn, they get to decide the order in which they are resolved.
Player A chooses to resolve Misfortune first, the roll becomes a 1 and the die cannot be rerolled.
The Lucky Charm is now invalid, since a requirement for choosing the result requires that the dice can still be rolled, which has already been done by the Misfortune spell. Misfortune also forbids a reroll, so there is no way for the Lucky Charm to be used. Player B dies.
The Lucky Charm is never used as it did not resolve, so it remains on the table for others to pick up later.
Example 2:
It is Player B's turn.
They roll a 1 and send the Reaper to visit themselves, Player B, because they have a Lucky Charm.
Player A casts Misfortune on Player B.
Player B uses the Lucky Charm.
As it is Player B's turn, they get to decide the order in which they are resolved.
Player B chooses to resolve the Lucky Charm first, they choose to have the die result become a 6 instead of rolling the die.
Now that the Lucky Charm has resolved fully, the Misfortune spell has no valid target anymore, since the die roll was replaced by a chosen result and Misfortune requires a die to be rolled. Misfortune is not cast and remains in the hand of Player A.
If your ruling was in effect, in Example 1, player B would simply not have ANY chance to use the Lucky Charm, thus meaning that when the active player A moves the Reaper to a character and has Misfortune in hand, he can just ignore that the victim has a Lucky Charm, because he has the power to supersede it. Is that fair? No, because it means certain death for another player (barring Counterspell).
In Example 2, player B with the Lucky Charm can move the Reaper to himself without ANY concern for his safety, because whatever the others do he can trump their actions with the Lucky Charm. Player A should keep his Misfortune hidden and not play it, since he knows very well that Lucky Charm gets priority = Lucky Charm becomes an excellent passive protection. The worst happens when Player A casts Misfortune and Player B has e.g. Marked for Glory: since he gets priority, he does not have any problem with a Spell like Misfortune, because he can always cast his Spell and say "well, it's my privilege to decide that Marked for Glory goes first, so you just wasted your Misfortune, cause I'm adding up to 6 to the roll".
Returning a Spell to a player's hand because it cannot be played, even though it was perfectly legal to cast it, is lame and uncovers a great weapon. The combination with Marked for Glory is unfair at best.
I know I've had the debate before that Simultaneous Effects doesn't cover things like this, but I contend that just because the example given in the FAQ doesn't show 2 conflicting effects being resolved this way doesn't mean that they can't. I also contend that this is the closest we have to official rules regarding these situations, so I find it best to use the official rules as often as is possible.
What I contest in all this is that "Simultaneous" doesn't mean "that has the same triggering condition", but "that IS triggered by the same condition". The rule and example in the FAQ explicitly deal with the latter, while applying it to the former gives way to the problems discussed above.
And yes, it's true that cases where two players want to activate an effect at the same time are rare. For 1-2 situations per game I won't be instituting predetermined priorities, that would advantage the active character and discourage actions by the others. That's why we always give priority to who declares an action first. It's the natural way of playing and living, if I do something before you I simply do it; you cannot stop time, rewind and do something else before I even started my action. This is why there's no need for a line in the rulebook saying this is the intended way of playing. Perhaps it's too primitive for most players, this is why it's ok to try alternative ways if you like them.
As for me, I see more trouble than solutions in the Simultaneous Effects and in any other fixed set of priorities. The game should have been designed in a different way from the very start to deal with non-chronological priorities.
Edited by The_WarlockOne can agrue that choosing to use a spell or effect is a form of "Trigger". I personally wouldn't agrue such a point but its just a answer to a difficuit question about timing issues.
I'm with Nioreh here I mean "Big Deal" its a game, have fun play and enjoy yourself!, can we please put this to bed...
I get what sanity is trying to say, but if a player declares an action 2 seconds before another player then that's tough. The other player is too late. The player declaring the action gets to do it. End of. However if 2 or more players try to say something at exactly the same time, then using the rule in the FAQ is the way to go.
Perhaps my replies are getting too long and the length doesn't add too much to a thread that's stale. I'm just not able to overlook the consequences of something that's being proposed as a solution, but that's my problem.
Considering that everybody has his own solutions, we don't really care finding one that's good for everyone. Let's drop the topic, then.
...
If your ruling was in effect, in Example 1, player B would simply not have ANY chance to use the Lucky Charm, thus meaning that when the active player A moves the Reaper to a character and has Misfortune in hand, he can just ignore that the victim has a Lucky Charm , because he has the power to supersede it . Is that fair? No, because it means certain death for another player (barring Counterspell).
In Example 2, player B with the Lucky Charm can move the Reaper to himself without ANY concern for his safety, because whatever the others do he can trump their actions with the Lucky Charm. Player A should keep his Misfortune hidden and not play it, since he knows very well that Lucky Charm gets priority = Lucky Charm becomes an excellent passive protection . The worst happens when Player A casts Misfortune and Player B has e.g. Marked for Glory: since he gets priority, he does not have any problem with a Spell like Misfortune, because he can always cast his Spell and say "well, it's my privilege to decide that Marked for Glory goes first, so you just wasted your Misfortune , cause I'm adding up to 6 to the roll".
Returning a Spell to a player's hand because it cannot be played, even though it was perfectly legal to cast it, is lame and uncovers a great weapon. The combination with Marked for Glory is unfair at best.
...
Well written.
Considering that everybody has his own solutions, we don't really care finding one that's good for everyone. Let's drop the topic, then.
I think this thread is all about finding a solution that's good for everyone. Provided "everyone" can come to a agreement thats in best interest to the game.
I am a convert! After reading The Warlock's posts, and trying it out for myself, I am starting to beleive that the "shout first" method appears to be most consistent with the rules of spellcasting (and ability use in general), including spell secrecy. In addition, I now also realize why the simultaneous effect rule may not apply to voluntary spells and abilities, only to triggered events.
Coincidentally, speed priority is how the digital edition implements spellcasting and ability use in general. The first to use gains priority. If this method is consistent with the cardboard rules, and it also happens to be used in the digital edition, then perhaps it is good enough to be considered the gold standard?
Well, it's good enough for me anyway!