This post involves a rules question that arises as a result of two specific event cards: Vengeful Hit and Vengeful Mob.

Vengeful Hit - Disrupt: After you lose an Investigation struggle, choose a character with an Investigation icon, remove that character from the story it is committed to, then exhaust it if it is not already exhausted.

Vengeful Mob - Response: After you lose a Combat struggle, choose an opponent's character. If that character has fewer Combat icons than all of your characters that are not committed to a story, wound the target character.

While the timing on the two cards is different, both highlight the same question. We know that a player who has 1+ icon(s) in a specific type can "win" a struggle even if unopposed -- but does the other player "lose" it (allowing him to play Vengeful Hit / Mob as a result), or no? I've heard somewhat convincing arguments for either side, but there just isn't enough information in the rules and errata to come up with a proper answer as players. Thus, a ruling would be very helpful.

Any thoughts?

Amante said:

This was already discussed at length in a different thread here. I'm convinced that the existence of a 'winner' presupposes the existence of a 'loser', but the discussion itself was inconclusive. Since rule questions are answered quite promptly these days, I'd suggest you ask for an official answer using the 'Rules questions' link at the bottom of the page.

This was inconclusive? I'm guessing the logic is based on a multiplayer game?

In regards to one on one the rules on page 9 say, "To resolve an icon struggle (such as “Terror”), the active player counts the total number of the relevant icon on all his committed characters at that story. Then the opponent does the same for his characters that are committed to the story. The player (active player
or opponent) who has the most icons of the relevant type wins that struggle and immediately exercises its specific effect (see below).

If the players tie when counting the number of icons (they both have an equal number of icons of the relevant type, including zero) then nothing happens and the game proceeds to the next step. "

I'm not sure how anyone can argue that if a player counts more struggle icons than the opponent in a head to head game that there is not a winner and a loser. A player not opposing a story or having a character with the proper icon to engage in a specific struggle does not mean they have not lost the struggle.

Is there a link to the original thread this was brought up in?

I don't remember the precise location, but the discussion was about the definition of "loser". Winner is clearly defined, but loser is never defined.

So the discussion followed along the lines of "Do we use "loser" as we understand it in general English usage, or is there a game specific definition of "loser" that we don't know about?"

And the reason it became a discussion is because often times in this game (and in many others) the general English usage is NOT the correct interpretation of a critical word.

Oh, for example, if there is no opponent at the struggle, there is clearly a winner, but is there a loser?

Your opponent is always your opponent. That is not the same thing as having opposing committed characters at a story.

I did end up sending Damon the question and he said, "Yes, if there is a winner, there must be a loser. If they counted more icons in a struggle (or as many with Fast on their side) as you did, then they have won and you have lost that struggle. Whether or not you had any characters committed to the story is immaterial to having won or lost."

That's a logical and appropriate response. Thanks again to Damon for answering these questions quickly and clearly!