how does cersei's wheelhouse work with cards that raise initiative? and why?

johnn0411 said:

The relevant card text: "Reduce the initiative value on each player's revealed plot card to 0."

I think it speaks for itself. The only cards that have initiative reduced to 0 are plot cards. If you have any other cards, such as Bay of Ice, that give an initiative bonus, they are not reduced to 0 and will count toward the initiative count.

so you reduce the card to 0 then you increase it with the other cards like bay of ice. why is it done that way and not increase the int on the plot then reduced tob0? or am i not understanding plot cards and they add to int like bay of ice?

johnn0411 said:

Relevant passage from the core rules:

"Some cards have large copper diamonds with a
+X value in their rules text. These cards raise the
initiative value on your revealed plot , even when
kneeling. Your total initiative is the sum of your
revealed plot card’s initiative value and all initiative
bonuses provided by cards you control. "

I see your reference, but I wouldn't read too far into the text I put in italics. In the end the plot still provides an initiative bonus separate from the cards you have in play.

The text in bold is the most relevant text because it tells you exactly how you get your total initiative.

The same template in the core rules is used for Income Modifier cards in play:

"Some cards (mostly locations) have a large gold
coin marked with a value of +X or -X in their
rules text. These cards modify the income value
on your revealed plot card, even when kneeling."

However, if someone has Blockade revealed, you are still counting your incoming bonuses from other cards in play separate from the plots.

Therefore, you should treat all revealed plot income and initiative as separate bonuses from cards you have in play toward the total count.

ok thank you. i feel the rules could explain this much better by just removing the first part about adding to the plot card

im rereading what you posted and i dont get why you would still get income if your opp blockade. from the quote it looks like you would get nothing as the bonus is added to the plot card

johnn0411 said:

I will quote more passages from the core rules to help you:

Page 11:

"After the plot cards are revealed, first determine
who wins the initiative. The player with the
highest total initiative (the sum of his plot card’s
initiative and any initiative bonuses on cards he
or she controls) wins initiative."

Page: 12

"On your turn in the marshalling phase, you
must first determine your income by adding the
income on your revealed plot card to any income
bonuses provided by cards in play that you control.
Then, take that number of gold tokens from
the Treasury, and place them near your House
card. This is your gold pool."

These are the instructions as to how you determine your initiative count during the Plot Phase and your income during the Marshaling Phase. The other passages are more likely used to help simplify the rules for beginners, but that is definitely not what you actually do with income and initiative bonuses on cards you have in play.

thank you now i understand i was looking at the wrong place

I think the conceptual problem we're getting into here is trying to determine the order in which these effects modify the plot card. If the order is one way, you get one result, but if the order is another way, you get a different result.

But in this game, the order never matters because you always "start from scratch" when checking the value of any statistic or characteristic. This is described on pg. 14 of the FAQ when talking about "lasting effects":

Lasting Effects Conflict
Even if not triggered at the same time, multiple Lasting Effects may affect the same card at the same time. For example: a character without the Power icon is affected by two lasting effects. One (such as Slander) removes a Power icon from the character, and one (such as Lordship) adds the Power icon to that character. In this example the two lasting effects cancel each other, and the character is left unchanged. T he order in which the lasting effects take place is irrelevant: the net sum result of all lasting effects is applied to the character (the net sum of -1 Power icon and +1 Power icon is 0, thus the character remains unchanged).

So, there is no "order." You total the modifiers and apply the result just the one time. And you do that every time you check the characteristic, so the modifier that has been around for 3 rounds goes into the count just the same as the one that just showed up.

What this means is that your income is, at all times, "Base + total of all modifiers." So when you have the Wheelhouse and your opponent has a couple of Bay of Ice's in play, the opponent's initiative count is "Base (from the plot card) - X (from Wheelhouse) + 2 (from the 2 Bay of Ice's)." All you have to do is define X.

When you look at the equation this way, X must equal just the base initiative (from the plot card only). Otherwise, for X to ensure that the equation always worked out to "0," you'd have to create a paradox of "X = X + 2." So, since X pretty much has to equal "base," this equation will always come down to "Total Initiative = Base (plot card) - Base (Wheelhouse) + 2 (BoI) = 2.

Long story short, because all modifiers (including the Wheelhouse, or Blockade) are totaled and applied together, the reduction from a "reduce to 0" can only wipe out the base value, not the value of other modifiers that will be added at the same time .

A little technical, but I hope that helps explain why other initiative modifiers are not wiped out by Wheelhouse (and other income modifiers are not wiped out by Blockade).

im back again. . . so using the rules you talked about with x -2 and such what if 2 players play blocade and a 3rd had a plot with 5 gold would that players gold be -5 for the turn so they would need a total of +6 on other cards to get any gold while the 2 blockade players would only need a +1 as there 0 gold is just reduced by 0 two times not by 5 two times like the third player? also could blockade be seen as a replacment effect?

No, they would only need a +1 gold location to get 1 gold.

Unless im massively mistaken or missing your question entirely.

Look at it like this, your income is plot + modifier. Blockade reduces plot to zero, it dosent subtract, as silly as that may sound. Think of it in terms of multiplication. In this example you gave you would end up with; plot of 5 x0 x0 = 0 + modifiers = whatever.

i see it as plot income= printed + whatever location and char mods - whatever then as you said blockade then×0 thus no matter what you do your income for the turn would be 0 but it seems blockade does not x0 it subtracts the printed value as there is no multiplying in this game as that would require you to know when each mod is applied.

Blockade reduces the value on the opponents plot card to zero, blockade does not provide a gold bonus of -x where x is the value on the opponents plot card. (when the game says bonus it also includes negative values such as burned and pillage). As such you would end up with plot value of 0 plus any modifiers from gold bonuses = total income.

You seem to be treating the reduction as if it is an actual negative bonus which afaik it is not.

Now for example if you are playing greyjoy and play blockade and have 3 burned and pillage (attachment; attached location gains -1 int and -1 gold) attached to your opponents locations THEN they would need a bonuses of 4 or higher to count any gold as the plot wuld be zeroand any bonuses would be reduced by 3.

im with you an per the core rule book cards with +x gold modify the gold value on your plot card so you add you +x golt to your plot card then reduce it to 0 or atleast that is the order i would think it was done but ktom said there is no order to adding and reducing so i am not sure how that works

Multiple copies of Blockade act the same as a single copy. Each reduces opponents' income on their revealed plot to 0. FULL STOP. They do not count the amount of income X on an opponent's plot card and subtract X from it. They simply change the number that's there to a 0. Modifiers on non-plot cards still get added to the 0 that Blockade makes their plot card income amount.

OK, while there is no order to the modifiers and they do need to be factored in simultaneously, the nature of the "reduce to 0" modifier made the explanation in terms of a "-X" factor in the calculation a little too simple for when multiple "reduce to 0" modifiers are involved. Sorry for making it murkier by oversimplifying.

The question is whether the calculation is:

A. ((Base) to 0) + modifiers = total modifiers, or

B. ((Base + modifiers = total statistic) to 0) = 0

A. is the correct way to go because all modifiers, including the "to 0" one, must be added in at the same time. The calculation must be a 1-step process. You cannot do B as a 1-step process, although you can do A as a single step (even though you can think of it as multiple steps, too).

When you have more than one Blockade, ((Base) to 0) becomes (((Base) to 0) to 0), so it all comes out the same. You don't go "further" in the hole.

It's not technically a replacement effect because the word "instead" does not show up.

Anyway, things like the Wheelhouse and Blockade only apply to the "base" statistic, not the fully modified one. The reason is because it needs to be applied as part of the modification, not before or after as if modifying a separate characteristic. That is the rule/answer, but the gurus at FFG may have a better explanation for why if you want to send it in.

thank you it was really the core rulebook that caused all of this but i now can explain why the rule in the core book is not really correct. Thanks guys