exclamation-circle Timing of "Kindred Spirits" under "The Rising"

05 Feb 2013 08:49 #44863 by Ohlmann

LSJ has ruled that the effects of an action card take place before other effects of the action, but it is an arbitrary ruling.

How is it "arbitrary" to suggest that card text takes precedence over effects generated by card text?


It's not, but it's not what LSJ suggest either.

LSJ have arbitrary decided one interpretation (it's part of the action), with its problem, over another interpretation (it's a trigger on the action being successful), which have the exact same wording and a different set of problem.

Also, "arbitrary" is applicable to both decision in this cases : something have to be decided, and cardtext don't help here.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 Apr 2016 18:19 #76497 by Hakuron

[...]
Floppy said he would add it to the review list, so let's wait for his final changes (if any).

I guess I missed the solving of this little riddle.
How did Floppy decide?

National Coordinator Germany
nc [dot] germany [at] magenta [dot] de

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
19 Apr 2016 17:09 - 19 Apr 2016 20:33 #76532 by Robert Scythe
There is nothing inherently wrong with LSJ's ruling/clarification. Does it work logically and soundly? Yes. Is it intuitive? Not necessarily since a discussion such as this one has made Pascal add it to the review list. When wording on cards is exactly the same and nothing in the rules claims that one should be resolved before the other, why not go with the words and phrasings as they are written?

Certain words and phrases, especially in other language translations, also make it more difficult to explain the arbitrary decisions that attempt to codify a specific blanket ruling for different particular situations. It adds yet another step to go through when just ordering effects that seem to happen at the same time does not require these additional partitions and is used during many situations throughout the course of the game already, with the plus that even a beginner can grasp with little to no difficulty.
Last edit: 19 Apr 2016 20:33 by Robert Scythe. Reason: clutter
The following user(s) said Thank You: Lönkka

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
19 Apr 2016 17:36 #76534 by Brum
It is another example of rulings that say "VtES doesn't have a stack, but it has a stack for some things".

1. Make it all work at the same time.
2. When some things happen simultaneously, the player with the impulse chooses order of effects he controls.

As with any big ruling in VtES this might open another can of worms...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2016 09:19 - 20 Apr 2016 09:22 #76538 by Ankha

It is another example of rulings that say "VtES doesn't have a stack, but it has a stack for some things".

1. Make it all work at the same time.
2. When some things happen simultaneously, the player with the impulse chooses order of effects he controls.

As with any big ruling in VtES this might open another can of worms...

You misunderstanding the definition of the stack, and mixing it with a simple chain of things happening one after the other.

In a stack, you pile up things, then unpile them in reverse order. In games such as Magic, you can even start piling again other things after some of them have been unpiled.

In a chain of events, A -> B -> C, A happens, then B, then C.

With regards to the OP, the chain of event is for Kindred Spirit: A -> B
A: resolve the action (Rising prevents you from gaining a pool if you don't have the Edge)
B: Gain the Edge if the bleed was successful.

If the unnamed bleeds, the chain is the same: A -> B
A: resolve the action.
B: Two events trigger at the same: gain the Edge, and gaining 2 pool from the unnamed special text.

The pool gain of the unnamed is not part of the action resolution (because his cardtext doesn't say that it's part of an action).

Since two events happen at the same time, the acting player choose how to order them.

There's no stack involved there.

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 20 Apr 2016 09:22 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Apr 2016 13:27 #76545 by Brum
It depends on your point of view, Obi-Wan.

Any time you have a set order of events that trigger each other in order, you can look at it as a stack.
Also (and that's my issue with Bundi) these games are a mathematical system described with human language.
You can have Last In - Last Out stacks and First In - Last Out stacks.

Oh and I understand both examples completely (Kindred Spirits and The unnamed).
However, it is tricky for new players.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.124 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum