Yui & Brewy

[hypoking]

Sesnei Yui can use the Discipline action to use Brewmaster's Drinking Contest action. Drinking contest forces models to take the (1) on the house action, which most models don't actually have printed anywhere on their cards. With Brewy this isn't an issue as standing near enough to the grem to be in the aura will grant them access to it through a second aura, but Yui doesn't have anyway to grant access to the action. So what happens when a model is required to take an action they don't have?

[The Godlyness]

No Action to take then no action.  they would still have to take the duel the effects of the duel would do nothing.

 

now if Sensei  Yu used this while near Brewmaster and the enemy model was within 3" of BM then it works as intended.

 

BM's Aura gives models the Tactical action (1) On the House: This model heals 1/2/3 Damage and gains the Poison +1 Condition." but other wise they have no action to take.

[hypoking]

Ok, I'm with you in the no On The House without Brewy. I'm trying to find something in the rules for illegal actions and I'm coming up short to make sense of the rest. What is your rational for the action defaulting back to the original after failing the duel, reaching (metaphorically) for On the House and not finding anything.

 

Closest parallel I can find in the rules is Set'er Off, but that only comes into play if the charge would have a legal target.

[Math Mathonwy]

I think that it is pretty obvious that an enemy failing the test would not do anything for that action.

[Cunning]

As I understand it, a model failing the duel would attempt to take the On the House action, but that would fail as it isn't allowed so the ap is wasted.

[Fetid Strumpet]

I would argue since the action isn't there to take the AP isn't wasted, and they are free to act normally. If I'm playing Lady J and I decide I want to take the Lure action and state I'm doing so, when my opponent points out I can't take the action, does Lady J lose the AP?

[Cunning]

But Lady J isn't being forced to take that action.

 

Is there a similar situation we could compare to?

[Fetid Strumpet]

I'm not sure honestly. My take is that if you can't provide the full amount of the required action then it's your wasted action. So if you can't provide the ability for my model to take the action you are forcing it to take, then your action breaks down. If the Developers for the next cycle created a Belle of some sort that could force opposing models to spend their AP to take the Lure action, but she didn't provide an ability that actually gave them that action, and it wasn't printed on her card, the ability just wouldn't work. I'm pretty certain the common interpretation wouldn't be that the opposing model just loses their AP, it would be that the ability on the Belle just didn't work.

 

But that's my interpretation, and how I would rule in a Tourney situation, outside a clarification from the FAQ. It is certainly something that could be argued, but I'm clear how I would rule it.

[Cunning]

Say a model was the subject of Uppers, Rooted and insignificant.  It can only take walk and interact actions due to uppers, cant walk due to rooted and cant interact due to insignificant.  

 

The way I see it, it can't do anything as it's not allowed to do anything.  Which is the same as if a model failed Drinking Contest but cant take the On the House action.

[Fetid Strumpet]

That is certainly one interpretation. I don't see it at all that way, as a parallel, but its certainly as valid an interpretation as mine. We will have to see if Wyrd thinks this is worthy of putting in the FAQ and if not this will most likely have to be handled by TO fiat at an organized event, or by mutual agreement or flipping cards in casual play.

 

Good discussion.

[Cunning]

Very true.  It's a niche problem that probably wont raise it's head that often.  But hopefully a ruling will be made.

[Myyrä]

AP is spent when an action is declared. Drinking contest forces model to take a test after the action is declared. Not spending AP after that is clearly not an option anymore.

[Fetid Strumpet]

You are certainly welcome to that interpretation.

[Bengt]

AP is spent when an action is declared. Drinking contest forces model to take a test after the action is declared. Not spending AP after that is clearly not an option anymore.

Isn't the argument that if drinking contest fails the declared action goes of like normal? Not that the AP gets refunded.