Brew and Yu

[Dafty]

If sensei Yu copys brewmaster drinking contest and brewmaster drinking contest was up an enemy model would need to take 2 wp 12 duels. And if they fail the first one do they still flip for the second duel?

Also what happens if they are nit close enough to brewmaster to take the (1) on the house. Does the action fail or do they still take the original action ?

[asrian]

Yes, if both Brewy and Yu had Drinking Contest up, and an enemy were in range of both they would have to take two tests.

If they are outside of Brewmaster's range to take the On The House ability, then they would still need to take the WP test, but would not have any consequences to failing it as they wouldn't have to take the On The House ability (as Yu doesn't have that aura).

If a model failed 1 test, they'd have to take an On the House Interact for 1AP. If they failed the second, they'd have to take a second AP for another On The House. Auras, unless otherwise noted, do stack.

[Dafty]

Ok if a nurse gave a model drugs so the can only take walk or ml actions. And they fail the duel would they take the on the house.

On your last bit would it cost them an ap. Or due to actions causing actions clause they would take the on the house twice but only have spent 1 ap.

[asrian]

The nurse  Take your Meds  is Walk or Interact actions only, so would still have to do Drinking Contest if aura was up.  If something did prohibit the model from taking action then they'd have to take the test for Drinking Game, but wouldn't be able to take the action for On The House.


Last bit - It would cost the enemy model two AP if they lost both Drinking Contest Auras.  



*Edit - Kept thinking Brewmaster's action was an Interact. On The House is a tactical action, so Take Your Meds would prohibit a model from taking doing On The House

[hippodruid]

I think he might have been referring to Hallucinogens, not Uppers, which only allows for Ml actions.  I suppose the situation also could apply to models with Insignificant.  Are the AP just wasted then?  I'd lean toward "yes," but I'm nowhere near sure on that.

[Adran]

I don't have the rules to hand, but surely if you fail both duels, the second on the house  action is replacing the on the house action that you are now doing from the first duel. So no you aren't spending 2 Ap, or healing twice

[asrian]

I think he might have been referring to Hallucinogens, not Uppers, which only allows for Ml actions.  I suppose the situation also could apply to models with Insignificant.  Are the AP just wasted then?  I'd lean toward "yes," but I'm nowhere near sure on that.

Yeah, I'm not sure either on the wasted AP or not. I'd lean toward no, but only because I would view it like trying to use Terrifying on a model immune to Paralyze. You still would have to take the test for it (i.e. Drinking Game), but pass or fail are unphased by the effect (i.e. being forced to take the action of On The House).

That's my reasoning anyway until we have a more definitive answer.

[asrian]

I don't have the rules to hand, but surely if you fail both duels, the second on the house  action is replacing the on the house action that you are now doing from the first duel. So no you aren't spending 2 Ap, or healing twice

They are counted as two separate tests, each having the consequence of if you fail then you take a 1AP action On The House. As far as I can see, (i.e my opinion and how I interpret the abilities only) it would have the double effect of using up both your AP if you failed twice as they are two separate tests from two separate sources. 

I would like to see this in the FAQ as Yu throws a monkey wrench in this ability for ease of interpretation. Either way it's damn evil.

[Adran]

I'm pretty sure that the on the house test is after the AP is spent. As such you don't spend the extra AP. If I were to declare a (0) action and fail my on the house test, I still end up taking the on the house action.

 

I remember a very long discussion with Omenbringer about Charging and On the house. If you declare the charge, and fail the on the house test, you just get the 1 On the house even though you've spent 2 AP

 

But this is all memory, so I'm going to go and read the cards and the rules and return to the thread later.

 

Maybe now we know whay the brewmaster has been so delayed. Its to avoid these questions...

[Seregon]

Just for reference:

Brewmaster:

(0) Drinking Contest: Until the end of the Turn, enemy models within 3 of this model which declare an Action must succeed on a TN 12 Wp duel or take the (1) On the House Action instead.

 

Sensei Yu:

(0) Disciple (Ca 6 / TN: 11 ): This model immidiately takes a (0) Action belonging to a friendly Leader in play. <and some additional irrlevant stuff>.

 

 

If I'm not mistaken completely you do the following:

 

Spend 0-2 AP to declare Action X.

Take Wp test #1

Win test #1 -> take Wp test #2

Fail test #2 -> Declare On the House instead but instead of taking it, take Wp test #2

Win test #2 -> Take Action X

If you fail #2 then you take On the House.

Action and 1st AP completed.

 

Since it's an aura you'll have to make the Wp test twice no matter what, but you can't perform On the House twice. It also won't force you to spend more than the initially declared amount of AP.

[Dafty]

I did say only walk OR melee. Both suffice for the question. Neither one allows you to take the desired action. So in effect the ap is wasted. Now apply that to Yu not being near brewmaster. You can't take the action (you don't have it to take it) action fails.

That's my reasoning.

On the double tap of wp 12 duels. I see it as

Pass or fail contest 1. Still must take contest 2. Stacking effects and all that jazz.

Fail contest 1. take on the house action. Take contest 2.

Fail contest 2. ??????? Profit

Fail contest 1. take on the house action take contest 2

Pass contest 2. ????? Profit.

Pass contest 1. Take contest 2

Fail contest 2. Take on the house

Pass contest 1. take contest 2

Pass contest 2. do original action.

With the release of brewmaster (SOON tm) these questions need definitive answers.

[asrian]

I'm pretty sure that the on the house test is after the AP is spent. As such you don't spend the extra AP. If I were to declare a (0) action and fail my on the house test, I still end up taking the on the house action.

 

I remember a very long discussion with Omenbringer about Charging and On the house. If you declare the charge, and fail the on the house test, you just get the 1 On the house even though you've spent 2 AP

 

But this is all memory, so I'm going to go and read the cards and the rules and return to the thread later.

 

Maybe now we know whay the brewmaster has been so delayed. Its to avoid these questions...

On the Charge response, you take a test for each attack action in the charge.

Per FAQ:

 

Q: If the Brewmaster has used the Drinking Contest Action and is targeted by a Charge, what happens if the charging model fails one (or more) of the duels caused by Drinking Contest?

A: If the model fails the Drinking Contest duel, it must take the (1) On the House Action instead of making an Attack. The model would test separately for each Attack. So, if a model charged the Brewmaster and failed the Drinking Contest duel on its first Attack, it would need to take the On the House Action instead of making the first Attack, but it would then test again for its second Attack.

[Cunning]

If the charge is declared within the aura and you fail the test you fail the entire charge.  I think that's what Adran meant

[asrian]

If the charge is declared within the aura and you fail the test you fail the entire charge.  I think that's what Adran meant

So someone declaring a charge would have to take three tests by that interpretation. Once for the charge itself, then once for each attack action, even though they were part of the original charge, but the FAQ says you take one per each individual attack. 

[Dafty]

Asrian. Did you declare an action within 3" of brewmaster bubble. If so. Take a wp 12 duel.

So yes a model would need to take 3 tests if it declares charge action near Brew.

Caveat. If the first action fails (ie the charge) no charge takes place. So no additional attacks or so duels.

[Cunning]

I believe the FAQ is referring to charging into the aura from outside it.  

If you charge from within it and fail the test the charge completely fails so you dont generate any attack actions.

Not that it would matter as if you could charge you wouldn't be in melee range anyway.

[Bengt]

They are counted as two separate tests, each having the consequence of if you fail then you take a 1AP action On The House. As far as I can see, (i.e my opinion and how I interpret the abilities only) it would have the double effect of using up both your AP if you failed twice as they are two separate tests from two separate sources. 

I would like to see this in the FAQ as Yu throws a monkey wrench in this ability for ease of interpretation. Either way it's damn evil.

This is an Actions Causing Actions type of situation, p 38. The forced action doesn't cost any AP.

[Adran]

So someone declaring a charge would have to take three tests by that interpretation. Once for the charge itself, then once for each attack action, even though they were part of the original charge, but the FAQ says you take one per each individual attack. 

 

Yes, the FAQ isn't answerign the question of if you declare a charge whilst in the bubble it is answering the question of if the charge move ends in the bubble. (Which is a shame, the first question is more useful but the answer is fairly obvious)(at least to me, these threads always make me question what is obvious to others).  

 

I think Seragon is spot on here.

the key word is instead. So the on the house action replaces the original action. Which means for the second failed test there are 2 possibilities, eitehr you replace the on the house action, with an on the house action, or you can't replace the original action as it no longer exists. Regardl;ess you will only end up doing 1 on the house action if you fail 1 or 2 of the Wp duels.

 

For what its worh, I think drinking contest should strictly be errataed to specify non (1) On the house actions, otehrwise you ought to take the test every time you declare on the house, and just keep burning through the deck until you pass the Wp12 test. (After I fail, I declare On the house instead, so I have to take a wp test or replace that action with on the house etc.).

[Myyrä]

I hate the wording of Drinking Contest. Like Adran said, technically you have to take the test even when taking On the House action, so every time you fail the test you end up in a loop that ends when you succeed in it once. I don't actually believe this is how it should be played, but it annoys me to no end.

The real problem with the aura is that it is quite unclear what happens when the target can't take On the House action for some reason. Asrian gave two different answers depending on why the model can't take the action. (ie. it doesn't have it and it isn't allowed to take it.) I refuse to believe that the answer varies based on why the model can't take On the House action.

[Dafty]

Drinking contest should say any enemy model Declaring an Action that is not (1) On The House. Must take a wp 12 duel or take the (1) on the house action.

No infinite loop. But still no resolution if don't have or can't perform the action.

[Kadeton]

I hate the wording of Drinking Contest. Like Adran said, technically you have to take the test even when taking On the House action, so every time you fail the test you end up in a loop that ends when you succeed in it once. I don't actually believe this is how it should be played, but it annoys me to no end.

Easily resolved: you don't declare the On the House action as a result of Drinking Contest. You declare the action you want to take, make the test, then perform either the action you declared or the On the House action based on the result.

The real problem with the aura is that it is quite unclear what happens when the target can't take On the House action for some reason. Asrian gave two different answers depending on why the model can't take the action. (ie. it doesn't have it and it isn't allowed to take it.) I refuse to believe that the answer varies based on why the model can't take On the House action.

That is definitely a significant problem. I would be tempted to rule it that if the model cannot take the On the House action, for any reason, then it takes the action it declared instead. Effectively, Sensei Yu can't challenge you to a drinking contest if he doesn't have any booze to hand, and a model tripping on hallucinogens will continue to flip out rather than calm down for a drink.

[Dafty]

Easily resolved: you don't declare the On the House action as a result of Drinking Contest. You declare the action you want to take, make the test, then perform either the action you declared or the On the House action based on the result..

Sadly not true. When it says take the (1) on the house action you have to follow the steps of taking an action. Which step 1 is declare the action choose target etc. No ap is spent but the original action still never happens.

Charge Actions each attack action generated has to be declared. Same with any onslaught like triggers.

[Kadeton]

Sadly not true. When it says take the (1) on the house action you have to follow the steps of taking an action. Which step 1 is declare the action choose target etc. No ap is spent but the original action still never happens.

Why? You've already done Step 1 - Declare Action and spend AP. At the end of Step 1 you handle the duel for Drinking Contest. (p. 37)

If Drinking Contest said that the Action fails and then the model takes the On the House Action, I would agree with you - but it doesn't. There's no reset to declaring a new Action, the Action doesn't fail, it's just treated as though your original declaration was an On the House Action instead. You go straight to Perform Duels (there aren't any for On the House) and Resolve Results (heal 1/2/3 and gain Poison +1), and you're done.

[Dafty]

Yes you did step 1 for the original action. For instance if you declared a walk action Which would happen first a disengaging strike or drinking contest.

You still have to declare what action you are taking in this case you only get the choice of (1) on the house. Step 1 declare x fail duel. Step one declare on the house.

For instance how would you resolve if for some reason Jack daw had a curse on his own model that when ever a tactical action is Declared takes damage. (Drowning?) Declares the attack fails the wp duel. Now declares a tactical action (1) on the house. Takes damage etc.

You very well might be right but the wording is so muddled that trying to figure any thing out is amazing.

[Kadeton]

My go-to problem solving method in these cases - where "the wording is so muddled that trying to figure any thing out is amazing" - is to see which interpretation breaks the game (directly or by implication), and which does not.

As you point out, in several ways, the interpretation that Drinking Contest ends the current Action and forces the model to perform an entirely new On the House Action, with its own declaration step, is very problematic. It raises a host of game-breaking interactions, like your Jack Daw example. As you've pointed out, the very fact of generating a new Action will provoke a new duel, with an infinite-until-succeeded loop - that can't be the intention.

The interpretation I've put forward, where Drinking Contest simply changes the declared Action (without having to declare it again), does not seem to have any such issues. I can't find anything to contradict it in the rules - in fact, I think it's a stronger case even going purely by RAW, because Drinking Contest never states that the attempted Action fails (in the way that a Manipulative duel, which is done at the same point in the sequence, does).

Given the choice, I'll take the interpretation which seems to work properly over the one that doesn't.

[Dafty]

Also since step 1 is declare intended action. Does drinking contest happen before or after you spend ap.

If I declare a 2 action. And instead take the 1. Do I still have 1 ap then?

For clarity

1. Declare Action and Spend AP

The player begins an Action by announcing to her opponent what Action the model is taking. This is done for clarity, and because some models might react to certain Actions. The most common reaction is a disengaging strike, which will prevent a model from moving out of engagement range.

The model also spends the AP required to perform the declared Action. If the model does not have enough AP required for the Action, no AP are spent and the Action is ended without any further effect.

The model also declares any variable in the Action. This depends on the Action, as some Actions have different variables, or affect multiple targets.

It is during this step that the model declares a target. Unless specified by the Action, the target must be in range, and the model must have Line of Sight to the target. Line of Sight (LoS) and Range are discussed further on page 40.

Sometimes a target will have special Abilities (such as Terrifying) that requires a duel in response to being targeted. These duels are handled now, after Ap is spent and targets are declared.