Plague Pits and Blight

[Kogan Style]

Hi,

I was playing my second game with Hamelin last night vs @wobbly_goggy and he pointed out something to me that we couldn't find a definitive answer for.

In every other instance where a model can hand out the Blight condition states "Blighted +1: At the end of the Turn, increase this Condition's value by 1." but in the Plague Pits it only states: "...Plague Swarm Markers gain the Blighted +1 Condition until the end of the game."

RAW gaining Blighted from the plague swarm marker wouldn't increase at the end of a turn as it doesn't have the extra text so do players have to:

1) Track the source of Blighted and only increase it if it comes from a source that states it increases

2) Assume that the condition Blighted+1 is the same across all instances of it and thus it increases as per other sources. 

 

 

[Adran]

The blighted condition is exactly the same regardless of the source. Cards normally only have 1 instance of the fuill text of a condition, and every subsequent mention just uses name

Because the plague pits are an upgrade to a card that already spells out what Blighted does, they have saved space and not written the full text

[wobbly_goggy]

I'm going to stick my neck out and probably receive a ton of abuse for my opinion, but here goes..

We played that Blight ticked up as it 'always' does and it was only in turn 3, whilst waiting for Hamelin to do some form of rats shenanigans that I carefully read the Plague Pits card. The reason the difference is important, is because Marcus and a Blessed had run/leaped to pits and interacted to get rid of them, and then tactically withdrawn (ie hidden) to avoid any nasty Bleeding Disease type stuff. 
If it's as written, they would have run around with Blighted +1, a stackable condition, on them, rather than the large amounts of blight that were being thrown around elsewhere.
If deliberate, I see this as a tactical way of getting Blight on minis that refuse to play nice (hide) or otherwise manage to avoid getting the condition. Being kept at one, until added to by other minis would mean it's useful, though not overpowered. And they'll probably get more Blight later anyway (apart from in the case of our game, where they didn't). 

However I am inclined to think that this was a case of a card which could have been written better. 'The blighted condition is exactly the same regardless of the source' doesn't wash with me, I'm afraid. As far as I am concerned, every condition which is not in the rulebook (ie not armour, burning...) should always have the description when it is on a separate card. That being said, even those which are in the rulebook, such as armour, frequently (always?) have the condition in bold and the description/added info afterwards in normal text.
An upgrade is attached to a stat card, it is not another part of it. Therefore the rule should be written out in full, as it is every other condition/ability etc across the whole game.
It looks to me like a flaw that got through writing/playtesting. But I hope it's a deliberate 'ooh wouldn't this be an interesting slightly different way of playing it'. 

[Adran]

3 minutes ago, wobbly_goggy said:

However I am inclined to think that this was a case of a card which could have been written better. 'The blighted condition is exactly the same regardless of the source' doesn't wash with me, I'm afraid. As far as I am concerned, every condition which is not in the rulebook (ie not armour, burning...) should always have the description when it is on a separate card. That being said, even those which are in the rulebook, such as armour, frequently (always?) have the condition in bold and the description/added info afterwards in normal text.
An upgrade is attached to a stat card, it is not another part of it. Therefore the rule should be written out in full, as it is every other condition/ability etc across the whole game.
It looks to me like a flaw that got through writing/playtesting. But I hope it's a deliberate 'ooh wouldn't this be an interesting slightly different way of playing it'. 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think its wrong, and trying to play with multiple different rules for the same condition would be a nightmare. 

The Upgrade cards are normally worded so that the model gains the action. Hamlin has the rules for Blighted (on his Trigger Taint),  so it isn't needed to re-write the rules for blighted on his card. 

I think this is the second case of an upgrade mentioning a condition that doesn't have the full text because the full text is on the card of the only model that can hire the upgrade. (The other one is Flicker on Asamis upgrade that gives her Flicker +7).  Granted older upgrades (Dreams of Pain was the one I thought to check) did contain the full text of conditions, but I think they have stopped doing that for space. 

 

[solkan]

3 hours ago, Kogan Style said:

Hi,

I was playing my second game with Hamelin last night vs @wobbly_goggy and he pointed out something to me that we couldn't find a definitive answer for.

In every other instance where a model can hand out the Blight condition states "Blighted +1: At the end of the Turn, increase this Condition's value by 1." but in the Plague Pits it only states: "...Plague Swarm Markers gain the Blighted +1 Condition until the end of the game."

RAW gaining Blighted from the plague swarm marker wouldn't increase at the end of a turn as it doesn't have the extra text so do players have to:

I think the most infuriating part of this claim is how you manage to ignore completely how Conditions are specified in the game.

Conditions are specified in two different ways in the text:

1.  The Condition name, followed by a colon and then the text of the Condition's rules.

2.  The Condition name by itself, not followed by a colon and the text of the Conditions rules.

When the rules specify the second form, you're expected to find the Condition's rules elsewhere.  Or did you think that all of those cards that say Poison +1 or Burning +1 or Paralyzed didn't do anything, either?

 

 

 

[wobbly_goggy]

1 hour ago, Adran said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think its wrong, and trying to play with multiple different rules for the same condition would be a nightmare. 

The Upgrade cards are normally worded so that the model gains the action. Hamlin has the rules for Blighted (on his Trigger Taint),  so it isn't needed to re-write the rules for blighted on his card. 

I think this is the second case of an upgrade mentioning a condition that doesn't have the full text because the full text is on the card of the only model that can hire the upgrade. (The other one is Flicker on Asamis upgrade that gives her Flicker +7).  Granted older upgrades (Dreams of Pain was the one I thought to check) did contain the full text of conditions, but I think they have stopped doing that for space. 

 

haha awesome! Which part, that the card is badly written or that it would be cool to play AW? Or all of the above?

Asami is an interesting example. If she summons models and they get Flicker, there's the added stipulation about sacrificing the model. The Yokai have the Fading Fight ability, which also mentions being sacrificed. However if, via 'The Fate of Mortals' upgrade an Oni got Flicker, what would happen? Yasanori are Oni, as are Kamaitchi, but they have no abilities or attacks that mention Flicker at all. In these instances, do they just run around with Flicker and nothing happens? Or will they have to be sacrificed even though they were hired? Nothing on the card, so going on your logic, in the unlikely event you decided to whack Flicker on a hired Oni, it would sacrifice when Flicker ends, regardless of its own abilities, or what was written on the card. If this is not  the case, and they do  just run around with Flicker, then I would assume the same would hold true for Blight.

[wobbly_goggy]

4 minutes ago, solkan said:

I think the most infuriating part of this claim is how you manage to ignore completely how Conditions are specified in the game.

Conditions are specified in two different ways in the text:

1.  The Condition name, followed by a colon and then the text of the Condition's rules.

2.  The Condition name by itself, not followed by a colon and the text of the Conditions rules.

When the rules specify the second form, you're expected to find the Condition's rules elsewhere.  Or did you think that all of those cards that say Poison +1 or Burning +1 or Paralyzed didn't do anything, either?

 

 

 

Perhaps I didn't explain or you didn't read properly. 
Poison, slow, armour, burning, paralyzed are all in the core rulebook so they don't need further clarification. 
'you're expected to find the Condition's rules elsewhere'  - for non-rulebook conditions I disagree wholeheartedly. Surely that was the point of simplifying and explaining everything on cards in the first place? So you don't have to go rummaging around for extra rules all the time?

[wobbly_goggy]

3 minutes ago, wobbly_goggy said:

haha awesome! Which part, that the card is badly written or that it would be cool to play AW? Or all of the above?

Asami is an interesting example. If she summons models and they get Flicker, there's the added stipulation about sacrificing the model. The Yokai have the Fading Fight ability, which also mentions being sacrificed. However if, via 'The Fate of Mortals' upgrade an Oni got Flicker, what would happen? Yasanori are Oni, as are Kamaitchi, but they have no abilities or attacks that mention Flicker at all. In these instances, do they just run around with Flicker and nothing happens? Or will they have to be sacrificed even though they were hired? Nothing on the card, so going on your logic, in the unlikely event you decided to whack Flicker on a hired Oni, it would sacrifice when Flicker ends, regardless of its own abilities, or what was written on the card. If this is not  the case, and they do  just run around with Flicker, then I would assume the same would hold true for Blight.

One further point to add to this - previously it was stated that an upgrade is simply 'in addition' to a card and it's obvious what the rule is from the stat card. 
'The Fate of Mortals' has the restriction 'Oni', so Yasanori can take it. But as Yas has nothing on his card, does this mean Flicker if given from him has no effect.


 

[Adran]

 

9 minutes ago, wobbly_goggy said:

haha awesome! Which part, that the card is badly written or that it would be cool to play AW? Or all of the above?

Asami is an interesting example. If she summons models and they get Flicker, there's the added stipulation about sacrificing the model. The Yokai have the Fading Fight ability, which also mentions being sacrificed. However if, via 'The Fate of Mortals' upgrade an Oni got Flicker, what would happen? Yasanori are Oni, as are Kamaitchi, but they have no abilities or attacks that mention Flicker at all. In these instances, do they just run around with Flicker and nothing happens? Or will they have to be sacrificed even though they were hired? Nothing on the card, so going on your logic, in the unlikely event you decided to whack Flicker on a hired Oni, it would sacrifice when Flicker ends, regardless of its own abilities, or what was written on the card. If this is not  the case, and they do  just run around with Flicker, then I would assume the same would hold true for Blight.

I think your opinion that conditions should have different rules and it would be cool is the opinion I disagreed with. We would then need rules to cover what happened to a model hat had blight from Hamlins attacks and then gained blight from a plague pit. 

 

3 minutes ago, wobbly_goggy said:

One further point to add to this - previously it was stated that an upgrade is simply 'in addition' to a card and it's obvious what the rule is from the stat card. 
'The Fate of Mortals' has the restriction 'Oni', so Yasanori can take it. But as Yas has nothing on his card, does this mean Flicker if given from him has no effect.
 

Good spot. That really should have the rules for Flicker on it.  

[wobbly_goggy]

3 minutes ago, Adran said:

 

I think your opinion that conditions should have different rules and it would be cool is the opinion I disagreed with. We would then need rules to cover what happened to a model hat had blight from Hamlins attacks and then gained blight from a plague pit. 

 

Good spot. That really should have the rules for Flicker on it.  

Yeah I get that completely. As I said, we played as 'everyone knows...' but for pure clarity's sake across the board explanations IMO makes sense.

[Kogan Style]

20 minutes ago, solkan said:

did you think that all of those cards that say Poison +1 or Burning +1 or Paralyzed didn't do anything, either

Totally. It made for an easier game in terms of tracking conditions but I'm not sure how my opponents felt. 

[santaclaws01]

9 hours ago, wobbly_goggy said:

haha awesome! Which part, that the card is badly written or that it would be cool to play AW? Or all of the above?

Asami is an interesting example. If she summons models and they get Flicker, there's the added stipulation about sacrificing the model. The Yokai have the Fading Fight ability, which also mentions being sacrificed. However if, via 'The Fate of Mortals' upgrade an Oni got Flicker, what would happen? Yasanori are Oni, as are Kamaitchi, but they have no abilities or attacks that mention Flicker at all. In these instances, do they just run around with Flicker and nothing happens? Or will they have to be sacrificed even though they were hired? Nothing on the card, so going on your logic, in the unlikely event you decided to whack Flicker on a hired Oni, it would sacrifice when Flicker ends, regardless of its own abilities, or what was written on the card. If this is not  the case, and they do  just run around with Flicker, then I would assume the same would hold true for Blight.

It's not an "added stipulation" it's what flicker does. Unless you can come up with some valid reason that Asami can spend 1 stone to gain 7 stones immediately thay are seperate from her cache, and can gain more by killing enemy models with her with absolutely no drawbacks?

[wobbly_goggy]

1 hour ago, santaclaws01 said:

It's not an "added stipulation" it's what flicker does. Unless you can come up with some valid reason that Asami can spend 1 stone to gain 7 stones immediately thay are seperate from her cache, and can gain more by killing enemy models with her with absolutely no drawbacks?

I don't think you read what I wrote