Can the Viks manifest their avatar form with an opponent's Vik?

[Serigala]

This question won me a prize for most spurious rules question of the day at the Harrogate (UK) Icebreaker tournament yesterday. Appropriately, I won the Lawyer!

Can a Viktoria manifest the avatar form with an opponents avatar?

I had just read the ruling that a Vik is able to summon a replacement Vik with ' Another One' using an opponents Ronin. This just seemed a natural progression.

The wording in the book doesn't seem to preclude it, but this then raises all sorts of additional questions around whether you can piggyback on an opponents manifest requirements. i.e if an opponents Vik has whirlwinded can you count this towards your manifest requirement?

...in which case, why would the Viks be the exception. Could any other Master playing a mirror match count the opponents manifest requirements? Clearly this is not intended (I assume).

So I suppose the questions that actually need answering;

Are the Viks, by virtue of being a double master an exception to the normal rule that manifest requirements need to be carried out by models in their own crew (is this explicitly stated anywhere?), or can they include an opposing Vik?

Do the manifest requirements need to be carried out by the two models that are eventually going to manifest together, or are they crew dependant?

Could they therefore manifest with an opposing Vik?

Could this happen if either or both crews only had 1 Vik remaining?

Could this leave one crew with a single Vik and an avatar Vik on the table at the same time?

Edited February 13, 2012 by Serigala

[Mike3838]

Don't have the book handy to check the manifest rules, but don't you "attach" the avatar to a model you hired? At which point it makes sense (might not be explicitly worded) that the attached-to master can contribute to their own manifestation? Arent the manifest requirements worded mostly as "This model must..."?

Mike

[Ratty]

When the Manifest requirements say Viktoria or Viktorias it refers to the Viktorias the Avatar is attached to.

Sometimes you just have to use some Common Sense.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Ratty

[Serigala]

Don't have the book handy to check the manifest rules, but don't you "attach" the avatar to a model you hired? At which point it makes sense (might not be explicitly worded) that the attached-to master can contribute to their own manifestation? Arent the manifest requirements worded mostly as "This model must..."?

Mike

You might have it there Mike. I had been reading the Viks specific wording.

In the general rules we attach an avatar to our Master, which in the case of the Viks means attaching it to both Viks. Therefore the manifestation requires 2 'attached' Viks.

This addresses most of the questions...but might leave some wiggle room if your opponent Viks have also attached an avatar.

---------- Post added at 12:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 PM ----------

And there are many places in this game where 'common sense' is defied, and RAI while following common sense, are not always explicit within the wording.

There are multiple interactions which don't quite feel right...the fact that a Vik is able to recruit an enemy Ronin through Another One was the case in point which caused me to think along these lines.

[Ratty]

And there are many places in this game where 'common sense' is defied, and RAI while following common sense, are not always explicit within the wording.

I agree that common sense is not always enough. However in this case, not using it horrifically mangles things and makes certain phrases not make any sense. EG "other Viktoria" If you could use your opponents Viktoria it would be "another Viktoria". Also does it make any sense for my Ramos to be able to manifest because my opponents one has created two spiders.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Ratty

[Serigala]

Yes agreed. I had already made those points in the way I framed the question.

So far I have never been able to end a rules dispute with 'its common sense', so I tend to come here for clarification where potential or apparent rules query has already been clarified - rather than looking for new loopholes to exploit.

Yet every now and again the loopholes are ruled entirely justified so I see no harm in thrashing it all out here...even if unlikely to ever be an issue.

Also does it make any sense for my Ramos to be able to manifest because my opponents one has created two spiders.

Again I assumed this was not the case in the original post, but surely once we reach a statement like this we have suspended all sense of what makes sense?

Who are we to question the ways of the breach?

How can Ramos be fighting against an alternate self?

And could this be an intended vagary of a Master on Master mirror match?