Recommend
7 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Greed» Forums » Rules

Subject: Pete "Repeat" Fell rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Gillum the Stoor
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Pete "Repeat" Fell's ability is, "Next turn, when you play an Action, return it to your hand afterwards."

The ability of numerous Actions includes something that applies on the "next turn." For example, Vandalism! has each opponent lose a Holding on the next turn.

Suppose that I play Pete Fell in turn 1 and then Vandalism in turn 2. Which of the following happens?

A. I take Vandalism back into my hand at the end of turn 2 (because of Pete). Because Vandalism is in my hand in turn 3 (instead of on the table), I don't get its benefit. I made a dumb move.

B. I take Vandalism back into my hand at the end of turn 2 (because of Pete). At the end of turn 3, I remember that I played Vandalism, and my opponents each lose a Holding. I can play Vandalism again on turn 3 (to benefit me in turn 4) or later.

C. I leave Vandalism on the table at the end of turn 2 because it hasn't taken full effect yet. At the end of turn 3, my opponents each lose a Holding (due to Vandalism) and then I take Vandalism back into my hand (due to Pete). I can play Vandalism again on turn 4 (to benefit me in turn 5) or later.

If the "afterwards" on Pete means "at the end of this turn," then A or B makes sense. If it instead means "after that Action has taken full effect," then C makes sense.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald X.
United States
flag msg tools
designer
gillum wrote:
Pete "Repeat" Fell's ability is, "Next turn, when you plan Action, return it to your hand afterwards."

The ability of numerous Actions includes something that applies on the "next turn." For example, Vandalism! has each opponent lose a Holding on the next turn.

Suppose that I play Pete Fell in turn 1 and then Vandalism in turn 2. Which of the following happens?

A. I take Vandalism back into my hand at the end of turn 2 (because of Pete). Because Vandalism is in my hand in turn 3 (instead of on the table), I don't get its benefit. I made a dumb move.

B. I take Vandalism back into my hand at the end of turn 2 (because of Pete). At the end of turn 3, I remember that I played Vandalism, and my opponents each lose a Holding. I can play Vandalism again on turn 3 (to benefit me in turn 4) or later.

C. I leave Vandalism on the table at the end of turn 2 because it hasn't taken full effect yet. At the end of turn 3, my opponents each lose a Holding (due to Vandalism) and then I take Vandalism back into my hand (due to Pete). I can play Vandalism again on turn 4 (to benefit me in turn 5) or later.

If the "afterwards" on Pete means "at the end of this turn," then A or B makes sense. If it instead means "after that Action has taken full effect," then C makes sense.

Pete means "directly after resolving that action." A "next turn" ability is resolved when you play it; it sets up something to happen later, but it's done doing that set-up, there's nothing more for that card to do. We leave it in play to track the ability, but it's just tracking it at that point, it isn't causing it.

So, if you play Pete on turn 3, and play a "next turn do x" card on turn 4, Pete will return that card to your hand on turn 4, and you'll just have to remember that that effect happens on turn 5.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gillum the Stoor
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
donaldx wrote:
gillum wrote:
Pete "Repeat" Fell's ability is, "Next turn, when you plan Action, return it to your hand afterwards."

The ability of numerous Actions includes something that applies on the "next turn." For example, Vandalism! has each opponent lose a Holding on the next turn.

Suppose that I play Pete Fell in turn 1 and then Vandalism in turn 2. Which of the following happens?

A. I take Vandalism back into my hand at the end of turn 2 (because of Pete). Because Vandalism is in my hand in turn 3 (instead of on the table), I don't get its benefit. I made a dumb move.

B. I take Vandalism back into my hand at the end of turn 2 (because of Pete). At the end of turn 3, I remember that I played Vandalism, and my opponents each lose a Holding. I can play Vandalism again on turn 3 (to benefit me in turn 4) or later.

C. I leave Vandalism on the table at the end of turn 2 because it hasn't taken full effect yet. At the end of turn 3, my opponents each lose a Holding (due to Vandalism) and then I take Vandalism back into my hand (due to Pete). I can play Vandalism again on turn 4 (to benefit me in turn 5) or later.

If the "afterwards" on Pete means "at the end of this turn," then A or B makes sense. If it instead means "after that Action has taken full effect," then C makes sense.

Pete means "directly after resolving that action." A "next turn" ability is resolved when you play it; it sets up something to happen later, but it's done doing that set-up, there's nothing more for that card to do. We leave it in play to track the ability, but it's just tracking it at that point, it isn't causing it.

So, if you play Pete on turn 3, and play a "next turn do x" card on turn 4, Pete will return that card to your hand on turn 4, and you'll just have to remember that that effect happens on turn 5.

That seems to be B.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Maginity
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
We had a different situation with Pete "Repeat" Fell when the Action was Seance!. The player wanted to be able to put Seance! back in his hand and immediately play it again. Apart from Seance! referring to "another card" (which I think alone invalidates this), I pointed out that permitting this would create an infinite money machine and thus would break the game.

Donald, can you clarify whether Seance! would return to your hand before or after "another card" is played? Even if "another card" doesn't permit Seance! to be played again, this could still make a difference if "another card" is Gambit! and the player would like to be able to discard Seance! as the cost for Gambit!, for example if it's the last turn of the game and the player doesn't have any other cards to discard to pay for Gambit!.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gillum the Stoor
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Pete Fell's card says, "Next turn, when you play an Action, return it to your hand afterwards."

I would take the "afterwards" to mean "after you complete the play, action, and abilities of that Action card."

If the card you play is Seance, and you get play another card (due to Seance), it must be another card from your hand; you have to do that before your play of Seance is completed and you take the card back. (The play of the other card is like a "subroutine" and part of the play of Seance.)

With this interpretation, Seance would not be back in your hand when the time comes to play another card, so you could not play it again. If you hold Gambit, you could choose to play it, but it would get you $30,000 only if you have another card in your hand to pay the cost.

After you get that $30,000 (due discarding another card), only then would Pete let you take Seance back into your hand.

There is another question here: does Pete let you take Seance back into your hand, Gambit, or both? I think that it would be both, but it would be clearer if Pete's card had said "Whenever."
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald X.
United States
flag msg tools
designer
mmaginity2 wrote:
We had a different situation with Pete "Repeat" Fell when the Action was Seance!. The player wanted to be able to put Seance! back in his hand and immediately play it again. Apart from Seance! referring to "another card" (which I think alone invalidates this), I pointed out that permitting this would create an infinite money machine and thus would break the game.

Donald, can you clarify whether Seance! would return to your hand before or after "another card" is played? Even if "another card" doesn't permit Seance! to be played again, this could still make a difference if "another card" is Gambit! and the player would like to be able to discard Seance! as the cost for Gambit!, for example if it's the last turn of the game and the player doesn't have any other cards to discard to pay for Gambit!.

Seance says "another" to try to be clearer, and I guess that did help you some. It can't play itself. But also Pete doesn't resolve until the action finishes resolving; since Seance plays another card, it's not done yet until you play that card. I don't think that ever matters (here for example Seance says "another").
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald X.
United States
flag msg tools
designer
gillum wrote:
There is another question here: does Pete let you take Seance back into your hand, Gambit, or both? I think that it would be both, but it would be clearer if Pete's card had said "Whenever."

Pete gets back every action you play that turn. I think "whenever" may be marginally clearer, but it seems better than that, because Wizards of the Coast uses "whenever" in Magic.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.