$20.00
$15.00
$5.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
27 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

The Others» Forums » Rules

Subject: Innocents and Voluntary Corruption rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andy Steinberg
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Last night while playing we came across an instance in which we were unsure of what to do. I forget the name of the mission that was played, but for the second part of the mission F.A.I.T.H. needed to defeat the Avatar, but could not do so unless they had an innocent with them. The player with the innocent was at 6 corruption and thinking about fighting the Avatar. If the fight occurred and he elected to take the voluntary corruption (which would put him at 7) would the innocent die before or after the fight occurred?

If the corruption is ruled to have taken place before the fight then theoretically the innocent died and the Avatar could not be defeated. But if the corruption is timed to happen as the fight occurs I would think that the Avatar could be defeated, and the innocent would just die after the fight is resolved, as if the hero had taken the corruption during the fight. I did not see anything in the rule book that made me feel confident one way or the other. Hoping that someone here can clarify.

For what it's worth I guessed that the corruption is taken before the actual fight happens, the innocent dies immediately and the Avatar would not be able to be defeated. But I was playing the Sin last night In this instance, the hero decided not to fight regardless, for other team related reasons.

Also, semi-related, and just for clarification. Is the Avatar able to be re-summoned after it is defeated, under normal circumstances?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Aull
United States
Owensboro
KY
flag msg tools
Gaming Collector/Enthusiast
badge
Gamer Without a Cause
mbmbmbmbmb
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Last night while playing we came across an instance in which we were unsure of what to do. I forget the name of the mission that was played, but for the second part of the mission F.A.I.T.H. needed to defeat the Avatar, but could not do so unless they had an innocent with them. The player with the innocent was at 6 corruption and thinking about fighting the Avatar. If the fight occurred and he elected to take the voluntary corruption (which would put him at 7) would the innocent die before or after the fight occurred?

If the corruption is ruled to have taken place before the fight then theoretically the innocent died and the Avatar could not be defeated. But if the corruption is timed to happen as the fight occurs I would think that the Avatar could be defeated, and the innocent would just die after the fight is resolved, as if the hero had taken the corruption during the fight. I did not see anything in the rule book that made me feel confident one way or the other. Hoping that someone here can clarify.

For what it's worth I guessed that the corruption is taken before the actual fight happens, the innocent dies immediately and the Avatar would not be able to be defeated. But I was playing the Sin last night In this instance, the hero decided not to fight regardless, for other team related reasons.

Also, semi-related, and just for clarification. Is the Avatar able to be re-summoned after it is defeated, under normal circumstances?


You initiate the fight, you choose whether or not to taken corruption, the SIN player chooses whether or not to play a card (and the FAITH player can re-decide their corruption choice), and then you roll dice.

I'd say if you initiate the fight, its locked in until the end, any corruption you take won't affect your tokens until afterwards.

Avatar can be re-summoned once defeated, as it has died and is considered a 'monster' from there on out.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Bradford
United States
Silverdale
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Hey Andy. Solid questions. I perused the rulebook, and kind of walked away with the same feeling. But I decided to broaden my view and look at the context of the game.

In short, the Innocent dies before the killing blow to the Avatar.

The entirety of the game is based on 'instant' responses to actions and reactions. This means that, more often or not, there's no 'stack' to chew through in order to resolve things. Natural state of the game.

In the instance of taking 7th Level Corruption, the player has the option to take or not to take the corruption until the dice leaves their hand and hits the table. At that point, maximum corruption has been taken (officially), and the Innocent's death is immediately triggered. Therefore, your FAITH players wouldn't be able to 'max out' and still complete the mission.

My interpretation. (Edit: Under the 'Innocent Token' portion of the rulebook, it does use the words 'automatically kills')

Your second question. In the 'Choose Sin' part of the setup, it instructs the Sins Player to take their monsters. In parenthesis, it then specifies Abominations, Controller, and Avatar. Therefore labeling the Avatar a 'monster' and giving it all the benefits and limitations of other monsters. When it dies, it becomes a 'dead monster' that can be chosen to spawn.

In short, yes, after FAITH nixes your poor, defenseless, innocent Avatar, you can respawn it normally.

Hope this helps. I'm also open to counters to all of this. I've been looking for holes in the game avidly.


(*Edited for further clarification and general spelling/grammar mistakes.)
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Harrow
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
Your second question. In the 'Choose Sin' part of the setup, it instructs the Sins Player to take their monsters. In parenthesis, it then specifies Abominations, Controller, and Avatar. Therefore labeling the Avatar a 'monster' and giving it all the benefits and limitations of other monsters. When it dies, it becomes a 'dead monster' that can be chosen to spawn.

Just for completeness, the Acolytes also count as Monsters, as well as the Hellfire Club members.

You can summon dead Acolytes at the end of the turn. You cannot summon any Hellfire Club members though, because they are removed from the game entirely when they are defeated.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kent
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Just to argue the other position:

The official ruling on ties when completing missions is that the Hero Player wins the game if the last replaceable Hero dies while simultaneously completing the final mission.

Also, IIRC, an FAQ ruling was that Heroes resolve first during conflicting timing with the Sins player. Basically, the Heroes always seem to be given the edge in timing resolutions, as they are already fighting against hard odds.

Given the above, a case could be made that the timing effect in this case should be resolved in the Hero's favor. It would be somewhat thematic, as well, IMO.

However, I do not have a strong opinion in either direction and would love to see an official ruling.

Edits: spelling, grammar, clarification, etc.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Blasco

Brier
Washington
msg tools
mbmb
I don't have the game yet, so I can't speak for the exact wording, but typically in games, you resolve an action completely before you move to resolving something different, unless explicitly told otherwise. In my mind, when you start the combat, you wouldn't resolve anything else until the combat is finished. Part of the combat is taking corruption, so it makes sense to me that you wouldn't resolve anything outside of combat until the combat is resolved.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Atul Deshpande
United States
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
icarusmustburn wrote:

Also, IIRC, an FAQ ruling was that Heroes resolve first during conflicting timing with the Sins player. Basically, the Heroes always seem to be given the edge in timing resolutions, as they are already fighting against hard odds.

Given the above, a case could be made that the timing effect in this case should be resolved in the Hero's favor. It would be somewhat thematic, as well,


I remember this FAQ, the exact question was to resolve only the beginning of round/turn hero effects vs sin playing beginning of round/turn card. I believe the logic there was that since the hero's effects are already spelt out on the board, they take effect before the sin cards.

The question and answer applied to only this scenario as far as I understood.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Bradford
United States
Silverdale
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Well...
(pg.26)Innocent Tokens "If the Hero reaches the maximum level of Corruption, he automatically kills any Innocent Tokens in his possession, removing them from the game!"

(pg.39) Voluntary Corruption "The Hero must always choose whether to take Corruption or not before any dice are rolled. If he decides to take Corruption, raise his Corruption Level by one by moving his Tentacle markers one slot to the right."

The keys here are the use of the word 'automatically' in the Innocent Tokens excerpt and the big bold 'before' in the Voluntary Corruption bit. Since the decision is made before the roll, and the track is raised before the roll, the Innocent dies immediately before the roll.

(*Edited to correct typo of 'immediately' into 'automatically', as the rules excerpt says.)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Steinberg
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Except the word 'immediately' is not in that excerpt... The word 'automatically' is used instead.

TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
Well...
(pg.26)Innocent Tokens "If the Hero reaches the maximum level of Corruption, he automatically kills any Innocent Tokens in his possession, removing them from the game!"

(pg.39) Voluntary Corruption "The Hero must always choose whether to take Corruption or not before any dice are rolled. If he decides to take Corruption, raise his Corruption Level by one by moving his Tentacle markers one slot to the right."

The keys here are the use of the word 'immediately' in the Innocent Tokens excerpt and the big bold 'before' in the Voluntary Corruption bit. Since the decision is made before the roll, and the track is raised before the roll, the Innocent dies immediately before the roll.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Bradford
United States
Silverdale
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Except the word 'immediately' is not in that excerpt... The word 'automatically' is used instead.


So... does that nullify the point? Either would work. It was a typo.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kent
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sort of torn on this one. Either way can be justified. The argument may tilt slightly in favor of killing the innocent as soon as the corruption is maxed out. In the spirit of the game, though, I would like to see it tilt the other way.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
CK Lai
Malaysia
Subang Jaya
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
icarusmustburn wrote:
Sort of torn on this one. Either way can be justified. The argument may tilt slightly in favor of killing the innocent as soon as the corruption is maxed out. In the spirit of the game, though, I would like to see it tilt the other way.


Agreed about the timing. Wish CMON would put out an FAQ.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike
United States
Olathe
Kansas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
icarusmustburn wrote:
Sort of torn on this one. Either way can be justified. The argument may tilt slightly in favor of killing the innocent as soon as the corruption is maxed out. In the spirit of the game, though, I would like to see it tilt the other way.


I have to agree with you here. The rules to me say the innocent dies first, but the spirit of the game cries out for the sacrificial win!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Steinberg
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Except the word 'immediately' is not in that excerpt... The word 'automatically' is used instead.


So... does that nullify the point? Either would work. It was a typo.


Yes I think it would. They are different words entirely. If one is not the writer of the rule book, how could one claim that it is simply a typo? To me automatically means that the innocent is killed without any rolls or other conditions. Immediately would mean at that very instant. Two totally different definitions, based entirely on which word is used. I disagree with you on the premise that both words would have the same meaning in this context.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Blasco

Brier
Washington
msg tools
mbmb
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Except the word 'immediately' is not in that excerpt... The word 'automatically' is used instead.


So... does that nullify the point? Either would work. It was a typo.


Yes I think it would. They are different words entirely. If one is not the writer of the rule book, how could one claim that it is simply a typo? To me automatically means that the innocent is killed without any rolls or other conditions. Immediately would mean at that very instant. Two totally different definitions, based entirely on which word is used. I disagree with you on the premise that both words would have the same meaning in this context.


I think this is important. In my mind, the rule about taking corruption BEFORE rolling dice tells you than you can't decide to do it retroactively. However, in that instance, you are in the middle of your combat action, and (in my opinion) would not resolve the killing of the innocent token until that combat action has been resolved.

Certainly this should be addressed in a FAQ, but I guess to me it doesn't make sense thematically that the innocent token would die before the combat. Also, since the voluntary corruption only happens when rolling the dice, it seems to me that it is directly tied into the dice roll, and not a separate action that happens before you roll the dice. You have to declare it beforehand, so people can't see what they roll and decide to take the corruption only if they need it, but since you can't decide to just take corruption and not roll dice, I don't see why it would be resolved separately from the dice roll.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Bradford
United States
Silverdale
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Except the word 'immediately' is not in that excerpt... The word 'automatically' is used instead.


So... does that nullify the point? Either would work. It was a typo.


Yes I think it would. They are different words entirely. If one is not the writer of the rule book, how could one claim that it is simply a typo? To me automatically means that the innocent is killed without any rolls or other conditions. Immediately would mean at that very instant. Two totally different definitions, based entirely on which word is used. I disagree with you on the premise that both words would have the same meaning in this context.


I think you misunderstand me. My initial post contained a typo, not the rulebook. You're correct; I can't claim that it is simply a typo in the rulebook. And I didn't.

At this point we're arguing semantics. Turns out in the end, resolution would probably be best made at your gaming table with your gaming group at that time to set a precedent. Until the much desired (apparently) CMON TO7S FAQ provides a solution to this particular instance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Steinberg
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
TheLoneSubmariner wrote:
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Except the word 'immediately' is not in that excerpt... The word 'automatically' is used instead.


So... does that nullify the point? Either would work. It was a typo.


Yes I think it would. They are different words entirely. If one is not the writer of the rule book, how could one claim that it is simply a typo? To me automatically means that the innocent is killed without any rolls or other conditions. Immediately would mean at that very instant. Two totally different definitions, based entirely on which word is used. I disagree with you on the premise that both words would have the same meaning in this context.


I think you misunderstand me. My initial post contained a typo, not the rulebook. You're correct; I can't claim that it is simply a typo in the rulebook. And I didn't.

At this point we're arguing semantics. Turns out in the end, resolution would probably be best made at your gaming table with your gaming group at that time to set a precedent. Until the much desired (apparently) CMON TO7S FAQ provides a solution to this particular instance.


Definite misunderstanding, I got it now. I hope you didn't feel as though I was attacking you.

I do still think there is a large difference between 'automatically' and 'immediately' and those would not be synonyms for this case, but I can definitely see 'automatically' interpreted multiple ways. I hope that CMON releases an official FAQ sooner than later. Although I'd imagine that would probably wait until after general release to have a larger sample size of possible complaints/misunderstandings.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Bradford
United States
Silverdale
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
Definite misunderstanding, I got it now. I hope you didn't feel as though I was attacking you.

I do still think there is a large difference between 'automatically' and 'immediately' and those would not be synonyms for this case, but I can definitely see 'automatically' interpreted multiple ways. I hope that CMON releases an official FAQ sooner than later. Although I'd imagine that would probably wait until after general release to have a larger sample size of possible complaints/misunderstandings.


No troubles. Like I said; semantics. The Others DOES need a solid FAQ from CMON. On this we agree. I'd bet we'd see one about a month after it goes retail.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Augustine
United States
AUSTIN
TX
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I would play this as the innocent dying before the combat completes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Rush
msg tools
I say, the Hero threw the innocent at the Avatar to distract him, which is why he gets all those bonuses. So the Innocent dies at the same time the combat resolves. Depending on the story/objective of the mission, I could see the ruling going either way. Coming from an RPG background, if my group comes into a questionable situation like this, we tend to go with whoever can come up with a good thematic reason for a specific ruling. If killing the avatar was the main goal, then sacrificing the innocent may be necessary and so they can kill the avatar, but if the objective is to clear all the monsters then the innocent's life may not have been worth it. I'm not sure of all the scenario's story elements, so I couldn't say which was we would rule, but that is how we handle tough decisions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Blasco

Brier
Washington
msg tools
mbmb
Well, another thought came to my mind. Is the rule for that scenario that you need the innocent in order to fight the avatar(I don't have the game yet, so I can't look it up)? If so, and you can't take corruption without fighting, does that mean as soon as you say you're going to use corruption you can't fight? Because if that's the case, since at that point you can't fight, you therefor can't take corruption, so the innocent wouldn't be killed, and it becomes an endless cycle.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Steinberg
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Krushhhhh wrote:
I say, the Hero threw the innocent at the Avatar to distract him, which is why he gets all those bonuses. So the Innocent dies at the same time the combat resolves. Depending on the story/objective of the mission, I could see the ruling going either way. Coming from an RPG background, if my group comes into a questionable situation like this, we tend to go with whoever can come up with a good thematic reason for a specific ruling. If killing the avatar was the main goal, then sacrificing the innocent may be necessary and so they can kill the avatar, but if the objective is to clear all the monsters then the innocent's life may not have been worth it. I'm not sure of all the scenario's story elements, so I couldn't say which was we would rule, but that is how we handle tough decisions.


I like this; the best thematic description winning out sounds like a really fun way to do it!

markblasco wrote:
Well, another thought came to my mind. Is the rule for that scenario that you need the innocent in order to fight the avatar(I don't have the game yet, so I can't look it up)? If so, and you can't take corruption without fighting, does that mean as soon as you say you're going to use corruption you can't fight? Because if that's the case, since at that point you can't fight, you therefor can't take corruption, so the innocent wouldn't be killed, and it becomes an endless cycle.


The mission was 'Into The Breach'. Under mission 2B it says 'Destroy the Avatar. May only be achieved by Heroes with at least one innocent attached'. They would also need an innocent attached to complete the 3rd mission, but that is subject to a similar ruling as this.
I think that the Avatar could still be destroyed by the Heroes without an innocent attached, since it would be eligible to be summoned after the round is over if killed. So theoretically one could still fight the battle without the innocent attached, it would just do nothing to complete the mission. The player could as opt not to take the corruption and try the fight without being at max corruption.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
CK Lai
Malaysia
Subang Jaya
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
StoneTownLegacy wrote:
markblasco wrote:
Well, another thought came to my mind. Is the rule for that scenario that you need the innocent in order to fight the avatar(I don't have the game yet, so I can't look it up)? If so, and you can't take corruption without fighting, does that mean as soon as you say you're going to use corruption you can't fight? Because if that's the case, since at that point you can't fight, you therefor can't take corruption, so the innocent wouldn't be killed, and it becomes an endless cycle.


The mission was 'Into The Breach'. Under mission 2B it says 'Destroy the Avatar. May only be achieved by Heroes with at least one innocent attached'. They would also need an innocent attached to complete the 3rd mission, but that is subject to a similar ruling as this.
I think that the Avatar could still be destroyed by the Heroes without an innocent attached, since it would be eligible to be summoned after the round is over if killed. So theoretically one could still fight the battle without the innocent attached, it would just do nothing to complete the mission. The player could as opt not to take the corruption and try the fight without being at max corruption.


Yes. Looks like this is one way of doing it: the hero may take corruption, just not MAXIMUM corruption. So the hero gets 3 confirmed hits, and needs 4 from the dice. Do-able if it's Thorley equipped with the Ice Sword, Police NPC and maybe backed up by another hero in the space.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam K
United States
Tulsa
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Official answer here
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
CK Lai
Malaysia
Subang Jaya
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
DeathWarden wrote:
Official answer here


Thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.