Playing a Pbem game at present and opponent (French) has brought up a query I am struggling to answer to whit:
Fr just held his last card of Turn 3 Early Season and I have one card left in hand and his query is
I'm passing this turn, but pg 4 of the rules para 2 implies you don't get to play another card unless you have 2 remaining - seems odd! Am I reading this right?
I dont believe this 'implied' ruling to be correct as potentially every turn the Brits would not get to play last card. Also if a player Holds last card he commits himself to playing ALL his cards following turn (and there is a Brit Held Card chit so it must be possible ?)
I think the rule mentioned above only covers situation wherein one player has used all cards and other has multiple cards remaining, but to be fair I cant find a specific rule to confirm/deny ?
'If a player has expended all his cards—or held his last card— while his opponent has two or more remaining, the opponent plays his cards one after another until finished.'
This entry uses the word 'if' so it is conditional. The condition does not apply so you ignore the whole section. What it may or may not imply is irrelevant. You don't get to use an 'implication' for a rule that does not apply.
So if the rule does not apply which one do you use? Well, the normal one:
The normal play is given here:
A.2 Action Phases. Beginning with the French, players alternate taking Action Phases. Each Action Phase consists of playing a card to activate leaders and units, build fortifications, or introduce an Event. Continue until both players have played all their cards.
Your opponent is not correct in my reading of the rules. He does not get to use an implication where none is required. When interpreting rules you take the literal direct usage first. By doing that you have the answer.
To be honest I haver never seen this issue come up and it seems very rules lawyery as it is obvious why that paragraph was inserted. It just answers the condition of 2 or more cards and nothing more. In fact it is a redundant paragraph but I assume included as it was asked previously and included for clarity. It implies nothing else.
I couldn't have said it better than Jack did. The man is a genius.
Thanks, that gave my wife a good laugh
Nice parsing of the rules. Playing cards in turn until both players have exhausted their hands (or have decided to hold back one card which the rules allow), is straightforward enough and is clear by the rules. The issue is what happens if an opponent has more than one card left when the other is finished playing cards? Unless addressed there may well have been questions, so the rules go on to specify that in such cases the opponent still left with cards plays them all out one at a time until done. Quite right about no other implication(s) regarding the playing of cards is possible - but that seldom deters true rules lawyers...