7 replies to this topic

[Sulpures]

Just to make sure.

 

According to RR, the attacking player and the defending player are considered to be taking part in the challenge “against” each other. So "in a challenge against you" means in challenges no matter you're the attacking player or the defending player right?

 

So is that to say the wording "a character is declared as an attacker in a challenge against you" also means in a challenge YOU initiate, YOUR character attacks an opponent?

[mplain]

What card do you have in mind? I seached but didn't find anything relevant.

[Sulpures]

What card do you have in mind? I seached but didn't find anything relevant.

No such card, just assumed if there were one and state like this.

[mplain]

Against

During a challenge, the attacking player and the defending player are considered to be taking part in the challenge "against" each other.

 

Judging by this wording and the standard English meaning, I'd say that "against you" means on the opponent's side in a challenge in which you're the attacking or defending player. So, not on your side, not under your control.

 

For example, if you attached a Marriage Pact to your own character (maybe to protect it from Unexpected Delay?), then that character could still be declared as an attacker or defender.

 

Basically, don't read it as "a challenge against you", rather read it as "participate/initiate against you", emphasis on the verb.

[Sulpures]

Judging by this wording and the standard English meaning, I'd say that "against you" means on the opponent's side in a challenge in which you're the attacking or defending player. So, not on your side, not under your control.
 
For example, if you attached a Marriage Pact to your own character (maybe to protect it from Unexpected Delay?), then that character could still be declared as an attacker or defender.
 
Basically, don't read it as "a challenge against you", rather read it as "participate/initiate against you", emphasis on the verb.

you sure about marriage pact? according to core dany, shouldn't it specified as "participating on the opponent's side in a challenge against you"?

[mplain]

No, I'm not 100% sure on this. I see that Dany's wording is more precise. However I assume this is the case of "we wanted to be extra clear, but ended up making it more confusing".

 

I'm writing an email to Daniel, so I'll ask about Marriage Pact as well.

[Sulpures]

No, I'm not 100% sure on this. I see that Dany's wording is more precise. However I assume this is the case of "we wanted to be extra clear and ended up making it more confusing".
 
I'm writing an email to Daniel, so I'll ask about Marriage Pact as well.

thanks bout that

[mplain]

Best Answer

Hello Daniel!

A question about Marriage Pact:
 

Marriage Pact

Terminal.
Attached character cannot participate in challenges against you.
Forced Interrupt: When attached character leaves play, sacrifice a character you control.

If I attach Marriage Pact to my own character (e.g. in order to protect it from Unexpected Delay), can I declare it as an attacker or defender?

Should I read "challenges against me" as any challenges in which I am the attacking or defending player?

Or should I read "participate against me" as referring only to characters controlled by my opponents?

I'd assume the latter, but Dany's text is very specific:

Daenerys Targaryen

Insight.
While Daenerys Targaryen is standing, each character participating on an opponent's side in a challenge against you gets -1 STR.

I'm not sure if this wording is just supposed to be extra clear, or if "participating in challenges against you" actually includes characters on both mine and my opponent's sides.


Thanks Daniel!

 

Hello!

The latter interpretation is correct. The character is prevented from participating “against” you in a challenge, but could still participate in a challenge in your side, as you are not taking part in the challenge “against” yourself. Daenerys’s card includes the “on an opponent’s side” text for added clarity.

Thanks!
Danny Schaefer