Jump to content



Photo

Loss of vision + lantern = what?


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Lumice

Lumice

    Member

  • Members
  • 19 posts

Posted 24 March 2011 - 09:28 AM

Loss of vision is a trauma that makes it so you have to treat each room as if it was in darkness.

 

but if you have a lantern you may ignore darkness.

 

So you may just ignore it?


Thematically I don't think this makes sense, if you have lousy vision a doctor won't prescribe a flashlight so you see better.

 

Can anyone clarify a way to make this just make more logical sense for me.



#2 Elbi

Elbi

    Member

  • Members
  • 140 posts

Posted 24 March 2011 - 10:04 AM

Lumice said:

Thematically I don't think this makes sense, if you have lousy vision a doctor won't prescribe a flashlight so you see better.

I seriously laughed. Thanks.

No, I think this kinda sucks, yeah. The rules say that those two cards cancel each other out, so obviously blindness is cured by MOAR LIGHT.



#3 CraggleRock

CraggleRock

    Member

  • Members
  • 60 posts

Posted 24 March 2011 - 10:26 AM

I don't know, it somewhat makes sense to me: your vision is "darker", not gone, so having more light lessens the affliction; someone with partial sight in this manner would have more trouble in dim lighting than full light.  Remembering it's set in the 1920's also, so the default light setting of most rooms is probably going to be fairly dim.

The question I think is: does the lantern allow you to ignore all darkness tokens "in your room",just one?  So if you have loss of vision, a lantern,you enter a room with a darkness token, do you still suffer the -2 penalty from one of the two sources?



#4 dvang

dvang

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 24 March 2011 - 11:27 AM

You're reading too much into it. It's a game. There are game mechanics.

Yes, as it stands, it appears the mechanics of the Lantern allows you to ignore/counter the effects of that Trauma card.



#5 Brine

Brine

    Member

  • Members
  • 296 posts

Posted 24 March 2011 - 01:41 PM

dvang said:

You're reading too much into it. It's a game. There are game mechanics.

In other words, who cares?



#6 dvang

dvang

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 25 March 2011 - 06:54 AM

Brine said:

 

dvang said:

 

You're reading too much into it. It's a game. There are game mechanics.

 

In other words, who cares?

 

 

That's not exactly what I'm saying. The original question is a valid one to ask (does the lantern negate/affect the Loss of Vision trauma card). What I am saying is not to get too hung up on "theme"or "realism", though, for *why* it works.



#7 Brine

Brine

    Member

  • Members
  • 296 posts

Posted 25 March 2011 - 07:38 AM

dvang said:

 

That's not exactly what I'm saying. The original question is a valid one to ask (does the lantern negate/affect the Loss of Vision trauma card). What I am saying is not to get too hung up on "theme"or "realism", though, for *why* it works.

 

 

Oh I know, I was just being an ass.

I just don't understand people that try to thematically explain every rule and mechanic. It just doesn't matter, because it's a board game, so rules and mechanics trump any perceived theme inconsistencies.



#8 DarkNord

DarkNord

    Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 25 March 2011 - 09:22 AM

I suppose an argument could be made that the Lantern cancels out the "Darkness" tokennot the "Loss of Vision" darkness effect. Loss of Vision has the same effects of Darkness, but it is NOT Darkness.

There were other similar rulings for the AxeSealed Door.

The Axe will open a "Lock Puzzle" (some objective cards) but not a "Lock Card" with a Puzzle. 

Monsters can't move through "Sealed Doors" (tokens), but they CAN move through the "Sealed Door" lock card.

 

It depends on what Cory's intent was. You could send in an official question for clarification.

 

 



#9 Deek

Deek

    Member

  • Members
  • 197 posts

Posted 25 March 2011 - 11:08 AM

Brine said:

I just don't understand people that try to thematically explain every rule mechanic. It just doesn't matter, because it's a board game, so rules mechanics trump any perceived theme inconsistencies.

Mansions is a game built around theme and narrative, constructed from the ground up to tell an engaging story. With so much effort gone into immersing players, it becomes much harder to justify mechanics that make no effort to adhere to the underlying, logical theme. I can appreciate the complaint.

 



#10 Brine

Brine

    Member

  • Members
  • 296 posts

Posted 25 March 2011 - 01:03 PM

Deek said:

harder to justify mechanics

 

Mechanics are beyond justification. This is a board game; those are the rules and nothing else matters.



#11 Elbi

Elbi

    Member

  • Members
  • 140 posts

Posted 25 March 2011 - 03:47 PM

"Mechanics are beyond justification. This is a board game; those are the rules and nothing else matters."

Hahaha, no.
Never.
Mechanics without justification are an arbitrary set of rules that are, in worst case, impossible to remember because of their arbitrariness.
Hint: Those are bad mechanics. You don't want those in games based on themes and atmosphere.

This game, trying to fill the gap between board game and role playing game (which it does, look up every review. No I don't care about your personal opinion, you can keep that one, but don't force it on others), has to offer an understandable approach to rules.

Although I can deal with the fact that lamps cancel blindness in MoM, I do think that it's a matter to discuss.
If you don't think so, you're free to go. We know it doesn't bother you. That's alright. Just don't annoy those who want to talk about it.

Now, after feeding the troll, back to the topic on hand:

Lantern: Investigators may ignore darkness in your room.
Loss of Vision: Whenever you explore, treat the room as if it were in darkness.

The wording, in my opinion, is clear: Lanterns cancel the effect of darkness, that is caused by exploring while having "Loss of Vision". However, "Loss of Vision" doesn't appear to be "blindness" or anything like blindness.
Look what happens: If an investigator explores, he gets a disadvantage. During combat, though, s/he is not affected at all by the trauma.
Yeah, meta-gaming says this is due to balancing issues.
But in-game I'd expect "Loss of Vision", if it really is the loss of someone's eyesight, to affect combat like darkness does.

Imho, "Loss of Vision" is... well... did you ever search for a pen that you had in your hand? Or the glasses you just placed on your desk, so you had a hand free to open a drawer to search for your glasses inside? I certainly did, and I expect the Trauma Card to represent a much more severe case of this.



#12 DHFrew3

DHFrew3

    Member

  • Members
  • 44 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:28 PM

This may sound dumb at this point, but what about Torch & Loss of Vision.  Do they cancel each other out as well?

Don



#13 Methrin

Methrin

    Member

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 09 April 2011 - 05:00 AM

It makes perfect sense. Not every vision problem can be fixed by just wearing glasses, I once met a guy who had a degenerative problem with his eyes, it was hereditary and gradually made his eyesight worse. He explained that his vision as greatly reduced in darkness and that in 20 years, he would see absolutely nothing in areas with very little light and his vision in lighted areas would be as bad as his current vision in darkness.

So yeah, thematically the investigator might have such a degenerative disease and bring more light to every area to make his vision half-decent again...



#14 FurinMirado

FurinMirado

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 10 April 2011 - 02:27 AM

Methrin said:

It makes perfect sense. Not every vision problem can be fixed by just wearing glasses, I once met a guy who had a degenerative problem with his eyes, it was hereditary and gradually made his eyesight worse. He explained that his vision as greatly reduced in darkness and that in 20 years, he would see absolutely nothing in areas with very little light and his vision in lighted areas would be as bad as his current vision in darkness.

So yeah, thematically the investigator might have such a degenerative disease and bring more light to every area to make his vision half-decent again...

This makes the most sense to me.  The extra light helps you see better (near enough to normal), but poorly lit rooms might as well be pitch black.

Does everything have to be explainable though?  In one scenario someone failed a dexterity check and took 1 damage from bees.  I took that opportunity to play Loss of Hearing.  We all laughed so hard.  Now it's a running gag for us.  Was the game fun?  Yes.  Did we maintain the horror atmosphere and realism?  Not at all.  I think as long as the first question is answered in the affirmative you're alright.  It's up to whether your group feels like everything needs to be realistic to be fun and engaging.



#15 imanfasil

imanfasil

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 10 April 2011 - 08:52 AM

I absolutely agree it should all be about fun.  That said... it makes perfect sense for the lantern to not work to off-set Loss of Vision.  I have been wearing corrective lenses in one form or the other for darn near 30 years.  If someone kicked them off my face... it wouldn't matter if I was holding THE SUN - I still wouldn't be able to see anything.  The game just already has a mechanic for poor visibility (Darkness) and is using that to represent the effects of poor vision.  I do not think the lantern should offset the effects of that card.

Again it should be about having fun... if the investigators are really behind the 8 ball already - I'd let them have this one.

I don't know if its just me, but calling one player a Keeper and the RPG-ish-ness of it makes me play this game like that... I try to steer things towards the players having a chance.  They don't win all the time or even most of the time, but I think they generally feel like they had a shot and everyone has fun.  (In theory the reason we are playing!)



#16 dvang

dvang

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 11 April 2011 - 07:14 AM

Actually, as I think about the wording, I think I've changed my opinion. I do not believe that the lantern will counter Loss of Vision.

Lantern counters Darkness.

Loss of Vision is NOT actually Darkness; the investigator merely has a condition that causes the same effect as Darkness.

It's a subtle distinction.



#17 Dan

Dan

    Member

  • Members
  • 166 posts

Posted 25 April 2011 - 06:29 AM

Answers. Bookmark this thread, I think it is good. Probably because it is mine:)

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/623428/rules-questions-and-answers/page/3

 



#18 Brine

Brine

    Member

  • Members
  • 296 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 09:00 AM

Edit - already posted






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS