Jump to content



Photo

player action window


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 db123456

db123456

    Member

  • Members
  • 105 posts

Posted 01 November 2011 - 06:01 PM

 is there an additional player action window after the last active player end his action(no marshall or no challenge) in the Marshalling or challenge phase? 



#2 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,414 posts

Posted 02 November 2011 - 12:05 AM

Marshaling, no. Remember that playing cards from your hand is considered a player action - that only the active player can do. So you can do whatever you want in the same window. The problem you're likely to run into, though, is that you have all passed consecutively if you wait for the active player to pass before trying to play something. For example:

  • Player 1: I do nothing
  • Player 2 (active): I marshal this card
  • Player 1: I do nothing
  • Player 2 (active): I marshal this card
  • Player 1: I do nothing
  • Player 2 (active): I'm done marshaling
  • Player 1: Then I do this
  • Player 2 (active): No you don't - you passed, then I passed, so the player action window is closed. You should have played that action instead of doing nothing that last time before I did nothing.

In challenges, yes. There is technically a Player Action window between the last active player's final challenge and the last active player confirming that he has no more challenges.



#3 Penfold

Penfold

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,180 posts

Posted 08 November 2011 - 07:01 AM

 I think it all depends on how the active player plays. In my neck of the woods, the active player usually plays cards, one at a time, but does not stop after each to ask the inactive player(s) if they have actions to take, they just do it slow enough to allow someone to say, "Wait, before you play your next card..." when they reach to kneel a reducer or grab one or more gold tokens. If they play this way, as active player passing, "I have no more actions" means the last action they took is their intended last, giving all other players an opportunity to pass.

This is obviously not quite the correct way to play since they should be requiring the inactive player to pass every chance they have to play something, but the inactive player could make a credible argument that they did not verbalize their pass either.

It is cleaner for everyone to get into the habit of asking if the other players want to take an action, but some groups are bound to feel this loses part of the casual social nature of the game.



#4 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,414 posts

Posted 08 November 2011 - 10:26 AM

Penfold said:

 I think it all depends on how the active player plays.
Undoubtedly. And that's why I put in the "likely" bit. It is not unusual for the active player to kneel 3 reducers at once and drop a character - even though they should be checking between each reducer to see if other players have actions. Or, the active player ofter tosses 6 gold from their pool into the treasury and lays out a 3-cost character with a 1-cost attachment and a 2-cost character in one fell swoop. It is definitely part of casual gameplay, and when the active player rushes through, you really do need to give the other players the chance to "go back" and get in the opportunities to play that were skipped over. You cannot pass on your player actions by default, especially when you are not given the opportunity to do so.

But let me give you an example I have seen where someone tried to "game the system" with the active player passing. This is back in the CCG days when Initiate of the Citadel was a Marshaling action instead of a Dominance action. Anyway, the First Player waited until the last active player (in a Joust) said "I'm done Marshaling," and then attempted to use the Initiate to bounce all of the attachments on a character back to the active player's hand. Sure, no problem. But then the active player wanted to put all of the 0-cost attachments back onto the character. Can he do that?

The First Player called "foul," saying that the active player had, by his own admission, finished Marshaling. But by the rules, it doesn't work that way. Either the First Player passed before the active player passed - ending the player actions for the phase, or, by going back to give the First Player the opportunity to use the Initiate, you remain in the player action window with the same active player (who would still be allowed to play cards from their hand - including those 0-cost attachments).

So just be careful about the practical matters here. If the active player is just throwing out cards without pause, as so often happens, it is undoubtedly the right thing to do to let the other players "catch up" to that quick game play. But when that happens, the active player remains the active player and still has the opportunity to spend gold/play cards, even if they had said "done" before you went back.



#5 Bolzano

Bolzano

    Member

  • Members
  • 344 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 03:08 AM

ktom said:

In challenges, yes. There is technically a Player Action window between the last active player's final challenge and the last active player confirming that he has no more challenges.

Why do you follow the FAQ chart arrow tagged "Active Player’s Next Challenge Opportunity" when there is no such opportunity?



#6 Bomb

Bomb

    Cool Person Club

  • Members
  • 1,758 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:32 AM

Bolzano said:

ktom said:

 

In challenges, yes. There is technically a Player Action window between the last active player's final challenge and the last active player confirming that he has no more challenges.

 

 

Why do you follow the FAQ chart arrow tagged "Active Player’s Next Challenge Opportunity" when there is no such opportunity?

Because it is possible that the Active Player has a player action that will allow them to create an additional challenge that is unbeknownst to the opponent.  Even if there is no such card yet that allows this, the opponent shouldn't know for certain that they don't have a trick up their sleeve.  For example, maybe they have a way to kill Lucas Blackwood and thus can initiate an additional challenge.



#7 Bomb

Bomb

    Cool Person Club

  • Members
  • 1,758 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:42 AM

Previously I gave a bad example.

Here is a better one:

The active player can have a chance to use the following effects that will directly allow them to initiate additional challenges after they have exhausted their standard challenges:

Citadel Politics
Challenges: Kneel a Maester character to choose a player. That player may initiate an additional challenge this phase. (Limit 1 per phase.)

Citadel Custom
Challenges: Kneel a Maester character to choose a player. That player may initiate an additional challenge this phase.

If you cannot go back up to the Player Action window before a challenge is initiated, this will can affect the strategy of the active player.



#8 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,414 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:08 AM

To put it another way, it is the active player's failure to initiate a new challenge that signals the end of his opportunities to do so, not the resolution of an old challenge.

It's easier to see from the "fewer than 3" side of things. Say that I do my POW and INT challenge, but decide not to do a MIL. If we judge the end of my challenge opportunities by what challenges have resolved, I still have an opportunity to declare a challenge - so "active player" status doesn't change and game play stalls. But if we judge the end of my challenge opportunities by what challenges have initiated, my choice not to declare a challenge ended my "next challenge" opportunities and game play continues.

So you keep following that arrow until the "active player" fails to initiate a challenge - no matter whether that comes after resolving 0, 1, 2, 3, or more challenges.



#9 Bolzano

Bolzano

    Member

  • Members
  • 344 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:00 PM

Then should I also follow the arrow "Next player become Active player" (when I'm the last active player) in case somebody has a card effect to become Active player?

It is the very similar situation compared with initiating a 4th or more challenge through a card effect that contradicts the 3 opportunities given by the rules.

 

Hmm.. I guess it would be illegal to follow it in the first place since you would end up with an illegal situation right away (with a player being immediatly Active twice after the arrow).

Whereas for the Challenges arrow, you are still in a legal situation and will just possibly fail to initiate a new challenge.



#10 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,414 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 01:45 AM

 

You wouldn't follow that arrow  for "New Active Player" again because you wouldn't get to it until the framework action window changing the status from one active player to the next finishes resolving - during which, you would determine that everyone has been active player one time and know the next thing to do was to move on to the end of phase. 

The illegal situation you mention (with a player being Active more than once) becomes apparent before you even get to the arrow. If you get to that window - because the last active player is finished with challenges - it's too late to play anything. Your opportunity to play the (theoretical) effect that would let you be active player twice would have come when you followed the "next challenge opportunity" back to a player action window.

 



#11 Bolzano

Bolzano

    Member

  • Members
  • 344 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:42 AM

ktom said:

 

To put it another way, it is the active player's failure to initiate a new challenge that signals the end of his opportunities to do so, not the resolution of an old challenge.

It's easier to see from the "fewer than 3" side of things. Say that I do my POW and INT challenge, but decide not to do a MIL. If we judge the end of my challenge opportunities by what challenges have resolved, I still have an opportunity to declare a challenge - so "active player" status doesn't change and game play stalls. But if we judge the end of my challenge opportunities by what challenges have initiated, my choice not to declare a challenge ended my "next challenge" opportunities and game play continues.

So you keep following that arrow until the "active player" fails to initiate a challenge - no matter whether that comes after resolving 0, 1, 2, 3, or more challenges.

 

 

This really makes sense. Also, its conclusion is backed by Damon since somebody asked him on our board. But, I mean only the conclusion, about the reason of it, he didn't say much.

It's true that the game could know he shouldn't follow the arrow after the active player fails to initiate a challenge.

But it's also possible that the game know you have 3 opportunities and cannot have more (of course except through the Golden rule). If you cannot have more, then you cannot follow the arrow "Next Challenge Opportunity" because there is no opporunity of initiating a challenge left.

Also, there could be an effect that cancel the initiation of a challenge. In that case, the initiation has failed. But you could still initiate the 2 other challenges.

Although it does not really matter, I think it's way more simple and intuitive that you cannot follow the arrow if you don't have the opportunity as defined by the Coreset rules. You showed a possibility of game stalling to make your point with "fewer than 3" but actually you could also consider that by NOT initiating your challenge you fail to initiate it and loose the opportunity. Then, no game stalling would be possible.



#12 Bolzano

Bolzano

    Member

  • Members
  • 344 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 08:08 PM

In any case, FFG confirmed that we can play actions after the last challenge of the last player.

Thanks again for your answer  :)!






© 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