Jump to content



Photo

No Power to Lose


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Doc4

Doc4

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 June 2012 - 12:47 PM

I'm looking for some help understanding how running into low power/favour works. The wording in the rules is just not sinking in with me.

Under the Guide to Wizards and Magic pg34 it reads that a caster must fulfill all the requirements to cast the spell including having enough power. Under Losing Power it states that if you don't have enough power when forced to pay a power cost (likely from a Chaos rolled or additional effects on the power) then you suffer one stress. I take this to be that you have payed just enough power to cast your spell, taking you to zero power, and then you roll a Chaos and cannot pay the cost. So then I would gain 1 stress.

Yet the very next paragraph reads that if a player is at zero power and forced to pay a cost that the situation grows more dire. How is this situation different than the previous paragraph of "if a character does not have enough power in his supply to satisfy the required loss". The new section "No Power to Lose" says that a roll must be made to gain 1 stress and possibly an insanity. How is this more dire? It seems like its the exact same thing, or is it?

Are these two different scenarios? How can one run short on power in the first section without being at zero yet have a separate rule for when you are at zero and unable to pay in the next section.

Basically, what happens when I run out of power? Do I gain 1 stress, make a roll, or both and under what situation would this happen?

 

I'm sure I'm making this much harder than it needs to be, but I simply cannot get my head around these specific rulings.

 

Thanks for the help,

Tom / Doc4



#2 GravitysAngel

GravitysAngel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 23 June 2012 - 02:57 PM

 Here's the way I interpret it:

Situation 1: You have > 0 power and go to < 0 power through no fault of your own, i.e. you cast a spell for which you had enough power, but you lost more than you had.

Situation 2: You have = 0 power and lose power.

 



#3 Doc4

Doc4

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:45 AM

GravitysAngel said:

 Here's the way I interpret it:

Situation 1: You have > 0 power and go to < 0 power through no fault of your own, i.e. you cast a spell for which you had enough power, but you lost more than you had.

Situation 2: You have = 0 power and lose power.

 

Thanks for the response.

 

So situation 1) I have 1 power and some disastrous roll comes up that forces me to pay 3 power. Then I would simply gain 1 stress and drop to zero power?

 

Then situation 2 would imply there are cards or abilities that cause you to lose power when you are already at zero power, i.e. not casting a spell.? I'm new to the rules, our first game is tonight, so I haven't seen many (if any cards) that make a player lose power outside of a spell being cast.

 

 

Tom / Doc4



#4 GravitysAngel

GravitysAngel

    Member

  • Members
  • 142 posts

Posted 25 June 2012 - 06:01 PM

 That fits with my understanding of the rule.  Let's see if anyone else has an interpretation to share.



#5 Grumbold

Grumbold

    Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 29 June 2012 - 01:39 AM

I think that is correct. It's an additional risk that you take if you cast a spell that requires every scrap of your power. If the die roll results in you losing additional power you are in a much more dangerous situation than if you cast a spell that left you with a small amount of power left.






© 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