Jump to content



Photo

Weird Alchemist question…


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Urabutbl

Urabutbl

    Member

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:47 AM

We were faced with the following scenario:

My character with an alchemist follower and a mule is carrying his maximum of eight items, and is being pursued by two other characters. During an opponents turn, he casts mesmerize on me, and chooses to steal the mule. This means I am now carrying four more items than I am allowed, and must therefore leave four items on the space I am on. Rather than doing this, I instead choose to turn four items into gold using the alchemist follower, in order to deny the other players my loot.

This started an argument, since they say I can only use the alchemist skill on stuff in my possession. I argued that it is not until I move away from the square, leaving the four items, that they leave my possession. I also point out that the fact that I get to choose which four object I leave, rather than them being drawn from my hand at random, shows that until I have made that choice, they are clearly in my possession, and as such available for the alchemist to turn into gold.

They argue that the taking of the mule means the stuff on it immediately drops on the floor, and since I cannot encounter the space without landing on it again, I cannot turn it into gold.

 

Who's right?

 



#2 Dam

Dam

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,260 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 03:19 AM

Ditching stuff as a result of losing a carrier happens when you lose the carrier, not when your turn next comes around, however, I would allow use of Alchemist Follower when your opponent declares he is casting Mesmerism, prior to it taking effect.


"A dirty mind is its own reward."


#3 Nioreh

Nioreh

    Member

  • Members
  • 64 posts

Posted 18 October 2012 - 08:13 AM

Dam said:

Ditching stuff as a result of losing a carrier happens when you lose the carrier, not when your turn next comes around, however, I would allow use of Alchemist Follower when your opponent declares he is casting Mesmerism, prior to it taking effect.

 

I wouldn't even allow that, as soon as he has announced that he is casting a spell I would allow him to resolve that spell unless someone casts counterspell etc.



#4 EvilEdwin

EvilEdwin

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:46 AM

I agree with Nioreh, I don't think you can use cards to interrupt what someone else does (unless a card allows that). There's no last in first out type stack. I believe everything is resolved in isolation. So Mesmerism would be cast, you'd lose your Mule and would then have to ditch four objects before any other cards could be used.



#5 talismanamsilat

talismanamsilat

    Talisman Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,198 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:23 AM

Except in your example the Mesmerism Spell wasn't cast following the text on the Spell card and therefore it was an illegal casting!

Ell.



#6 Velhart

Velhart

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,210 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:52 AM

Urabutbl said:

 

We were faced with the following scenario:

My character with an alchemist follower and a mule is carrying his maximum of eight items, and is being pursued by two other characters. During an opponents turn, he casts mesmerize on me, and chooses to steal the mule. This means I am now carrying four more items than I am allowed, and must therefore leave four items on the space I am on. Rather than doing this, I instead choose to turn four items into gold using the alchemist follower, in order to deny the other players my loot. 

 

 

If the other player cast mesmerism, then you must wait until the spell has been cast.

If you must ditch the objects, because you lose your mule, then you should be able to use the alchemist on your objects, that the character carries himself. In this manner, you can create some room to get the objects that the mule has been carried. Otherwise, you must ditch those objects.

 



#7 talismanamsilat

talismanamsilat

    Talisman Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,198 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 10:29 AM

If a character loses a Mule to Mesmerism (or the Vampiress loses her Followers to the Hag), then the surplus Objects must IMMEDIATELY be ditched on the space. This is the effect of losing the Mule. A character cannot use the Alchemist before choosing which Objects to ditch nor can the Vampiress drain the lifeforce from her Followers before the Hag forces them to be discarded.

Ell.



#8 EvilEdwin

EvilEdwin

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 11:10 AM

It's always been my understanding in Talisman that there are no interrupts at all. So you can't do something in response to another player doing anything. Is this correct?



#9 talismanamsilat

talismanamsilat

    Talisman Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,198 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:41 PM

EvilEdwin said:

It's always been my understanding in Talisman that there are no interrupts at all. So you can't do something in response to another player doing anything. Is this correct?

In regard to the example here:

The effect of losing the Mule is stated on the card. The forbidding effect of the card forces a character to ditch his surplus Objects. Therefore a character cannot use the Alchemist to turn the surplus Objects into gold (Can vs. Cannot rule).

Ell.



#10 Uvatha

Uvatha

    Member

  • Members
  • 344 posts

Posted 30 October 2012 - 05:37 PM

talismanamsilat said:

EvilEdwin said:

 

It's always been my understanding in Talisman that there are no interrupts at all. So you can't do something in response to another player doing anything. Is this correct?

 

 

In regard to the example here:

The effect of losing the Mule is stated on the card. The forbidding effect of the card forces a character to ditch his surplus Objects. Therefore a character cannot use the Alchemist to turn the surplus Objects into gold (Can vs. Cannot rule).

Ell.

Damn Mule Read Tape :).



#11 ososober

ososober

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:44 AM

I like the old 2ed wording anything on the mule/porter/horse and cart/bag of carrying ect, goes with the stolen/lost dead, mule/porter/horse and cart, bag of carrying ect.

 

 






© 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