Jump to content
FireBones

Rules for Rex Curse Revealed Tokens?

Recommended Posts

When afflicted by Rex's Curse, are secondary effects from the first token ignored?

Example: I draw a broken tablet token, and the scenario rules say something like "-4: punch yourself in the face." I happen to be at +5 for the skill test, so (owing to Rex's Curse) I put the token back in the bag and draw a second. Does the "punch yourself in the face" effect still occur?

Similarly for the use of Baseball bat, Shriveling, Blinding Light, etc. where "revealed" tokens have effects.

I'm think only the second token counts, similar to the rules for Grotesque Statue and for the use of Wendy's special ability. In both cases the unused but "revealed" token is ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't say to replace or ignore, so you still punch yourself in the face, return the token, and draw another one. If you draw it again, punch yourself in the face again, but you've still succeeded so go ahead and pick up that Clue.

 

Yes - anything that triggers off a token type being revealed, like Spells or the Bat, would still be affected by the first token. Again, you're not canceling or ignoring the first one. The Grotesque Statue is different because it explicitly says to ignore the other token.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The timing on this is... weird.  Steps for a skill test:

3. Reveal
4. Apply effects
5. Determine Skill Value
6. Determine success

I'm guessing the idea is that the instruction to draw a new token returns you to Step 3, but there doesn't seem to be anything in the actual timing chart or the text to support that.  Following the strict flow, I'm not sure you'd apply anything from the new token.  Effects from the drawn token aren't triggered by the draw, they're applied in a very specific step.

The rules for Chaos Tokens basically say they trigger when they're revealed though.

<shrug>  I can guess what the intent is, but it seems like the two entries actively contradict each other on how to apply tokens drawn for the test.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was intrigued by this question, so I just submitted it for rules questions, specifically asking about Midnight Masks, with the cultist icon that places a doom on a nearby cultist, and then also about the "if you fail.." and "if you succeed..." tokens, if only the second one applies or both.  I'll post the answer when I have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SuperMarino said:

I was intrigued by this question, so I just submitted it for rules questions, specifically asking about Midnight Masks, with the cultist icon that places a doom on a nearby cultist, and then also about the "if you fail.." and "if you succeed..." tokens, if only the second one applies or both.  I'll post the answer when I have it.

That's very nice - FFG seems to HATE explaining underlying rules reasoning, and instead will only answer specific interactions.  Finding a question that covers a lot of potential interactions is clever :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a consistent line of reasoning for this would be that an effect that causes you to return a token to the chaos bag typically cancels the effect of that token.

Another way to think about it is that only the modifier of tokens that stay revealed count, so only the effects of tokens that stay revealed count.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Official answer, courtesy of Matthew Newman:

Quote

 

This is a bit of a tricky situation so I will outline it step by step, as best I can. =)
 
Rex’s Curse triggers during Step 6, when you determine success/failure of the skill test. By that time, some chaos token effects will have already triggered. Chaos token effects that say “if you succeed" or "if you fail” will not have triggered yet, as Rex’s Curse interrupts the timing of those effects, but since Rex’s Curse does not *cancel* or *ignore* the token (like Wendy’s Amulet or Grotesque Statue does), the token will have created a delayed effect that will trigger during Step 7, regardless of whether the token is returned to the bag or not. Chaos token effects that simply have an effect (like “Place 1 doom on the nearest Cultist enemy,” for example) trigger during Step 4, before Rex’s Curse triggers.
 
After you return the chaos token and draw a new chaos token from Rex’s Curse, the sequence returns to Step 3, and you should follow the sequence in order as normal.
 
So, in your example:
 
– You draw the cultist token during step 3. During step 4, you place 1 doom on the nearest cultist, as part of the token’s effect.
– When you would pass the test (during step 6), you return the revealed chaos token to the bag and reveal a new chaos token. This returns you to step 3 of the sequence.
– You draw another cultist token! Poor Rex. During step 4, you place another doom on the nearest cultist.
– Step 6 rolls around again and you pass the test, so Rex’s Curse remains in play.
 
Had you revealed a chaos token that says “If you succeed / if you fail” during your first reveal, it might go like this:
 
– You draw the hypothetical token during step 3. It says “if you fail, take 1 horror.” This creates a delayed effect that will deal you 1 horror during step 7 if you fail the test.
– When you would pass the test (during step 6), you return the revealed chaos token to the bag and reveal a new chaos token. This returns you to step 3 of the sequence.
– You draw another hypothetical token. This creates another delayed effect that will deal you 1 horror during step 7 if you fail.
– If you failed this hypothetical test, during step 7, you would take 2 horror (one from each of the tokens).
 
I hope this clears things up. Cheers!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rough. Poor Rex.

Based on this, it is the "cancel" or "ignore" words on Grotesque Statue and Wendy that make the difference, and so Rex is on the hook for both tokens if he is using baseball bat, shriveling, blinding light, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on this explanation, I surmise that only the second draw counts for determining Rex's ability or for other special situations where it matters how much you succeed by, like Opportunist, and Scavenging.

There is only 1 skill test, so you can only succeed or fail once, and the curse resets the sequence back to step 3, so I assume that it is the second token that determines the actual modifier used to determine whether you succeeded by 2 or not.

So if Rex has Rex's Curse and he investigates with a skill score of 5 on a location of shroud = 3 and he draws a -1, he puts the -1 back and draws a second time, getting a 0, then he has succeeded by 2 and his special ability (or Scavenging) can be triggered. But if he got the tokens in the reverse order, his ability would not trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the test only succeeds/fails once - and therefore the consequences of success/failure only occur once.  So each ability that has a "when/if you succeed..." ability only triggers the once at the end (step 7).  Something with a "needs a success by two" or something only triggers if the final token pull has you succeed by that much.  So you are right on all accounts there, FireBones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt Newman explained that the effect of the original token (e.g., "If you succeed") triggers at ST.4 and thus still applies even if at ST.6 Rex's Curse sends the token (without canceling  it) back to the bag.

That same reasoning seems to imply that the original token's numerical modifier, which is normally applied at ST.5, would also still apply after Rex's Curse and a second token drawn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, there's nothing in Rex's Curse that says you cancel or ignore the token. As far as I can tell, returning the token to the bag only happens so you can draw it a second time; you effectively reveal two tokens for the test and apply both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was disappointed to see in this BGG thread that Matt Newman had said, "Any effects from the previous token will still have occurred before, but its modifier is no longer active; instead the new token’s modifier is active":  https://boardgamegeek.com/article/31806103#31806103

I respect the ruling, but I don't feel that it leaves players with some consistent principles by which to judge such cases.

It is almost as if the first token's "If you succeed/fail" effect gets "banked" at ST.4 (the first time) for application at the ultimate ST.7 - but for some reason that token's modifier doesn't get "banked" at ST.5 for application at the ultimate ST.6.

I guess the first ST.4 "queues" up the "If you succeed/fail ability", but the second ST.5 starts all over again using "the chaos token(s) revealed" - and the first token is no longer "revealed."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens if the effect of the first token is to reveal another token? Does it stay there with its effect and modifier, just its effect or also returned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gillum the Stoor said:

I was disappointed to see in this BGG thread that Matt Newman had said, "Any effects from the previous token will still have occurred before, but its modifier is no longer active; instead the new token’s modifier is active":  https://boardgamegeek.com/article/31806103#31806103

I respect the ruling, but I don't feel that it leaves players with some consistent principles by which to judge such cases.

It is almost as if the first token's "If you succeed/fail" effect gets "banked" at ST.4 (the first time) for application at the ultimate ST.7 - but for some reason that token's modifier doesn't get "banked" at ST.5 for application at the ultimate ST.6.

I guess the first ST.4 "queues" up the "If you succeed/fail ability", but the second ST.5 starts all over again using "the chaos token(s) revealed" - and the first token is no longer "revealed."

It makes sense - you count the modifiers from all the revealed tokens, that were not ignored/cancelled. But the first token is no longer revealed at that time, so there is nothing to count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Adny said:

It makes sense - you count the modifiers from all the revealed tokens, that were not ignored/cancelled. But the first token is no longer revealed at that time, so there is nothing to count.

But it was revealed and was decidedly not canceled/ignored -- see Wendy's ability for the same effect but canceling the token.  I kind of get it, but it's unintuitive to me.

At any rate, not including the first modifier is usually better for Rex, who needs all the help he can get, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, Rex's Curse is written poorly and does not match the designers intent for what it was suppose to do.

By a strict reading you would keep all the special effects and modifiers (and make his curse somewhat more relevant).  There is the errata/rules clarification that change that to what the developers wanted it to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jobu said:

By a strict reading you would keep all the special effects and modifiers (and make his curse somewhat more relevant). 

Not sure I agree that it would make it more relevant.  If you kept the modifier, it almost becomes "Fail your next skill test, then shuffle it in".

As it is, it's sort of a constant risk but not that guaranteed to go off.  IMHO this makes it more interesting, as you have to constantly be aware of the potential and account for it for a much longer period of time.  Higher probability of failure would mean you just take a few low-importance tests to get it to go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 11:28 PM, Gillum the Stoor said:

I was disappointed to see in this BGG thread that Matt Newman had said, "Any effects from the previous token will still have occurred before, but its modifier is no longer active; instead the new token’s modifier is active":  https://boardgamegeek.com/article/31806103#31806103

I respect the ruling, but I don't feel that it leaves players with some consistent principles by which to judge such cases.

It is almost as if the first token's "If you succeed/fail" effect gets "banked" at ST.4 (the first time) for application at the ultimate ST.7 - but for some reason that token's modifier doesn't get "banked" at ST.5 for application at the ultimate ST.6.

I guess the first ST.4 "queues" up the "If you succeed/fail ability", but the second ST.5 starts all over again using "the chaos token(s) revealed" - and the first token is no longer "revealed."

I think the reasoning is that the “If you succeed”/“If you fail” effects of the tokens are ‘lasting effects’, by virtue of their wording. (See lasting effects section in rules reference.) So yeah, they are banked because they are lasting effects.

It’s not that the token’s effects last throughout the entire duration of the skill test by default. For instance, if Skull said “Lose one horror,” then that effect wouldn’t be banked either, because it’s not a lasting effect. Rather, it’s that any “if you succeed” or “if you fail” effects that tokens create during ST3 are lasting effects that apply until the end of the skill test. That’s why Matt says that the tokens’ effects “will still have occurred before” — the effect has already happened and creates a lasting effect, so it’s just waiting to see if its “if you succeed/fail” trigger will be met.

Whereas modifiers on the tokens *aren’t* lasting effects — modifiers only get counted during ST5 of skill tests.

At least, that’s how I’m interpreting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Buhallin said:

Not sure I agree that it would make it more relevant.  If you kept the modifier, it almost becomes "Fail your next skill test, then shuffle it in".

As it is, it's sort of a constant risk but not that guaranteed to go off.  IMHO this makes it more interesting, as you have to constantly be aware of the potential and account for it for a much longer period of time.  Higher probability of failure would mean you just take a few low-importance tests to get it to go away. 

Thats a good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...