Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
The Hunter

Priest at the Crags

24 posts in this topic

If the Priest gets attacked by a Spirit at the Crags, can he still use his ability to destroy it, and gain a spell if his Cract allows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the Spirit in the Crags is a creature, not an Enemy-Spirit.
As I said in another thread about Warlock Quests, it could have received any other name instead of "Spirit" and avoid this kind of confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was somewhere said on this forum that Digital Editon rules can not be compared with a game board beacuse it is the product of two different companies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, ideally they would be identical...

 

While technically, Nomad and FFG have no obligation to each other (being contracted by GW), they should be consistent. And FFG's rulings should be taken as official because their team consists of designers and playtesters, whereas I think Nomad consists mainly of computer programmers (rather than creative content developers).

 

So even though the digital edition is a "constantly-updated rules clarification machine..." when we play the physical board game, I think only the rules from FFG should count.

 

If a question arises that has not been covered by FFG's FAQ, then sure, copy what the digital edition does... until FFG addresses it themselves.

Edited by Artaterxes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was doing some research to find out if the Assassin can assassinate the Pit Fiends (it appears he can according to his character card and the core rulebook), I checked the Priest's abilities.

 

His card says:

You may choose to automatically destroy any Spirits without resorting to psychic combat. When you destroy a Spirit in this manner, you may not keep the Enemy as a trophy but you may gain one Spell.

[underlining mine]

 

This implies the Priest can destroy Spirit Creatures as well as Spirit Enemies.

But I'm not sure if the Priest can gain a spell from killing a Spirit Creature like he would if he destroyed a Spirit Enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I checked the Priest's abilities.

 

His card says:

You may choose to automatically destroy any Spirits without resorting to psychic combat. When you destroy a Spirit in this manner, you may not keep the Enemy as a trophy but you may gain one Spell.

[underlining mine]

 

This implies the Priest can destroy Spirit Creatures as well as Spirit Enemies.

But I'm not sure if the Priest can gain a spell from killing a Spirit Creature like he would if he destroyed a Spirit Enemy.

 

What is a "Spirit Creature"?

 

A “creature” is any encounter (other than a character) that attacks with Strength or Craft. This may include Enemy cards and also Events, Strangers, Places, Spells, and board spaces.

 

An “Enemy” is any Adventure Card with the word “Enemy” in the card type box.

(all Enemies are also creatures)

 

What the rules don't have explicitly written is what a "Spirit" is, but this section is quite clear:

 

Enemy – Spirit

These Enemies attack any character encountering them by engaging that character in psychic combat. Killed Enemies of this type may be kept as trophies to be exchanged for Craft (see “Trophies” on page 14). Enemies that defeat characters remain in the space.

 

In game terms, "Spirit" is always associated to the word "Enemy" and together they form a particular "Card Type", as shown in the "Card Anatomy" box at page 7. On all card wordings, "Spirit" it is only a short form for "Enemy-Spirit", just like "Dragon" is a short form for "Enemy-Dragon" and "Animal" a short form for "Enemy-Animal".

 

A Spirit is an Enemy and an Enemy is a creature, so a Spirit is a creature. But a creature is not necessarily an Enemy and not necessarily a Spirit. A "Spirit creature" does not exist according to the rules. Are you attacked by a "Brigand creature" if you roll a 1 in the Forest? Are you attacked by a "Farmer creature" at the Tavern? Surely they are creatures but their names don't mean a thing.

 

The full rules picture suggests that Spirits, together with Animals, Constructs, Cultists, Dragons, Elementals, Law and Monsters, form a subsystem called "Enemies". Enemies, together with other Card types and board spaces that attack your character with Strength or Craft, form a subsystem called "creatures".

 

However, since thematically it might be appropriate for the Priest to destroy the Spirit in the Crags or the Minstrel not to be attacked by the Dragon in the Cave, house-rule it if you want to.

Edited by The_Warlock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I checked the Priest's abilities.

 

His card says:

You may choose to automatically destroy any Spirits without resorting to psychic combat. When you destroy a Spirit in this manner, you may not keep the Enemy as a trophy but you may gain one Spell.

[underlining mine]

 

This implies the Priest can destroy Spirit Creatures as well as Spirit Enemies.

But I'm not sure if the Priest can gain a spell from killing a Spirit Creature like he would if he destroyed a Spirit Enemy.

 

What is a "Spirit Creature"?

 

A “creature” is any encounter (other than a character) that attacks with Strength or Craft. This may include Enemy cards and also Events, Strangers, Places, Spells, and board spaces.

 

An “Enemy” is any Adventure Card with the word “Enemy” in the card type box.

(all Enemies are also creatures)

 

What the rules don't have explicitly written is what a "Spirit" is, but this section is quite clear:

 

Enemy – Spirit

These Enemies attack any character encountering them by engaging that character in psychic combat. Killed Enemies of this type may be kept as trophies to be exchanged for Craft (see “Trophies” on page 14). Enemies that defeat characters remain in the space.

 

In game terms, "Spirit" is always associated to the word "Enemy" and together they form a particular "Card Type", as shown in the "Card Anatomy" box at page 7. On all card wordings, "Spirit" it is only a short form for "Enemy-Spirit", just like "Dragon" is a short form for "Enemy-Dragon" and "Animal" a short form for "Enemy-Animal".

 

A Spirit is an Enemy and an Enemy is a creature, so a Spirit is a creature. But a creature is not necessarily an Enemy and not necessarily a Spirit. A "Spirit creature" does not exist according to the rules. Are you attacked by a "Brigand creature" if you roll a 1 in the Forest? Are you attacked by a "Farmer creature" at the Tavern? Surely they are creatures but their names don't mean a thing.

 

The full rules picture suggests that Spirits, together with Animals, Constructs, Cultists, Dragons, Elementals, Law and Monsters, form a subsystem called "Enemies". Enemies, together with other Card types and board spaces that attack your character with Strength or Craft, form a subsystem called "creatures".

 

However, since thematically it might be appropriate for the Priest to destroy the Spirit in the Crags or the Minstrel not to be attacked by the Dragon in the Cave, house-rule it if you want to.

 

 

This ruling seems incredibly clunky. By extension this means that the Dragons and Goblins in the Cave and Demons, Wights, and Shadows (was it Shadows?) in the Crypt are also creatures but are not "Enemies." This seems to overburden the whole keywording gimmick.

 

Better would be something like, "Enemies that appear as part of a location's or spell's effect, as opposed to those which are drawn as cards (i.e., card type, Enemy), cannot be claimed as trophies if defeated and do not activate other card abilities when defeated. For example defeating the Farmer result on the Tavern space while using the Runesword does not result in the Runesword's wielder gaining a life and, similarly, the Priest may use his ability to destroy the Spirit at the Crags or the Demon, Wight, or Shadow at the Crypt but, he cannot gain a spell for destroying the spirit in either of these cases." 

 

What you have above is semantic nightmare that is needlessly confusing to anyone who isn't a rules' lawyer. Other areas of the rulebook are similarly poorly worded, such as the difference between "battle" and "psychic combat" which isn't clearly established and must be inferred during gameplay. Similarly, the Ghoul's ability to claim defeated enemies but only use their strength in battle implies that he can convert defeated spirits into followers but that they have no further game effect (except that perhaps he could sacrifice them at the Vampire's Tower in lieu of other followers). 

Edited by Vandal Thorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is correct the Dragon in the cave and the other examples you gave do not classify in those categories. No using special abilities, no turning in trophies and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This ruling seems incredibly clunky. By extension this means that the Dragons and Goblins in the Cave and Demons, Wights, and Shadows (was it Shadows?) in the Crypt are also creatures but are not "Enemies." This seems to overburden the whole keywording gimmick.

 

Better would be something like, "Enemies that appear as part of a location's or spell's effect, as opposed to those which are drawn as cards (i.e., card type, Enemy), cannot be claimed as trophies if defeated and do not activate other card abilities when defeated. For example defeating the Farmer result on the Tavern space while using the Runesword does not result in the Runesword's wielder gaining a life and, similarly, the Priest may use his ability to destroy the Spirit at the Crags or the Demon, Wight, or Shadow at the Crypt but, he cannot gain a spell for destroying the spirit in either of these cases." 

 

What you have above is semantic nightmare that is needlessly confusing to anyone who isn't a rules' lawyer.

 

I usually give explanations based on existing rules, this is the reason why I quote existing rules in italics.

 

If you think that concepts like "creatures" and "Enemies" overburden the whole keyword gimmick, you are missing important rules from the basic game. They are not fancy interpretations used by rules lawyers to confuse innocent players; they are an essential distinction used in the game design to separate Enemies on the Adventure Cards from encounters described on the board spaces that attack with Strength or Craft.

 

Special abilities and card effects always distinguish between Enemies and creatures; effects applicable to creatures affect also Enemies, but not vice versa. However, the effect wording does always say "Spirits", "Dragons", "Animals", "Monsters", as short forms for "Enemy-Spirits", "Enemy-Dragons" and so on.

 

In the Crags you may be attacked by a Spirit with Craft 4, but this does not allow using any ability that affects Enemy-Spirits. Why? Because it is a creature, not an Enemy. Being called "Spirit" doesn't mean a goddamn thing, he could have been called "Spectre" instead and we wouldn't be losing our wits in this pointless discussion.

 

Other areas of the rulebook are similarly poorly worded, such as the difference between "battle" and "psychic combat" which isn't clearly established and must be inferred during gameplay.

 

I'm the first to say that there are parts in the Rulebook that are poorly worded, but I cannot understand how somebody could miss a sentence like this (Rulebook, page 10):

 

Attacks

Attacks are split into two types:  battles  and psychic combats. 

A battle occurs when a character is attacked by a creature

whose Strength is given, and a psychic combat occurs when

a character is attacked by a creature whose Craft is given. If

a player decides to attack another character, they must fight

a battle unless the attacker has a special ability that lets him

use psychic combat instead.

 

Still, there are many people that do not understand the difference between battle and psychic combat. If you feel that some vital game information is missing, why don't you read the rulebook again?

 

Similarly, the Ghoul's ability to claim defeated enemies but only use their strength in battle implies that he can convert defeated spirits into followers but that they have no further game effect (except that perhaps he could sacrifice them at the Vampire's Tower in lieu of other followers).

 

I assume you believe this because you did not get the difference between battle and psychic combat.

 

When you kill an Enemy in battle, you may raise it from the dead and keep it as a Follower instead of a trophy. You may have one of your raised Followers add its Strength to yours for one battle, after which it disintegrates to the discard pile. You may only use one raised Follower per battle.

 

The Ghoul's ability to raise Enemies is applied only when he defeats Enemies in battle, so no Spirits or other Enemies that have the Craft attribute can be raised, because they fight in psychic combat.

Edited by The_Warlock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been reading through some character abilities that can cause confusion, based on what's been discussed.

Here's what I've found:

The Assassin can assassinate board opponents such as farmers, pit fiends, even the Lord of Darkness and the Eagle King on their spaces.

Yet, if using the Dragon expansion or a boss alternate ending, he can't assassinate these because he's on the Crown of Command.

If the Dragon Priestess encounters the Dragon in the Caves, she can't make a sacrifice. (Maybe she can)

If the Minstrel encounters the Dragon in the Caves, he must attack it. (Maybe he can choose not to attack it, but if he does, he would not be able to encounter any other cards after the Caves (which is unlikely) according to the FAQs).

Any characters who have the ability to obtain card opponents as followers are most likely unable to obtain such board opponents (none that I know of) as followers as there would be no cards to represent them.

With this is mind, until a revised FAQ can resolve these matters, I will assume that abilities used with regard to card opponents do not apply to board opponents unless the character card says "creature" (in the case of the Asassin).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Assassin can assassinate board opponents such as farmers, pit fiends, even the Lord of Darkness and the Eagle King on their spaces.

Yet, if using the Dragon expansion or a boss alternate ending, he can't assassinate these because he's on the Crown of Command.

 

You got it right. He can to that because board opponents are "creatures" and the Assassin applies his ability to creatures. You're also correct on the Draconic Lord and Ending bosses.

 

If the Dragon Priestess encounters the Dragon in the Caves, she can't make a sacrifice. (Maybe she can)

If the Minstrel encounters the Dragon in the Caves, he must attack it. (Maybe he can choose not to attack it, but if he does, he would not be able to encounter any other cards after the Caves (which is unlikely) according to the FAQs).

 

The doubt you may have here is whether "Dragon" means "Enemy-Dragon" or "any encounter featuring the word 'Dragon' ".

 

The first is a quite safe assumption, because all character special abilities put the concept in the same fashion (Necromancer enthralls 'Spirits'='Enemy-Spirits', Ogre Chieftain dominates 'Monsters'='Enemy-Monsters', Elementalist automatically kills 'Elementals'='Enemy-Elementals', and so on); assuming the second is a flight of fancy (the next question would be: can she offer a sacrifice when she encounters the Dragon Sprite Stranger?).

 

Any characters who have the ability to obtain card opponents as followers are most likely unable to obtain such board opponents (none that I know of) as followers as there would be no cards to represent them.

 

No, they won't be able to do this because such abilities always refer to "Enemies", not to "creatures".

 

With this is mind, until a revised FAQ can resolve these matters, I will assume that abilities used with regard to card opponents do not apply to board opponents unless the character card says "creature" (in the case of the Asassin).

 

Ok, but "creatures" and "Enemies" are keywords defined in the rulebook (see the box "Creatures and Enemies" on page 10). You can't ask for a FAQ to address an explicitly given rule! The assumption you are making here is no assumption, is the normal application of the rule.

 

Sorry if I insist, but the more I read your doubts, the more I'm convinced that you ignore or misinterpret the above rule. It's better for you to understand that rule well; your current doubts will be fewer than now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the agreements on my speculations.

When I first bought the game, I applied the abilities to Enemy cards.

Board opponents never crossed my mind until the recent game.

I was reading a previous post I made and, being a Sheldon Cooper type geek, I tend to take the wording too seriously. In some cases, me and a friend may disagree on the wording, and the answers provided prove that I'm right, others proving I'm wrong.

In future, I will accept the answers provided.

However, when playing games, questions tend to arise and I will post them as as and when they occur.

In view of tjis subject, I will accept the original answer to my question.

I will apply the Enemy/Creature rule as I did when I first bought the game.

If a friend raises a similar question in the future, I will say that the matter was discussed in this forum.

Hopefully therefore I consider this matter closed!

Edited by The Hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem Hunter, my purpose was to help you find the answer within the existing rules. The original question was a good one, so please continue submitting your questions in the forum as you find appropriate.

 

The discussion attracted other users and it has shown that there are still many doubts around, so it was a good discussion. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very sorry for raising this thread from the dead, but I'm still unable to fully understand why this works like you say it works and I see no point in making a new thread just for this. It kinda blows my mind and I'm having a really hard time trying to explain to my friends why they can't use a +3 Holy Lance against a dragon in a Cave or destroy a spirit at the Craigs, especially since I'm having a lot of doubts myself.

I understand the difference between an Enemy and a Creature. While it doesn't make much sense from the lore perspective that, for example, the Dragon Hunter can't use deathblow against a dragon from the Cave, the official rules leave no room for interpretation here. The first situation, however, is giving me a lot of trouble.

The Cave card says "Attacked by a Dragon with Strength 7", the Holy Lance says "Add 3 to your Strength during battle against Dragons". There is nothing about enemies and they both use the same word - Dragon. From the official rules we know that the dragon from a place like Cave is not an enemy, but a creature. That's okay. But if, as The_Warlock said

 

"On all card wordings, "Spirit" it is only a short form for "Enemy-Spirit", just like "Dragon" is a short form for "Enemy-Dragon" and "Animal" a short form for "Enemy-Animal".

 

doesn't this mean that both the Cave and the Holy Lance use the short form for Enemy-Dragon? Except in a Cave it's not an enemy but a creature, since there is a general rule for that, but it still is a Dragon - sharing the subtype, but not the type.

 

The_Warlock said:

 

In game terms, "Spirit" is always associated to the word "Enemy" and together they form a particular "Card Type" [...] A "Spirit creature" does not exist according to the rules.

but I don't see where the rules explicitly say so. I see that Spirit is a type of an enemy, a subtype of some sort, but it doesn't say that a creature can't share this subtype.

There is one part in the rulebook for Dragon expansion: 'The term “Dragon” refers to any Enemy with the word “Dragon” in the card type box', but it still confuses me. Again, the Cave uses the same term - Dragon. It could mean that even though we can't see it for obvious reasons, the Cave spawns an Enemy-Dragon that... isn't really an Enemy.

Plus, something like that should have been in the core rulebook, not one of the expansions.

 

[...]  it could have received any other name instead of "Spirit" and avoid this kind of confusion.

 

And yet, for some reason, it didn't. Why would they give them the same names as the enemies, if they didn't want us to treat them as if they share the same subtype? Why isn't it a 'Spooky bug' or a 'Terrible zombie monster thing'?

 

The rules are not clear for me and when they aren't, I like to use common sense - when two cards reference the same name, like Dragon or Spirit, they mean the same thing. Why would the word 'Dragon' on one card mean something totally different then the 'Dragon' on the other card? It causes a lot of confusion and it makes people look at me funny when I try to convince them that a dragon from the cave isn't really a dragon, but just some mysterious being that is called by the same name. It looks like I'm trying to fool them and stop them from using cool weapons and abilities.

I know that people with few hundred/thousand posts are more skilled in interpreting the rules, but I wish I was able to explain it better, to myself and my friends.

My brain hurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leywalker, I'll summarize it for you: pretend all non-Enemy creatures don't have names,

The things you fight in the cave are just called "creature." They're not dragons or goblins; they're "creatures." The thing guarding the river is just called "creature." Guy in the tavern is a "creature." Thing in the Crags is a "creature." Pretend they don't have names.

From a gameplay perspective, these things are not supposed to be affected by effects that target enemy types. For proof, look at the Dragon expansion rulebook. It literally says that the creatures in the Dragon Realm Inner Region aren't affected by stuff that affects Enemy Dragons. So the Hydra Dragon isn't a dragon. It works like that so certain characters and objects don't break the game.

I know it doesn't make sense, but the best way to think about it thematically is these creatures are simply just stronger versions of their "Enemy" counterparts with the same name. They only have to be given names for flavor, as it would be extremely boring to call everything a creature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One could argue that the Dragons are treated differently in the expansion, to emphasize their power. But I guess you're right, I will just have to accept it as it is. It's just a game, after all and I shouldn't overthink it.

Thank you for the response!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You may choose to automatically destroy ANY Spirits without resorting to psychic combat." -- Priest Special Ability

On its own, this should speak for itself, and settle the matter; the Priest CAN destroy the Crags Spirit without resorting to the dice.

Opponents of this ruling may argue, however, that the continuation of this text implies ambiguity for their case against his being ableto do it: "When you destroy a Spirit [unqualified] in this manner, you may not keep the Enemy [qualified] as a trophy but you may gain one spell."

Assuming my first ruling allows for the Special Ability to circumvent the dice battle (and win it outright, which I strongly suggest), it is still literally true, per the Priest's Special Ability requirement, that "a Spirit" has been destroyed "in this manner", and notwithstanding the apparent redundancy of disallowing the trophy acquisition (which of itself does not rule anything out, but merely reiterates that no trophy may be acquired), the Priest should be allowed to take a Spell, craft limit permitting.

Not to mention, of course, that there is already a Crags Spirit Adventure Card which would allow him as usual to utilize this ability; a Crags Spirit is a Crags Spirit. If the Flavour Text doesn't differentiate them, why should the game mechanics? (Which I still contend do not anyway.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You may choose to automatically destroy ANY Spirits without resorting to psychic combat." -- Priest Special Ability

On its own, this should speak for itself, and settle the matter; the Priest CAN destroy the Crags Spirit without resorting to the dice.

Opponents of this ruling may argue, however, that the continuation of this text implies ambiguity for their case against his being ableto do it: "When you destroy a Spirit [unqualified] in this manner, you may not keep the Enemy [qualified] as a trophy but you may gain one spell."

Assuming my first ruling allows for the Special Ability to circumvent the dice battle (and win it outright, which I strongly suggest), it is still literally true, per the Priest's Special Ability requirement, that "a Spirit" has been destroyed "in this manner", and notwithstanding the apparent redundancy of disallowing the trophy acquisition (which of itself does not rule anything out, but merely reiterates that no trophy may be acquired), the Priest should be allowed to take a Spell, craft limit permitting.

Not to mention, of course, that there is already a Crags Spirit Adventure Card which would allow him as usual to utilize this ability; a Crags Spirit is a Crags Spirit. If the Flavour Text doesn't differentiate them, why should the game mechanics? (Which I still contend do not anyway.)

 

Well you are in the minority here and we do not agree with you. We have concrete evidence from one of the rulebooks to back up what we are saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not this thread again...

 

"You may choose to automatically destroy ANY Spirits without resorting to psychic combat." -- Priest Special Ability

On its own, this should speak for itself, and settle the matter; the Priest CAN destroy the Crags Spirit without resorting to the dice.

 

But he can't destroy the Wight or the Demon in the Tomb Adventure Card, can he?

 

Just ask you why.

 

Opponents of this ruling may argue, however, that the continuation of this text implies ambiguity for their case against his being ableto do it: "When you destroy a Spirit [unqualified] in this manner, you may not keep the Enemy [qualified] as a trophy but you may gain one spell."

 

The continuation of the Priest special ability has NEVER being used as an argument in this thread, so I don't think it's even worth quoting.

 

Spirit[unqualified] is not true; the Spirit is qualified on the Priest Special ability, as much as "Dragon" and "Animal" is qualified on Minstrel's special abilities. They are Enemy-Spirits, Enemy-Dragons and Enemy-Animals respectively.

 

Since there's no card that says "attacked by an Animal with Strength 3", no one ever tried to use the Minstrel's charm out of its normal application field, which is Enemies.

 

Assuming my first ruling allows for the Special Ability to circumvent the dice battle (and win it outright, which I strongly suggest), it is still literally true, per the Priest's Special Ability requirement, that "a Spirit" has been destroyed "in this manner", and notwithstanding the apparent redundancy of disallowing the trophy acquisition (which of itself does not rule anything out, but merely reiterates that no trophy may be acquired), the Priest should be allowed to take a Spell, craft limit permitting.

 

Again, can he destroy the Wight and the Demon in the Tomb in this manner?

 

Not to mention, of course, that there is already a Crags Spirit Adventure Card which would allow him as usual to utilize this ability; a Crags Spirit is a Crags Spirit. If the Flavour Text doesn't differentiate them, why should the game mechanics? (Which I still contend do not anyway.)

 

Where's a Crags Spirit card in the game? Probably it's the Digital Edition, which I played a few times in the Prologue. There's no card in the board game, therefore the important distinction between "Enemies" and "creatures".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on Warlock, come play Talisman Digitial Edition. We have Talisman Cup Tournaments & also a Talisman League of Champions. Come join the party!

 

Thank you for the invitation, I know very well that the hype about Talisman has shifted from the board game to the Digital Edition.

 

I'm fine with being out of it and not having to argue on how DE implements FFG board game rules. I decided not to join that party a long time ago. I don't have time for playing online games and to get addicted to them, the time I spend here on the forums is ok for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Come on Warlock, come play Talisman Digitial Edition. We have Talisman Cup Tournaments & also a Talisman League of Champions. Come join the party!

 

Thank you for the invitation, I know very well that the hype about Talisman has shifted from the board game to the Digital Edition.

 

I'm fine with being out of it and not having to argue on how DE implements FFG board game rules. I decided not to join that party a long time ago. I don't have time for playing online games and to get addicted to them, the time I spend here on the forums is ok for me.

 

 

A **** shame!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0