- This topic has 851 replies, 40 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 14 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Can Behemoth benefit from copying All-Powerful from a crew after kraken cancelling shuts down the All-Powerful ability? (Each turn roll a d6, on a result of 5 or 6 no crew abilities can be used this turn.)
Can a kraken surround a titan that is on an island? If so, do you move the titan into the kraken once the kraken is as close to the island as possible?
Can Behemoth benefit from copying All-Powerful from a crew after kraken cancelling shuts down the All-Powerful ability? (Each turn roll a d6, on a result of 5 or 6 no crew abilities can be used this turn.)
Even though it’s copied from a crew, Behemoth isn’t one, so it can still use that ability normally.
Can a kraken surround a titan that is on an island? If so, do you move the titan into the kraken once the kraken is as close to the island as possible?
Short answer is no.
Longer answer is that this question has revealed an error in the Pirate Code. There’s a line under Kraken/Octopus that refers to surrounding docked ships (the only line in green text, incidentally), but in the Master Keyword List the keyword’s text specifically states that “it cannot surround a docked ship”. That line of green text never should have been added!
If a ship has both of these abilities aboard:
-Masts on this ship cannot be eliminated by shots unless the cannon roll is a 6.
-Two hits from the same shoot action are required to eliminate one of this ship’s masts.
Does the first hit of each pair also have to be a 6, or can it be any regular hit because only the second hit would actually eliminate a mast?
If a ship has both of these abilities aboard:
-Masts on this ship cannot be eliminated by shots unless the cannon roll is a 6.
-Two hits from the same shoot action are required to eliminate one of this ship’s masts.
Does the first hit of each pair also have to be a 6, or can it be any regular hit because only the second hit would actually eliminate a mast?
The specific hit that eliminates a mast would have to be a 6, but any non-6 hits in between will still count toward the “two hits” ability as long as they’re high enough for the cannon(s) used.
Other hit-based abilities still function normally throughout too, even if the rolls aren’t high enough to actually eliminate masts.
Namazu and the Trident target an area rather than any ship specifically, so Parley won’t work even if it’s the only ship within that target area.
That also means that Namazu could effectively “shoot” (just not with its cannons) at ships docked at a home island, correct?
Namazu and the Trident target an area rather than any ship specifically, so Parley won’t work even if it’s the only ship within that target area.
That also means that Namazu could effectively “shoot” (just not with its cannons) at ships docked at a home island, correct?
Yes! If the target area happens to overlap a ship docked at its own home island, that ship can lose masts.
The home island protection really only prevents ships from being targeted directly; it doesn’t negate damage from other sources.
Just to confirm: If you capture an enemy ship that has a Ransom crew on it, and the two ships are of different nationalities, you cannot transfer the Ransom crew to the towing ship due to the rule that 0-point crew can only be assigned to ships of their own nationality?
Why does the Pirate Code make an exception to the above 0-point crew assignment rule for Captain Nemo’s “shanghai” ability? (an ability which says specifically “captive becomes assigned to this ship”)
Do you know if “Shanghai” was the ability shorthand that Wizkids or the community used before 2011? (such as during the production years)
Just to confirm: If you capture an enemy ship that has a Ransom crew on it, and the two ships are of different nationalities, you cannot transfer the Ransom crew to the towing ship due to the rule that 0-point crew can only be assigned to ships of their own nationality?
Ransom activates as soon as the ship is captured. It doesn’t explicitly disable the 0-point rule, but that’s implied, because otherwise it largely defeats the purpose of Ransom. You CAN transfer the captured Ransom crew to other ships in your fleet, regardless of nationality, but the only island you can unload it to is your home island. (I’ll add a note to my markups to cover this more clearly.)
Why does the Pirate Code make an exception to the above 0-point crew assignment rule for Captain Nemo’s “shanghai” ability? (an ability which says specifically “captive becomes assigned to this ship”)
Those two abilities don’t mesh together particularly well. I don’t recall the exact reasons for why the interaction was handled that way, but it would allow Nemo’s ability to function in full while keeping Ransom (plus whatever other abilities the Ransom crew has) mostly intact. Essentially, it’s changing the original ownership of the captured crew, even though it doesn’t directly say that.
Looking at it now, in hindsight, it probably should just count as a simple capture that triggers Ransom for the gold value. It always seemed like more of a hypothetical situation anyway, because the ship would have to be completely stripped of other crew first before Nemo could even touch it. Plus, Nemo has never really been a particularly popular crew to use, which makes the scenario that much less likely to come up in the first place. Can you remember it ever actually happening in a game?
I’ll think about that one (and would love to hear other input), but that may get changed if another update to the PC actually happens.
Do you know if “Shanghai” was the ability shorthand that Wizkids or the community used before 2011? (such as during the production years)
I don’t think the term was ever used by WK. That was just semi-thematic slang used to make it easier to distinguish from the other capture ability.
It doesn’t explicitly disable the 0-point rule, but that’s implied, because otherwise it largely defeats the purpose of Ransom. You CAN transfer the captured Ransom crew to other ships in your fleet, regardless of nationality, but the only island you can unload it to is your home island.
I’m finding that quite confusing. This is how I see it based on the keyword and Pirate Code (emphasis added):
Ransom: If a crew with this keyword is captured or transferred to a ship opposing to its original owner its other abilities cease to function regardless of nationality…
This would mean abilities like Reroll/etc cease to function.
Ability Conflict Hierarchy: -This list applies only when two or more abilities conflict. When an ability and a rule conflict the ability always takes precedence regardless of the terms used, unless specifically stated otherwise.
Placing Crew rule:
-A zero-point crewmember can be assigned only to a ship of its own nationality. Whether or not some other ability would allow that crew to use its abilities on another ship is irrelevant.
I think the flaw lies in the wording of the Ransom keyword. It should specify that when the ability kicks in, it also disables the 0-point crew rule. It says “its other abilities cease to function”, but makes no mention of essentially cancelling the 0-point crew rule. I understand that abilities override rules, but the Ransom ability specifically refers to other abilities and doesn’t include any rule overrides. Thus, based on what I’m reading, the 0-point crew rule still has to apply.
Rules come before abilities, so usually when an ability takes precedence, it’s quite clear in the ability wording (it’s obvious what rule it’s changing/etc). In this case, it is not clear. I personally don’t think it’s heavily implied enough to read into it so that the 0-point rule would be disregarded. It does make the negative of Ransom less negative, but there is still often quite the incentive to tow the captured ship back to your home island, as the ship might sometimes be more valuable than the 5 gold in the long run.
I totally understand that Ransom would be more thematic with what you’re saying, I just don’t see enough justification in the written rules to warrant that. Maybe there’s something I’m missing though! 🙂
I think the flaw lies in the wording of the Ransom keyword. It should specify that when the ability kicks in, it also disables the 0-point crew rule. It says “its other abilities cease to function”, but makes no mention of essentially cancelling the 0-point crew rule. I understand that abilities override rules, but the Ransom ability specifically refers to other abilities and doesn’t include any rule overrides. Thus, based on what I’m reading, the 0-point crew rule still has to apply.
The root of the issue is that Ransom was introduced in Crimson Coast, while the 0-Point rule was added later in Revolution, but Ransom was never updated to address it directly.
As written it technically doesn’t override that rule, but based on how it initially worked, I’ve always assumed that once triggered Ransom would disable that rule along with whatever other abilities that crew had. Without that, your options for getting the max value out of Ransom are pretty limited: you either need to drag the captured ship home (or at least to somewhere it can repair), or you need to get lucky and happen to already have a ship with a matching nationality in your fleet.
I don’t know if it’s necessary to update the MKL just for that, but I’m definitely adding it to my notes for the potential PC update.
The root of the issue is that Ransom was introduced in Crimson Coast, while the 0-Point rule was added later in Revolution, but Ransom was never updated to address it directly.
Interesting, I didn’t know about that part. I could ask Piranha if he remembers any direction from Wizkids about it.
I’m not so sure it should override the 0-point crew rule, since it doesn’t indicate that it’s supposed to. To me any rules updates at this point in the game’s life should be edits, not additions.
It sounds to me like that would be an edit, rather than an addition. Rules as intended, rather than rules as written.
(Ben) Interesting, I didn’t know about that part. I could ask Piranha if he remembers any direction from Wizkids about it.
I’m not so sure it should override the 0-point crew rule, since it doesn’t indicate that it’s supposed to. To me any rules updates at this point in the game’s life should be edits, not additions.
(Captain V) It sounds to me like that would be an edit, rather than an addition. Rules as intended, rather than rules as written.
I agree that it would have to be considered an edit (technically more of a reversion) at this point, but that’s why it would be better addressed in the PC than through an update to the MKL.
What I’m most curious about is how often it was actually relevant in games, and when/if it did occur, how various different players/groups handled it.
I still have vague memories of the game from before the addition of the 0-point rule, where the quickest way to cash in a Random crew was to have the captured derelict explore to transfer them over to your attacking ship. But, for anyone that came into the game after that 0-point rule was already locked in (the majority or remaining players, I think) might have never even considered the possibility.
Can a 0 coin become negative in value (-1) due to the Rats UT?
No, non-unique treasures cannot be reduced below zero by other effects.
A [custom] UT could give itself a negative value, but it would have to explicitly say so.
ADDED: I couldn’t find a specific reference to this in the PC, but know it’s been ruled on in the past, so I’ll add it to my list of stuff to include in the future (maybe) update.
If an L-mover forces a ship onto a whirlpool, which player decides if that ship goes through and where it ends up? (the moving player or the original controller?)
“Give this ship a move action but do not move her. Instead, roll a d6. On a result of 5 or 6, move an enemy ship L in any direction.”
If an L-mover forces a ship onto a whirlpool, which player decides if that ship goes through and where it ends up? (the moving player or the original controller?)
“Give this ship a move action but do not move her. Instead, roll a d6. On a result of 5 or 6, move an enemy ship L in any direction.”
The ship’s current owner (not mover) chooses if the whirlpool activates, where the ship goes, and what falls out on the way.
Who rolls the d6 for the ability of Paradis de la Mer, the fort controller or the player shooting at it?
“The first time this fort is shot at each turn, roll a d6. The result is the number of times this fort must be hit that turn before any of its cannons can be eliminated.”
I also think the Pirate Code entry about it is a bit confusing – the ability to me says that if you roll a 4, it ignores the first 4 hits and the 5th hit will take out a flag. But this line indicates otherwise:
-The d6 result is the number of hits required to eliminate the first flag only; it is not the number of hits required to remove each flag. For example, if a result of 4 was rolled, the fourth hit will remove one flag. The fifth hit and every subsequent hit this turn will remove one flag each.
From Tilorfire27:
Does Seleucis move another sea monster Seleucis’ speed or the target monster’s speed?
Can Davy Jones copy Intermediario? It says if this sea creature, but could a vanilla ship copy it?
-Also in the Pirate Code, for the Intermediario entry it lists the ability as “if this sea monster” instead of sea creature. (card does say sea creature)
Who rolls the d6 for the ability of Paradis de la Mer, the fort controller or the player shooting at it?
The fort’s controller gets to make the roll.
“The first time this fort is shot at each turn, roll a d6. The result is the number of times this fort must be hit that turn before any of its cannons can be eliminated.”
I also think the Pirate Code entry about it is a bit confusing – the ability to me says that if you roll a 4, it ignores the first 4 hits and the 5th hit will take out a flag. But this line indicates otherwise:
-The d6 result is the number of hits required to eliminate the first flag only; it is not the number of hits required to remove each flag. For example, if a result of 4 was rolled, the fourth hit will remove one flag. The fifth hit and every subsequent hit this turn will remove one flag each.
It’s a poorly-worded and broken ability, but the number rolled is the number of hits needed to take out the first flag. Once you’re past that initial armor, every hit after works just like it would against any other fort. It is a little ambiguous the way the ability is worded, but it was interpreted/ruled that way a long time ago in an attempt to make it slightly less broken.
So, if a 3 was rolled:
1) First hit – no damage
2) Second hit – no damage
3) Third hit – eliminate one flag
4) Fourth+ hit(s) – eliminate one flag each
From Tilorfire27:
Does Seleucis move another sea monster Seleucis’ speed or the target monster’s speed?
Can Davy Jones copy Intermediario? It says if this sea creature, but could a vanilla ship copy it?
-Also in the Pirate Code, for the Intermediario entry it lists the ability as “if this sea monster” instead of sea creature. (card does say sea creature)
The ability of Seleucis doesn’t specify the distance, so it uses the target creature’s base move.
DJ can copy Intermediario’s ability, but because it specifies the type he can only use it if he’s on a creature (via Chariot), so it’s much easier for Behemoth to use.
I’ll make a note to correct that wording.
Thank you!
nextjr is wondering:
Could a submerged submarine be hit by Neptune’s Trident, and if so if it’s the Nautilus submarine does it take two hull pieces of damage or one because of its defensive ability?
Would holy water save a submerged submarine being fired upon by a ship that has an ability can shoot submerged ships
2) A player has unloaded more than half of the game’s starting gold value onto his or her home island.
–The gold value required to trigger this end condition is determined during setup, before the game begins. Abilities or effects that increase or decrease the actual gold value in play during the game do not change that required value.
Is the last sentence mainly to reduce confusion? (with lots of +1/+2 abilities and gold-bearing UT’s potentially in play)
I don’t think it’s a bad rule, but certain competitive fleets that abuse the gold bonus abilities certainly have an interesting way to exploit it (sometimes by flinging gold home that gets increased in value, sometimes allowing a fleet to win with spoils from just one island or a couple original coins).
Could a submerged submarine be hit by Neptune’s Trident, and if so if it’s the Nautilus submarine does it take two hull pieces of damage or one because of its defensive ability?
Yes – The wave affects everything in the area, whether it’s submerged or not.
It eliminates masts directly without causing hits, so abilities that reduce/ignore damage from hits won’t apply. Nautilus would lose two pieces.
Would holy water save a submerged submarine being fired upon by a ship that has an ability can shoot submerged ships
Yes, because that ability is affecting the sub by allowing the shoot action.
2) A player has unloaded more than half of the game’s starting gold value onto his or her home island.
–The gold value required to trigger this end condition is determined during setup, before the game begins. Abilities or effects that increase or decrease the actual gold value in play during the game do not change that required value.
Is the last sentence mainly to reduce confusion? (with lots of +1/+2 abilities and gold-bearing UT’s potentially in play)
I don’t think it’s a bad rule, but certain competitive fleets that abuse the gold bonus abilities certainly have an interesting way to exploit it (sometimes by flinging gold home that gets increased in value, sometimes allowing a fleet to win with spoils from just one island or a couple original coins).
Yeah, it’s meant mostly just for clarification, specifically because of all of those abilities and effects that increase the total gold value. You only look at the original/starting amount, instead of having to constantly keep recalculating a new “half” based on what’s actually in play.
That gold rule worked okay way back in the early days of the game, and it works when playing with just a couple booster packs per player (and/or the illustrated rules), but so many gold modifiers and adders got added to the game over time that in a full format game it can end things ridiculously quick.
That’s why it’s almost always better to toss that rule out entirely and use the full multiplayer rules even in two-player games.
Would holy water save a submerged submarine being fired upon by a ship that has an ability can shoot submerged ships.
Yes, because that ability is affecting the sub by allowing the shoot action.
I reject this ruling. The “target” of the ability is the ship with said ability; it doesn’t directly affect submarines because the ability itself doesn’t target them. By that logic, World/Faction Hater shouldn’t work against Holy Water; Captain won’t allow a Move-Shoot targeting a ship holding Holy Water because it “allows the shoot action”.
To quote Holy Water’s entry in the Pirate Code: “This unique treasure protects a ship only from abilities that affect or target it directly. It has no effect on abilities that affect it indirectly by modifying the actions or effects of another ship.”
Would holy water save a submerged submarine being fired upon by a ship that has an ability can shoot submerged ships.
Yes, because that ability is affecting the sub by allowing the shoot action.
I reject this ruling. The “target” of the ability is the ship with said ability; it doesn’t directly affect submarines because the ability itself doesn’t target them. By that logic, World/Faction Hater shouldn’t work against Holy Water; Captain won’t allow a Move-Shoot targeting a ship holding Holy Water because it “allows the shoot action”.
To quote Holy Water’s entry in the Pirate Code: “This unique treasure protects a ship only from abilities that affect or target it directly. It has no effect on abilities that affect it indirectly by modifying the actions or effects of another ship.”
The interaction between the ability allowing the ship to submerge and the sub-shooter ability is just like the interaction with a standard canceller, except the effect is passive and automatic rather than actively targeted. In both cases, the ability is directly and specifically affecting the shot prevention.
It’s yet another example of slightly ambiguous ability wordings interacting in ways that were never fully thought out.
I’ll make a note in my updates list to address it somehow, to make it more clear.
Does anything strange happen if the Wolves UT is teleported straight to your home island? (such as by one of the Royal Decree UT’s, or a Mysterious Island effect) This old review makes me think not, but I want to be sure.
I was slightly hopeful it might prevent HI raiding, but it specifies a wild island in the ability text.
Does anything strange happen if the Wolves UT is teleported straight to your home island? (such as by one of the Royal Decree UT’s, or a Mysterious Island effect) This old review makes me think not, but I want to be sure.
I was slightly hopeful it might prevent HI raiding, but it specifies a wild island in the ability text.
If Wolves is facedown, a Royal Decree can pick it randomly and dump it on your home island, but it’ll have no effect there.
If Wolves is face up on a wild island, Royal Decree can’t pick anything from that island; it has to pull from elsewhere.
—–
Similar happens with Mysterious Islands. They can move Wolves and other treasures around, but Wolves would block anything that involves loading treasures from their island, even if it’s triggered by a ship exploring a different MI somewhere else. Wolves will still have no effect if it somehow lands on a home island.
Some of the interactions between MIs and other abilities get weird, so use your best discretion if something with them doesn’t line up in a clear way.
If Wolves is face up on a wild island, Royal Decree can’t pick anything from that island; it has to pull from elsewhere.
I think the Code entry for Wolves should probably include a note about needing to keep it face up once revealed. The part about it needing to be hit for elimination implies that, but it’s a little odd that it doesn’t say so explicitly. I could also see a newer player finding it, keeping it hidden, and then not taking any treasure from the island while bluffing that they didn’t want to (whereas Wolves should become known to all players).
Noticing a pretty huge discrepancy in the wording for the Explore Action. The Start Here rules state:
If you’re docked at a wild island, you can take treasure.
Complete Game rules state:
If a ship begins one of your turns docked at a wild island
I’ve never played that a ship has to begin a player turn docked at a wild island to explore that turn (even making the distinction to “her” turn as a specific ship would be very important for something like Hidden Cove, a staple of competitive play). She should be able to dock, then potentially get an extra action to explore.
It’s a bit odd to me that the Complete Game rules should be the incorrect ones here, since normally the Start Here rules contain the annoying discrepancies that got fixed with the Complete Game rules or Code. (Such as not looking at coins while exploring. It’s still odd to me that the wording for that made it into the game – it would make sense for one set if Spanish Main had no UT’s, but if players pull a UT out of their first pack, the game will probably have an asterisk for the “error” caused by the bad rule)
On that note, thanks again as always for keeping up with this so consistently over the years. The more I dig into things, the more discrepancies and gray areas I find. I thought by now this thread would be less active, but it seems there will be no end to new rules questions!
I think the Code entry for Wolves should probably include a note about needing to keep it face up once revealed. The part about it needing to be hit for elimination implies that, but it’s a little odd that it doesn’t say so explicitly. I could also see a newer player finding it, keeping it hidden, and then not taking any treasure from the island while bluffing that they didn’t want to (whereas Wolves should become known to all players).
The general rule for UTs is that they get revealed when found and stay revealed, unless something specifically flips them face down again, but I can add a note clarifying it.
I’ve never played that a ship has to begin a player turn docked at a wild island to explore that turn (even making the distinction to “her” turn as a specific ship would be very important for something like Hidden Cove, a staple of competitive play). She should be able to dock, then potentially get an extra action to explore.
It’s a bit odd to me that the Complete Game rules should be the incorrect ones here, since normally the Start Here rules contain the annoying discrepancies that got fixed with the Complete Game rules or Code. (Such as not looking at coins while exploring. It’s still odd to me that the wording for that made it into the game – it would make sense for one set if Spanish Main had no UT’s, but if players pull a UT out of their first pack, the game will probably have an asterisk for the “error” caused by the bad rule)
That rule might have been written before all of the abilities were fully fleshed out, because extra actions and even the Explorer’s own text contradicts it. I’m not sure why they bothered to change the wording, unless it’s intended just to make it clear that you can’t grab treasure immediately after you dock. In any case, it’s pretty safe to ignore that “begin the turn” rule when extra actions and such are involved.
On that note, thanks again as always for keeping up with this so consistently over the years. The more I dig into things, the more discrepancies and gray areas I find. I thought by now this thread would be less active, but it seems there will be no end to new rules questions!
You’re welcome! It’s funny how no matter how much gets covered, there’s always something more.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.