Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Discussion on The Book of the Mind Flayer Mastermind has brought up one of my favorite debates on the definition of the word "random" when used for stealing/discarding cards/order markers from an opponent - namely does it use the scientific definition of random or the "customary" definition of random which IMHO is more akin to the definition of arbitrary. So let us have a vote! For the powers below, how do YOU play or think it should be played:

Mind Flayer Mastermind
Glyph of Oreld (Intercept Order)
Note: Entangling Web DOES NOT have the word random, so the poll is about the the two above, but note your interpretation of Psionic Blast Special Attack and Glyph of Oreld may differ from your view of Entangling Web or may be the same.

Fyorlag Spiders

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

FWIW, option 5 is the GenCon ruling. Play them where they lay. The card doesn’t say to shuffle them.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

The point is that the choosing player does not know what OM they are picking. However you can make that happen is fair.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I have not played this way (tournaments I went to were option 3 or 4), but would not mind doing, as it reminds me of:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/16/f6...1e53a6bade.jpg


So basically any of the choices above would work for you.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I really need to watch that movie. I just haven’t gotten around to it yet.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I was reading up on the conversation imbedded in The Book of the Mind Flayer Mastermind and I have to admit it is a very interesting topic to discuss and I love the idea of this poll.

I will start by stating that Heroscape in itself was not designed to be played competitively as is. Therefore, the designers did not anticipate any ruling such as this to be a big deal nor this thread to even have a reason to exist. Because of which, I feel it is the responsibility of the players, table, and event coordinator to decide what ruling should apply. For house games, informal events and the like, it would be best to "read the room" to set the competitive level of the games prior to any being played. Any rules set forth before play cannot be undermined like rules that are implemented mid-match or made by a judge ruling at such games because, once again, Heroscape is not a naturally designed competitive game. More specifically in each case I describe in detail below.

My argument stems from other competitive games and the notion to "Do as the card says". But in regards to the answer to the question it depends on the setting. I, however, find some answers to be wrong in any setting. For example, the answer I picked, Players MUST always roll a dice or shuffle the order markers and without either player looking. This answer is the closest ruling I can see to the nature of "random" in games. I agree whole-heartily with this answer except for the option to shuffle. No where does any card say they may shuffle the order markers. That being said the premise of responses 2, 3 and 4 namely Owner MUST shuffle/rearrange OMs but can look before the player chooses which he/she removes, Owner CAN shuffle/rearrange OMs and can look before the player chooses, but is not required, and Owner CAN rearrange OMs but MUST do while looking before the player chooses, but is not required. There is no shuffling/rearranging required nor stating in any power or ruling and so there is no option to shuffle/rearrange. Players cannot shuffle/rearrange order markers at any point period, whether prior to a "random" discard or no discard at all. Order markers are placed in any fashion, important note here, any fashion, and not removed until chosen from a power described in question or when used.

With these answers void that leaves 3 choices remain. I agree with answer 5 stating: Owner CANNOT shuffle/rearrange OMs before the player chooses. OMs must be placed strategically but this does not explain the methodology in which players would "remove a marker at random". I've shown sympathy to the last response stating: Depends on who you play with and mood players are in, but can be decided differently each game but with a caveat. In home games, informal and non-competitive matches where the only outcome is fun, this is acceptable as it maintains the level of fun and has no other consequences as long as all players are in agreement with the decision.

This leaves but one answer. To be honest my true answer would be a combination of Players MUST always roll a dice or shuffle the order markers and without either player looking and Owner CANNOT shuffle/rearrange OMs before the player chooses. OMs must be placed strategically given that players can arrange their order markers strategically at all times while also playing to the premise of "random".

Lefton4ya, I do not believe the intentions of the designers were to include the word "random" on some powers and be devoid of it on others, namely the Fyorlag Spiders' power. The difficulty of attaining the Fyorlag Spiders's power by having 3 adjacencies and rolling a 16 or higher (25%) grants the ability to remove an order marker not randomly, but systematically chosen. All other instances of similar powers (to my off-the-cuff knowledge) uses the word "random" which I believe falls under the definition better suited by your word "arbitrary" and was not intended to be ambiguous. The word random is more common, in language and in other games as described below, than arbitrary which I believe is the reasoning for its inclusion to reduce discussion and ambiguity as to the nature of the phrasing, but in the end only added, and is the sole reason for the discussion.

The video in question on The Book of the Mind Flayer Mastermind I can only describe as either a lack of judgement in "reading the room" as described prior given the competitive, or not so competitive nature of the event in this instance, a lack of moral character, knowing to chose at random but choosing with methodology to gain a malicious edge in game, or just a complete under-sight not realizing the ruling on the specific power tells you the method in which to chose the marker. Mistakes can be made and whether the result in this particular case, if the outcome of the match matters (mainly a competitive setting), I would call a judge (or other authoritative figure given the event calls for a judge if competitive) and correct the players actions. When playing competitively the game is not just for fun and so it is more serious than casual where rules need to be abided for sake of competition. In the event the event is not very competitive or if the result is minimal to the game I personally would brush it off, having caught it, taken the process of correcting the actions would be more time intensive than to just ignore the minor mistake and continue.

More on the term "random". I will need to include an example from another game for the wording. Forgive me, I really have no idea how to work links on this forum and would have included a picture of the card in question instead, it's been some time I've linked anything on the forums. In Magic the Gathering, a card game that uses the term "random" on multiple occasions, really hits home with the premise of the word. One card reads: "Target opponent discards a card at random" I have never heard of any argument as to how the card is chosen. The definition of random here is taken literally. Given that there are more likely more choices in other games than Heroscape, given a maximum of 4 order markers, and in this specific case referring to the discussion in The Book of the Mind Flayer Mastermind, only 2 choices, I feel the need for the word random to be taken literally to be of much more importance given the lesser of choices.

To sum up, I would just roll a die given the card says at random in this case. That's how I would personally understand this. This has no mention as to how those markers have been arranged by the opposing player. The ability to place order markers in any given fashion is not mandated in any form so I believe this option is up to the player, but this may be another discussion.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Maybe my example of "gay" wasn't the best example, but the idea is that a word can mean two different things to different people, based on their culture and experiences. In addition people may decide how to interpret a rule differently. You are right in that there is not (as of yet) any codified way - Gencon uses a completely different interpretation than Online games - that is because the tournament directors decided on an interpretation. But note that specifically the word random has the same issues in other games as well. However I think a TD deciding on an interpretation is a strength of Heroscape - fun and friendliness is prioritized over formality. Now if you are coming from the CCG/CMG realm such as Magic the Gathering or Warhammer where formality is prioritized over fun and friendliness, I can see where you are coming from, as they prefer all tournaments to have the same exact rulings. The ultimate answer is Heroscape is philosophy diametrically opposed to those types of games in that it embraces differences in groups. However anyone who has been to a Heroscape tournament as well as a Magic tournament will tell you that most HS players put fun and friendliness first and therefore most of them appreciate HS tournaments more than CCG/CMG, even (especially) BECAUSE each game/TD may be run differently. I have seen some HS tournament goers not like the "TD prerogative", but they are few and far between.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I don't see why "clear rules" and "friendly fun" have to be mutually exclusive. I do not accept this dichotomy.

What is friendly about fudging the rules? Faking reality to satisfy someone. Seems to me this has simply fostered an environment where more and more generous faking is expected.

It's not fun, in my mind, to be put in a scenario where you rightfully should have a 50/50 lease on life, and you are expected to just give away that chance so your opponent can fudge the rules in his/her advantage. You know what's fun for me? Rolling the dice and seeing if I get lucky. Luck makes for hilariously epic games. Win or lose.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

My only point is that each game/event/tournament organizer has the right by Heroscape's very nature to decide interpretations. I agree that these should be done before a game starts to set the groundrules and expectations, and that if someone disagrees before the game start then a decision by the organizer can be changed. However in my view it is more important as a player to go by the rules of the organizer without complaining, than to resent the organizer who may not go by the same rules as other groups/tournaments you play.

For this example Gencon has option 5 and Online tournaments have option 1, and most tournaments I have been to in Ohio and KY (and home games in my house) have option 3 or 4, but I am perfectly happy with playing differently in different groups.
@Brewster Would you be willing to to follow the rules of each group, or would you rather not play because they do not have your preferred rule interpretation? Sorry if I seem like an a$$ asking this, but my hope is we can "agree to disagree" if it means we can play more games and have fun doing so.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

You are more than welcome to do what you want in home games. You have laid out a different way to rule this than the GenCon rules team, and that's fine! Our ruling is that because the opponent does not know which OM is which, choosing one is sufficiently random.

But I will push back on the notion that we're "fudging the rules" simply because you don't agree with the ruling. This is an example of "clear rules"; this is the standard for competitive play (at GenCon). If you want to change that, the burden is on you to prove why our current ruling is erroneous. It isn't enough to just say it could, or perhaps even should, be ruled the other way. You need to make the case as to why it MUST be ruled the other way, and you have not adequately made that case yet. Again, we are certainly open to reevaluating our rulings.

As a quick aside, is a thread with a current list of GenCon rulings something that the community would like to see? Most people that play at GenCon are aware of the rulings we use, but perhaps that would be helpful?

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I'm surprised that its anything other than #5. I've never put any thought that it could be anything different.

Interesting discussion.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I'm typically happy to play however the house/TO wants. The bad beats so to speak happen when such a scenario happens in the moment, you were playing the whole game under the assumption the rules work one way, and instead they worked the other way. If I go into a game knowing the mind flayer can pick away a vital OM on an educated guess, that makes it much more powerful, and I will play accordingly. But if I play under the assumption that I have only a 33% chance of getting wrecked by it, and it turns out I was guaranteed to get wrecked by it, my whole game goes belly-up because of confusion over the word "random".

Tl;Dr regardless of the TO or house rules, don't tell me it's random if it's not randomized.

FWIW
 

Online assigns random numbers to each OM (unless you're me and give them all unique punny names) as it's the cleanest way to distinguish multiple OMs on a players card (although you do have to set it each round or otherwise it adds more numbers onto the previous set which means it becomes trivial to figure out which OM is which). However, from what I've seen the player pretty much always decides which of those random numbers they want and it's how I would rule as a TD there.

In real life, I would default to the Gencon rule. I think the only appreciable difference between the Gencon ruling and OHS ruling is the medium through which information is transmitted.

~Dysole, noting this is not the only, but probably the worst case of connotations not matching the intent in Scape language

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Do things however you want, but don't tell me that's randomized. It's not. The proof is that "random" has a specific meaning, and that clear language is vital for operating mentally. Just as you would not warn someone a room had a "puppy" in it when really there was a wild wolf inside, and that despite convention sometimes referring to all canines as puppies, the person's proper course of action is determined by the specific meaning of the word used. Such is the same in a game. How to play the game should follow from the instructions on the card and rulebooks. If the rules do not adequately describe how the game ought to be played, an errata (or at the very least, an official ruling in the BOOK) should be the proper course of action.

However this is decided, I would like it to be officially ruled on somewhere for future reference.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

My computer is updating, so all I can muster is a quick text, but I’ve already officially ruled on this multiple times (both in this thread and the other). I don’t have the power to edit the book.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Can you shuffle your order markers on your own turn? Since this option says you cannot do so before order marker removal, I assume it's legal on your own turns to change order every time.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

My ruling (and I’ll defer to Ken on this) would be to treat OMs like figures: feel free to manipulate their position on your own turn, but leave them alone on your opponent’s.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I guess I don't see the point. Other than if someone wants to be a huge jackwagon and have like extra 2s and 3s, etc up his sleeve and do some cheating crap. How is it any different than just placing them down "strategically" (I believe that is the word being throw around it my limited reading of this "issue").

I can try and catch up on all the reading here but it might not be til the weekend but I feel like I'm missing the big point somewhere.

The point is for your opponent not to know which OM it is. Which heroscape (geniusly?) did by making them UNREVELAED OMs. I'm not sure why there is discussion beyond that.

You succeed in your mind blast, point to an OM on the unit. Your opponent removes it or puts it face down (but does not reveal it to you until it's that turn of the round) and you move on with the game. Simple.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

As I understand it, the question is basically about what happens if your opponent wasn't thinking about your OM removing power and just placed his OMs on a particular card in numerical order with the X last.

My personal feeling is that not letting the opponent shuffle the OMs in this scenario would be a pretty jerk move, since the only way it makes a difference is if you think that you can get a non-random OM (e.g. one that's not the X) by preventing your opponent from shuffling, in which case you're trying to go against the card's specification of a "random" OM.

On the other hand, if your opponent is keeping your OM removal power in mind when placing their OMs and shuffles their order at the start of the round, it seems like a waste of time to roll a die or make them shuffle again. Basically, if your opponent feels the need to shuffle the OMs to make your selection "random", and they express this before you've chosen an OM to remove, let them shuffle, otherwise, just pick an OM.

~KoS, noting that even in math it can be hard to use the word "random" unambiguously (technically a selection where there's a 99% chance of picking the leftmost OM is random, it just doesn't follow a uniform distribution)

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Ineresting, but doesn't that end up being on you? Like if I forgot Sharwin had a lightning attack that could bounce from unit to unit do I get to replace my figures before you attack?

I also think the random element is not knowing which OM you sniped because it's not facing you. For instance, you obviously can't randomize one OM, so since it can't be randomized does that negate the ability if the opponent only has one OM on the card because then it's not random at all? Unless they mean random as in from the perspective that the OM isn't facing you so you don't know for sure which one it is.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

There's no advantage to moving your OMs to a "strategic" position after placing them, except that you might have forgot to place them strategically initially. So let's say your opponent moves out the Mindflayer on his OM1 and you realize you need to disguise your left to right 1 2 3 X placement before his next turn with the Mindflayer when he can knock off one of your OMs.

In general in competitive games (where I'm playing armies with relevant OM management) I do physically place my OMs "strategically", just so my opponent doesn't try to read my OMs based on their physical placement. I doubt this has ever changed the outcome of a game though.

I do agree with KoS that not letting your opponent do that sort of shuffling during "your turn", if you hit a Psionic Blast, is a bit mean. It's just something they forgot to do, there's no game skill involved, and it actually is a huge impact on the outcome of the game because it vastly changes the power of the OM removal. To be honest I'd probably let my opponent do it if they asked to unless I was playing dok.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I plan on playing MFM x 5 for the main event and I'm going to watch you place your OMs like a hawk.

Juicy Goodness?
 

500 points/10 figures or something? ~_^

~Dysole, who'd probably run Sudema and something if that was the actual GC setup; don't have to worry about this OM business just kill things

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

If it's clearly specified before the game that "random" just means "chosen without looking", and the opponent just forgets then I guess that you can reasonqbly say it's on them (although personally, I'd let them shuffle). If the person believed that "random" meant "selected by a die roll", then I don't think that their interpretation is really less valid, and making them sufdenly play by yours seems unfair.

I would assume that in this context "random" means that each unrevealed OM on the card equally likely to be chosen from your perspective. Whether this is accomplished by your opponent shuffling their OMs at the start of the round so that the first OM is equally likely to have any number, or whether it's accomplished by rolling a die to select an OM doesn't matter. If there is only one unrevealed OM, it trivially has the same probability of being revealed as every other OM on the card.

If anything, your interpretation of random as "you don't know which one it is" is the one that breaks down in the edge cases. It's possible to have a scenario where all but one of your opponent's OMs are revealed. For example, if they've taken 2 turns and revealed their X for a special power, you could know with certainty that the single unrevealed OM on their army card is a 3. But you surely wouldn't say that in this case you couldn't remove the 3, just because you know what it is.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

True random would be rolling the die or shuffling them to the point where neither party knows the numbers. "Strategy/Guesswork/Intuition/Pokerface"-style random is when the Fylorag Spiders remove an OM, which if yer opponent is smart and has his Unrevealeds in a somewhat random pattern is more in line with your gut or reading your opponent.

So I put Option 1.

~TAF, :2cents:

Re: Juicy Goodness?
 

Good job cathcing that...or was that just a rope a dope? Only 3.5 people know the answer to that...

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I really think this is getting blown out of proportion. We're talking about the MFM here. He's decent, but if they spent an OM on him and kill one of yours, that's a fine trade for you. I don't buy that him killing one of your OMs will "ruin your game" or whatever- it's not like he did very much on his OM. You shouldn't be losing to the MFM- and if you are (and this "costs you the game" or whatever), the real secret is you've made plenty of mistakes leading up to that point. Again, this is really a non-issue in "competitive" play.

However, even if you put your OMs in a line, your opponent doesn't know that. You could have just as easily not put them in a line. Just keep a poker face, as they have no way of knowing what you did. Further, unless you only have one army card left, the fact that you put the "X" on that card proves that you DID know they had an OM-stripping ability. Finally, as for forcing them to play by your interpretation, the ruling is the ruling. It's no different than rolling up and being told by your opponent that your Airborne count against the figure/hex limit, forcing you to sit figures. It's not the opponent's fault.

I want to stress how much of a non-issue this really is. Personally, I'd probably just let you shuffle them; I really don't care that much. However, the ruling is the ruling, and I wouldn't enforce otherwise.

The nice thing about games is that both players can agree to do basically whatever they want. I'm not going to walk over and DQ you both if I see you shuffling OMs. Heck, if you want to just wrestle to see who wins the game, or see who can eat more tacos from the taco truck in five minutes to settle a ruling, or whatever else you decide to do, that's totally cool!

This is no trivial matter
 

Tell that to the OFFICIAL power ranking:

We're talking game-altering powers here. Very serious business. Human sacrifice, cats and dogs living together, mass hysteria! ;)

~TAF, surprised more people haven't voted Option 6 because it's probably the correct one at the end of the day

Re: This is no trivial matter
 

Lol, even if you got to look at their OMs before choosing, he'd still be a B, maybe a B+. Enslave is the big play power. The fact that he has to hit them with a 3-die attack to strip an OM, coupled with a 4/4 D/L stat line, means he'd still be mediocre.

And are you really going to trust a guy who passed up the opportunity to say it's a mind-altering ability? Come on now. ;)

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I agree that this isn't a particularly important question, and that it probably comes up rarely. I do take some issue with the idea of "the ruling is the ruling," why are we having this discussion? As far as I know, there is no official ruling or FAQ on this issue. I understand that GenCon has their own ruling, and if I ever go to GenCon, I'd certainly abide by that ruling, but GenCon isn't an official rules source. Lefton4ya is also a TD, and based on this poll, he has a different interpretation of the rules than you.

Clearly, as a player in a tournament, the answer is to check with the TD beforehand about potential ambiguities and to abide by their ruling. But since we aren't at any particular tournament right now, it's valid to talk about what the most "correct" ruling is, and how TD's ought to rule on this question. If we don't all come to the same answer, it doesn't really matter, not all tournaments have to use the exact same interpretation of the rules. Nevertheless, I don't think it's a pointless discussion to have.

~KoS, who admittedly spends a lot of time thinking about questions with fairly limited practical value.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I'd just shuffle 'em around in a cup like dice and draw one. My 2cents.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Ok, but I never said it was pointless. Brewster asked if there was a GenCon ruling. There is. I'm not saying everyone has to follow that ruling. However, when I say "the ruling is the ruling," I suppose I really mean "the ruling is the ruling until such point that the ruling is no longer the ruling."

As I said earlier, I'm open to hearing arguments as to why it has to change. I haven't heard a strong enough argument to warrant changing it yet. However, if it becomes clear that it should change, I will be more than happy to advocate for its change.

Finally, as to GenCon not being an "official" rules source, that's certainly true. However, most local TDs fall in line with what Ken decides. Ken's rulings are basically as official as you get while not technically being "official." Again, local TDs may rule as they please, but GenCon has been a driving force in rules for the last 15 years.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Believe it or not, Orc, yes a clutch MFM psionic blast did cost me the game, and only because the turn it stole was so vital. It wasn't a competitive game, no. I wasn't playing a very good army (neither was my opponent). But it was a super close game, it could have been anyone's game, except for the fact that my opponent was able to skip a vital turn of mine and know nearly for certian which OM would do it. It was a rare scenario, yeah. Still felt like utter garbage. Especially since I could have easily killed the MFM earlier in the game if I thought its power was that good (and it is good... if you can strategically skip your opponents turns).

Anyway, I am satisfied with the ruling. Well, not really, but if you haven't been convinced by anything I've said so far, I've got nothing else. I guess I'll just play accordingly at tournaments and others' houses, unless we're at my house and then you better be prepared to roll some friggin' dice if the card says 'random'.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Just play it how you want to play it, as long as it's random or arbitrary enough, this really shouldn't be an issue. It's just pedantry for a children's game, really. We have no official ruling on it, so you can play to the unofficial Gencon Standard if you wish, that doesn't mean it's the only correct way.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I’d like to see this.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Cool, I'll talk to Ken and try to get something up this weekend. It'll obviously be progressively updated as I can't immediately remember everything that he's ruled, but I'll try to recall what I can. I can feel old age taking me already...

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I think a lot of times it’s gonna come down to the players and what they decide to do.

For example, I think it was the last time I was at GenCon, I had a game against The Orange Mailman. We both had Marcu so before we start the game, I said “are we going to hate each other?” At first he didn’t know what I meant. I pointed out the official ruling that we would not roll for eternal hatred when we both have him in our army. I never liked what the ruling did to Marcu vs Marcu games; this is why I brought it up. OMM is like, “oh yeah! we’re gonna hate on each other” so we play the game with eternal hatred in play, going against the rules.

I was on the rules team.(still am?) I was involved in a lot of the rulings. It doesn’t mean I agree with all of them.

I’m not saying that the rules should be circumvented; I’m just saying that it really shouldn’t be that hard to come to an agreement either before the event or before the game about how it will be played, official rules, Gen Con rules or otherwise. Communicate. Have fun.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

If there were any debate at my table, I'd put it to a blind d20 roll. If there were two OMs, 1-10 would be the one on the left, and 11-20 would be the one on the right. 3 OMs? 1-6, 7-12, 13-18, (19/20 reroll). This is fair and random to me.



That said, I'd abide by whatever ruling a tournament director wanted at that tournament.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I voted #1, mostly agreeing with the concept of rolling a die to determine which OM is removed. That seems completely random. I honestly wouldn't care if my opponent shuffles their OMs without me looking before I pick one to remove, but if someone went all 'rules lawyer' on me, I would agree that the rule does not say that OMs should be shuffled around.

I'm shocked that #5 has as many votes as it does. I understand that OMs shouldn't really be shuffled around for any reason (that I can think of?) however an observant player could pay attention to their opponent's OM placement habits, and then pick an OM based on observations they have made - that does not qualify as random IMO. Even if a case could be made that the above is random, I don't think it is more random than a die roll. I suppose you could argue that someone can sneak a weighted D20 to influence their chances of removing a specific OM (making that outcome less random,) but weighted dice is cheating to begin with. Hashtag you suffer German suplexes equivalent to the result you roll on the D20 if you are using weighted dice. Observing your opponent's OM placement tendencies/habits isn't cheating as far as I know, but in the context of 'remove a random OM' something would need to be done about the potential for abuse.

I think that a D20 roll is the 'most random' of all options in the poll.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I agree 100% with this. Basically option 5 would be my ideal choice, but if people do not keep the power/glyph in mind and to prevent other person removing order markers using this knowledge to their advantage to remove "random" and instead "watch like a hawk" to try to determine order placement, I allow people to "shuffle" order markers or I guess force opponent to roll a die to ensure random. For instance if you notice they just rotated their markers from last round and didn't actually move them around, you can know for sure which order markers is which - which is why I go with option 3 or 4 to allow people to randomize in case they forgot to do during initial placement.

Maybe also I am too lazy for option 1 as I don't want to have to roll a die or shuffle order markers every time if it is not necessary to keep the effective randomness as people can effectively "randomize" their order markers when they place them initially, so going with option 1 would be redundant. I do note that with an infinite brain people are incapable of placing markers scientifically randomly on initial placement even if they shuffle them, but rather only "arbitrarily" (your mind has an indefinite reason as to where markers are placed) but is a close approximation to random and IMHO is matching the customary definition of random as used in most games - if you are irked that this "customary random" is not really random than I can see why you chose option 1, but IMHO is negligible and not worth the extra time and effort.

But again if people forget to "randomize" (AKA arbitrarily place) initial placement I feel like I am cheating if I pay attention and don't let them randomize. Gencon ruing basically says this is not cheating as it treats participants as experienced players who must remember all powers that may come up and people must "pay the penalty" if they forget rules, similar to having to remembering Engagement Strike and as soon as your hand comes off a figure you just moved next to a Nakita Agent you get struck at Gencon and most tournaments, and if you forget to randomize your order markers you allow our opponent to take advantage of that. However I and most people are lenient at home games or tournaments with newbies to let them redo moves on Engagement Strike and randomize order markers when it matters.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Sorry for the long quote but I also agree to all of this to a degree, which is why I chose option 1. My choice of option 1 would work to randomize the choice of order marker whether the opponent shuffled / strategically placed their order markers or not. If the opponent did not shuffle markers then this additional protection of rolling a die is not redundant. In the case of option 1 no one is punished if they forgot to shuffle their order markers but those that do are given an extra level of security/redundancy (Order markers are not reveled when removed by a power of glyph only when taking a turn so even after an order marker is removed the number of that marker is still unrevealed so this information stays hidden).

In a Gencon tournament where rules are taken to the most serious degree of strict for this game I can see the reasoning to allow players to be penalized for not shuffling their markers or making their marker placement patterns easy to identify. But it is this same serious degree of strict that tells me to play to the card in the terms that "random" means as random as possible (by means of shuffling or more convenient rolling a die to add an additional level of random / redundancy). My reasoning falls back on the comparison of the Fyorlag Spiders vs any other unit having an order marker removal power. The Fyorlag Spiders' power is comparably much harder to come by, needing a full squad of spiders (with very limited survivability) to enter engagement with the same unit and rolling a 16 or higher (25% chance) to remove an order marker. I believe this level of difficulty to remove a marker warrants the omission of the word "random" from this power, ergo, if you can pull this power off take whatever order marker you want whether you figured out your opponents' marker placing habits or they just moved a couple from last round and can pull off that numbered marker.

On the flip side in not as serious a tourney environment (anything other than Gencon in this case) I would be much more lenient on the rulings as the less serious tone of the day would allow for a softer touch when regarding rulings. In these cases I personally would still randomize my choice by rolling a die as to not give myself a competitive edge over my opponent regardless of event type and seriousness. This is just my personal take to follow the random rule as directed by the cards.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Totally agree with that line of logic and with die rolling. I definitely watch OM placement and make decisions based off it. If I can deduce your OM placement because you simply set them back up, then I'm going to pick the one I want. Die rolling is fair in my case

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I'm a bit surprised this topic blew up as it seems so esoteric to me.

I voted #6, which honestly seems like the only reasonable option to me. Like, do whatever you like. Obviously.

If I was running a live event and someone actually called me over to judge on this issue, I'd rule #3; i.e. the owner is allowed to shuffle the OMs blindly before the other player chooses one to remove. This seems like, far and away, the more common interpretation of "random"; i.e. that it's not supposed to be a skill contest. #1 is also pure random and would be an acceptable alternative, of course; I just wouldn't rule that way because it seems like it would take longer.

I'm surprised the "official" Gencon ruling would be #5 as this feels like the most inherently cut-throat approach. Granted, it's really not a big deal.

That said, if people want to play it as some sort of mini-game where the one with the power tries to guess their opponent's placement patterns, and both players are enjoying that (or simply don't care) then hey, that can be fun. Online we have an "apply random numbers to the OMs" feature for these powers (so I can say "I'll remove OM 2754"), but @Dysole likes to name her OMs using different puns instead. When I played Ozymandias against her once this made for a very fun guessing game, where I had to try to guess which pun she would put on a numbered OM and which on OM X.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I'm surprised you don't know our real answer. I'll give you a hint: it was a two-word text in all caps from Ken...

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Voted option 6. I've played with a wide variety of skill and levels and have no issue with seeking to make the game fun. It helps that 95% of the time I'm the GM though ;)



For comp play though, I've no issue with you (or squidface) if you snipe an Order Marker off of me knowing fully well it was a numbered one. Especially true if I was just putting OMs in order (like I do a vast majority of the time).


Really, its no different than if I focus fire a hero with 2 Order Markers on it knowing that you are going to lose at least 1 turn if that hero dies.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

I disagree with the last line, this poll is about something completely different than choosing to destroy opponent’s figures to remove their turns. While I agree with the mentality of “if you are watching my habits like a hawk and snipe my OMs to punish me, that’s just being competitive,” the thing that gets me with the poll here is the word random. It’s not very random if you can use knowledge to pluck specific OMs with any reasonable amount consistency.

Perhaps quantifying/clarifying that would be more troublesome for me to do... but it’s how I feel about this, in a nutshell.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

Wow...interesting discussion.
I never even thought of the word random being such a huge part of the rules for the Mind Flayer that's why I went number 5. I guess 6 is probably best but if you're truly looking for random, pull out the old D&D dice and roll a d4. If it's past round 1 and you roll a 1...it's still random and simply takes away from the value of the card or it forces you to use the Mind Flayer earlier and come up with a new strategy. That's why this game is so awesome.

Re: Remove one unrevealed Order Marker at random?
 

And that's perfectly fair and valid. I'd much rather have fun with the game than not, and fighting over a small mechanic at the game table is something I'd rather not bother with. :)