The Book of Elaria the Pale

[awesomeunleashed]

Originally Posted by personwholives

Well, except that the way it's worded.... you could make the argument. You're rolling the 20 sided die for "the army card" of a figure you control within 6. The fact that the figure that triggered that roll is outside of the aura doesn't change the fact that you are rolling the die for a card of a figure within the aura.

You're gonna need to FAQ that one, I think. And what is the intended answer? You can definitely argue it either way, so it'll need an answer.

This. You are rolling for the Army Card of a figure you control within 6 spaces, despite the fact that the figure that triggered the power is more than 6 away.

[quozl]

It only works for figures within 6 spaces of Elaria.

[awesomeunleashed]

Originally Posted by quozl

It only works for figures within 6 spaces of Elaria.

If you say so, I'll play it that way, but I can't get that from the card, or even, now that I think about it, within 'Scape's ruleset...

[Dad_Scaper]

Quozl is, as usual, correct.

QUEEN OF THIEVES
After rolling the 20-sided die for the Army Card of any figure you control with the Tricky personality within 6 clear sight spaces of Elaria the Pale, you may add 1 to your die roll. Queen of Thieves does not affect Elaria the Pale.

The "rolling" is for the "figure" that is "within 6 clear sight spaces of Elaria." If the figure is not within 6 spaces of Elaria, you do not have to check, but if it *is* within 6 spaces, this power applies to abilities on the "Army Card."

Obviously it's not the "Army Card" that has to be within 6 spaces, because the card is not on the map. It's the figure. Which means just the figure, not every figure associated with the card. It doesn't say that; don't do that.

Quozl is right, and the answer is there on the card. It's complicated, but the answers are all there.

[Xotli]

Originally Posted by personwholives

Well, except that the way it's worded.... you could make the argument. You're rolling the 20 sided die for "the army card" of a figure you control within 6. The fact that the figure that triggered that roll is outside of the aura doesn't change the fact that you are rolling the die for a card of a figure within the aura.

No. You're not rolling the 20 sided die for the army card of a figure you control within 6. You're rolling the 20 sided die for the army card of a figure you control outside the aura. The fact that some other figure attached to the same army card is within 6 doesn't change the fact that you are rolling the die for a figure outside the aura.

See, you're just looking at it wrong.

Originally Posted by personwholives

You're gonna need to FAQ that one, I think. And what is the intended answer? You can definitely argue it either way, so it'll need an answer.

Sure, add it as an R&C if you like. The answer is what I, and q, and D_S have consistently been saying: if the figure is outside the aura, it doesn't get the bonus (which sort of conforms to the definition of "aura," if you think about it ).

[awesomeunleashed]

All right, I was reading it wrong.

[Dad_Scaper]

Awesomeunleashed, please understand that we do not just "read it differently." Your reading is wrong. The problem is not the words, which were chosen with great care. The problem is, at one point apparently you were reading them wrong, which happens, and then when someone came along to help you, you did not see your error.

It's not "whatevs," which is a horrible word and the day will not be soon enough when it's not used anymore, it's just you were wrong and now you know how to be right.

[personwholives]

I understand why you wrote the power the way you did. I even understand that your intended reading is that only figures within the aura can get the bonus. But I'm just saying, the way it's worded makes it weird for squads, because of exactly the issue that we've been talking about: I don't think there are any other powers in scape that refer to "rolling the 20 sided die for the army card of a figure". (No time to check that right now)

I imagine that there isn't really a better wording, or I'm just not clever enough to come up with one at 8 in the morning, but this is a slightly weird thing, so that makes sense.

[caps]

Ah, I just realized that Morsbane is tricky.

60 Elaria the Pale
160 Haduc
260 Morsbane
340 Emirroon
490 Ulginesh
540 Arkmer
630 Chardris
720 Myrrdin or 700 Martial La Hire

looks like a lot of fun for my game-groups 700 point mashes. I destroyed Zelrig on a natural 20 the other day, and a few weeks ago I destroyed Charos on a 19. I'd love to kill TKN or Nilfy or someone like that on an 18. Or, with Myrrdin, a 16.

They'd really hate that, though...

[dok]

Originally Posted by personwholives

I don't think there are any other powers in scape that refer to "rolling the 20 sided die for the army card of a figure".

That exact phrase? No, that's not anywhere. But "Roll the d20 for [power] on [an] Army Card"? Yes. "Figure within XXX clear sight spaces"? Yes. The meanings are all clearly defined. They don't change simply because they get used in the same power.

[Xotli]

Originally Posted by personwholives

But I'm just saying, the way it's worded makes it weird for squads, because of exactly the issue that we've been talking about: I don't think there are any other powers in scape that refer to "rolling the 20 sided die for the army card of a figure".

I think you've missed the weirdness. The squad is not the weird part--Su-Bak-Na refers to rolling the 20-sided for an Army Card, and that includes plenty of squads. The weird part is the clear sight restriction, which requires a figure, and that's where we're breaking new ground here. And, believe you me, we spent a lot of time debating the exact words to use on this one. We do that whenever we break new ground.

But, hey: the words can very clearly be interpreted in the proper way. The alternate reading that you guys are proposing isn't as likely--isn't very likely at all, in my opinion--but I suppose it isn't completely insane either. But it's wrong. It's stretching the language to the breaking point, and willfully ignoring how auras work. But, more importantly, it's wrong because it's not our intention, and we're flat out telling you it's wrong. There are plenty of cases on official cards where you can make arguments that the words mean one thing, but when the designers, or the FAQ, or whatever, tells you that's not what it means ... well, that just ain't what it means.

Ya know?

[personwholives]

Well, fine. If that's what it's supposed to be, that's what it's supposed to be. I agree that that makes the most sense, anyway. But, since it is not entirely insane to "stretch the wording to the breaking point" in that way, I recommend you put it in the FAQ in the first post.