Pathetic Attempt and Ghost
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Pathetic Attempt and Ghost

  1. #1

    Default Pathetic Attempt and Ghost

    Is it possible to play Allister Thornes pathetic attempt on an opponents unit if they attack Ghost and fail to kill him I know solos have 0 ranks but he is also technically not losing a rank. I don’t think it would work but I want to be sure.

  2. #2

    Default

    I think it's a great question. I would initially say that solo units (both small and large solo trays), can never lose ranks (since they don't have any to lose), so pathetic attempt will always work on them as long as they survive the attack. Just my opinion. The Trigger could have been Infantry and Cavalry Combat Unit, but it is just Combat Unit, so seems to include solos intentionally. Not sure though.

  3. #3

    Default

    Ser Shinall noted this in a discussion about Northern Ferocity, which I think is applicable here:

    "Rulebook, Pg. 9
    Ranks: While the individual models on a tray represent the unit’s overall health, the remaining ranks in a unit determine most game effects. Each Infantry Unit is composed of 3 ranks,while each Cavalry Unit is composed of 2 ranks. Solo units do not have ranks, since they usually consist of only a single model.



    Sorry to be blunt here, but I cannot see how you can read "Solo units do not have ranks" as meaning anything other than they do not have ranks. There is nothing that would make a Tactic Card that relies on remaining Ranks an exception to this."

    Thread: http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/...l=1#post886691
    "I did warn you not to trust me." -Littlefinger

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serbaelish View Post
    Ser Shinall noted this in a discussion about Northern Ferocity, which I think is applicable here:

    "Rulebook, Pg. 9
    Ranks: While the individual models on a tray represent the unit’s overall health, the remaining ranks in a unit determine most game effects. Each Infantry Unit is composed of 3 ranks,while each Cavalry Unit is composed of 2 ranks. Solo units do not have ranks, since they usually consist of only a single model.



    Sorry to be blunt here, but I cannot see how you can read "Solo units do not have ranks" as meaning anything other than they do not have ranks. There is nothing that would make a Tactic Card that relies on remaining Ranks an exception to this."

    Thread: http://www.coolminiornot.com/forums/...l=1#post886691

    This is absolutely not applicable here because the card in question does not care at all if you have ranks. The only factors that matter for the card are:

    1. Were you attacked? (If yes, proceed)
    2. Did you lose any ranks? (If no, proceed)

    Defining if the target of the card has ranks at all is adding additional rules and qualifiers for the effect that straight do not exist in the rules.

    The Tactic Card only cares if any ranks were lost, the fact there are no ranks to lose is completely irrelevant; there are no rules "making exceptions" here.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alliser Thorne View Post
    This is absolutely not applicable here because the card in question does not care at all if you have ranks. The only factors that matter for the card are:

    1. Were you attacked? (If yes, proceed)
    2. Did you lose any ranks? (If no, proceed)

    Defining if the target of the card has ranks at all is adding additional rules and qualifiers for the effect that straight do not exist in the rules.

    The Tactic Card only cares if any ranks were lost, the fact there are no ranks to lose is completely irrelevant; there are no rules "making exceptions" here.
    f

    Hey, welcome back Alliser!

    Understand what you're saying, but I gotta disagree. Including ranks as part of the trigger wording should automatically disqualify units that don't have them.

    Step 2 in your example should also cause the card to fail. You can't perform a check on an element of a unit that doesn't exist. The rules note not that solo units only have one rank, but that they have no ranks. So this is multiplying by zero, imho.
    "I did warn you not to trust me." -Littlefinger

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serbaelish View Post
    f

    Hey, welcome back Alliser!

    Understand what you're saying, but I gotta disagree. Including ranks as part of the trigger wording should automatically disqualify units that don't have them.

    Step 2 in your example should also cause the card to fail. You can't perform a check on an element of a unit that doesn't exist. The rules note not that solo units only have one rank, but that they have no ranks. So this is multiplying by zero, imho.


    That is absolutely false logic, and again, inventing rules that don't exist in the game. Saying that "it should automatically disqualify units that don't have them" isn't a rule, and nothing suggesting that appears anywhere in the rules.

    The only rules are what is written for the trigger of the Tactic Card. The Tactic Card asked "did the unit lose a rank?". Nowhere is it worded, asked, or mentioned "did it have ranks to lose as well?", and, again, nothing in the rulebook says that Solo units are immune/aren't affected by cards that mention ranks- it ONLY says they don't have them.

    "You can't perform a check on an element of a unit that doesn't exist." is also a sentence that isn't backed by the rulebook. The only other mentions are very specific in their wording and implications-

    Two Examples:
    Northern Ferocity: The secondary effect wouldn't do anything for a Solo unit, as it's ALSO checking for remaining ranks, of which the rules specifically state they don't have- they don't gain the benefit here, they don't meet the criteria of "only has 1 remaining rank", NOTHING says it cannot target them- just they do not meet the condition.

    War Machines: They specifically have a rule saying they NEVER make Morale Tests. This doesn't make them immune to cards that would force them, it just means they can never take them, and currently all such cards are worded that they do X or Y on Pass or Fail- THAT is the condition that is causing the card(s) to be "negated", it has nothing to do with the specific "immunity" of the unit.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alliser Thorne View Post
    That is absolutely false logic, and again, inventing rules that don't exist in the game. Saying that "it should automatically disqualify units that don't have them" isn't a rule, and nothing suggesting that appears anywhere in the rules.

    The only rules are what is written for the trigger of the Tactic Card. The Tactic Card asked "did the unit lose a rank?". Nowhere is it worded, asked, or mentioned "did it have ranks to lose as well?", and, again, nothing in the rulebook says that Solo units are immune/aren't affected by cards that mention ranks- it ONLY says they don't have them.

    "You can't perform a check on an element of a unit that doesn't exist." is also a sentence that isn't backed by the rulebook. The only other mentions are very specific in their wording and implications-

    Two Examples:
    Northern Ferocity: The secondary effect wouldn't do anything for a Solo unit, as it's ALSO checking for remaining ranks, of which the rules specifically state they don't have- they don't gain the benefit here, they don't meet the criteria of "only has 1 remaining rank", NOTHING says it cannot target them- just they do not meet the condition.

    War Machines: They specifically have a rule saying they NEVER make Morale Tests. This doesn't make them immune to cards that would force them, it just means they can never take them, and currently all such cards are worded that they do X or Y on Pass or Fail- THAT is the condition that is causing the card(s) to be "negated", it has nothing to do with the specific "immunity" of the unit.
    Okay, checking to see if a Tactic card can be played based on its trigger condition is not "inventing rules that don't exist." It is, in fact, the initial rule by which you determine whether the card can be played at all. Note that I use disqualify here in the sense that units that don't match the trigger should not be legal targets of the card, much in the same fashion as you can't play Pathetic Attempt on your opponent's units or NCUs.

    I'll amend my previous to say that yes, you can perform a check on an element of a unit that doesn't exist. It should then fail that test, as having ranks can be read as a condition the target of the tactic card must meet in order for it to be successfully played.

    As for Northern Ferocity, the card itself can still be played because the trigger has nothing to do with ranks. The secondary effect does though, and that's what is specifically being noted as not being applicable in Michael's response.

    I'll also admit that a distinction can be made between checking for "remaining" ranks and having ranks at all, and that "ranks" may only be on the card as shorthand because it's a lot simpler than noting "3 wounds for an infantry unit, 5 wounds for a cavalry unit, 1 wound on a wolf, etc...". But I don't think it's that significant a leap in logic to apply the example of a secondary effect not being permitted because the unit doesn't have ranks to not being able to play a tactic card because the unit doesn't have ranks.
    "I did warn you not to trust me." -Littlefinger

  8. #8

    Default

    I'm quite certain that Alliser's reading is correct. The trigger says, "After a friendly Combat Unit is attacked, if it did not lose a rank:"

    It doesn't care about if you have any ranks, only if you lost any ranks.

    Serbaelish's argument seems to be that having ranks is a prerequisite for playing the card, but the actual text doesn't support that argument. The trigger only cares about the results of the attack, nothing else.

  9. #9

    Default

    So does this mean you can play Pathetic Attempt even if Ghost dies? As Ghost doesn’t have any ranks presumably the second condition will always be met.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Privacy Policy  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Contact Us  |   The Legion


Copyright © 2001-2018 CMON Inc.

-->