Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38

Thread: Article: BFF Globals Review

  1. #1

  2. #2
    Regarding Beholder Global...

    The ruling on the rules forum is;

    "The die waits a turn in the Prep Area, unrolled. If you moved a die to the Prep Area with this effect on turn 4, it would get rolled on turn 6."

    Source: http://wizkidseventsystem.com/bb/vie...t=4814&p=11572

  3. #3
    this ruling was from Oct '14; I'd be very interested to see what they say now with the change to the rules described above...

  4. #4
    The Beholder global ruling will be interesting. I can see how this new interpretation is what WK intended, since putting an action die into Prep to be used two turns later is awkward as heck. It always seemed like a very weird mechanic with the current ruling. I guess we'll have to wait and see what WK says on this new interpretation.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorpion0x17 View Post
    Regarding Beholder Global...

    The ruling on the rules forum is;

    "The die waits a turn in the Prep Area, unrolled. If you moved a die to the Prep Area with this effect on turn 4, it would get rolled on turn 6."

    Source: http://wizkidseventsystem.com/bb/vie...t=4814&p=11572
    So, I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that you would ignore the new rulebook and continue to use the forum ruling based on an outdated rulebook? Or were you simply posting the forum link to show the change in views over the past few months?

  6. #6
    The argument I see though is that since card supersedes rules, Beholder global would work differently.

  7. #7
    The card hasn't changed, and the way you play the card hasn't changed. But, the way the rulebook changed has changed the result of doing what the card says to do.

    It is the rules forum interpretation that has changed, not the way to actually use the card.

    To walk it through, step by step, the card says pay 1 generic to move an action face to your prep area. Next it says don't roll it next turn. Previously, the rulebook stated that if you don't roll a die you don't move it from prep. Now, the rules say to move the die from prep to the Reserve Pool, without changing their face.

    You still do 100% of what the beholder card tells you to do, it is simply that the rulebook has changed the outcome of what those steps results in.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy View Post
    So, I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that you would ignore the new rulebook and continue to use the forum ruling based on an outdated rulebook? Or were you simply posting the forum link to show the change in views over the past few months?
    What good is the rules forum, if we are not to take their rulings seriously?

    They stated, plain as day, how the prepped die is to be treated. Until they rule on it again, this should be all you need.

  9. #9
    The rules forum is not meant to be more important than the rule book. It is meant to answer or clarify questions the players have. As with all resources and reference material, one MUST take the most recent copy of any rule as the most relevant. When that rules forum ruling was made they ruled correctly, as they are simply interpreting card and rulebook interactions. However, when the rulebook is changed, those interactions change.

    The big question here really boils down, which writen text is more important? The rulebook or the forum. This is like saying, which writen text is more important, state law, or case law developed from state law?

    State law can change, and when it does, this can invalidate case law entirely. We as a community need to remember that things can change, and even if a rules forum interpretation is correct at the time, it is possible that some day the rules can change in such a way that the ruling is no longer correct.

    I would also like to point out, the rule book likely changed for a reason. The only card apparently affected by the change is the beholder. A majority of us dislike the ruling from the forums as it makes the global useless. In fact, after having takes to Mike Elliott about this specific topic, he informed me that the intent of the global was to work, not as the rules forum had ruled, but as the rules now indicate the global to work. Perhaps, the rule book is finally catching up with intent, now with the beholder changes and the out of play zone being deliniated.

  10. #10
    I think beholder is good, when you dont need the action face, but later and you have an extra energy you couldnt use otherwise.

    But still Lex Luthor: Former President is still better for this job!
    Last edited by Ressless; 07-24-2015 at 11:52 AM.

  11. #11
    I see it now and agree that the change in the rulebook would make it work differently.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy View Post
    So, I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that you would ignore the new rulebook and continue to use the forum ruling based on an outdated rulebook? Or were you simply posting the forum link to show the change in views over the past few months?
    I am saying that the ruling describes the intended use of Beholder Global.

    This change in the wording of the roll and reroll step doesn't alter that.

  13. #13
    To be honest, that ruling isn't very clear anyway. Am I turn 4, my opponent turn 5 and my turn is 6? The only precedence we have for counting turns is the tie rules, and the 5 turn rule that passes turn numbers back and forth.

    Your interpretation of what the intent is, is thus just as accurate as the interpretation that a player pays 1, doesn't roll on the opponents turn, and then rolls on their next turn.

    Also, the rules forum can declare intent, but if the rules change, shouldn't the ACTUAL rules take precedent over previous intent?

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowmeld View Post
    To be honest, that ruling isn't very clear anyway. Am I turn 4, my opponent turn 5 and my turn is 6? The only precedence we have for counting turns is the tie rules, and the 5 turn rule that passes turn numbers back and forth.
    Hmm. Now that is a good point. And I now am not sure what the intended interpretation of the ruling should be.

    Ok, put me firmly in the 'Randy could well be right about this, but we need confirmation and clarification from WizKids to be sure' camp now.

  15. #15
    If the new interpretation of Beholder is true, so many actions become so much more valuable. Imagine being able to hold a defensive Polymorph for the turn you actually need it, or holding Charm until the turn to take full advantage of what you draw out of your bag. Wow.

  16. #16
    I will rule it like the text says on the card, and if something want to argue about it, he must show me a Thread on WKRuleForum and a good explenation for it.

    The Card says, dont roll it next turn, thats all. And the rulebook rules say, add all dice from prep area to your 4 dice from the bad and roll that. So Beholder global just gives this action die the chance not to be rolled and staying as an action face.

  17. #17
    I'm not going to engage in a huge debate here but want to highlight three points:

    (1) The only rule change since the game's inception has been the transition zone. That was done with an announcement. I find it difficult to believe that WizKids would have changed the game rules sub silento here or elsewhere.
    (2) The ruling on the forum plainly does not refer to the hypothetical turn five being your opponents turn. You would not roll your prep area dice on your opponents turn so there is no reason to repeat that fact in a card or in a ruling. The ruling then goes on to say that you will actually roll the relevant die in a later turn.
    (3) The changed language in the rule book could also be an attempt to provide clearer wording about what was already understood to be the case. Personally, that is what I thought when I saw it but I can understand why people might think differently.

    tl;dr WizKids can always change its rulings if it wants to, but disregard the rulings in the forum at your own risk. FWIW, I'm sticking with the original ruling unless and until I hear otherwise. If you plan on this being an issue, ask your TO before your event begins

    EDIT: you can put me in the camp of people who didn't like that ruling by the way; I'd personally love to see the ruling changed. But the ruling is what the ruling is.

  18. #18
    Gonna have to agree with Indy on the key points here regarding how Beholder works. As to (1), WK have put in several tweaks to the rulebook over time without actually making any point of it, and even if they aren't necessarily world shattering, they're there.

  19. #19
    To address your points sir:
    1) there have been several more minor changes to the rules, including the addition of the caveat about ties, this specific change and of course the out of play zone. There have been other more subtle changes to the rules as well, but most of them have had zero impact other than to incorporate rules forum rulings into unclear portions of the text.
    2) The new rules changed the line that said dice must be rolled to move to the Reserve Pool. The card itself doesn't infact say that the dice must be rolled, only a ruling that was made before the rules were changed. Most current rules should always be taken as more relevant than older rulings.
    3) What portion of the previous rules were unclear? The only portion of the rules that changed was move all rolled dice versus move all dice in the Prep.

    If we ignored the old ruling, the new wording clearly states two effects, moving the die to the prep area and not rolling it next turn. We clearly see how moving the die resolves, in both rulings. However, the aspect of what happens to the die now that even unrolled dice in the Prep area are moved to the Reserve Pool on the next turn is made unclear, only because of the old ruling. If we follow the text of the card, and the text of the new rules, the result is easy to follow. The only change to the standard method of play is moving the die to the prep, and not rolling it next turn. The rules clearly state that we roll everything (global superceded this as a card effect) and then move all dice in the Prep area to the Reserve, keeping the faces as they are.

    Following along these lines, it is the OLD rules that confused the situation, and the old ruling follows those rules to the letter. However, as the rules have changed, the outcome of the ruling has necessitated a second look. While I am positive that this is the new interpretation, and even the original intent of the global, I definitely do not begrudge your skepticism. We will all have to wait and see if they correct their old ruling to match the new rules language. However, I return to my example of State law versus case law. Rules as written, the beholder global now allows you to save an action die. The rules forum interpretation is no longer a valid ruling due to the change in text. When the laws change, some legal precedents are made invalid. We see it frequently on the national level with things like campaign funds, gay marriage and even the Confederate flag rulings. What we have to remember is that the rule book is the source of our rules, the forums are simply a guide to help us interperate that text. When the text changes, interpretations must be reexamined. Sure we could wait for a new court case before being forced to obey a new or changed law, but it is best to examine each case, independent of any previous rulings, and decide for ourselves what the laws mean.

    I'm rambling, so going to cut myself off, but first I will say, I enjoy being a member of a site that can have such a healthy and friendly debate. Know that no one here is trying to say anyone is wrong, only that we beleive and will act according to our beliefs, that the rules read and are interpreted in a particular way.

  20. #20
    Reading the Beholder ruling as: Turn 4 (your turn), Turn 5 (opponent's turn), Turn 6 (Your turn) is just wrong. Trying to force that interpretation throws out a lot of information, like: "The die waits a turn in the Prep Area". Are people seriously saying that this line just means the die waits "your opponent's turn" in the Prep Area? If so, why say it. EVERY die will wait a turn in the prep area. It is clear that when they talk about turns, they are talking about YOUR turns, if you read the entire post.

    Having said all that, I was probably the hugest proponent of the global working like this article says it does. But then the beholder ruling happened. As it stands, that's the way to play the ability. It's right there, plain as day.

    This reminds me of something that James Cameron said at the end of a Mythbusters episode. *SPOILERS* At the end of Titanic, Jack says he can't fit on the wood with Rose, and he eventually drowns. Many people, Mythbusters included, have proved that Jack could have survived, as there was enough material to keep him and Rose afloat. To this, James Cameron has replied, "I think you guys are missing the point here. The script says Jack dies, so he has to die. So, maybe we screwed up and the board should have been a little bit smaller, but the dude's going down."

    The official forums have already given us the "script" on how to use this global. Until they delete it, or update it, that's just the way the ability works.

  21. #21
    In this case that script may have been based on what the rule previously stated about only dice that were rolled moving to the reserve pool.

  22. #22
    The "Do not roll it next turn" can be:

    1-don't roll it your next turn, and wait until the turn after that one of yours to roll it
    2-just move it to the reserve pool as it is, action side up and do not roll it on your next turn. It moves but does not roll.

    Therein lies the issue.

    I want to see this ruled the way Randy describes it. But I can tell you from recent experience that store judges will most likely go with the forum ruling, so use at your own risk.

  23. #23
    I'm somewhat astounded that they ruled that way (delay 2 turns and rolled) in the first place, rather then errata the cards ["...Move the die to the reserve pool (without rolling) before the Roll and Reroll phase on your next turn" or perhaps send it to some other special "out of play" zone] as the intent of the effect (save an action face for the next turn) seemed clear, to me at least.

    Beholders are superior spell-casters and manipulators, so improving action dice usage makes more sense than simply prepping a single die from the reserve pool. But this is purely guessing at intent based on theme.

    If the intent was to defer an action die to a later turn but still require a roll (and risk of coming up energy), they could have just moved it Prep and have it rolled on the next turn. I can't come up with any reason to design the effect to delay the die two turns. But this is guessing on intent based on game design principles.

    Together, though, they seem to me to indicate the clear intent of the effect. Thus the rules forum reading only makes sense as abiding by the strict reading of the rules [as written at the time] at the expense of the card's intent, which is ultimately a good thing as it respects the importance of careful writing (and reading) of the rules and does not cop out to relying on "obvious intent".

    The change to core rule would seem to fix this to work as intended as well as cover any future cases where they want to save a rolled die for the next turn, without introducing some new special zone. [*** Yes, they managed to step into same rules tarpit as MtG's "phasing". Pray that "banding" isn't next...]

    The flip side to this fix is that they'll need to revise/rescind the rules forum answer in light of the change to the core rules. Since the ruling doesn't cite the reasoning for how the core rule determined how the effect works it's now ambiguous whether or how the ruling stands in light of the change to the core rule.

    As a TO I would most likely rule that the Beholder global now works "as intended" [save an action face for next round] but conceed that it's not a clear cut case.

    I would read the rules forum ruling as an implicit restatement of how the core rule worked at that time [only those dice that were rolled from Prep go to Reserve] and as not introducing any wording change, errata or special behavior to the card text; the ruling is strictly a consequence of the literal unchanged reading of both the core rules and the card. Since the card text has not changed, a literal reading of the card text and currently existing core rules [all dice move from Prep to Reserve, faces unchanged, after Roll and Reroll step] leads to a different consequence.

    Does this mean that every revision to the rules potentially invalidates any number of existing rulings? I think it does as long as you can demonstrate that the ruling is grounded in the functioning of any specific rule that has changed.

  24. #24
    So..... did anyone make it past the second paragraph? : )

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy View Post
    So..... did anyone make it past the second paragraph? : )
    I did. I think the Tarrasque global needs some help, but it's in the spirit of a global I want to see someday. Then of course, there's all those REALLY good DnD BAC globals. mmmmmm....

Posting Permissions

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