Divine Intervention, Annihilation, Make the GM snort. We need a ruling.

[PhigNootin]

Mine goes to 11 is in play.

Vince is at level 10 and is a cleric and has wand of Dowsing. Divine intervention is in the discard pile. While he plays the wand of dowsing card and starts to look through the pile we discuss out options out loud. I have Anniliation (but don't say it) but would rather keep it if some has 'Make the GM snort soda card'.

Tony says he has 'Make the GM snort' and plays it on Vince once he plays DI. Everyone hoots and hollers and we all have a good laugh (maybe 10 seconds worth).

Michael then puts his hands int the air and claims victory saying that he was also a level 10 cleric.I Immediately play my annihilation on DI and prevent him from winning.

He has two arguments that we need resolved. One he says that I did not play in it a timly manner (2.6 seconds) so it doesn't count. I have read and understand the 2.6 second rule to only apply to battles so that doesn't apply here. Most everyone agreed with this.

His other argument was that I couldn't play the Annihilation card because the 'make the GM snort' card was played after DI and that blocks me from being able to annihilate the DI because it wasn't the last card played.
thoughts?

[Andrew Hackard]

You cannot Annihilate the Divine Intervention unless you do it immediately. Michael won the game, and in true munchkinly fashion, too.

[PhigNootin]

So if a player was at level 9 in this game (going to 11) and was fighting a low level monster and everyone agreed that he defeated the monster. He draws his treasure and then someone realizes that he is an orc and had the monster defeated by more than 10. Does that player win or do the other players get a chance to help the monster in the battle?

Is the player responsible declaring that he will win the game if he wins this battle?

[Andrew Hackard]

A player may not intentionally lie about the fact that he is going to win the game, but he is not required by the letter of the rules to warn the other players.

In the situation you cite, if the combat had JUST ended, I would say y'all should rewind the fight with the new information at hand. If play had continued, then the easiest thing is to decide the Orc forgot he was an Orc for a moment (because Orcs are dumb) and get on with the game.

[PhigNootin]

In the first situation. A player hid the fact that he was winning the game and upon realizing this, the other players are not allowed to play the necessary cards to stop him.

In the second situation, a player hid the fact that he was winning the game and upon realizing this, the other players are allowed to rewind the game to a point at which they can stop him.

In both scenarios the winning level has already been awarded. I would argue that in the first scenario a player actually has a card that can retroactively change the situation and in the second scenario no such card exists. Why the discrepancy?

[griffinsclaw]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

You cannot Annihilate the Divine Intervention unless you do it immediately. Michael won the game, and in true munchkinly fashion, too.

How is "immediately" defined here? Is it from a game-mechanical perspective, as in it would have to the next card to hit the table? So if "Make the GM" was played after DI, no matter how fast you tried to play Annihilation it could no longer cancel DI? Or is it defined in terms of actual time, where you have a reasonable time to cancel it even if other cards are played, but they couldn't in this situation because they spent all their time laughing about it?

[Andrew Hackard]

Originally Posted by PhigNootin

In the first situation. A player hid the fact that he was winning the game and upon realizing this, the other players are not allowed to play the necessary cards to stop him.

In the second situation, a player hid the fact that he was winning the game and upon realizing this, the other players are allowed to rewind the game to a point at which they can stop him.

In both scenarios the winning level has already been awarded. I would argue that in the first scenario a player actually has a card that can retroactively change the situation and in the second scenario no such card exists. Why the discrepancy?

If Michael intentionally did not claim victory from DI until after the other card was played, then yes, he was cheating and the "Snort Soda" card could be taken up in favor of Annihilation.

As a general rule, however, Annihilation cannot cancel a card if another card has been played in the interim. Rewinding a situation where a player was breaking the rules, intentionally or otherwise, is not explicitly addressed in the rules of the game and the table should feel free to remedy mistakes (or not) as they see fit. Winning by cheating is never appropriate.

Originally Posted by griffinsclaw

How is "immediately" defined here? Is it from a game-mechanical perspective, as in it would have to the next card to hit the table?

Yes. "Immediately" means "right afterward."