Ethical questions

[Andrew Hackard]

Originally Posted by Mourhelm

Do you think my friend is right to be so angry?

Since it's a game, the absolute answer is "No, not even a little bit." If he gets that upset over a game, he needs to see a good therapist.

[Bazz]

personally i disagree, and i realise i'm obviously wrong, seeing as how erik is virtually infallible, but when i read a FAQ and a rule is illustrated through a specific example, i don't assume that that is the only situation in which it can be used. i look at it as a way of simplifying a genral rule. for example, i rem,ember in a game of Bites! i came across a similar situation as is described in the FAQ:

"You can't switch items during combat. In other words, you can't chose to wear a different helmet or different armor once combat has started. You also can't "unwield" one item which uses hands and "wield" another in its stead. Basically, all the items you were using or carrying must remain in their current states. Unfortunately, this means that if you lose or change your class or race, you don't start getting bonuses from other items you have in play that are usable by your new race or class, including items that anyone could use.
An example of such a case: An Elf is using the Bow with Ribbons and is carrying the Sword of Slaying Everything Except Squid. He has no extra Hands, so the Bow is using both of the Hands he has available. The Elf then goes into combat with anything but Squidzilla and is subsequently Cursed by another player to lose his race. He now loses the bonus for the Bow, and since he can't switch out the Bow and replace it with the Sword, he gets no bonus from it. As an aside: Should the player have another Elf card, he could play that immediately and get back his bonus from the Bow."

i wanted to play a vampire card from hand in order to get back the bonus from my blackerthanblack item - and the response from the owner, after i had quoted the FAQ, was: "Yeah, but you're a vampire, not an elf. doesn't count. My game, I get final word." the FAQ doesn't explicitly state that you can play a race card from hand, and regain use of any items that changing race prevented you from using, if the new race can use the cards, it only shows it through the elf example.

personally, i don't think the rule should be legislating to say when you should be playing the card on an opponent. for example, i might want to raise an opponents level in order to become the lowest level character in the game, or to make a specific opponent the "highest level opponent", allowing you to do many other munchkinly things. or hell, if you're level 9, and helping out a lower level character in combat (in order to get lots of treasures, obv), then any GUAL cards you have would be useless on yourself, but could make the difference between winning and losing the combat. or even just charging another player to make them GUAL, "I'll play this on you in exchange for your boots of buttkicking".

[DenSpb]

Originally Posted by MunchkinMan

No, that's not true and your logic is specious at best. If you are given a certain set of conditions where you can or may do something, it does not follow that you can or may do that same thing under any other conditions you deem worthy. It doesn't work that way, and the typical game meta-rule is this: If the rules (or the "commentary") say you can do something, you can under the conditions that are given. Otherwise, you can't.

Well, as I understand there is second place where playing GUAL on the other player seems reasonable — dividing treasure after helping.
Owner gets all cards, and he can toss some items to helper after that. But what if there was GUAL in loot — can owner "give" helper that level by playing GUAL?

[MunchkinMan]

Originally Posted by DenSpb

Well, as I understand there is second place where playing GUAL on the other player seems reasonable — dividing treasure after helping.
Owner gets all cards, and he can toss some items to helper after that. But what if there was GUAL in loot — can owner "give" helper that level by playing GUAL?

You aren't dividing Items, you are dividing Treasure cards. There is a huge difference, and of course you could give that player the GUAL card if you want.

At the same time, if the player gives the cards to the lower level players as charity, that's another acceptable option. That's what I thought the original poster said in the first place, but maybe I'm mistaken.

[MunchkinMan]

Originally Posted by Bazz

personally i disagree, and i realise i'm obviously wrong, seeing as how erik is virtually infallible, but when i read a FAQ and a rule is illustrated through a specific example, i don't assume that that is the only situation in which it can be used. i look at it as a way of simplifying a genral rule. for example, i rem,ember in a game of Bites! i came across a similar situation as is described in the FAQ:

"You can't switch items during combat. In other words, you can't chose to wear a different helmet or different armor once combat has started. You also can't "unwield" one item which uses hands and "wield" another in its stead. Basically, all the items you were using or carrying must remain in their current states. Unfortunately, this means that if you lose or change your class or race, you don't start getting bonuses from other items you have in play that are usable by your new race or class, including items that anyone could use.
An example of such a case: An Elf is using the Bow with Ribbons and is carrying the Sword of Slaying Everything Except Squid. He has no extra Hands, so the Bow is using both of the Hands he has available. The Elf then goes into combat with anything but Squidzilla and is subsequently Cursed by another player to lose his race. He now loses the bonus for the Bow, and since he can't switch out the Bow and replace it with the Sword, he gets no bonus from it. As an aside: Should the player have another Elf card, he could play that immediately and get back his bonus from the Bow."

i wanted to play a vampire card from hand in order to get back the bonus from my blackerthanblack item - and the response from the owner, after i had quoted the FAQ, was: "Yeah, but you're a vampire, not an elf. doesn't count. My game, I get final word." the FAQ doesn't explicitly state that you can play a race card from hand, and regain use of any items that changing race prevented you from using, if the new race can use the cards, it only shows it through the elf example.

personally, i don't think the rule should be legislating to say when you should be playing the card on an opponent. for example, i might want to raise an opponents level in order to become the lowest level character in the game, or to make a specific opponent the "highest level opponent", allowing you to do many other munchkinly things. or hell, if you're level 9, and helping out a lower level character in combat (in order to get lots of treasures, obv), then any GUAL cards you have would be useless on yourself, but could make the difference between winning and losing the combat. or even just charging another player to make them GUAL, "I'll play this on you in exchange for your boots of buttkicking".

There's a difference between an example and a specific rule or ruling. The example is a specific description applying the generalized rule or explanation, so what your friend did with respect to the Vampire issue was asinine and petty, in one respect, but it still resides within him to make a final decision. It might not be Marquess of Queensbury, but it's still a legitimate tack. What the FAQ says with respect to playing a GUAL on another player cites a specific circumstance where that activity is allowed. Please also note that the rules have never been changed to allow the play of GUAL cards on another player.

[Mourhelm]

When I wrote this:

Originally Posted by Mourhelm

(If you want to discuss this, open a new thread and link to this one).

I really meant it...
There are even a few good reasons why to do it regardless of my request. The main one is that other people will miss this clarification because the name of the thread doesn't match the subject.

Erik, I really appreciate your clarification about the FAQ. You might want to update the FAQ so it'll be clearer for everyone. It appears that I'm not the only one that misinterpreted that entry.

Oh, and if you already reading this, could you please post your opinion on the original subject?

[Skunk]

Well... think about it like this... what if you're trying hard to convince someone to fight for you and you have to bargain? They want all the treasures, but you obviously need the items for combat bonuses cause you're getting your buttocks handed to you right now. So you say, "Yeah, look... I need these treasures. I tell you what, I'll give you one of the three treasures... and I can play this GUAL card on you as well."
That's acceptable isn't it?

EDIT: Especially because if I remember correctly you can't trade items in your hand. If you take GUAL out of your hand you'll go up a level, right?

[gim88]

The FAQ states you CAN play a GUAL card on another player. The way it reads is the reason given is just an example of one reason why you'd want to do that.


It seems odd to put this limitation on the move that's not really documented anywhere.

If this is really the way SJG wants it, the FAQ should definately be updated.

[Andrew Hackard]

I have to agree -- there's nothing on the GUAL cards or in the rules that says you can't play them on another player. I can see other times when it would be useful (for instance, you're tied for lowest level with someone who has too many cards -- you play GUAL on him to force him to give you Charity rather than discarding the excess). I don't read the FAQ entry as exclusive -- "This is the only time you may do this" -- but simply as an acknowledgment that no one had ever thought of a reason to do it, but that it's not forbidden.

To sum up, I don't think the problem is with people violating the FAQ as written; I think the problem is that the FAQ as written is being construed too narrowly. I concur with the request for revision.

[munchkinenthusiast68]

But what if someone plays a GUAL card on you and you don't want to GUAL? For example, what if someone plays the "Contemplate your Navel" GUAL card on you, and you don't want to discard your hand? Or the "Senseless Act of Kindness", and you don't want to give away your highest bonus item? I assume then in order to GUAL, you must do the requirement on the card, but you don't have to, you can choose to not GUAL.