Jabberwock bad stuff

omelette dabbler · 10-15-2012, 08:49 AM

The Jabberwock has as its bad stuff two conditions:
"You must choose: go down to Level 1, or lose all your items."

Easy enough to see that it is a choice, but if I cannot satisfy one of the conditions does that mean that I should suffer the other?
Thatistosay, if I have no items (yes, such things happen all too frequently) am I forced to being reduced to level 1, or am I lucky (so to speak) that the bad stuff does not affect me as I have no items and choose the item option?

[I love this game. So dastardly.]

Enzzo · 10-15-2012, 08:54 AM

I'm gonna say that if you have no items, you could choose Option 2 and lose all 0 of your items; or if you're level 1 already, you certainly could choose Option 1 and have the Bad Stuff not do anything to you. This is not an official ruling of course, but I'm basing this answer on the logic of this post, which allows for choosing an outcome of a Curse that has no effect.

Bampop · 10-15-2012, 09:13 AM

I don't think that ruling applies here, since that's a fringe case that involves someone else deciding the effect. It has been stated elsewhere (and searching from my phone isn't easy, but I'm sure Clipper will be along shortly,) that when given a choice between two outcomes where one can't affect you, you must choose the one that will.

Enzzo · 10-15-2012, 10:45 AM

You're right, that question was asked and answered already here. The answer came from Eben (MIB), and both Andrew and Erik commented later in the thread, but they did not specifically address that question. :)

Clipper · 10-15-2012, 02:00 PM

With Bad Stuff, if you are given a choice between an option that affects you and an option that doesn't, you must choose the one that affects you. So in the Jabberwock case, you must choose to go down Levels if you have no Items; or lose all Items if you are Level 1.

Andrew's post about Curse! Kick Yourself In The Ass that Enzzo pointed out only applies to Curses. I still find that having it as an exception is a tad weird due to how it complicates Curse! Caaaaaaaanes! and Curse! Butterfingers; and for the confusion it can generate between which cards provide choices and which don't, but that's how I interpret the ruling at least.

omelette dabbler · 10-15-2012, 08:44 PM

Very interesting replies, and I greatly admire the expertise of respondents.
My feeling was that we choose whichever gives us the better outcome. It is Munchkin, after all. But I am glad to discover more about the game and other ways of thinking.

Does it temper the thinking if one considers the situation where neither condition can be met? Thatistosay, no items to lose and already at level 1. Of course the bad stuff will have no effect in this case. In the situation where either condition can be met, the case is also clear cut, it being a choice of the player.

MunchkinMan · 10-16-2012, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by omelette dabbler

The Jabberwock has as its bad stuff two conditions:
"You must choose: go down to Level 1, or lose all your items."

Easy enough to see that it is a choice, but if I cannot satisfy one of the conditions does that mean that I should suffer the other?
Thatistosay, if I have no items (yes, such things happen all too frequently) am I forced to being reduced to level 1, or am I lucky (so to speak) that the bad stuff does not affect me as I have no items and choose the item option?

[I love this game. So dastardly.]

Bad Stuff is bad. If given a choice between an option you can fulfill, and one you can't, you must suffer the one you can fulfill. If you can't fulfill either, you're very lucky, and if you can fully or partially fulfill either one, then you're back to getting to choose which Bad Stuff to suffer. This is an official response.

UncleBob · 10-16-2012, 12:30 AM

Previously, the discussion has came up when there's Bad Stuff that is something like "Lose your X. If you're not wearing X, then Y." - and the idea is you might have an "X" that is protected from being lost (like "Bear Feet").

The previous ruling was that you're wearing footgear, so you don't get "Y", but you can't lose them to Bad Stuff, so nothing happens.

That's a different, but similar situation to this one. Am I to assume the previous ruling is still in effect - or is "Bad Stuff" bad and something bad should happen?

Andrew Hackard · 10-16-2012, 03:06 AM

No, the previous ruling has not been superseded -- you've found a weird edge case where you skate without suffering the Bad Stuff at all.

Brf · 10-16-2012, 12:04 PM

I didnt think in this case though, that you would lose your items if you were already level-1. I would think you could choose to go down to level-1 if you were already level-1. It does not actually specify that you must lose a level. I am actually already "down to level-1"

10-15-2012, 08:49 AM	#1
omelette dabbler Join Date: Aug 2012	Jabberwock bad stuff The Jabberwock has as its bad stuff two conditions: "You must choose: go down to Level 1, or lose all your items." Easy enough to see that it is a choice, but if I cannot satisfy one of the conditions does that mean that I should suffer the other? Thatistosay, if I have no items (yes, such things happen all too frequently) am I forced to being reduced to level 1, or am I lucky (so to speak) that the bad stuff does not affect me as I have no items and choose the item option? [I love this game. So dastardly.]

10-15-2012, 08:54 AM	#2
Enzzo Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Salt Lake City, UT	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff I'm gonna say that if you have no items, you could choose Option 2 and lose all 0 of your items; or if you're level 1 already, you certainly could choose Option 1 and have the Bad Stuff not do anything to you. This is not an official ruling of course, but I'm basing this answer on the logic of this post, which allows for choosing an outcome of a Curse that has no effect. Last edited by Enzzo; 10-15-2012 at 08:57 AM.

10-15-2012, 09:13 AM	#3
Bampop MIB Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Palm Bay FL	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff I don't think that ruling applies here, since that's a fringe case that involves someone else deciding the effect. It has been stated elsewhere (and searching from my phone isn't easy, but I'm sure Clipper will be along shortly,) that when given a choice between two outcomes where one can't affect you, you must choose the one that will. __________________ Andy Partridge MiB #3282, Palm Bay, FL Munchkin, Zombie/Cthulhu Dice, Burn in Hell!, Revolution!, Castellan, Chez Geek, OGRE DE, Chupacabra, Nanuk mib3282@gmail.com

10-15-2012, 10:45 AM	#4
Enzzo Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Salt Lake City, UT	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff You're right, that question was asked and answered already here. The answer came from Eben (MIB), and both Andrew and Erik commented later in the thread, but they did not specifically address that question. :)

10-15-2012, 02:00 PM	#5
Clipper Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Sydney, Australia	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff With Bad Stuff, if you are given a choice between an option that affects you and an option that doesn't, you must choose the one that affects you. So in the Jabberwock case, you must choose to go down Levels if you have no Items; or lose all Items if you are Level 1. Andrew's post about Curse! Kick Yourself In The Ass that Enzzo pointed out only applies to Curses. I still find that having it as an exception is a tad weird due to how it complicates Curse! Caaaaaaaanes! and Curse! Butterfingers; and for the confusion it can generate between which cards provide choices and which don't, but that's how I interpret the ruling at least. __________________ My unofficial, but comprehensive Flowcharts: Munchkin: A4 Letter; Munchkin Quest: A4 Letter Rules Checklist for all Munchkin sets: A4 Letter. Last edited by Clipper; 10-15-2012 at 02:10 PM.

10-15-2012, 08:44 PM	#6
omelette dabbler Join Date: Aug 2012	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff Very interesting replies, and I greatly admire the expertise of respondents. My feeling was that we choose whichever gives us the better outcome. It is Munchkin, after all. But I am glad to discover more about the game and other ways of thinking. Does it temper the thinking if one considers the situation where neither condition can be met? Thatistosay, no items to lose and already at level 1. Of course the bad stuff will have no effect in this case. In the situation where either condition can be met, the case is also clear cut, it being a choice of the player.

10-16-2012, 12:30 AM	#8
UncleBob Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Southern Illinois	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff Previously, the discussion has came up when there's Bad Stuff that is something like "Lose your X. If you're not wearing X, then Y." - and the idea is you might have an "X" that is protected from being lost (like "Bear Feet"). The previous ruling was that you're wearing footgear, so you don't get "Y", but you can't lose them to Bad Stuff, so nothing happens. That's a different, but similar situation to this one. Am I to assume the previous ruling is still in effect - or is "Bad Stuff" bad and something bad should happen?

10-16-2012, 03:06 AM	#9
Andrew Hackard *Munchkin* Line Editor Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Austin, TX	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff No, the previous ruling has not been superseded -- you've found a weird edge case where you skate without suffering the Bad Stuff at all. __________________ Andrew Hackard, *Munchkin* Line Editor If you have a question that isn't getting answered, we have a thread for that. Let people like what they like. Don't be a gamer hater. #PlayMunchkin on social media: Twitter \|\| Facebook \|\| Instagram \|\| YouTube Follow us on Kickstarter: Steve Jackson Games and Warehouse 23

10-16-2012, 12:04 PM	#10
Brf Join Date: Apr 2011	Re: Jabberwock bad stuff I didnt think in this case though, that you would lose your items if you were already level-1. I would think you could choose to go down to level-1 if you were already level-1. It does not actually specify that you must lose a level. I am actually already "down to level-1"