Negotiating BEFORE Combat begins?

[Mugsy79]

Apologies if this is obvious, but I couldn’t find a clear answer on the forum.

Scenario: Player1 has a combat strength of 10, and is considering a Looking for Trouble with a lvl 14 monster. He starts asking for help from the other players BEFORE actually playing the card and initiating combat. He reads off the monsters levels, offers up its treasures, but has not played the card, yet. Only once Player2 (and elf with combat strength of 12) agrees to help does Player1 play his monster.

Is that allowed - to negotiate assistance before entering combat, or does Player1 need to play the monster card, initiating combat and THEN seek assistance?

Player1 was reading the rule set section “Asking for Help” opening line of “If you cannot win a combat on your own...” to allow this pre-emptive assessment of the combat (he’s 10, the monster is 14) as a green light to begin seeking assistance.

I tried to argue that assistance is only sought IN combat, so he needs to play the monster first (and risk all the other players leaving him to his fate) to initiate combat, and THEN start seeking helpers. Cross talking of what monsters “might” be played and what assistance “might” arrive if they’re played seemed against the spirit of the game, but is it against the rules?

[Anh-Dalan]

I don't think the rules stop players from talking to each other while not in combat, so I don't see why these two should not negotiate an upcoming fight.
question would be, how committing their deal needs to be: must player 2 stick to the agreement and join combat? must player 1 play exactly the monster he mentioned and must he accept player 2 or can he change his mind?

[MunchkinMan]

To my way of thinking, the rules only protect you from someone leaving a fight they've already agreed to join when that agreement has been made during combat you're already fighting. Agreeing to fight alongside someone before a Monster is on the table is somewhat risky (what if you make them face a Monster that will seriously hurt them should you lose, and barely do anything to you), so I, personally, would be very unlikely to agree to something like that, and don't feel I'd be beholden to honor that agreement, even if it might make it harder for me to negotiate with other people later if they think I'm untrustworthy because of it.

If you're seriously interested in making such a thing work, you should make it incredibly clear that there should be an or clause in that agreement wherein the other player agrees to help, or owes you in some obvious, concrete way (like giving you an Item they have in play that you can use, or giving you so many gold pieces worth of Items) if they don't.

[Mugsy79]

Thanks for the response. This was the first game for most of the players, so they didn’t see the inherent risk of blindly agreeing to help prior to combat (elves eager for levels, you know). I guess I was trying to use the rules to protect them from themselves.

In my case, Player1 and player2 recited their entire hands to each other before Player1 decided they had enough combat strength + items to account for any interference from the other players and only then did he play his monster.

So, just to recap, while not the best strategy for those who know what they’re doing, it’s technically legal to “cross talk” ahead of a Looking for Trouble and work out things like “Hey, IF I play this monster, will you help?” Or “Hey, if you help, do you have any potions or one-shots to help with the fight?”

[Mugsy79]

Or is it more accurate to say, rather than “legal,” such “pre-combat” crosstalk is “not illegal,” as the rules only contemplate “in combat” negotiations, so it’s up to the players and/or house rules to govern pre-combat behavior?

[Andrew Hackard]

You're welcome to table talk as much or as little as you want - that's beyond the scope of the rules as written and is very much a "your group can play however they want" situation. However, no deals made outside of combat are binding.