Helper using Bat Bat prevents "you" from getting any levels nor treasures?

[hippiedippie]

I played Munchkin Bites! with some friends for the first time a week ago, which ended in an argument resulting in people leaving and ending the game prematurely =/.
And now I'm hoping for help regarding the ruling of the 'Bat Bat'-card (the bad boy in this story)

The scenario:
When I needed help defeating a Bat of higher combat strength than me, a player offered to help me without claiming any reward. Naive, thinking he was preventing other players any possible spoils rather then screwing with me, I agreed on it.
Good he said, the bat is dead and you won't get any treasure nor level! showing me the Bat Bat-card. In response (after reading the fine print of 'Bat Bat') i threw 'Evil Twin' in my own battle to now face a second monster, triggering 'Bat Bat', allowing both the treasure and kill, for both Bats.
After winning this battle, all hell broke loose...

We all agreed on that 'Bat Bat' would have prevented me from getting neither the treasure nor level, but when I played the "Evil twin' they all believed that since it was his special ability ('Bat Bat') slaying the first Bat, and specifically saying "YOU get the kill and treasures only if you defeat any remainig monsters" that it was his kill, and that it should be he (and not me) that should be entitled to the treasure for that first Bat. They read "you" as in singular you, an thus as the owner of the card whereas I read it as the plural you, as in both the combatants.

After that, we had a long, wild, and increasingly loud fight regarding the grammar of the triggered part of 'Bat Bat'...

So which one of us is right? Me or my friends? Plus, I consider the fight as mine, and thus making all spoils mine until the agreement takes effect (in this case he wanted zero treasure allowing me any number of treasures

[Mister Ed]

It is "you" singular, as in the person whose combat it is. The "owner" of the combat is ALWAYS the one getting ANY treasures, which are then distributed to any helper according to your agreement.

Any card that allowed somebody OTHER than the person whose combat it was to get treasure from that combat would be very explicit about that.

[Clipper]

Treasure and levels always go to the combat owner, and while the helper's abilities mostly apply to any combat they are in, the 'you' on most cards that refer to combat are also discussing the combat owner, which is most certainly the case for Bat Bat.

Now it seems that none of you were fully correct in the combat in question, though. Here's some points about the cards in question:

• Bat Bat would need to be in play, it couldn't just be in the helper's hand (which may have been the case in your example, but I'm mentioning it just to make sure).
• As soon as the helper joins the combat, the Bat Bat automatically defeats the Bat you were fighting. It is now too late to play Evil Twin as there is no monster present to get a twin.
• After the player joined, you are now in a combat where there are no monsters present. You can state you are winning the combat and provide other players reasonable time to interfere before claiming your spoils. If nobody interferes, by such techniques as playing a Wandering Monster to join the combat, then this counts as 'defeating any remaining monsters' for the purposes of Bat Bat (you defeated all of the remaining ones, as none existed) and you are thus entitled to get the Level and Treasure of the Bat (face-up as you had help, but you then get to take it all according to the deal).

If this happened in a friendly game, I would almost certainly allow the helper to rescind his offer to help for free, as it was a nice attempt to snipe you, despite it not being able to work due to the rules misconception.

Edit: Had a feeling I might be beaten given the time it took me to write this one up...

[hippiedippie]

Thanks, both of you!

After your explanation Clipper i read the text for bat bat once again, and then it came to me. It doesn't say that you have to face multiple monsters to get a treasure and kill, what it DOES say is that if you face multiple monsters you have to kill the remaining to get bat bats kill (Which in turn is the common rule for dealing with multiple monters). Am I right?

I have one question regarding Evil Twin though. Why is it possible to play Wandering Monster but not Evil Twin? Sure Bat Bat says that you automatically kill a bat, but not immediately?... Doesn't other players have 2.6 seconds to respond to this? Or is the killed Bat somehow immediately discarded and cant be targeted? 'Cause sure a dead bat could have an evil and alive twin... ;)


And by the way, Bat Bat was in play for that player, but I didn't think of it because it was the first time playing Bites! (but not munchkin in general)

[Mister Ed]

The other player has a reasonable time to respond to try to stop you from winning a combat, but that doesn't mean they get to stop a card from taking effect. If a card is played to kill a monster in a combat, you cannot then play a card that requires that monster to still be part of the combat.

You could play a card that specifically cancels the first card being played, but cards that do that are rare, and will explicitly state that they can be used to cancel another card. Otherwise, the first card takes its effect first.

[Clipper]

Yeah, the only point at which you need to give reasonable time to your opponents to play cards is when you about to win a combat by there being either no monsters left or when your combat strength is higher.

And yes, when you automatically defeat a monster, you discard it from the combat, so there is no way to target it any more.

[hippiedippie]

Great! I believe I got the answers I was looking for. So ty both!