Space Munchkin Anti-Matter and Solar flare interaction

[chrisd]

This came up in early in a game, one player only had one item, the Bananafanafofaser, a complex item with a bonus when she opened a door she was hit by the anti-matter trap turning her Bananafanafofaser into a negative bonus, next turn she still only has Bananafanafofaser opens a door and gets hit by a solar flare - this destroys one complex item and the only item she has is the Bananafanafofaser, so does this get rid of the Bananafanafofaser or does the wording on the anti-matter card take precedence?

On this occasion as it was also her first game, and we needed to keep the game moving, we ruled that the solar flare as the most recent trap won out and discarded the Bananafanafofaser.

Any one got any better ideas?

Chris

[morleydotes]

Originally Posted by chrisd

This came up in early in a game, one player only had one item, the Bananafanafofaser, a complex item with a bonus when she opened a door she was hit by the anti-matter trap turning her Bananafanafofaser into a negative bonus, next turn she still only has Bananafanafofaser opens a door and gets hit by a solar flare - this destroys one complex item and the only item she has is the Bananafanafofaser, so does this get rid of the Bananafanafofaser or does the wording on the anti-matter card take precedence?

On this occasion as it was also her first game, and we needed to keep the game moving, we ruled that the solar flare as the most recent trap won out and discarded the Bananafanafofaser.

Any one got any better ideas?

Chris

I'd allow it.

Pat

[MunchkinMan]

Technically, anything hit with Antimatter is no longer an Item and therefore the Solar Flare wouldn't affect it. However, in the interest of moving things along, I can understand why you did what you did.

[Socrat]

Originally Posted by MunchkinMan

Technically, anything hit with Antimatter is no longer an Item and therefore the Solar Flare wouldn't affect it.

Wait! What do you mean, saying "is no longer an Item"? I thougt that Item that was hit with Antimatter is still an Item, but it's bonus is negative. Am I wrong?

[chrisd]

I was thinking that the conflict was between the anti-matter card stating that the only way to get rid of the item affected by it was discarding your hand and the solar flare destorying a complex item.

Chris

[MunchkinMan]

For all intents and purposes, it's now just a penalty that you can't get rid of except for giving up 2 Levels (that you must actually have to lose) (unless you use a Wishing Ring or some other card which specifically cancels a Curse/Trap). It can't be sold, it can't be lost to another curse that takes Items, it can't be traded. So, again, I say, for all intents and purposes, as long as the card is under the effects of Trap! Antimatter, it's no longer an Item.

[Socrat]

May be I'm stupid, but the Antimatter card says that Item with highest bonus "now carries penalty equal to it's former bonus...You can discard it at any time, but it will cost you 2 Levels. Nothing else will reduce or remove the penalty and there is no other way to get rid of this item"
So, the card says, that it is still an Item. Did I miss something?

[MunchkinMan]

I guess I don't understand, at this point, what difference it makes.

[Progmode]

Originally Posted by Socrat

May be I'm stupid, but the Antimatter card says that Item with highest bonus "now carries penalty equal to it's former bonus...You can discard it at any time, but it will cost you 2 Levels. Nothing else will reduce or remove the penalty and there is no other way to get rid of this item"
So, the card says, that it is still an Item. Did I miss something?

(Emphasis mine.)

I think you're focusing on the wrong part of the card's text. The text I put in bold should be all you need.

As Erik said, the only way to get rid of the Antimattered item is to pay the 2 level cost. That means Bad Stuff, Curses, selling for levels, trading, stealing, etc. will not let you rid yourself of the item.

When Erik says it's not an item for all intents and purposes, he most likely means that there's no point in calling it that because nothing that would normally rid yourself of an item will have any effect on it. It may technically be an item, but what good does that distinction do for you?

So, summary:
1. Erik's (MunchkinMan) word is law.
2. Erik says it's not considered an item anymore.
3. You could always make your own house rule if you don't like what Erik says.

Originally Posted by MunchkinMan

I guess I don't understand, at this point, what difference it makes.

I guess if it's still an item you could put an Item Enhancer on it if you really wanted an even more negative bonus.

[MunchkinMan]

Originally Posted by Progmode

I guess if it's still an item you could put an Item Enhancer on it if you really wanted an even more negative bonus.

Well, I guess if it's still an Item, it could still take up its slot, but we've already done that one to death. I've already said that it was decided that it doesn't. It's a nasty card, but we don't want it to be so nasty you're forever screwed.