HMOH and definition of "win"
 

So last night the guy opposite me has both pollymorph potion and transferal potion out in front of him. No one is interfering with his combats, because why throw down enhancers if he has two automatic outs showing? But I know I have to get rid of at least one of those if I am going to beat him.

Then I draw Help Me Out Here. I look for trouble on a monster, play two different +10's on it so that I can't beat it, and then play Help Me Out Here to take his Pollymorph Potion. (eliminating the pollymorph potion is mission accomplished; the seven treasures I would get is not bad, either).

The discussion begins; can I take pollymorph potion with HMOH?
Does that fit HMOH's requirement of making the difference between winning and losing?

In this thread from April, Andrew clearly said no, "[HMOH] cannot take a card that doesn't cause you to lead the monsters in combat strength (i.e., no Magic Lamp or Pollymorph Potion). It CAN take a card that would give you an instant win (for instance, the Churninator from Cthulhu)."

He further says, "This will be elaborated upon in the upcoming FAQ revision"

So I checked the new FAQ...and I'm actually confused as to whether it confirms this ruling or not. I had expected there to be an explicit definition of "win"; but AFAICT there is not.

There is "Important Note #3: "Defeated" versus "Killed" versus "Lost""
in which it is explained that "defeating" means you don't have to run away, "losing" means you do. "Killed" means you get treasure AND levels. "Defeating" includes both killing and removing monsters from the combat.


So...what is winning? Is winning the same as defeating (i.e., not losing), or is winning only killing?

In the section on Combat, there is the question:
Q. When you are faced with two or more monsters, can you kill one and flee the other?

And part of the answer states:
"(You will have to win that fight before you can claim any treasure at all...")

This seems to imply that winning is the same as defeating, not killing. As I understand it, I could pollymorph one monster, and charm the other one, and still claim the treasure by defeating both monsters, even if I didn't kill any of them.

So...what is the definition of winning a combat under the new rules?

And does it now allow for HMOH to take a pollymorph potion?

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

My answer has not changed. HMOH cannot take a card that does not cause your combat strength to exceed the monsters' combat strength.

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

I was in a similar situation. All I did was play some cards on them to force them to use the cards. That way you have got rid of the cards. No problem. Enlist the help of others if need be. Explain to them that you will all be stuffed while they have those cards and would they be able to put a bit on a monster if you did also. If everyone adds three or four then it becomes very difficult for the person to defeat the monster and they will use the cards. then you should be able to keep the big guns for when they don't have those "get out of jail free" style cards.

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

BTW, thanks for the prompt, Kirt; we've updated the FAQ to address exactly your question.

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

This is contradictory with your previous answer, in regards to the Churninator.

The "win" effect of the Churninator has nothing to do with combat strength.

By the wording in the FAQ, and this post, the Churninator is no longer a valid target by way of it's instant-win effect (assuming the +4 it gives is not enough to win).

Along these lines, what about the Bat Bat?

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

You are correct and I will try to find time to update the FAQ answer today, or at least this week.

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

definitely looking forward to seeing the official updated answer on this one, cause all of the sudden I'm seeing all the cards that fall under this bracket:

knee pads
rat on a stick
etc

all can give you wins without changing combat strength directly...

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

Rat On A Stick has a bonus now. . .

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

Already answered specifically in the FAQ.

The old version didn't win the fight -- it let you escape if you were losing. The new version, as Erik said, has a combat bonus and would be eligible for HMOH.

I do appreciate being fact-checked, but it would be helpful if the people doing so would read the available information (including the cards themselves!) before writing in to "correct" me.

Re: HMOH and definition of "win"
 

You're welcome, and thanks for the quick update of the FAQ.

I would still suggest that when you have a chance the FAQ be further changed from

Q. When you are faced with two or more monsters, can you kill one and flee the other?
A. No. If you have cards that let you abolish one entirely (like Pollymorph Potion) then you may do that, and fight the other one(s). (You will have to win that fight before you can claim any treasure at all . . . you can't charm one monster, grab its treasure, and then try to fight its mate.) But you can't fight one and flee the other. They fight you together.

to

Q. When you are faced with two or more monsters, can you kill one and flee the other?
A. No. If you have cards that let you abolish one entirely (like Pollymorph Potion) then you may do that, and fight the other one(s). (You will have defeat all monsters in that fight before you can claim any treasure at all . . . you can't charm one monster, grab its treasure, and then try to fight its mate.) But you can't fight one and flee the other. They fight you together.