Resurrection vs. Stacked Deck

[aeronaut]

Originally Posted by Palmer

Now if you were to play a curse on me (Lose A Level perhaps) and I prevented that with a wishing ring, would you feel that was a "raw deal"?

No, that't not it. Playing a curse/wishing ring, or playing a wandering monster when someone is about to win, is part of the game.

The distinction here is that the cleric discards a card to get an advantage, and then that advantage gets taken away (by use of another card,) and the cleric gets nothing for her pains. If the cleric then wants to take the stacked deck off the door discard pile, she has to discard another card to get it. And of course, an unscrupulous player with another stacked deck could take that stacked deck, discarding his own stacked deck. This progression could repeat until the cleric is out of cards to discard, and is then forced to draw the top door card (more likely, until the cleric figures out that she won't be able to get the stacked deck either, and gives up.

Now that's munchkiny.

As a final suggestion, I'd recommend that the resurrection ability have the wording changed to make this ruling more clear, something like "When you are supposed to draw a face up card, take the top card from the appropriate discard pile in place of the face up draw, and discard one card." Removing the "instead of" would clarify the situation that started this thread in the first place. Instead of implies that you don't perform the replaced action (drawing a face up card;) if that is accurate, then stacked deck wouldn't be able to be used here, since you aren't drawing a face up card but doing something "instead" of that. Since Andrew and Eric have made it clear that the stacked deck can be used in this situation, the resurrection ability should be worded to make it clear that it can.

Regards,
aeronaut