What happens when you killing a Monster only to have to face a new Wandering Monster?

[Andrew Hackard]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

3. Within a "reasonable amount if time" ie, roughly 2.6 seconds, wandering monster was played.

"Roughly 2.6 seconds" is inaccurate. That part of the rule is a joke. Each group must define "reasonable time" for itself -- but if you do a SLOW count of "one . . . two . . . two point six," that gives everyone a chance to say "Stop!" and do something. (I've found, in watching groups play, that the length of seconds changes dramatically when you are in the combat and trying to stop it.)

BTW, we changed the time in Munchkin Pathfinder as a metajoke. Now I'm leaning toward changing it in every set from now on, just to drive home the fact that it's not the precise number of seconds that matters, it's the "reasonable time."

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

"Roughly 2.6 seconds" is inaccurate. That part of the rule is a joke. Each group must define "reasonable time" for itself -- but if you do a SLOW count of "one . . . two . . . two point six," that gives everyone a chance to say "Stop!" and do something. (I've found, in watching groups play, that the length of seconds changes dramatically when you are in the combat and trying to stop it.)

BTW, we changed the time in Munchkin Pathfinder as a metajoke. Now I'm leaning toward changing it in every set from now on, just to drive home the fact that it's not the precise number of seconds that matters, it's the "reasonable time."

I know it's a joke. I thought i emphasized the "reasonable time" enough; guess I failed. My post just didn't adequately convey my intent to use the joke. Reading the rules is quite the exercise in identifying humor. :-)