Divine Intervention, Annihilation, Make the GM snort. We need a ruling.

[Andrew Hackard]

Originally Posted by PhigNootin

In the first situation. A player hid the fact that he was winning the game and upon realizing this, the other players are not allowed to play the necessary cards to stop him.

In the second situation, a player hid the fact that he was winning the game and upon realizing this, the other players are allowed to rewind the game to a point at which they can stop him.

In both scenarios the winning level has already been awarded. I would argue that in the first scenario a player actually has a card that can retroactively change the situation and in the second scenario no such card exists. Why the discrepancy?

If Michael intentionally did not claim victory from DI until after the other card was played, then yes, he was cheating and the "Snort Soda" card could be taken up in favor of Annihilation.

As a general rule, however, Annihilation cannot cancel a card if another card has been played in the interim. Rewinding a situation where a player was breaking the rules, intentionally or otherwise, is not explicitly addressed in the rules of the game and the table should feel free to remedy mistakes (or not) as they see fit. Winning by cheating is never appropriate.

Originally Posted by griffinsclaw

How is "immediately" defined here? Is it from a game-mechanical perspective, as in it would have to the next card to hit the table?

Yes. "Immediately" means "right afterward."