Wand of Dowsing to Divine Intervention

[Clipper]

The way I understand it from more recent rulings regarding use of Wand of Dowsing during the reasonable time period at the end of combat, if the player declares they are looking for a certain card that you know is in the discards, then you need to let them find the card before another card can be played. If the player is instead looking through the deck reading cards to find the best one, then you can consider Wand of Dowsing resolved and continue the game as they search.

Thus, this would mean the Level 9 Cleric who played Wand of Dowsing could declare he's getting Divine Intervention and there's little chance to stop him (Annihilation could work, though).

This would seem to be a good way to make the combat rulings consistent with the older ruling of Andrew's...

[Andrew Hackard]

Before I start getting quoted out of context by people on both sides of this discussion, let me tell you how I would rule *in this specific case*, because it involves some weird effects. Notably, the "play immediately" and "may be the winning level" clauses on Divine Intervention muck things up -- that's a combination found almost nowhere else in Munchkin.

So, in this specific case, a Cleric who is dumpster diving for Divine Intervention to give himself the winning level must actually find and play that card before the level takes effect, even if he doesn't declare that he is searching for that specific card. (Note that nothing in the Wand of Dowsing text requires its player to reveal the card he's looking for before he finds it, so the other players may have to infer his intent.) Other players may interfere by playing "lose a level" cards before Divine Intervention is pulled from the deck. Once it has been pulled, however, it must be played immediately, so it's too late for other interference cards -- and if the other players DO interfere, the WOD player is perfectly within his rights to change strategies and grab another card instead.

This, to me, strikes the right balance of fairness and cleverness. I welcome comments on the subject.

[Bampop]

Works for me for the Munchkinly balance you cited.

[Andrew Hackard]

To explain further why I ruled somewhat differently for the Wand of Dowsing in combat example: if a player can clearly articulate within a reasonable time what he intends to do to interfere with a fight, I think it's unpleasantly rules-lawyerly to say that he loses the right to do so because of an inability to complete the physical action within an arbitrarily small time window. "I'll play my Wand of Dowsing to pull Humongous from the discards and play it on the Gazebo" is a clear statement of intent, and actually FINDING the Humongous card is, in my opinion, secondary to being able to say that you're doing it. (If the Humongous card is not, in fact, in the discards, that's a separate issue. At that point, you can't say "Well, I found Ancient, so I'll use that instead" -- that's too close to "I'll play the Wand of Dowsing and find SOMETHING to use against you," which is not at all in the spirit of the "reasonable time" rule.)

Since there's no "reasonable time" stricture on playing Divine Intervention -- in fact, just the opposite, since it must be played immediately -- my in-combat reasoning, above, is beside the point of the original question.

BTW, everything I said in the first paragraph is equally true of a physically challenged player who actually just takes a long time to make plays. Someone who tells such a player, "Well, you didn't actually play that card from your hand in a reasonable time, so sorry, I win," is a cad and a bounder and I would back up anyone who tossed that guy out on his derriere. In an actual Munchkin tournament, that sort of Wheaton's Law violation would be grounds for disqualification.

[Clipper]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

This, to me, strikes the right balance of fairness and cleverness. I welcome comments on the subject.

The only issue I have here is that Wand of Dowsing ends with the text telling you to discard Wand of Dowsing only when you take the other card. I've never really understood why we are allowed to interrupt Wand of Dowsing to play another card (such as a Curse to lose a level or a Race) while still resolving Wand of Dowsing, as you cannot do this with any other card effect.

The combat situation did sort this whole thing out nicely in my head, but now I'm back to being just as confused as I used to be regarding this ruling.

[Gridxd]

with regards to the situation, so can he sell stuff in response to steal a level then go back to lvl 9, then find DI for game?

The logic there is that it was during his turn and not in combat so that why he argued for it. How do i argue against it?

[Clipper]

Originally Posted by Gridxd

with regards to the situation, so can he sell stuff in response to steal a level then go back to lvl 9, then find DI for game?

The logic there is that it was during his turn and not in combat so that why he argued for it. How do i argue against it?

That is a very good point, if others can play cards and they resolve while the searching player is looking for a card, then the player searching for the card should be able to play a GUAL from his hand or sell Items before he finds a card he wants to draw too.

I doubt the above is the case, but I find it difficult to fault the logic.

[Gridxd]

i know but something feels off about it.

[MunchkinMan]

You're searching through the deck, and can't do anything else. Other people aren't searching through the deck. If you want to take your time, you have to deal with the consequences.

[Gridxd]

what do you mean taking ur time and dealing with the consequences. I get that taking his time allows us to play steal/lose a level cards, but their logic is it is during their turn so they assume it could be done at any point during their turn (other than combat)