Treasures and Helping in Combat

SirHaggus · 02-05-2011, 02:19 AM

So here is the situation. I entered into combat against a level 11 monster that gives three treasures and I am not beating it. I ask another player to assist me in combat and he agrees to, but specifically states that he "wants all three treasures". I clarify and ask him how many treasures he wants in exchange for helping me. He says "three". We shake on it and I play a +10 card to boost the monster to level 21, we are still beating it. No one objects and we flip over 5 treasures. The 4th treasure that flips over is hoard and we discard it and draw another three treasures for a total of seven treasures.

The person that agreed to help me argued that he should get "first choice" of the 7 treasures drawn because, He had stated "all three treasures" and at the time that he said this, there were only three treasures so why would he have specified "first choice" since it was implied.

My argument was that as soon as there were more than three treasures in play that I automatically got first choice of all but three of them because he didn't specifically negotiate for "first choice" rights and since it was my combat, I got to pick treasures first and he would get the leftovers.

We argued back and forth for about 15 minutes.

What is the ruling on this? Does the player who's combat it is get first choice if it isn't specifically negotiated?

Should the guy who helped me have said - "Even though there are only three treasures now, if you modify the combat in a way that gives you extra treasures, I want first choice of three cards from the loot"

It was my deck so at the end, we agreed that neither one of us would get "first choice" of the seven treasures and that my helper would get the first three treasures drawn and I would get the other 4.

02-05-2011, 02:19 AM	#1
SirHaggus Join Date: Feb 2011	Treasures and Helping in Combat So here is the situation. I entered into combat against a level 11 monster that gives three treasures and I am not beating it. I ask another player to assist me in combat and he agrees to, but specifically states that he "wants all three treasures". I clarify and ask him how many treasures he wants in exchange for helping me. He says "three". We shake on it and I play a +10 card to boost the monster to level 21, we are still beating it. No one objects and we flip over 5 treasures. The 4th treasure that flips over is hoard and we discard it and draw another three treasures for a total of seven treasures. The person that agreed to help me argued that he should get "first choice" of the 7 treasures drawn because, He had stated "all three treasures" and at the time that he said this, there were only three treasures so why would he have specified "first choice" since it was implied. My argument was that as soon as there were more than three treasures in play that I automatically got first choice of all but three of them because he didn't specifically negotiate for "first choice" rights and since it was my combat, I got to pick treasures first and he would get the leftovers. We argued back and forth for about 15 minutes. What is the ruling on this? Does the player who's combat it is get first choice if it isn't specifically negotiated? Should the guy who helped me have said - "Even though there are only three treasures now, if you modify the combat in a way that gives you extra treasures, I want first choice of three cards from the loot" It was my deck so at the end, we agreed that neither one of us would get "first choice" of the seven treasures and that my helper would get the first three treasures drawn and I would get the other 4.