Slaked Thirsts vs. Pippin WoBaS

[Kralik]

So clarify this for me...

I understand it that on Gemp with Slaked Thirsts you cannot use it on a minion that has 2 vitality if there's another one with 3 or more available. The general idea is that given the choice, you must choose the effect that you can complete most fully (or something like that).

Wouldn't the same logic say that WoBaS cannot be used to wound a minion with 1 vitality if there are minions with 2 or more vitality on the table? If not, what is the difference?

As an aside, I'm not sure that the rule was intended to apply to Slaked Thirsts as it does... hmm...

[Kralik]

After the first time, the minion is discarded and no longer there to wound... therefore, you were not fully capable of performing the action.

[Air Power]

After the first time, the minion is discarded and no longer there to wound... therefore, you were not fully capable of performing the action.

The rules go out of their way to emphasize that certain wounds (i.e. archery, threat) are placed one at a time.  This seems to imply that, in other cases, wounds may be placed simultaneously.

[Kralik]

After the first time, the minion is discarded and no longer there to wound... therefore, you were not fully capable of performing the action.

The rules go out of their way to emphasize that certain wounds (i.e. archery, threat) are placed one at a time.  This seems to imply that, in other cases, wounds may be placed simultaneously.

Of course. But what I'm saying is that this is no different than the exertion case. Exerting a minion twice vs. wounding a minion twice still happens one exert or wound at a time. The logic behind not allowing Slaked Thirsts on a 2 Vit. Minion when there are "better" options is that two exertions cannot be fully performed. Likewise with two wounds.

Slaked Thirsts:
(exert a minion twice)
Versus a 2 Vitality Minion:
First exert is successful.
Second exert would fail because you cannot exert an exhausted minion.

WoBaS:
(wound a roaming minion twice)
Versus a 1 Vitality minion:
First wound successful.
Second wound would fail because the targeted minion is no longer on the table.

Therefore by the Slaked Thirsts logic you can't use WoBaS against a 1 Vit minion if there are 2+ Vit minions available. It seems to me that either both CAN be used versus "low" vitality minions or both cannot. It would be inconsistent otherwise.

[Not a Zombie]

Maybe since they are put on at the same time it is more like this:
WoBaS:
(wound a roaming minion twice)
Versus a 1 Vitality minion:
Both wounds placed.
Minion is now at or below 0 vitality and is killed.

[Kralik]

The rulebook is quite clear:

wound

[snip]

Wounds are always placed on a character one at a time.

[Kralik]

Let's look at this:

If the effect of a card or special ability requires
you to perform an action and you cannot, you
must perform as much as you can and ignore the
rest. (See limit.)

If the effect of an event requires you to discard 2
cards from your hand and you only have 1 card in
hand, just discard the 1 card and ignore the rest.

If the effect of a card or special ability requires
you to choose one of two different actions, you
must choose an action that you are fully capable
of performing (if possible).

I think the key words here are requires you to choose. What sorts of cards require one to choose? Let's see here...

Desperate Defense of the Ring.

The Free People's player has to choose whether to discard three cards from hand or add a burden.

Now read the context of the ruling again. The sentence applied on Gemp to Slaked Thirsts comes directly after an example of a case where you are forced to discard two cards but can only discard one. If required to choose, you can't do that sort of thing. i.e. in the case of DDotR, you cannot choose to discard three when you only have two cards in hand. If forced to discard (like TWAoL) then you do as much as possible and call it enough.

Or what about...

Worry.

You are required to choose to either exert the Ringbearer or add a burden. You can't choose the former action if the Ringbearer is exhausted since you can't complete it.

My thoughts are that this ruling really doesn't apply to cards like Slaked Thirsts or WoBaS where it just says wound/exert a minion twice. No "choice" is required in the game text. Furthermore, even if a choice is implied, you are not choosing one of two different actions. The action is set (wound/exert twice); you are choosing the minion.

[bibfortuna25]

You are still choosing between X different minions. You have to choose one that has 3 or more vitality (for Slaked) or 2 or more vitality (for WOBAS), if there is one available.

[Kralik]

You are still choosing between X different minions

you are not choosing one of two different actions. The action is set (wound/exert twice); you are choosing the minion.

The ruling very clearly refers to choosing between one of two different actions. I could quote dozens of cards that this very clearly applies to; Slaked Thirsts and WoBaS are not among them. If you misapply the ruling, you'll end up with a whole bunch of other messes besides just Slaked Thirsts and WoBaS.

[bibfortuna25]

However, everything in this game is an action. Wounding Minion A is one action, and wounding Minion B is another action.

[Kralik]

I'm sticking to my guns on this. I think it's abundantly clear given the context of the quote which sorts of cards it applies to: cards involving a choice between two actions that are clearly written on the card. DDotR, Worry, Ulaire Toldea, Winged Sentry, Saruman's Reach, ARBs like Gimli, Bearer of Grudges, Boromir, Bearer of Council.. and so on.

Last I checked WoBaS isn't coded like Slaked Thirsts on Gemp. And there are several others cards like it--if you want to twist this rule--that would play incorrectly. A couple more examples: Hard Choice would be unable to heal companions with one wound if you can spot a companion with two. Elrond, HtGG would be unable to heal any ally with one wound on the turn after you've used his regroup text. I'm going to argue that such is clearly not the intention.

[bibfortuna25]

Yes, with Hard Choice, if there is a companion with two wounds, you have to heal that companion.

Elrond HTGG can heal a different ally, because he says "heal that ally up to 2 times."

[Kralik]

Fair enough on Elrond HtGG -- I was going from memory and forgot the "up to." Not so on Hard Choice. There is no choice between two actions written on the card. I'm going to take what you have in your signature and rest with:

"The rules do what they say, no more, no less"

You're taking the line from the rules:

"If the effect of a card or special ability requires you to choose one of two different actions..."

And applying it to situations where it does not apply. That is, adding "more" than what the rules say.

[bibfortuna25]

Healing Frodo is one action.
Healing Legolas is one action.

When you play Hard Choice, you are choosing which companion you want to heal. If Legolas has 2 wounds and Frodo has 1, you can't choose Frodo. It is crystal-clear.

[Kralik]

I don't think it's fair to say that we should go off of some implied choice where in most/all cases we tend to take the rules VERY literally. The cards in question do not have a literal choice printed whereas there are dozens that do. The ruling applies to the latter, not the former. Misapplying it flies in the face of players' common sense.

At this point I'm feeling a bit blue in the face.