Webs and Influencing Away

The place where the NetRep and the rules wizards discuss upcoming rulings
Sauron
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:27 pm

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by Sauron » Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:02 pm

Lidless Eye wrote:
Influence Check: A dice roll you make when your character is attempting to influence a faction or an opponent's card. Influence checks are called for in other situations also.
Webs wrote:
Except for unused general influence and unused normal direct influence (including influence modifications given in a character’s card text), all modifications to each influence attempt are reduced to zero.
Webs says influence attempt. Are influence attempt and influence check the same in this situation? Or does the attempt count as the total thing and the influence check just the last value versus what is needed? I need to do more research ugh.

miguel
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by miguel » Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:20 am

CoE Digest #122 wrote:The terms "influence check" and "influence attempt" are not synonymous. In general any card that modifies an attempt will affect whatever dice-roll is made in that attempt. A card that affects a check or roll will only modify checks or rolls of the appropriate type.

Note this ruling overturns COE 119
Webs affects influence attempts and any checks they call for. You can find the whole discussion here: http://www.councilofelrond.org/forum/vi ... f=12&t=330

Sauron
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:27 pm

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by Sauron » Mon Jun 06, 2011 3:05 pm

Ok according to the link Mikko provided an influence attempt and an influence check are not the same thing.

A check is the roll while an attempt may or may not have a roll, etc.

Webs makes all modifications except XYZ to the influence attempt.

Treating a character's mind as 0 for the purposes of the influence attempt seems like a modification to the attempt.

While this does not modify the influence check, it does modify the influence attempt.

Unless someone can point out something I missed, I'm going to have to disagree at this point.

miguel
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by miguel » Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:40 am

Sauron wrote:Treating a character's mind as 0 for the purposes of the influence attempt seems like a modification to the attempt.

While this does not modify the influence check, it does modify the influence attempt.

Unless someone can point out something I missed, I'm going to have to disagree at this point.
Please note I left this matter open in the proposed ruling on purpose, for further discussion if necessary. So I guess you agree with the proposed ruling itself?

I just want to get a ruling out there regarding Webs, we can open a new thread for the remaining issue.

Sauron
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:27 pm

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by Sauron » Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:10 pm

Yes I agree with the proposed ruling that says opponent's roll and -5 cross alignment penalty are reduced to 0.

miguel
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by miguel » Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:04 pm

Good. :)
Proposed Ruling wrote:When influencing an opponent's resource or character, Webs of Fear and Treachery reduces the opponent's roll to zero. Same applies for the -5 across alignment influencing penalty.
Dave?

miguel
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Webs and Influencing Away

Post by miguel » Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:23 pm

Published in digest #124. Locked.

Locked

Return to “Rules and Rulings - NetRep Discussion Forum”