![]() So why use it in the first place? 5% is a nice bonus but compared to other Camp Items it is, IMO, dumb. It is one of the very rare items that doesn't stack in any capacity. That said, I understand the confusion some are having with the description as other descriptions are not explicitly clear.(See "HP as in heals or +Max?!?!" discussions) Though, this does beg the question of Candlesticks use/balance. TLDR: It is rather clear and easy/quick to check if it stacks. (Though later errata was added to make this clearer: they are treated as opponents) It is not explicitly stated but the descriptions imply that. Reading the little rulebook that came with a Planeswalker, one can logically deduce that Planeswalkers would be counted as an opponent. A lot of people argued cards with " each/all opponents." should affect Planeswalkers as well. ![]() ![]() Though I think a more apt comparison is when Planeswalker cards first came out. even though your Creature can't be targeted, it is still destroyed by Wraith of God since it does not need a Target as implied by "all". If I play Wraith of God, which states "Destroys all Creatures". Like for Creatures that had "Can not be Targeted" effects. It's like when people used to argue about Creature Board interactions in MTG. IMO, this discussion tends to come up because people did not check the total effects screen and simply think multiple Candlesticks stack like nearly everything else. Then, thanks to in-game interface, one can quickly/easily check that interaction. Again, it may not be explicitly clear but it is clear enough that one can deduce the interaction. Thus, option 3 is the correct interaction. However, one can easily check the effect by equipping multiple Candlesticks, then navigating to the total applied effects screen to see if the % has increased. This is where I understand confusion for many players since, save for rare exceptions, Camp Items stack. Originally posted by Dusk_Army:1) The bonus from Candlestick is not applied twice or more if you are within range of multiple Beacons and LanternsĪs "effects" is plural it should be clear that option 1 is invalid. If it were, this discussion would never have been opened in the first place.Īlso, have you tried not getting angry over a person disagreeing with you? I was pretty polite, but you're kind of "shouting" at me with that text, and it's making me respond with bitter sarcasm. Yes, the computer knows exactly what's supposed to happen, but contrary to what you believe, it is not clear enough to the player. If this effect were written, exactly as it is, on a card in a physical card game, you can bet that there would be arguments at the table over exactly what it means. In fact, if it were written either of the two ways you mentioned, I would not question it at all those are both "perfectly" clear as to what they mean. You are clearly someone who has never played a tabletop game in his life. They do not have to list everytime the effect doesn't stack if it doesn't stack EVER. There's at least three ways it can be interpreted: Originally posted by Dusk_Army:Actually, speaking from the perspective of a designer, it's not clear. If it were written "you will only get bonus from one candlestick" or "only one lantern at a time will activate the effect" you would be right to question if there are other ways to stack the effect It should be changed to "multiple Candlesticks do not stack", or "multiple Candlesticks and overlapping roadside tiles do not stack". Since nearly every other supply item does stack if you equip multiples, the player naturally assumes that the developers meant option 1, not option 2 or 3. There's at least three ways it can be interpreted:ġ) The bonus from Candlestick is not applied twice or more if you are within range of multiple Beacons and LanternsĢ) The bonus from Candlestick is not applied twice or more if you have more than one Candlestick equipped Actually, speaking from the perspective of a designer, it's not clear. Originally posted by Seftak:It couldn't be any clearer though, EFFECT DOES NOT STACK is pretty straight forward.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |