|
|
Post by mhanc911 on Jan 1, 2019 13:42:51 GMT -5
We played a game last night and someone played Counter-Clock Warlock while the Heavenly Halo was out.
[Counter-Clock Warlock (1146; Deck= Caramel; Play Immediately; Direction= counter-clockwise) All Bunny Modifier cards under bunnies in The Bunny Circle are moved to the next bunny counter-clockwise.]
Does this card affect the Heavenly Halo Bunny Modifier? We decided it did take affect, but the QCC officially states, "Once assigned to a bunny, The Heavenly Halo cannot be moved to another bunny."
Another question that came up that we were fairly certain on was whether you could use the card Einstein to kill the the Holographic Bunny. We decided you can't as that would cause it harm, but the specific card Einstein was not listed in the QCC chart for Holo outcomes which caused some dispute.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 2, 2019 8:49:52 GMT -5
We played a game last night and someone played Counter-Clock Warlock while the Heavenly Halo was out. [Counter-Clock Warlock (1146; Deck= Caramel; Play Immediately; Direction= counter-clockwise) All Bunny Modifier cards under bunnies in The Bunny Circle are moved to the next bunny counter-clockwise.] Does this card affect the Heavenly Halo Bunny Modifier? We decided it did take affect, but the QCC officially states, "Once assigned to a bunny, The Heavenly Halo cannot be moved to another bunny." Yes, I believe that is correct (that Counter-Clock Warlock will affect a Halo/Angel Wing'd bunny) because it is not harming the bunny. I'll add that to our list of items to review for the next edition of the QCC. Another question that came up that we were fairly certain on was whether you could use the card Einstein to kill the the Holographic Bunny. We decided you can't as that would cause it harm, but the specific card Einstein was not listed in the QCC chart for Holo outcomes which caused some dispute. We tried to include cards in the table that may have been gray areas in the rules. Killing the bunny is definitely harming it and Einstein is not among the cards listed that can harm Holographic Bunny. I've added that to our list of items to review for the next edition of the QCC. |
|
|
|
Post by mhanc911 on Jan 3, 2019 0:15:35 GMT -5
Cool. Thanks for the quick reply. That makes sense. As a side note, we also found another card that could remove the Halo called Under Blunder.
|
|
marek14
Seaman Apprentice
Posts: 30
|
Post by marek14 on Jan 15, 2019 5:07:55 GMT -5
Basically, I *think* that the intent of Holographic Bunny is that it generally cannot be harmed by anything material -- it's, however, susceptible to energy attacks like lasers, radiation, etc. So any corner cases not otherwise specified might be evaluated according to this.
|
|
|
|
Post by mahobear8 on Jan 15, 2019 9:25:14 GMT -5
Basically, I *think* that the intent of Holographic Bunny is that it generally cannot be harmed by anything material -- it's, however, susceptible to energy attacks like lasers, radiation, etc. So any corner cases not otherwise specified might be evaluated according to this. Personally, I find it much safer to go strictly by what the Bunny Bits say rather than to add more cases not originally intended. Having the house rule of allowing other cases if they could be considered "energy attacks" would lead to several arguments during the game and likely would discourage several players, especially the player who had the Holographic at the time of the argument if it leads to him losing it. |
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 16, 2019 14:30:52 GMT -5
Mahobear8, how literally do you follow the interpretation of rules on the cards?
For example, the Quest Holographic Bunny (0191) says "The Holographic Bunny can only be harmed by the Laser Gun, Nuclear Warhead, Miniature Black Hole, Cheese Balls, Anti-Matter Raisins, Plutonium Radiation, Psychic Waves, or Sharks WFLB." The Conquest Holographic Bunny (0958) says, "The Holographic Bunny can be harmed by Quantum Singu-Harity, Ruby Laser Slippers, Servo Pen, Blipverts, Magnetic Monopole, Thermo-Nuclear Chicken Wings, and Spectral Cleansing."
Do you consider each of those Holographic Bunnies vulnerable to different weapons or is Holographic Bunny vulnerable to the union of those sets of weapons? (The latter is the stance we take in the QCC).
|
|
|
|
Post by mahobear8 on Jan 17, 2019 17:05:11 GMT -5
Mahobear8, how literally do you follow the interpretation of rules on the cards? For example, the Quest Holographic Bunny (0191) says "The Holographic Bunny can only be harmed by the Laser Gun, Nuclear Warhead, Miniature Black Hole, Cheese Balls, Anti-Matter Raisins, Plutonium Radiation, Psychic Waves, or Sharks WFLB." The Conquest Holographic Bunny (0958) says, "The Holographic Bunny can be harmed by Quantum Singu-Harity, Ruby Laser Slippers, Servo Pen, Blipverts, Magnetic Monopole, Thermo-Nuclear Chicken Wings, and Spectral Cleansing." Do you consider each of those Holographic Bunnies vulnerable to different weapons or is Holographic Bunny vulnerable to the union of those sets of weapons? (The latter is the stance we take in the QCC). Personally, I've always gone by the first interpretation that the Holographic bunnies are vulnerable to different weapons although I think the latter interpretation is quite reasonable as well. I don't recall if there is a JB response on this topic, feel free to let me know if there is and correct me. The 2 primary reasons why I've always gone with the first interpretation are the following: 1. While the Holographic Bunnies share the same name, it can be argued that the Quest bunny bits only refer to the Quest Holographic and same with Conquest. An argument for this is the ID numbers being referred to in the bunny bits (ex. "0958 Holographic Bunny: Holographic Bunny is a red bunny...."). Furthermore, the bunny bits for each describes Holographic Bunny as "a red bunny" arguably meaning there is only one in each description. I would expect if the Holographic Bunnies were intended to be the same, it would be written more like "Holographic Bunnies are red bunnies that do not need to feed..." in the Conquest bunny bits. 2. Having the Holographic bunnies affected the same way creates yet another case where rules are not written on the cards. This case is different, however, in that the rules are listed within a complete different set of bunny bits (Nearly within a complete different game as Conquest can be considered standalone). The QCC being available mostly fixes this problem if all fan clarifications listed there are accepted. However, for those who don't use the QCC, I'd imagine this would lead to some heated arguments mid game, causing players to become discouraged at the complex rules, especially the player who had the Holographic Bunny. Personally, I've had games where players get in a large mid game argument and it doesn't tend to end well for either side, so I try to avoid it. Naturally, this is more a reason of pragmatics than an actual rule interpretation. Naturally, I don't intend for any changes to the QCC to be made (unless we get a JB clarification) as I still consider the latter a reasonable interpretation. I'm just providing possible reasons for the other interpretation so that it's possibility is considered and to double check that my logic is sound. |
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 18, 2019 8:35:53 GMT -5
Mahobear8, how literally do you follow the interpretation of rules on the cards? For example, the Quest Holographic Bunny (0191) says "The Holographic Bunny can only be harmed by the Laser Gun, Nuclear Warhead, Miniature Black Hole, Cheese Balls, Anti-Matter Raisins, Plutonium Radiation, Psychic Waves, or Sharks WFLB." The Conquest Holographic Bunny (0958) says, "The Holographic Bunny can be harmed by Quantum Singu-Harity, Ruby Laser Slippers, Servo Pen, Blipverts, Magnetic Monopole, Thermo-Nuclear Chicken Wings, and Spectral Cleansing." Do you consider each of those Holographic Bunnies vulnerable to different weapons or is Holographic Bunny vulnerable to the union of those sets of weapons? (The latter is the stance we take in the QCC). Personally, I've always gone by the first interpretation that the Holographic bunnies are vulnerable to different weapons although I think the latter interpretation is quite reasonable as well. I don't recall if there is a JB response on this topic, feel free to let me know if there is and correct me. The 2 primary reasons why I've always gone with the first interpretation are the following: 1. While the Holographic Bunnies share the same name, it can be argued that the Quest bunny bits only refer to the Quest Holographic and same with Conquest. An argument for this is the ID numbers being referred to in the bunny bits (ex. "0958 Holographic Bunny: Holographic Bunny is a red bunny...."). Furthermore, the bunny bits for each describes Holographic Bunny as "a red bunny" arguably meaning there is only one in each description. I would expect if the Holographic Bunnies were intended to be the same, it would be written more like "Holographic Bunnies are red bunnies that do not need to feed..." in the Conquest bunny bits. 2. Having the Holographic bunnies affected the same way creates yet another case where rules are not written on the cards. This case is different, however, in that the rules are listed within a complete different set of bunny bits (Nearly within a complete different game as Conquest can be considered standalone). The QCC being available mostly fixes this problem if all fan clarifications listed there are accepted. However, for those who don't use the QCC, I'd imagine this would lead to some heated arguments mid game, causing players to become discouraged at the complex rules, especially the player who had the Holographic Bunny. Personally, I've had games where players get in a large mid game argument and it doesn't tend to end well for either side, so I try to avoid it. Naturally, this is more a reason of pragmatics than an actual rule interpretation. Naturally, I don't intend for any changes to the QCC to be made (unless we get a JB clarification) as I still consider the latter a reasonable interpretation. I'm just providing possible reasons for the other interpretation so that it's possibility is considered and to double check that my logic is sound. I haven't asked JB about this one, specifically. It is one of the few where there could be confusion. Gorge The Bunny resulted in confusion and the Conquest version of the card uses the Feed The Bunny name. On other issues, he's indicated that the card name is what matters. For example, whether they (CTA) list the color for the bunnies as part of the name (not just what it says on the card) determines whether that bunny is a particular color. I can also see it going either way, but we decided to combine them for the QCC and use the union of the sets of weapons. If one plays only Quest or only Conquest, it won't matter because the "other" cards won't even be in the draw pile. It only matters in a combined Quest + Conquest game. My thought was that with the additional cards, the likelihood of drawing one of the weapons that can do harm becomes so rare that to re-balance the game we used the union. Should JB decide otherwise, we'll change it. |
|
|
|
Post by mahobear8 on Jan 18, 2019 11:13:50 GMT -5
I can also see it going either way, but we decided to combine them for the QCC and use the union of the sets of weapons. If one plays only Quest or only Conquest, it won't matter because the "other" cards won't even be in the draw pile. It only matters in a combined Quest + Conquest game. My thought was that with the additional cards, the likelihood of drawing one of the weapons that can do harm becomes so rare that to re-balance the game we used the union. Should JB decide otherwise, we'll change it. That's fair reasoning for re-balance. Typically, there will be at least one weapon in the discard that is able to harm the Holographic before it is played, but not all players would consider it worth the dolla to attack it. I had a 2 player game last year where an opponent got the Holographic bunny within the first few turns and I decided to spend all my dolla and purchase Magnetic Monopole from the discard pile. On a later turn, I resurrected the Holographic and my opponent was unwilling to do the same play, partially causing him to lose the game. Naturally, this scenario as a 2 player game means balance was a bit off, but regardless, he still was able to respond if he were willing. In that sense, the Holographic Bunny isn't necessarily OP with either interpretation (Especially considering it's difficult for cards to be strictly OP in this game according to my theories), but players who are too conservative with their dolla may have a difficult time dealing with it when using my interpretation hence why the QCC interpretation has its benefits. |
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jun 2, 2019 10:21:25 GMT -5
I asked JB about Holographic Bunny this weekend.
He rules that the two Holographic Bunnies are vulnerable to different weapons. That is, only those weapons listed on the cards.
We'll move the existing QCC rule to a house rule and split the card entries into two for the QCC.
Glenn
|
|
|
|
Post by mahobear8 on Jun 5, 2019 9:34:07 GMT -5
I asked JB about Holographic Bunny this weekend. He rules that the two Holographic Bunnies are vulnerable to different weapons. That is, only those weapons listed on the cards. We'll move the existing QCC rule to a house rule and split the card entries into two for the QCC. Glenn There is something else in the QCC that probably should be changed as well, although being a minor technicality. In the conversation about interaction between Blanch/RPA and the Holographic Bunny, I think we agreed that although neither could remove the special abilities of the Holographic (as the ability isn't bound to the color for unique bunnies), it could in fact be used to change the color of the Holographic bunny which is relevant for Triplet purposes or for cards like Red Light District. However, in the discussion I intended that this rule is true for all unique bunnies (Ambassador, Bunny Detroit, etc.), but the QCC currently contains only the exception for Holographic. By mechanical consistency, it should be all unique bunnies (and I'm pretty sure I included all unique bunnies in the question when I got the JB clarification). Again, it is a rather minor technicality, but I have had it be relevant in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jun 18, 2019 7:34:10 GMT -5
After about a month off, I've started updating the QCC again. I will incorporate these changes. It'd help substantially (so I don't miss any) if you could help itemize the changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mahobear8 on Jun 18, 2019 11:43:13 GMT -5
After about a month off, I've started updating the QCC again. I will incorporate these changes. It'd help substantially (so I don't miss any) if you could help itemize the changes. I'll see if I can find the time to go through it later this week. Already relatively busy with work, preparing for the next Bunny Banter podcast, and with another Killer Bunnies related project that I haven't made public yet. I'll plan on sending you an email this weekend with the things that I find. (If nothing else, I'll remind you of the Holographic Bunnies being affected differently and RPA and Blanch interactions with Unique bunnies) |
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jun 22, 2019 13:18:04 GMT -5
I've had a few moments to re-read the JB responses that you posted. All of them discuss Holo, specifically, not Unique bunnies in general. I think the Holo is simply a very unique bunny. We've clearly gotten into trouble with more expansive readings of rules. Jeff's readings are much more restrictive to what is literally on the cards or in the Bunny Bits. I think there is a general understanding that Blanch and Random Paintball Assault cannot remove the special features of the Holographic Bunny, however can they change the color of the Holographic Bunny (again, perhaps helping with triplets or to help combo with cards like Blue Bunny Group) Jeff: That is correct. The color changes, but not the features. That talks to Holo, specifically, not Unique bunnies in general. Then, Marek asked him about Free Agents and whether they could become Kinderbunnies types. 3. Can a Free Agent become a Kinderbunnies type like Sporty? Marek also asked him if Adventure Bunny could be Blanched: 1. Is it possible to Blanch the Adventure Bunny? So, Blanch (and maybe RPA) can't work on every bunny that has color. I asked Jeff about the two Holographic Bunnies and he responded that they're treated differently (only the weapons on the cards harm them). I also asked Jeff about Metal coins. His response was that if a card said discard a Metal card, that did not include having to discard Metal coins. Another Marek question was this: Me: Rules question: If a card refers to metal cards (like Olympic Winner), is it allowed to use a coin instead? Jeff: Yes, of course. :0) So, a player can choose to use Metal Coins, but if a card instructs a player to discard a Metal card, he is only required to discard the Metal Card and not Metal coins. Anyway, unless you've had some other conversations with Jeff about Unique bunnies (or I'm missing some recent communication threads; it's possible. I've been traveling a lot lately), I think the QCC needs to err on the conservative, literal reads.
|
|
