Re: Was it a cat I saw? Was it a rat I saw? New idea (feel free to tell me I'm crazy and this sucks, or any other comments/suggestions/etc.)

by The Founder at 2006-06-27 18:49:34

Thanks for the reply Jeff.

Yeah, the whole "imbuing" thing is what I'm most worried about wording right, hence wanting to make sure it actually works "properly." Since that paragraph is the one that has both problems, replace it with (underlined parts are the changed portion):

Players may select Rat as a target for non-attack commands (such as Spell Shield, Empathy, etc.). Any effects that would normally occur (other than cooling down) do not occur at that time, and instead Rat becomes imbued with that command (Rat may be imbued with the same command multiple times). At any time, if a player has caused Rat to be imbued with a command, that player may release the command by selecting a new target for the command, where the target must have been a legal choice if the unit to which the command was issued occupied the same square as Rat. Doing so causes the command to be carried out as if the unit that originally targeted Rat had targeted the chosen target instead, and the instance of imbuing associated with that command to end (this may leave other instances of that command, whether placed by the same or a different player, imbuing Rat). If Rat is removed from the board (subsequently causing another Rat to be created), all imbued commands are removed.

And, expanding on the example with a little more clarification:

Eg: Rat is on Square 5, and is targeted by Spell Shield from a Monk on Square 4, causing Rat to be imbued with Spell Shield (Rat may be targeted because it is adjacent to the Monk). Even though nothing is (immediately) enchanted with Spell Shield (Rat is only imbued), the Monk immediately begins cooling down. Rat later moves to Square 17, and the player who issued the Spell Shield command chooses to release that instance of Spell Shield, targeting a Warrior on Square 24 (the Warrior is a legal target to release Spell Shield "onto" because it is adjacent to Rat, ie: it would have been a legal target if the original Monk were on Square 17 because the Monk and Warrior would be adjacent). That instance of Spell Shield ends (no longer imbuing Rat), and the Warrior is now enchanted by Spell Shield as if the Monk to which the command was originally issued had just been issued the command, targeting that Warrior.

Does that help clarify the issues? Anything else I'm not clear on/possibly missing?