Ambiguous Wording on Revered Elder
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:04 pmSemi-bug, but mostly just a confusion/readability thing.
This came up when thinking about the Martyr topic I made in general, as someone here asked me if the Revered Elder countered the Martyr. I said that I didn't think so, but they assumed it did.
After looking at it some more, this is actually somewhat ambiguous given the current wording in-game.
Martyr says, "When martyr participates in combat ... Combat priority 1."
Revered Elder says, "Where revered elder is present, no specialists participate in combat ... Combat priority 2."
So, in strict combat priority, one would assume (correctly) that the Martyr triggers before the Revered Elder does. However, people in my game were confused by this because the Elder's description implies that enemy specialists don't get to participate in combat at all and therefore the Martyr's ability would not trigger.
I'm not sure if there is specifically a better way of wording this, but it might be worth considering to remove the ambiguity. (Perhaps something like, "When the revered elder participates in combat, no more specialists participate in combat unless both sides have a revered elder.")
This came up when thinking about the Martyr topic I made in general, as someone here asked me if the Revered Elder countered the Martyr. I said that I didn't think so, but they assumed it did.
After looking at it some more, this is actually somewhat ambiguous given the current wording in-game.
Martyr says, "When martyr participates in combat ... Combat priority 1."
Revered Elder says, "Where revered elder is present, no specialists participate in combat ... Combat priority 2."
So, in strict combat priority, one would assume (correctly) that the Martyr triggers before the Revered Elder does. However, people in my game were confused by this because the Elder's description implies that enemy specialists don't get to participate in combat at all and therefore the Martyr's ability would not trigger.
I'm not sure if there is specifically a better way of wording this, but it might be worth considering to remove the ambiguity. (Perhaps something like, "When the revered elder participates in combat, no more specialists participate in combat unless both sides have a revered elder.")