I’m resurrecting this old response to ask a question. This ruling came in response to Zephyr’s question about memory: He [quote=“Zephyr, post:621, topic:146”]
Readiness 1 attack per turn details
If unit gains and loses Readiness how exactly 1 attack per turn limit works. How does this effect “memory” work. In particular are those sequences legal:
A) Gain readiness, attack, lose readiness, attack
B1) No readiness, attack, ready by some effect, gain readiness, attack
B2) No readiness, attack, ready by some effect, gain readiness, attack, Lose readiness, Attack
C1) Gain readiness, attack, lose readiness, gain readiness, attack
C2) Gain readiness, attack, lose readiness, gain readiness, attack, lose readiness, Attack
D1) Gain readiness, attack, lose readiness, attack, ready by some effect, attack, ready by some effect, gain readiness, attack, lose readiness, attack
It seems to me that the answer wants to preserve what’s good about Readiness (you can attack and then still patrol) and prevent all the crazy scenarios. However, I find it pretty counter-intuitive because it means gaining Readiness is actually a bad thing in certain situations, and that losing it is good because it lets you attack again (rather than patrol).
I think this ruling is weird because it means that if a unit attacks, is readied, gains readiness - it cannot attack again. So, assume I have a Stewardess, I attack with her, ready her with Ready or Not and then I want to use Manufactured Truth to make her into an Argonaut so that she can attack again but also patrol. I would be able to attack with her again but not after she gained Readiness. I find that weird - Readiness is a huge liability here, for no apparent reason. It’s also thematically weird because the Argonaut can’t do his thing, that is attacking and also defending, because the Stewardess attacked beforehand (without readiness, not enjoying that benefit). I also think allowing this is not too crazy - to pull this kind of stunt you have to ready your unit after it attacked somehow, which is costly and there aren’t many ways to do it repeatedly. So it seems to me wrong that the current ruling doesn’t allow it.
I think I would have ruled it ‘a unit that has attacked with readiness can’t attack again this turn’. To me that would make more sense and it would allow the previous scenario I just described. What it would rule out, which the current ruling seems to allow, is the stint that Jaidel cleverly pulled on me in a game recently: attacking with Brave Knight, then using Manufactured Truth to copy something else such that he would lose Readiness and then attack again.
Both rulings are reasonable. I am only raising this question because it seemed to me that both of them rule out all the other scenarios other than A, and was wondering if this particular corner was ever explored.