Tyx + Mayfair Hamshanks vs. Pinned Down + Pinned Down

Rules Questions: Doomtown
1

In this thread, it’s ruled that, if Hamshanks has a Mayfair deck (and is thus a Huckster), while unbooted in the same location as Tyx, then:

Both say you can’t choose X if you can choose Y legally instead. Which would make both illegal targets, which turns off both traits in regards to Action cards, as Tyx only protects against action cards.
When they go to use an ability from elsewhere, it must effect Hamshanks if able.

Makes sense to me; the two create a condition where neither is able to legally be the target, so neither of their traits are active, and it’s the wild west.

If I take that same train of thought, and apply it to two different targets pinned down in a shootout:

Shootout: Choose a dude. They must be selected as the first casualty. If that dude is chosen as the shooter, they get –3 bullets (minimum 0).

I would think that neither can be true (with respect to the first casualty), so neither is in effect, similar to this. But the ruling from the compendium is:

If multiple effects have been played that claim the first casualty, the player selecting that
casualty can select which applies. Once that first casualty has been chosen, any other
effects currently in play that require a dude to be selected as the first casualty are ignored.

Just want to reconcile this. The biggest difference I see between Ham + Tyx and PD + PD is the “if you can choose Y legally instead”… but that’s pretty much an implicit given on every card effect, right? It’s just stated explicitly because it makes contextual sense for those cards?

Would the ruling be different if PD was worded:

Shootout: Choose a dude. They must be selected as the first casualty if legally able to. If that dude is chosen as the shooter, they get –3 bullets (minimum 0).

1 Like
2

The question will be answered in a way to provide a current ruling for Weird West Edition for the use of multiple Point Blanks and/or Black Owl.

“If multiple effects have been played that claim the first casualty, the player selecting that
casualty can select which applies. Once that first casualty has been chosen, any other
effects currently in play that require a dude to be selected as the first casualty are ignored.”

This ruling in the compendium remains the current ruling.

Regarding logistics on why this is different from the Hamshanks/Tyx ruling:

If Pinned Down or Black Owl were perhaps worded as “You cannot choose other dudes than this one as first casualty” than we would have a similar scenario to the Hamshanks/Tyx wording.
In this case, we are referencing who is taken as the first casualty; you’re not prevented from using either Pinned Downs played, and once you’ve used one, you’re no longer choosing a first casualty.

‘First casualty’ is something you try to do if you can. There can be situations, like with Pinned Down + Takin’ Cover where the dude can’t be a casualty. That doesn’t mean you can’t choose any first casualty at all, just that that dude can’t be it.

If Hamshanks, Tyxarglenak, or any similar card is printed in future PBE Doomtown expansions, the rulings will be kept in mind and addressed on the cards.

1 Like