Crash or Pass?

Last night's game came up with a situation that I think I ruled right, but I want to be 100% positive.

Player One(P1) had made a straightawaythrough a prism, and their lazer was still on the table active.

Player Two(P2) was coming torward P1's lazer with the intent to pass through the prism.

P2 want's to use a piece(If memory serves they were entering/leaving the crystal at a 30 degree angle abouts) that would have them come in contact with P1's lazer, through the prism, then in contact with P1's lazer again.

This would have resulted in P2 resulting in a crash before ever coming within contact with the prism, correct?

P2 said that it should have been fine since they were passing through a prism, but if they didn't crash going in, they would have crashed going out...

Scoring a prism always happens before a crash. They are two separate events, evaluated individually.
In this case, as long as the piece passing through the prism did so in a manner that legally scored the prism, they do score, and they do crash.

EDIT: My apologies, I believe I am working off of an old version of the rulebook. That is currently definitely a crash.

EDIT2: As per @dpt, this is going to be errata'd to be Score, then Crash =]

According to earlier posts, that's an errata in the rulebook, and your first answer was correct, @RySmith6.

Edited for clarity. Thanks for the backup, @dpt! Having played it at cons, the "Score, then Crash" was one of my key points of strategy, so I had just assumed that was still the final product rulings. I'm glad to know that is still the case.

Score then crash has the problem of a prism on your track and no one else's, that belongs to another player.

I understand the value of making it easier to take prisms, but in my games that just extends game time and makes for pretty frequent win-crash endings, which I don't like.  I also don't like how easy it is to get ficused on fighting for the same prism instead of going for unclaimed ones, which also extends the game.

People get into a vengeance mode where they just take prisms and crash because they can, and it is easier than trying to win, and you get a push toward a screw-over gameplay that crash -> score doesn't allow.


None of it is gamebreaking, it just allows for styles of play that extend game time, are less skill based and often lower the fun by a good bit.

Personally this sounds like a player-personality scenario as opposed to an inherent encouragement from the game. Similarly, when my group plays Munchkin, we will not curse or add wandering monsters, etc. until someone is about to win(same in Catan). Those games don't make a clear advantage to this style of vindictive play, but it's what we end up doing anyway. The score-then-crash works just fine for my play group, as one person does generally try to play defense, but everyone else often goes for unclaimed prisms.
TL;DR, Score -> Crash encourages players to take a risk and attempt curves and whatnot to score prisms that might be under contention, whereas Crash -> Score encourages a measureably more cautious playstyle that ensures players stay away from each other unless absolutely necessary.


But what if they are hitting the enemy's lazer firs before they even touch a prism? Shouldn't they not score at all since they'd crash before getting it?

The entire piece would be evaluated at once for scoring, and then the entire piece would be evaluated for crashing. There is no sense of "hiting something first", although that would be a fine house rule if you want to implement that.

I'd probably house rule that in since it just doesn't make sense that someone who just crashed should then get a prism like that.

Travelling faster than the speed of light does all kinds of wierd stuff.


It isn't just personality, when you can crash, but first take one of someone's prisms you prevent them from winning, and it is significantly harder to line up a clean capture through a prism than it is to just make sure you capture before crashing.

It makes winning less of a skill than a "win when stopping others from winning has made others unable to stop you", which is how munchkin ends up playing out if people care about winning, the skill is more of a gamble on when to try, which takes a quick and fun dexterity game and makes winning a less dexterity challenge and more of a strategic timing challenge, that can be largely reproduced with luck.

I enjoy Munchkin and Kill Dr. Lucky, but I don't want that gameplay in a fun dexterity game.

Thinking about it, here is a better statement of my opposition to score then crash.

When it is just as easy to steal a prism as it is to capture one first, the game becomes less of a race and more of a hold the points game.  It isn't about who gets thete first, it is about who controls it last.

If me getting there first means you have to do something awesome to take it away, that feels like a race, the reward is there for whoever gets there first, or for whoever can pull off some really fancy flying.  When 2 players are racing to the same prism, 1 gets there first and the second just takes it and crashes, the game is rewarding the person who got there last, not who got there first.

I don't like that at all.  Because the game's theme is a race, not capture and defend.

I'm totally with Skippy here.

Stealing a claimed prism should be more difficult than capturing a neutral one, requiring fitness rather than smashing into it any old how.

I'm going by what was suggested in an earlier thread as my house rule: you follow the course of the laser, scoring or crashing in order.