In my mind immediately end your turn means you skip the rest of it it doesn't take you at the end of turn phase but if I'm wrong that means I always played mist-fuelled recovery wrong as I thought it prevented you to use the star shield necklace that turn.
It means to go to your end of turn phase.
Yes, the official meaning of Skip the rest of your turn is "Go directly to your end of turn phase."
It sounds like the playtest should have turned up that that particular card was not nearly verbose enough in how it tells you to use it.
For my purposes, it'll be draw one card unless you choose to skip power and play, and things that end your turn will still push you into exiting your turn (triggering your start of turn cards in the process). Not sure I'll change that even in light of an "official ruling".
The problem for playtesters is those definitions have been known in the forums for a long time now. Us playtesters see those wordings and largely know what they mean, and how to use them, so there really isn't a lot of confusion, and when there is confusion usually someone knows the answer, or eventually Christopher smoke bombs in and gives us a ruling.
Mini-Expansions play around with the rules a lot more than regular decks, and Guise and Wager-Master much more than others. They weren't very easy to balance and they aren't clean cut when it comes to having them be easy to pick up, read cards and understand the nuances of rule interactions.
Also from eveything we've seen I'd say following official rulings and playing "the right way" isn't a big priority of the game's creators. So go play and have fun. We can give you rulings and arguments about them, but your group your game your rules. Wager Master is intentionally Fiddly and game-breaking. That is the whole schtick behind the deck, so don't be too worried about it.
Yeah, for me the issue with that paticular card is playing it in a way that makes it feel like it's reversing our turns, as opposed to way that makes it feel like a gigantic rules artifact. Oddly, Fixed Point from Time Cataclysm does not trigger the same feelings in me :)
I'm certainly not married to playing games "the right way" myself, but usually in Sentinels the "feels right to me" lines up well with "officially the right way". :) I think right now Ambuscade is the only one I don't play by the rules.
And thats totally ok! A lot of people on the forums house rule things they do not like and tweak things to make things fit better for their own purposes.
We spend a lot of time on the forums trying to figure out exactly how cards are intented to work so we can work out official answers. For me, I am a strong proponent of playing games as they were designed and intended and spend a lot of my forum time debating rulings and opinions until we tease out official answers or come to popular consensus on how things are supposed to work. It's helpful for other gamers who share my sensibilities on that front, but don't feel pressured to use official rulings if you feel theres a better solution for your group.
immediately end your turn brings you to the end of turn phase. Skip the rest of your turn skips everything, bringing it to the next turn's start of turn.
Edit: Fixed some typos, because I cannot type on tiny keyboards for the life of me.
Honestly, I usually draw 1, but that's just because I hadn't ever thought about it.
Reading the exact wording of the rules, I would be inclined to say that the extra card draw would prohibit you from playing or using a power. It says, "if the hero DOES NOT play a card nor use a power..." not, "if the hero HAS NOT played a card nor used a power..."
So, by my interpretation at least, getting the extra card draw would commit you to not playing or using a power. But, then again, the name of the card is Breaking the Rules. So... whatever. However you want to do it. Roll a bluff check.
Have you used a power? No? Have you played a card? No? Then draw two cards.
If the rulebook were written that way, sure. But with "If you neither play a card nor use a power, you may draw two cards instead of one", I'm perfectly content to look backwards in the power phase and the play phase, and say you're locked in by your earlier choice.
If it said "if you didn't draw a card or use a power", I'd be content the other way.
Certainly not open-and-shut, and I'm influenced by my desire to not have the card feel overly mechanical, vs. thematic.
So wait, what's the consenus here? Draw two cards at the draw phase, provided you have not used a power or played a card? In the case of Master Wager's card, I would say you wouldn't be able to do either after the "draw a card" phase, since you've decided to do neither. I can see how people would argue the other way, but it seems fairer to stop at two and call it a turn.
By the way, even outside of Wager Master's deck, I can see a scenario in which there would cause confusion.
Guise-Blatant Reference
Captain Cosmic-Dynamic Siphon on Legacy
Legacy decides to not use a power or draw a card. During his draw phase, he draws two. At the end of his turn, Guise uses Blatant Reference to deal the Dynamic Siphon, enabling Legacy to use a power. Would he be allowed to? It would be after the power and draw phase, just in time before their turn would end.
Yes, that Guise/Legacy example seems to have the exact same issue, so however you answer one, your other answer should be similar.
Personally, I'm in the camp of "Yes, you can draw 2" (and Legacy in your example could use a power).
I think the concensus is "it doesn't really matter, do what you want."
…which is fine for tabletop. If Wager-Master ever comes to the App, a definitive answer will be needed.
Fixed it for you.
So right now I'm going with "if you can somehow use powers after the power/play phase and decide to draw 2, you can if you want."
Unless official word says otherwise, that's what I'll go with.