I'll start by setting up the scenario-
Player 1- Plays the "Play All" which is a new rule card, then plays a new Goal card and then plays the 2 Keepers needed for this Goal to win the game.
Can another player play the "Veto" surprise card that discards any new rule played after Player 1 has won??
I'm asking this because on the "Veto" card it says "Discard a new rule another player has just played, thus preventing it from ever taking effect"
Does this mean-
The veto must be played straight after the "Play All" card is played?
Or can it be played at any point/even towards the end of Player 1's turn stopping him from ever playing the "Play All" card? also what would happen to the Goal and 2 Keeper cards that were played? do they go back to player 1's hand or do they get discarded?
The veto must be played straight after the "Play All" card is played.
That said, if I am playing with a group of fFriends, and someone realizes they meant to play something like this a moment ago, I'll probably let them play it. Like say if I played my cards down very quickly and the other person was distracted getting a drink or talking to other people.
But I'm a nice person like that.
I would agree that the Surprise player should have a reasonable amount of time to play the Surprise. What's reasonable kind of depends on the group and the circumstances, though.
What counts as a reasonable amount of time? In my case the second player realised that player one had won the game and then decided they wanted to play the Surprise card to cancel out the winning moves(which a lot of players would play on, saying that they missed some ones moves or they were distracted)
I think having to play it straight away would stop any arguments but also means that players have to take a gamble when using surprise cards, whereas being able to play it towards the end of a players turn can add a little spice to the game and makes it harder for players to win, Thanks for the speedy replies everyone, they are much appreciated.
The key distinction is "enough time" vs. "considering the result." There is no reasonable interpretation of the rules (IMHO) that means you get to say, "Oh, you won? Well, I'm going to play this card to retroactively cancel a card you played several plays ago to rewind your win."
The "enough time" distinction comes to prevent someone from doing "PlayPlayPlay, Ha, I win, you didn't play your Surprise in time." There shouldn't have to be a race to play the Surprise before the other player plays his next card. Imagine you were playing with the rule that after every play, you stop to ask everyone, "Are you playing a Surprise?" That doesn't work in practice because it would slow the game down too much, but that's the standard I would apply. Would they have played the Surprise if you had stopped the game and asked them at the appropriate time? If they had enough time to react to the card they're cancelling, and they didn't, they lose that ability. If you played quickly and didn't give them enough time to react, then they should have an opportunity to react. Even if you gave them additional information by playing too quickly and then saying, "I win."
The "it depends on circumstances" part comes into play because different groups have different standards for how much someone should be paying attention. In Scott's group, "I was talking and wasn't paying attention" might be a valid excuse. It probably wouldn't fly if you were playing a tournament or something. Depending on where you are on that spectrum, you might bear some responsibility to (subtly) bring everyone's attention back to the game before you play your combination that lets you win. Then you can honestly say, "You saw me play it and didn't stop it, and now it's too late."
In my gaming group, we typically require that the Veto be played right after the Play All card.