[Lunch Money] Backlash & Hippie ; Hippie & Defenses

How do Hippie and Backlash interact? We ran into this in our last game and we had a long discussion over the interaction of the two cards.

Three options:
(1) Backlash works on all of the attacks, reflecting the attacks back to the individual attackers during the "Hippie" round.

(2) Backlash works on all of the attacks, reflecting the attacks back to the player who played the Hippie card.

(3) Backlash only works on an individual attack within the "Hippie" round.

Also, when a Hippie is played, we couldn't decide whether the victim gets to allocate his defenses after ALL attacks have been played by all attackers, or whether the victim has to decide to defend against each particular attack as they are played by the individual attackers. Part of the confusion is caused by the fact that the "Faster" description specifically mentions Hippies, and it didn't make much sense to insist that the Faster (and accompanying Dodge/Block) had to be played at the outset, as it would seriously decrease the incentive to take advantage of the free Hippie attack (of course considerations would include whether a Block or Dodge was played with the Faster, as this would some attacks more desirable than others).

Thanks for any help you can offer.

my gang uses rule number three with the exception that it works on all attacks (not just one attack) from one of the players that you are defending against.

In other words if you are playing in a 4 girl group, and you are the hippie, and all other players attack you, and you have one backlash in your hand, once everyone lays down their attacks, you would choose which player to use backlash on, all of that players attacks would be turned back on that player, and the other two players attacks would get through unless separately defended against...


I would agree with Maveric on the backlash only counters one attacker. In the rules it states that:

To me the hippie card just allows for individual attacks from multiple people. There fore its not a combo and the Backlash is used against one individual attack.

I'm interested on how the developers would suggest to play cards after someone is designated a "Hippie." Does eveyone lay down their cards and then the Hippie chooses how to defend each one once she see's what is coming? Or is each card played one at a time and the hippie has to gamble on defending certain cards? The latter brings up the issue the OP stated. If you play your defense and then faster at the very beginning those who haven't played a card will use lesser cards cause they know they are going to get defended.

You mention one of the very terms that is giving my group trouble with Hippie vs. Backlash:

The Faster description states:
"This is especially effective against combos and multiple-attack cards like Tantrum and Hippie"

Backlash states:
"Backlash is played against a single card or combo. It causes the attacker to suffer the counter damage his or her attack(s) would have caused..."

The definition of Attack is "an attack occurs when a player uses a Basic Attack card, Weapon card, or Specialty card on another player in a direct attempt to cause counter loss. Some cards allow multiple attacks."

A Combo is "A sequence of cards..."

So, given the above, if a Hippie is a "multi-attack" card, as shown in the Faster definition, then it seems that it is also a combo, and Backlash works on Combos. Therefore Backlash, it seems, should work on ALL of the Hippie attacks.

I did note, however, that the rules state that "Block, Dodge, and Backlash are no use against Hippie". However, that doesn't necessarily rule out the damage from the Hippie being Backlashed.

Feel free to poke holes in my analysis. I'm not really advocating a position, I just want to understand the rules.

Rereading the rules, I have a related question:

I have seen previously in these forums where it was stated that the follow-up attack to a Poke In The Eye could not be Backlashed, because the description for Poke in the Eye states that the victim is helpless and cannot defend, and Backlash is a defense card.

The Sticks & Stones "Terminology" section defines a "Free Attack" as an attack against which a defense card is not permitted. By my reading, applying the reasoning above, this means that you cannot Backlash ANY "Free Attacks".

However, glancing through the rules for all three games (Lunch Money, S&S, and Beer Money), just about all of the combos are described using the terminology "Free ... Attack".

For example:

Grab says it permits "... one free Basic Attack or Weapon Card"
Uppercut2 says "... one free Basic Attack Card"
Powerplay says "any single, free Basic Attack card"
Poke in the Eye says "[the attacker] gets the first free shot"
Horror of Horrors says "1 free Basic Attack"
Distraction says "1 free attack that can't be defended against"

So, my question is, is the definition of "Free Attack" superfluous? Because if it means anything, it seems to me that Backlash won't work against ANY combo attacks, as I can't think of one that doesn't use the verbiage "free attack" in its description. This is in spite of the fact that Backlash specifically says that it works against a "single attack or combo".

Or is it only that Backlash cannot be used against attacks that say something to the effect of "cannot defend against" (e.g. Poke in the Eye, Humiliation)?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

This doesn't seem that confusing to me.

Hippie is not an "Attack", it's a specialty card that grants everyone an out-of-turn Attack at a target player. (This is why you can't Dodge, Block, or Backlash it).

The newly-dubbed Hippie can defend these attacks as normal which means he dodge one, block another, and backlash a third.

My two cents,

The issue isn't with the Hippie card. It's with the attacks that are played after the Hippie card is played. And the order in which cards should be played and defended.

The original-poster's query was with the Hippie card, so I guess my response was to that line of question and response.

But yes, I see that you asked a good question in regards to the order of the out-of-turn attacks that are granted.

There is a sample combat that shows that each Attack card is resolved seperately (as opposed to them all getting layed down at once). So based on that, a Faster works to defend you for the round when played against the first bonus attack, but you are not likely to see the other players waste a good attack card if they know you are Faster.

(An argument could be made that one could elect to not defend any of the attacks but the last one, and then play Faster+Dodge and it then defends against all the the attacks. But to me the usage of the phrase "for the duration of that turn" implies going forward from the point Faster was played.)


Here's how my group have decided to rule the Backlash card:

Bob: Plays Poke in the Eye on Carl
Carl: Can defend but Plays Backlash.
Bob: Takes the 1 point of damage but since Backlash just reveses damage done and not effects Bob can still play his basic attack on Carl since Carl is considered "Defenseless."

This goes for Uppercut² as well. Bob would take the 6 points of damage but can still use his basic attack on Carl. This comes from a previous clarification we got on the forums. [url]https://forum.atlas-games.com/t/lunch-money-questions-backlash-and-humiliation/1444/1]
Note: You can not Backlash a Humiliation.

A sneaky way to possibly play it but again I'm not sure on if its legal:

Bob: Plays Hippie on Carl
Bob: Kicks²
Carl: Dodges
Anne: Plate Cleaner
Carl: Does nothing
Joe: Beat down
Carl: Plays Faster nullifying Anne and Joe's attacks

We are still waiting on one of the developers to let us know the correct way to play after a Hippie is played.

For the reason mention in the earlier posting (2 or 3 responses up) I don't think this is legal given the wording on the card.

But hey, everyone can choose to play how they want.


My team have spent far too many hours developing a lengthy list of House Rules to equitably assist in discussions just like this. Here's how we handle it:

Because we often play in large groups, a Hippie can be devastating. To offer the Hippie a bit of a fighting chance (and make it just a bit more fun to watch), all attackers place their card(s) face down before the bloodletting begins. Attacks are then exposed one by one going clockwise.

This face-down process serves several purposes:
#1 It allows the Hippie to meter her defenses and plan how she might use whatever is in her hand to survive the onslaught of blows.
#2 It makes attacking the Hippie a WAGER for the attacker-- especially for those last in line. It becomes a wager because all cards laid down must be played. If the Hippie is knocked unconscious, those cards are summarily lost (unless, of course, they return to one's hand like a Weapon). EXAMPLE: if 6 people are going to be bashing the Hippie and you're last in line, you might NOT want to waste a 7-point SMITE, knowing that she's likely going to be pushing up daisies by the time you finally get a turn :wink:

You'll see how this becomes important when we discuss BACKLASH...

We play that BACKLASH affects but a single card. So if 5 people attack a Hippie and she has just one defense-- a BACKLASH-- 4/5 cards are gonna hit paydirt. OUCH.

But wait: there's hope!

We have expanded the use of the FASTER card, so that a skillful Hippie can play a FASTER+BACKLASH, deflecting each attack back at her would-be assailants (plural). Whatever you dished out, you receive.
Here we can see the importance of putting your attack card(s) face-down in front of you: committing to the act of Hippie aggression means you're held responsible if you fail. :wink: