Search found 279 matches

by Theo
Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:27 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: New to the game and have some questions.
Replies: 131
Views: 5124

Re: New to the game and have some questions.

But Marvel's Told is not worded "Tap a sage to play this card to force the discard," but just "Tap a sage to force the discard..." as an apparent effect of the card. Effects aren't implemented until the card is played, so following the literal grammar and book rules Marvel's Told is indeed played to...
by Theo
Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:08 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

As a side note: I am not arguing for how the card was intended to be played, merely how it would be played based on the text it currently has. A far more straightforward solution than several pages of argument would be to simply add "Playable on a sorcery-using character" to the beginning of the ca...
by Theo
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:56 pm
Forum: 2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Non-minion agents as creatures
Replies: 2
Views: 45

Re: Non-minion agents as creatures

Sounds good to me. Updating original.
by Theo
Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:48 am
Forum: 2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Non-minion agents as creatures
Replies: 2
Views: 45

Non-minion agents as creatures

Currently: The following count as 1/2 a creature for deck construction: hazards that can be played as creatures or events, At Home Dragon manifestations, Ahunt Dragon manifestations, and agents. Note that agents count as characters in Ringwraith decks, not as 1/2 creatures. I think the generality of...
by Theo
Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:18 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: New to the game and have some questions.
Replies: 131
Views: 5124

Re: New to the game and have some questions.

But you wouldn't know this from the wording on the card alone, just by poring over the tomes of rules (particularly the ones about Active Conditions).
by Theo
Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:10 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

I guess we have nothing more to discuss, then. I think you are missing the dots. The CRF clarification for Old Friendship would be uninterpretable if there was no Diplomat target. I suppose you'd say that my opponent controlling a Ranger would let me play Many Turns and Doublings to cancel an attack...
by Theo
Sat Jan 12, 2019 5:28 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

Having a character with the proper skill is, by rule, an active condition for the play of a card. By rule, active conditions are not actions. Therefore, card play does not target the character with the skill, as targets can only exist when there is an action. I would think the play of the card (by ...
by Theo
Sat Jan 12, 2019 5:13 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

Cancels an attack against a company. One unwounded character of your choice in the company is wounded (no body check is required). 'Over the bridge!' cried Gandalf, recalling his strength. 'Fly! This is a foe beyond any of you. I must hold the narrow way. Fly!'-LotRII If text would be "Cancels an a...
by Theo
Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:33 pm
Forum: 2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)
Replies: 18
Views: 208

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

I realized I was conflating multiple definitions of "resolve", as well as "before". To your point, I wasn't remembering that here "before an" actually implies "before any", and furthermore "before any begin to resolve" (last chance is resource player declaring their intent to begin resolving). I''m ...
by Theo
Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:48 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

• A hero resource may not target an Orc or Troll character (e.g., Orc and Troll characters may not use Block, Escape, etc.). • A hero resource that requires a character with a specific skill may not use an Orc or Troll character to fulfill that requirement (e.g., Concealment, Many Turns and Doublin...
by Theo
Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:43 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

I confess to being mystified as to which quote I'm supposed to be looking at. At no point do the rules say you have to declare which Diplomat you are using for Old Friendship. Sorry, "(Foo) only" cards can only be played by characters with the (foo) skill. combined with the CRF quote you gave earli...
by Theo
Sat Jan 12, 2019 1:25 am
Forum: 2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)
Replies: 18
Views: 208

Re: Creatures played as an automatic-attack (playabilty conditions)

So (in your opinion) it is impossible to reveal the Fool of Froth and Rage placed as on-guard when a company enters The Under-grottos, because at the point no AA at this site is Spider or Animal attack? Full of Froth and Rage does not have any targets, so it can be revealed (when affecting an autom...
by Theo
Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:05 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

Old Friendship was declared to be played by Frodo. I find no indication anywhere that this happens or is even necessary. The CRF quote above doesn't work for you? How would it make sense for the character playing a card to change part way through the play of the card? Just because you have a friend...
by Theo
Thu Jan 10, 2019 8:34 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Govern the Storms
Replies: 47
Views: 443

Re: Govern the Storms

I like this example for illustrating the problem. "(Foo) only" cards can only be played by characters with the (foo) skill. Old Friendship was declared to be played by Frodo. It can't resolve if Frodo is not in play to resolve it (even if it did, there is no longer a company-of-Frodo to be able to c...
by Theo
Thu Jan 10, 2019 8:11 pm
Forum: 2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Sable Shield (clarification)
Replies: 10
Views: 101

Re: Sable Shield (clarification)

I would say first part of CRF is meant as a clarification, albeit a poorly worded one (should be, perhaps, "A bearer who chose to avoid being tapped when facing the strike still does not tap from having faced the strike."). I don't think it is intended to prevent tapping due to successful detainment...

Go to advanced search