I wouldn't make a deck based only on magic-dueling since I don't consider it to be a really viable strategy as such, but were I playing Hero I would certainly use it against Fw in the manner described by Jambo above. It doesn't even matter much if the bonus to the roll is smaller, a close game in th...

A creature "played at" a site is the same as being "keyed to" the site. A creature "played at a site in" a region is the same as being "keyed to" the site by name. And nothing about creatures played "in region". Angmar Arises says about creatures ke...

I must make a clarification to my original statement, just in case. You key the Wild Fell Best to the site path, but you must still spesify the regions a creature is keyed to as well. But note that a sitepath of [-me_sl-] [-me_sl-] [-me_sl-] requires you to only say you key WFB to [-me_sl-] [-me_sl-...

Of course its legal. If you have used the correct text then 'Some' is actually plural. Ehh. The correct version is "a region", not "some region". I'm sure I have read an ICE example stating this is legal. And I'm sure I have never read such a thing... Unless you can tell us wher...

Do Fallen Wizards use Vanishment to initiate Magic Duels with other FWs or is Shameful Deeds used for that purpose? (Or both). I'm waiting for Mark to rule on this, but I believe that the phrase "Wizard only" now means "Only Wizards, not fallen-wizards." At any rate, that's the ...

First of all I think the quote from LDR should say "a region" instead of "some region" (the card says "a region" and GCCG "some region" but there is no errata like that about LDR). Second, I don't get the idea that a creature requiring [-me_sl-] [-me_sl-] to b...

Well I finally read through all the VCs and this thread. Nice ideas! :mrgreen: Some thoughts: Faction battles At first Alliance of Free Peoples and Grond seemed really broken to me, but I’m quite happy with the changes talked about in this thread. Regardless... (1) Should not both players have the c...

Konrad Klar wrote:Should not be effect of Nature's Revange canceled? It causes such a violation.

Indeed, good catch.

Would it make sense to think of agents as sort of "hazard companies"? Naturally they can't combine with a player's normal companies, and thus those companies could not share a non-haven site. And since you get to have multiple havens, it's just simpler to give the agent its own site card. ...

I'm propose we let the previous ruling stand.

Otherwise "playable on a non-automatic-attack" is simply duplication of general rule. Hounds of Sauron is afaik the only card which has this problem. Knowing how poor the wordings can be at times, I wouldn't put too much value on Hounds of Sauron vs. rules. After the initial shock of havi...

"The other type of company"? What does that mean...? I guess the reference is to Adunaphel the RW's special ability? Makes sense..... What what? :shock: "The other type of company" to me simply means there are two types of companies, "one" and the "other" (rw...

Anyone?

OfL merely let's you have an additional leader in the company (since normally you may have only one), and that leader must be a troll. Imho normal company composition rules like trolls vs. elves or trolls vs. Rw should still apply.

I agree with Chad, no need to make an actual rule modification over this. The wording on some cards needs a bit or "interpreting" (like Morgul-horse) as far as the rules go, but I'd say most people play them in the way they were intented anyway so it's not a big problem. A card ruling woul...