I‘dlike too see anyone having ten or more copies of the same haven in play, but anyway it’s technically thinkable...

It is not an easy task. :shock: That was my first thinking... It’s really a charming idea but I’m not sure if the hard work will lead to a better tournament format in the end. The are some scenarios which are very unlikely to find a thematically fitting variant with 3 difficulty levels. Good luck a...

Long time ago we had initiated the format to integrate new players on the one side and give experienced players new challenges on the other side. DC brings in additional complexity which also Hero vs. Minion does, so I would rather vote against those changes as general rules. But I could imagine to ...

I'm more in favor of clarifying these problem cards individually. I support this view: many Short Events are precise in their duration (either due to ist effect or its text), so we should fix (erratum) or clarify those cards (like those mentioned here in the thread) on an individual basis. Although...

Hi Guys,

as no one was discussing this further, and there are a lot of submissions this year, I withdraw all of them.
May be I will make a house rule of that, but under current circumstances we have a lot of ARV with higher impact to the game.
Cheers.

Darksatin wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:49 am He seems to be an Half-elf :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%A4rendil

Argh, totally, correct! I have corrected my statement above.
As far as I remember, he was allowed to stay at the Undying Lands only because he did not sail to Valor for his own sake but to save all Men and Elves.

I like that very much, thematically.
Still I believe it's really hard to achieve, even if you place all items under the warrior at your last turn.

I would state that the warrior should be either Man or Elf, as Earendil was a Half-Elf.

Hi, as far as I remember, no one ever tried this scenario. We played Minion very limited (as mentioned elsewhere), but that were other scenarios. Although I do not like the idea of changing cards (apart from official errata), in this case I agree to have an exempt to it. Even if you give +2 in Bag E...

Would it be more clear to change it in the following way:

Diplomat only, or Scout only if played with the alternative option.

Just to make it even more precise what is required for which option.

The argument made in the reference topic is that River only “potentially” forces a company to do nothing. So you could play that on-guard if the company contains an untapped ranger (because then - and only then - it would be possible to tap a ranger to prevent the effect of doing nothing in the sit...

Hi All, although previously SotM has been played as a permanent-event without granting Marshalling Points, Theo’s arguments in conjunction with the ruling in the ME:BA booklet are quite convincing. Also, as SotM is mentioned as Spawn, ICE had likely this card in mind while writing the Balrog rules. ...

May be we should clarify this for Thrall & Open to ensure both are played this way.
I know it is ‚normal‘ game mechanics but as both cards are more often used the wrong way (in the same way like ACM / WhctK) it should be clearly mentioned.

To get this discussion back to the final wordings of the errata/clarification we should close the debate on Framsburg and the Wild Fell-beast and split that up into another ARV, which I posted here: https://councilofelrond.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=3792. So we can focus on, how "norma...

Regarding the automatic attacks the hero site of Framsburg reads as follows: ... It must normally be playable keyed to a Ruins & Lairs [-me_rl-], Shadow-hold [-me_sh-], single Wilderness [-me_wi-], or Shadow-land [-me_sl-]. As it was discussed if a Wild Fell Beast could be played as such AA, but...

My opinion is that the second is the more correct parsing, but why the "single" word appears then is mysterious. May be it’s an mistake by ICE: the just had all those double wilderness (even triple once) in mind and wanted to exclude those from being played. The just oversaw that the Fell...