It looks like some people feel that the fact that this card allows the gaining of a minor item upon splitting a company AND leaving the site is too strong.
I don't see it as too strong, but I also don't see any other way to word it without running into language problems. It was an intentional ability of the card. Unless I missed something, here's my reasoning why it can't be worded differently:
1) It has to at least say "when leaving the site", because otherwise you can't use it with another player's Galadriel or Arwen.
2) It also has to say "when splitting from a company," because otherwise the female character may have split off from the site and done her m/h phase already, and then the next company leaving the site will get no minor item.
Do others really see the ability as too strong? Perhaps I'm missing the obvious.
Frodo
Cup of Farewell -revisted
-
Bandobras Took
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 3111
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm
I don't see it as too strong; there are two characters for whom this is an issue: Galadriel and Arwen. Considering that you have to keep leaving them to benefit from the effects, you're looking at a Galadriel-squat deck or an Arwen-squat deck, which means your main company is likely returning to a haven every other turn or taking up deck space with Great Road.
I'm not sure if it's too powerful or not necessarily, but it just seems strange, that's all. Moreover the fact it's causing as much confusion as it is would suggest we should perhaps think of better wording for the card.Frodo wrote:1) It has to at least say "when leaving the site", because otherwise you can't use it with another player's Galadriel or Arwen.
2) It also has to say "when splitting from a company," because otherwise the female character may have split off from the site and done her m/h phase already, and then the next company leaving the site will get no minor item.
Personally, I really don't seem the problem with just having first option. If you're splitting characters from Arwen and/or Galadriel, is it too much to ensure that you move the non-Arwen, non-Galadriel company first (if the latter is moving)? It would seem strange for them to be giving the gifts when they're the ones departing anyway...
-
Bandobras Took
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 3111
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Sometimes the timing of getting the item is crucial; limiting Cup to only when a company leaves the site means that one can no longer get the minor items in the organization phase because you don't leave the site until the start of the m/h phase. This would mean that I can't bring in untappers for extra sideboarding (or rather that it would have to wait for a full turn after Cup's use, etc.). The card will still be useful, but it won't be quite as strong.
-
Nerdmeetsyou
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 6:30 pm
yeah... why not make it limited for each company once each turn???
For example:
Bold are my changes. Bold or would remain on the card. Wouldn't this solve the issue?Cup of Farewell wrote:Whenever a hero company splits off from and leaves a company with a female character or leaves the same site as any player’s Galadriel or Arwen, the resource player may choose for that female character to tap (Galadriel or Arwen do not tap) and place a minor item from his discard pile or sideboard with a character in the leaving company.
“Splits from and leaves” is redundant, isn’t it? Since you leave a company” as soon as you split from it? However, that’s easily enough solved with this version.
>Whenever a hero company leaves a company with a female character (or leaves the same site as opponent’s Galadriel or Arwen), the resource player may choose for that female character to tap (Galadriel or Arwen do not tap) and place a minor item from his discard pile or sideboard with a character in the leaving company.
The problem with either of these versions, though, is that it still eliminates the option of playing the minor item before you move away, and so there’s less options in terms of what Bandobras said.
What it comes down to is this: Is the current version so difficult to understand that the above version would be a noticeable improvement AND such enhanced understanding would compensate for the loss in game usefulness?
Or, was it understandable enough, but we don’t like the multiple items per turn? As Boder said, we need to merely add “once per turn” to the card.
Thoughts?
Frodo
>Whenever a hero company leaves a company with a female character (or leaves the same site as opponent’s Galadriel or Arwen), the resource player may choose for that female character to tap (Galadriel or Arwen do not tap) and place a minor item from his discard pile or sideboard with a character in the leaving company.
The problem with either of these versions, though, is that it still eliminates the option of playing the minor item before you move away, and so there’s less options in terms of what Bandobras said.
What it comes down to is this: Is the current version so difficult to understand that the above version would be a noticeable improvement AND such enhanced understanding would compensate for the loss in game usefulness?
Or, was it understandable enough, but we don’t like the multiple items per turn? As Boder said, we need to merely add “once per turn” to the card.
Thoughts?
Frodo
I'd be happy with either of those versions Joe. I just didn't like the 2 per turn as it created confusion and smacked of a loophole. Most wouldn't be aware of this possibility and it would probably be viewed as contentious in games (I know I raised an eyebrow! ). It reminds me of the ability to reorder company composition after Sneakin's played.
So let's just be done with it. If we do it by "one per turn" or limit it to "leaving" only, I have no preference. Suggest the version you prefer and I'll add it to the card corrections thread.
). It reminds me of the ability to reorder company composition after Sneakin's played. So let's just be done with it. If we do it by "one per turn" or limit it to "leaving" only, I have no preference. Suggest the version you prefer and I'll add it to the card corrections thread.
Oh boy, now my head is doing somersaults. Somebody, help!
Problem 1: I realized there's NO WAY to add "once per turn" to the current text (to allow items during splits) without STILL leaving the ambiguity--once per turn would still mean both effects could be used once per turn! IF we added something really specific and limiting, like 'this card's effects can only be used once per turn", then we have another problem: this would mean multiple companies leaving a site/company could not benefit from receiving gifts.
Problem 2: What I wrote in response to Jambo was correct but then I didn't follow my own advice. If there is such a thing as "leaving a company", it must mean the same thing as "splitting off from", and therefore is an org phase activity. We can't leave it worded like that, because then the "or" construction cannot be construed to mean EITHER THIS OR THAT, because we are talking about two actions that occur in different phases! So the above text would have to be reworded to say something like
>Whenever a hero company leaves a site with a female character (or leaves the same site as opponent’s Galadriel or Arwen),
but this isn't good enough either, because that would mean you could use it on any female character of opponent's... sigh... i keep trying to insert the word "your" into the above construction, and maybe my head is just tired, but I really can't see a way to do it!
Hmm, how about:
>Whenever a hero company leaves a site with one of its players female characters...
But man oh man, does that sound bad!
Can anyone think of a way to say this?
Otherwise, I am tempted to put a clarification in reminding players that 'splitting off from' and 'leaving a site' are two different things.
Frodo
Problem 1: I realized there's NO WAY to add "once per turn" to the current text (to allow items during splits) without STILL leaving the ambiguity--once per turn would still mean both effects could be used once per turn! IF we added something really specific and limiting, like 'this card's effects can only be used once per turn", then we have another problem: this would mean multiple companies leaving a site/company could not benefit from receiving gifts.
Problem 2: What I wrote in response to Jambo was correct but then I didn't follow my own advice. If there is such a thing as "leaving a company", it must mean the same thing as "splitting off from", and therefore is an org phase activity. We can't leave it worded like that, because then the "or" construction cannot be construed to mean EITHER THIS OR THAT, because we are talking about two actions that occur in different phases! So the above text would have to be reworded to say something like
>Whenever a hero company leaves a site with a female character (or leaves the same site as opponent’s Galadriel or Arwen),
but this isn't good enough either, because that would mean you could use it on any female character of opponent's... sigh... i keep trying to insert the word "your" into the above construction, and maybe my head is just tired, but I really can't see a way to do it!
Hmm, how about:
>Whenever a hero company leaves a site with one of its players female characters...
But man oh man, does that sound bad!
Can anyone think of a way to say this?
Otherwise, I am tempted to put a clarification in reminding players that 'splitting off from' and 'leaving a site' are two different things.
Frodo
-
Nerdmeetsyou
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 6:30 pm
why not add once per turn for each company???
Solution:
Cup of Farewell wrote:Whenever a hero company splits from a company with a female character (not Galadriel or Arwen) or leaves the same site as any player’s Galadriel or Arwen, the resource player may choose for that female character to tap (Galadriel or Arwen do not tap) and place a minor item from his discard pile or sideboard with a character in the leaving company.