Council of Elrond

Are Nazgûl automatic-attacks detainment?

Whether or not a Nazgûl attack counts as detainment can be determined by referencing the Council of Elrond official game rules:

3.II.4 A Nazgûl attack against a minion company is detainment, unless the attack is an automatic-attack (in which case the Nazgûl attacks normally).

However, some players might wonder why this was determined to be the case, given that the Lidless Eye rulebook states the following:

“Detainment Attacks”
Any Nazgûl attack against a minion company is a detainment attack.

The answer can be found in the Lidless Eye Companion (printed by ICE), which provides the following clarification:

Detainment Attacks (clarification)—Automatic-attacks are not detainment attacks unless specifically stated on the site card.

This important clarification is the basis for Rule 3.II.4, and the reason why Nazgûl automatic-attacks are not treated as detainment in Council of Elrond tournament play.

Detainment Attacks (clarification)—Automatic-attacks are not detainment attacks unless specifically stated on the site card.

True, normal AA of Ruined Signal Tower is not detainment, but cannot become detainment in result of effect of Ungoliant's Progeny?

Ungoliant's Progeny wrote:Unique. Spawn. The Wind-deeps and The Rusted-deeps each have an additional automatic-attack: Spawn — 2 strikes with 16/8 prowess/body. In addition, for each Spider attack your opponent faces, you can choose for it to be at +1 prowess and detainment.

Surely, it sometimes can work in opposite direction. All the Bells Ringing does it, for instance.

I do not know what doubt the Lidless Eye Companion tried to address. But I have seen on tournaments some players who were mixing AA at with attack keyed to ; the latter is detainment if against minion companies.

Think about minion company at hero The Under-leas as rescue site (provided by opponent).

Thank you for your contributions.

The RC will consider whether anything needs to change in the digest and post a final version soon.