Limited site use for FW companies?

Errata issued by the CoE, open discussion of candidate rules for errata, and submissions for the Annual Rules Vote.
Post Reply
User avatar
Shapeshifter
Council Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by Shapeshifter » Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am

CRF, Rulings by Term, Fallen-wizard wrote:If any version of a site is in play or in your discard pile, you may not play another version of that site.
Strictly reading of this CRF would mean that you - as a Fallen Wizard - may not move to your opponent's current site with any of your companies. Thus making any CvCC, riddling games or influencing attempts on characters, allies and items impossible. This cannot be intended.

My suggestion is to add the words "by you" to the current CRF entry.
suggested change wrote:If any version of a site is in play by you or in your discard pile, you may not play another version of that site.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2070
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by Konrad Klar » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:26 am

I agree with the proposal.
Shapeshifter wrote:Strictly reading of this CRF would mean that you - as a Fallen Wizard - may not move to your opponent's current site with any of your companies.
According to current text of CRF rule a FW companies can move to opponent's site as long they are using the same version of the site as version already in play.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Shapeshifter
Council Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by Shapeshifter » Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:31 pm

This is probably better english:
suggested change wrote:If you have any version of a site in play or in your discard pile, you may not play another version of that site.

CCG Collector
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 5:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by CCG Collector » Wed Jun 27, 2018 3:33 am

I know I'm fairly late to this discussion, but with a rule like that, what's the purpose of the lost challenge deck P - Fallen Alatar - having two different versions of both Isengard and The White Towers? I'm not very familiar with Fallen-Wizard rules, so maybe it's something simple I've overlooked, but is it just to have to option to pick between one or the other depending on the situation in the game?
Middle Earth and other CCG unboxings, booster openings, and guides: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheCCGCollector

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2654
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Jun 27, 2018 5:21 am

So long as a site is not in the discard pile, being able to choose which version you go to can be profitable, depending on the deck (I had one which used Carambor to keep on visiting different versions of the Lossadan Cairn to play/store Palantiri and also play the Wolves).
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
the Jabberwock
Council Chairman
Posts: 894
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by the Jabberwock » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:14 pm

Shapeshifter wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
CRF, Rulings by Term, Fallen-wizard wrote:If any version of a site is in play or in your discard pile, you may not play another version of that site.
Strictly reading of this CRF would mean that you - as a Fallen Wizard - may not move to your opponent's current site with any of your companies. Thus making any CvCC, riddling games or influencing attempts on characters, allies and items impossible. This cannot be intended.

My suggestion is to add the words "by you" to the current CRF entry.
suggested change wrote:If any version of a site is in play by you or in your discard pile, you may not play another version of that site.
Is there any reason this was not submitted for the 2018 ARV?

User avatar
Shapeshifter
Council Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by Shapeshifter » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:04 am

the Jabberwock wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:14 pm
Is there any reason this was not submitted for the 2018 ARV?
No, I simply forgot about that.

User avatar
the Jabberwock
Council Chairman
Posts: 894
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Limited site use for FW companies?

Post by the Jabberwock » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:46 pm

Shapeshifter wrote:
Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:04 am
the Jabberwock wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:14 pm
Is there any reason this was not submitted for the 2018 ARV?
No, I simply forgot about that.
Ok cool, thanks. I was just curious if something had changed which discouraged the submission.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules & Errata”