Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Official Nate Rule Clarifications
Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:46 AM
Enemy attacks outside of combat phase.
Official Answer from Nate:
Shadow cards should be dealt during attacks made outside of the combat phase. The [rules, pg 18] reads, "when resolving enemy attacks, follow these four steps." The main issue I see with that interpretation is that it is conflating the resolution of an attack with the act itself, and making the jump to the conclusion that anything that does not happen during the resolution of an attack (such as the dealing of a Shadow card) is not a part of the attack.
The main reason that Shadow cards are dealt at the beginning of the combat phase is that they serve as a convenient means of portraying which enemies have yet to act when combat is being resolved. (If an enemy has a face down shadow card, it still needs to resolve its attack.) Of course, this breaks down when the encounter deck empties mid shadow phase, but in most cases it serves its purpose, particularly early in most players' games, when they are still learning the basic mechanics -- it amounts to one less "memory issue" and stumbling point in those early experiences.
That said, it is worth specifying that Shadow cards should be dealt for enemies that attack outside the combat phase, so thanks for bringing it up -- I'll put it on the FAQ list. And yes, if the game is "foolish" enough to launch an attack during staging and open up action windows, the players can take full advantage of those action windows as they see fit.
- jeffbirman and arthurclin like this
Posted 10 May 2012 - 08:57 PM
(If Elladan is the prisoner in EfDG, does Elrohir get +2? Is an attached facedown card to Eagles of the Misty Mountains still a character (-> Dreadful Gap)?)
Answer from Nate French:
Facedown cards retain no characteristics beyond those that are defined by the effect that turns them facedown.
- jeffbirman and arthurclin like this
Posted 10 May 2012 - 08:59 PM
Answer: Yes, progress can be placed on side A; if you advance to side B they are discarded. (Most side As advance automatically, but there are some where you might need to mark progress.)
- jeffbirman and arthurclin like this
Posted 16 June 2012 - 04:15 PM
- jeffbirman and arthurclin like this
Posted 18 June 2012 - 01:25 PM
An enemy attacks, shadow card is revealed, you play A Light in the Dark before attack resolution step, the enemy moves to the staging area but how about the damage?
Official Response from Nate:
Light in the Dark does not cancel or stop an attack that is already in the process of resolution. The only step in which it is mentioned the enemy needs to be engaged with the attacked player is step 1. So, in order to prevent an attack, Light in the Dark must be played on an engaged enemy prior to choosing to resolve its attack during step 1.
- arthurclin likes this
Posted 01 August 2012 - 10:13 PM
Re: Abandoned tools question Official Answer
Nate needed to discuss with the scenario designer, hence the delay. Here's the official answer:
If there is an active location, the progress from Abandoned Tools should go on the active location. The only time an active location does not act as a "buffer" for the quest is if the card specifically instructs you to "bypass the active location."
Even though I was arguing the potential for the other side, I'm glad it's come down this way. This answer is more specific than what they have in the FAQ and overcomes some ambiguity (which brought the debate about in the first place).
I think it also sets a precedent that the naming of a specific card doesn't create a Golden Rule card-over-rules override.
James, can you append " - Received an official answer" to the thread header. Thx.
- arthurclin likes this
Posted 02 August 2012 - 10:40 PM
With Heavy Stroke.. did the card mean to say "an attack that a dwarf participates in" or dose it mean the dmg the target dwarf makes IN an attack. Like if you have Aragorn and Dwalin attacking a 1 Defence Monster with 5 Health….
Arragon (3) + Dwalin (2) = 5 -1(Defence ) = 4 dmg + Heavy Stroke (double dmg) = 8 dmg Total
Or is it..
Aragorn (3) + Dwalin (2) = 5-1 Defence = 4 dmg + Heavy Stroke (Dwalin 2 -1 = 1 dmg doubled (2) ) = 6 Dmg total?
Thanks in advance
The way Heavy Stroke is intended to work depends on allowing players to choose which character's attack value is applied to the enemy's defense value. In your example, the optimal way to play Heavy Stroke would be to apply Aragorn's attack 3 to the enemy's 1 defense. So Aragorn is dealing 2 damage to the enemy and Dwalin is also dealing 2 damage, at which point you play Heavy Stroke to double Dwalin's damage and make it 4 for a total of 6 damage dealt to the enemy.
Just to clarify it further, let's say Aragorn and Dwalin were attacking an enemy with 4 defense. The optimal way to play Heavy Stroke would be to apply all 3 of Aragron's attack plus 1 of Dwalin's to beating the enemy's defensse, then Dwalin would deal 1 damage to the enemy that could be double with Heavy Stroke for a total of 2.
Hope that helps,
- arthurclin likes this
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:03 AM
In order for the Adder's ability to destroy a character to trigger, damage must actually be placed. If you use Frodo's ability to raise threat instead of taking damage from a Muck Adder, then the Adder has not actually damaged Frodo and it's ability will not trigger.
- arthurclin likes this
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:08 AM
I presume this means that O Elbereth Gilthoniel will not work on Durin's Bane (since putting DB on the bottom of the encounter deck would involve it "leaving the staging area"). This seems fair enough. However, the same reasoning suggests that Dark Pit will not work on Durin's Bane, as it "discards DB from play" (= "leaving the staging area). This would obviously be absurd as DP appears to be the way that the quest requires you to overcome Durin's Bane.
Durin's Bane cannot leave the staging area, so O Elbereth! Gilthonial! will not send it to the bottom of the encounter deck. This does create a problem with the text on Dark Pit. That card will receive an erratum in the next FAQ to explain that its ability supersedes the game text on Durin's Bane, making it possible for players to defeat the scenario the way it was intended. In the meantime, please play the scenario as if the last line of Dark Pit reads "This effect supersedes the game text on Durin's Bane."
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:20 AM
The card Miruvor is an attachment that is played on a hero. I can play it on another player's hero and that player then controls (but doesn't own) the card.
When that player triggers the "Action:" on the card he may select 2 of the listed effects. One of the effects that can be selected reads:
"put Miruvor on the top of your deck"
My question is, does that player then:
A: indeed put it on the top of his deck (the controller)
B: put it on the top of my deck (the owner)
A support for option B is that the rules (p.25) talk about control and ownership and says that "when a card leaves play, it reverts to its owner's hand, deck or discard pile". A support for option A is that this is covered by the golden rule and the card clearly tells the person activating the card to put it on the top of his deck which contradicts the rulebook.
When resolving Miruvor's ability, the Golden Rule will supersede the Ownership rule. For example, if Player A attaches Miruvor to Player B's hero and Player B chooses the option "put Miruvor on the top of your deck" then Player B player will put Miruvor on top of his deck.
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:38 AM
Imagine a scenario where the defender Leaves Play in the Action Phase after shadow effect resolution in step 3 and before the combat resolution in step 4. The shadow effect is +1 if defended, +3 if undefended. Does:
a: The Shadow Effect resolve in it's entirety in 6.2.3, therefore the enemy's Attack Strength (AS) is given +1 because it's defended at the time the Shadow Effect is resolved. That new AS is what is carried over to step 4 of combat. We then determine that it's undefended, so the new AS (ie the enemy's original AS + 1) gets applied to a Hero. OR
b: Because defended vs undefended isn't determined until start of Step 4, and Shadow Cards aren't discarded until end of phase, the entire Shadow Effect stays attached with the enemy and gets resolved in Step 4, now undefended, resulting in AS+3 (ie the enemy's original AS, and then add 3) being applied to a Hero. Or
c: Same as b, but resulting in damage being applied to a Hero equal to AS+4 (ie original enemy's AS, +1 got added to it during shadow effect resolution when it was defended, and then +3 got added in step 4 because it's now undefended).
Item (a) is correct. The Shadow effect resolves in step 3, modifying the enemy's ATTK at that time.
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:41 AM
Question Submitted by "Booored" @ FFG:
Landroval's ability, is it limited once a game per player? Or is it limited to once a game per-card? As in if you run 3 cards, can you use that ability 3 times, one for each card.
Also, if 2 players use Landroval, then can both players can activate their Landroval cards separately? I know you can only have 1 on the table at a time, but does the "once per game" thing cover ALL players or only the player that controls the card. Lastly, we know that going into your hand dose not reset the "once per game" rule, but dose playing the card form your gravyard also not reset the ability? Thanks as always for giving us a defiant answer.
Limits are player specific, each player can reach the limit.
"Per game" limits are not card specific, they refer to any copy of the effect under that player's control. If you have reached the "per game" limit, you cannot trigger that effect again, with another copy of the card in your deck, a copy of the card you gained control of from another player, or from the same card that has left play and re-entered the game.
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:49 AM
Pelennor Fields says "If the players have crossed the Anduin, Pelennor Fields gains: "When faced with the option to travel, the players must either travel to Pelennor Fields or raise each players threat by 3."
When we crossed the Anduin there were two Pelennor Fields in the staging area.
Now when there is no active location we have the option to travel there.
2.1) If we decide not to travel to Pelennor Fields should we increase our thread by six?
2.2) If we decide to travel to one of the Pelennor Fields should we increase our thread by three for the one we didn't travel to?
If a card is self-referential, it refers only to that copy of itself. If multiple copies are in play, and you travel to one, the other would resolve. If you travel to neither, they both resolve once, for themselves.
A card that refers to other copies of itself will use language to the effect of "any copy of..." or "another copy of..." or "a card with the Title..." In the absence of such a term, if a card refers to its own title in the text it should be read as self-referential, and only self-referential.
Confirming it's 6 and 3.
Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:59 AM
1. If a hero is attached to a Nameless Thing at game end, is it counted as "dead" for scoring purposes?
2. When players are separated on stage 4, does each player count as both first and last player?
3. When players are separated on stage 4, do uniqueness rules still apply? (eg can both players play Steward of Gondor, because you act as if "only the player(s) that share any given staging area are currently present in the game"?)
4. When players are separated on stage 4, presumably if one player controls Elrohir and another controls Elladan, they lose their bonuses for the same reason?
5. If a player is eliminated while separated on stage 4, what happens to encounter cards i n his staging area/engaged with him?
6. Is a hero shuffled into deck by Lost and Alone considered to be "dead" for scoring purposes, or for the purpose of eliminating a player if that is his last hero?
1. Once a hero is dead, it counts as dead for scoring unless a card effect brings it back into play as a hero card. If a hero becomes attached to a Nameless Thing, it has not been brought back into play as a hero.
2. Yes. You are considered to be the only player in the game while you are at your own separate stage 4.
3. Technically, you could make an argument that they do not apply. However, the intention of the rules was directed at resolving encounter cards and player card interaction (i.e. playing an event to heal my partner's characters); it was not meant to circumvent the uniqueness rule. Furthermore, once players are rejoined it creates a problem with multiple copies of unique characters in play (or thematically the idea of Faramir being in 2 places at once), so I would rule the uniqueness rule does still apply, and I will see about updating the FAQ to include this clarification.
4. When I update the FAQ it will probably state that while separated players ignore other player cards "except for uniqueness" meaning that Elladan and Elrohir would lose their boosts until rejoined.
5. If a player is eliminated at stage 4, that staging area is eliminated as well. The encounter cards would simply be discarded.
6. A hero shuffled back into the deck is not dead unless the effect that shuffled him in the deck says he is dead. If that was your last hero in play, however, you would be eliminated from the game at that time.
1. When separated on stage 4 in multi-player, as you say each player counts as first and last player. But would you still pass the first player token back and forth in the refresh phase, even though this will have no in-game effect until the players are reunited?
2. I am a little unclear about your answers to my questions (1) and (6) - is a hero considered to be dead once he has been reshuffled into the deck, or not?
3. A separate question - the situation where Forest Snare has been attached to a Nameless Thing as a result of the action on Nameless Thing. I can't see any reason why the effect of Forest Snare ("Attached enemy cannot attack") would not apply in this situation. However, this seems a little silly. I suspect that what is needed is a ruling that cards attached to Nameless Thing by its effect are treated as if they are blank for all other purposes apart from their printed cost.
1. You still pass the first player token. The rules specifically address this point.
2. Under the heading "Hit Points and Damage" the rulebook explains that hero cards in the discard pile are not shuffled back into the deck or returned to hand by card effects, unless they specifically target hero cards in the discard pile. So, once a hero has been killed, it is considered dead until you play a card that specifically returns that hero to play.
3. I like this question a lot because I think it's the beauty of card games when something unintended and fortuitous like this happens. There is absolutely no reason why a Nameless Thing that attaches a Forest Snare to itself should ignore the text on that Forest Snare. In other words, if you top-deck a Forest Snare with the Nameless Thing's text, then it cannot attack. I would laugh out loud in a game where that happened!
I think we got our wires crossed regarding my question (2) - my questions are:
A: a hero who has been shuffled into the deck by Lost and Alone - is he considered "dead" for scoring purposes if he is still in the deck at game end? (I think your answer is "no")
B: a hero who has been shuffled into the deck by Lost and Alone and has then become attached to a Nameless Thing, and is still attached to a NT at game end - is he "dead" for scoring purposes? (again, I think your answer is "no")
Also, regarding the Forest Snare situation - I understand your ruling, but doesn't this open up a number of potential even weirder situations. For instance, if Gleowine has become attached to a Nameless Thing, what rule stops me from exhausting Gleowine to draw a card? He is in play, and I still control him…
Caleb's answers to these:
A & B - I think we understand each other now.
The difference between Forest Snare and Gleowine is that the Forest Snare is an Attachment. When attached to a legal target, it applies its text. Because Gleowine is an Ally, you can only use his ability when he is in play, in front of you. Obviously, if a Feint is attached to Nameless Thing, you can't pay 1 and discard it to prevent the Nameless Thing from attacking you. Nor can you exhaust Gleowine to draw a card. But the Forest Snare is different: because there is no way of distinguishing a Forest Snare that you played on a Nameless Thing versus one that was top-decked by it's Forced effect it has to work this way.
Posted 17 September 2012 - 03:21 PM
Yes, Dori can exhaust himself to take damage that would be assigned to Beorn. Dori's response targets the damage and not Beorn, so Beorn's immunity to player card effects is not a factor in this event.
Posted 17 September 2012 - 03:29 PM
Can cards such as Power in the Earth, Ancient Mathom, or Path of Need (or any other card that needs to attach to a location to trigger) attach to such locations and have their effect trigger?
You can play attachments on locations that are immune to player card effects. If a card cannot have attachments, then it will read "Cannot have attachments." However, cards that are immune to player card effects will be immune to the abilities of attachments. So you can play Power in the Earth on the Troll Cave, but it will have no effect on that location. Card like Ancient Mathom and Path of Need work differently because they don't affect the location, so their abilities will still work.
This ruling has changed in FAQ 1.5:
Q: Can I play an attachment on an enemy or location
that is immune to player card effects.
A: No. Playing an attachment on a card is a form
of targeting, and cards with "immune to player card
effects" cannot be targeted by player cards.
Posted 17 September 2012 - 03:36 PM
The standard framework of the game provides players with the opportunity to declare 1 attack against each enemy each round. Effects that enable attacks are in addition to the effects enabled by the game framework, so a quick-strike attack does not "eliminate" the standard attack that the game is enabling that round.
- Tragic likes this