5 replies to this topic

[sammann11]

A question about Gorgul Da Slaya and AoE:

 

Gorgul's text reads:
Interrupt: When a unit you control at this planet is declared as an attacker, your opponent cannot trigger effects until after that attack resolves.

 

Mordian Hellhound:
Area Effect(1)

 

If I attack with the Hellhound, trigger Gorgul, and use the Area Effect, the attack will never resolve per the etheral/gun drone ruling.

 

This would mean that my "opponent cannot trigger effects" for the remainder of the game: No card effects means no events, and no effects on attachments, units and supports. This would be crippling to my opponent as he basically has units with stats to attack and absorb damage....and that's about it

 

In this case  Is there anything in the rules that would stop Gorgul's effect?

[steinerp]

Best Answer

Under the current rulings and printing you are correct that Gorgul's ability would last until the end of the game.  

 

There is however a second error on the card that solves the AoE problem, but it effectively eliminates his ability entirely. Players trigger abilities, not effects, so technically, not being able to trigger "effects" really doesn't stop your opponent from doing anything.

 

Until we get a final FAQ (if we get one), my suggestion is to institute "house rules" and assume his text is "Interrupt: When a unit you control at this planet is declared as an attacker, your opponent cannot trigger abilities until after that attack ends."

 

(Note: heavy parts of this answer have been plagiarized from conversation with ktom on the subject)

[sammann11]

Interesting.....if ktom and steinerp say it is so then I accept it!

[ianj]

Hey

I'm not familiar to the ethereal/gun drone ruling? So hard for me to review your conclusions and the answer you already got.

But referring to the RRG page 3, Area Effect (X), last sentence:

"After the Area Effect ability has resolved, the attack is over."

 

Which in my understanding means, that the attack has been resolved?

[ktom]

Hi ianj,

 

From a common-sense point of view, you are exactly correct. When the AoE ability resolves and the attack ends, the attack would also be "resolved." But that's not the ruling that FFG made.

 

FFG has effective said that when the AoE ability resolves and the attack ends, the attack itself does not count as having been "resolved." This is because the AoE ability replaces the declaration of a defender and resolution of the attack. Effectively, "resolve attack" is defined as dealing the attacking unit's ATK to the defending unit as damage - if that doesn't happen, the attack technically does not resolve (although it does "end").

 

So, FFG made a distinction between "ending" an attack (which happens whether you use AoE or not) and "resolving" an attack (which does not happen with AoE), even though most people would tend to treat them as synonymous. The practical upshot is that there is no "resolution" of an AoE attack (although there is "resolution" of the AoE ability, and an "end" to the attack).

 

People call it the "ethereal/gun drone ruling" because attaching Gun Drones on an Ethereal unit and bypassing the "return to HQ when attack resolves" Forced Reaction on the unit by using the AoE keyword is the most common application of the rule. Interestingly enough, though, the ruling was made based on a question about the card "Rok Bombardment," which is when everyone found out they had been playing the ethereal/gun drones situation incorrectly for about 6 months.

[ktom]

Interesting.....if ktom and steinerp say it is so then I accept it!

 

Well, it's more of a "how technical do you want to get" thing.

 

If I were playing against someone who used a Gorgul/AoE combo to say that I couldn't trigger anything for the rest of the game, I would counter that I couldn't trigger "effects," but was free to trigger all the card "abilities" that I wanted. But if we followed this logic, Gorgul wouldn't even do anything during the attack that served as the triggering condition.

 

Point is, the OP is entirely correct that there is a technicality in the text that allows for an "over-powered" combo with AoE - but there is also a "counter technicality" which takes the teeth out of Gorgul entirely. Players can go back-and-forth on which technicality controls if they want. IMO, the cleaner solution is to not lean on technicalities at all, and to "self-errata" the card to make sense. But if people want to lean on one technicality or another with this card, that's up to them. It's just that the usual "play it as written" approach doesn't really work here.