Few questions:

Where the Virtual Boyz plan their latest capers
Locked
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Few questions arose from last night's game with Vastor:

1. Does having more than one BH in a company travelling through a suitable region, increase the hand-size cumulatively for the rest of the turn?

2. Can one have 3 [v] BH and any number of normal BH (as per the normal version's ability to allow up to 9 in play deck/sb). GCCG seems to allow this.

3. Does a lone hero character with an inverted Usriev attack himself if there's no-one else in his company to attack? Can the owning player opt for the character with the Usriev to attack himself if there are other characters available?
User avatar
Nerdmeetsyou
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 6:30 pm

what cards are you excactly talking about?
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Jambo wrote:Few questions arose from last night's game with Vastor:

1. Does having more than one BH in a company travelling through a suitable region, increase the hand-size cumulatively for the rest of the turn?

2. Can one have 3 [v] BH and any number of normal BH (as per the normal version's ability to allow up to 9 in play deck/sb). GCCG seems to allow this.

3. Does a lone hero character with an inverted Usriev attack himself if there's no-one else in his company to attack? Can the owning player opt for the character with the Usriev to attack himself if there are other characters available?
in my oppinion:

1. Yes, just like hoarmurath, while the yellow face sleeps, etc
2. No, since the V version doesn't have the same ability as the vanilla version
3. No, because IIRC the character must attack other character in the company, if not, then we must edit that
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Regarding question 2, slightly different question but bordering on this issue: where in the rules does it say that normal rules do not apply to V cards with the same title but different ability? At least I didn't see any lines referring to this in the rules posted at the V card section of this forum. I had this discussion with Joe, because I said that according to rules now you can play up to 9 copies of Black Horse V. Or maybe there's a more complete version of rules around that I missed? He settled on 3 BH V and 9 copies of BH combined in total (so still 6 regular BH playable).

This must be dealt with, because there could be issues like: can a possible Black Enemy's Wrath V /Bane O Ithil be played against minion to effect? And also: Does Arwen still have +7DI against a possible Aragorn V? Can First of the Order still be played on Saruman V actually? etc.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Thorsten wrote:Regarding question 2, slightly different question but bordering on this issue: where in the rules does it say that normal rules do not apply to V cards with the same title but different ability? At least I didn't see any lines referring to this in the rules posted at the V card section of this forum. I had this discussion with Joe, because I said that according to rules now you can play up to 9 copies of Black Horse V. Or maybe there's a more complete version of rules around that I missed? He settled on 3 BH V and 9 copies of BH combined in total (so still 6 regular BH playable).
i remember Joe saying that he forgot to post that somewhere in the forum. Yes, that is something to think about, and can cause confusion. I interpret this like the "cannot be duplicated" or "unique" special V rule
Thorsten wrote:This must be dealt with, because there could be issues like: can a possible Black Enemy's Wrath V /Bane O Ithil be played against minion to effect?
yes, that restrictions apply only to vanilla cards
Thorsten the Traveller wrote:And also: Does Arwen still have +7DI against a possible Aragorn V? Can First of the Order still be played on Saruman V actually? etc.
as long as they are not "manifestations" of the vanilla cards, they can do that things. The rule is something like: "a manifestation of a card is not the card itself"

So if Aragorn V is not a "manifestation" of aragorn II but aragorn II himself, then arwen does have +7 DI. But if Aragorn V is a "manifestation of aragorn II" like strider, then no DI for arwen nor return of the king, etc...
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

My guess is that any card making reference to another in its card text will also encompass a virtual version.

The card text on the normal BH states you can have 9 versions of it in play deck/sb combined, so that's not going to change for any reason. The question is really whether the standard 3-card restriction is going to be applicable to the virtual BH when it's included in play deck/sb with normal BHs, and which would take the total number of BHs above 3.

Thorsten's correct - it will need to be clarified. My desire would be as Joe's stated - that a play deck/sb cannot ever have more than 3 of the virtual version, and never more than 9 (virtual and normal) in total (as per normal BH text). I.e. 3 virtual and 6 normal.
Last edited by Jambo on Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Jambo wrote: Thorsten's correct - it will need to be clarified. My desire would be as Joe's stated - that a play deck/sb cannot ever have more than 3 of the virtual version, and never more than 9 in total (as per normal BH text). I.e. 3 virtual and 6 normal.
agree
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Ok so if the card title is the same and it's no manifestation therefore, then rules apply. But mele rules write that Nazgul Abroad has no effect on a ringwraith player for example. What's the status of cards played from under Nazgul Abroad V then? Where does it say this only applies to vanilla cards like Marcos says?
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Thorsten the Traveller wrote:Ok so if the card title is the same and it's no manifestation therefore, then rules apply. But mele rules write that Nazgul Abroad has no effect on a ringwraith player for example. What's the status of cards played from under Nazgul Abroad V then? Where does it say this only applies to vanilla cards like Marcos says?
I believe that's different, since that's a crf entry relating to a specifc aspect of a card's effect. For example, the part of TNaA which allows Nazgul events to be recycled can be used against a minion player.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

I know, but there is no crf entry obviously about using Fury from under TNaA V against minions....it's not a given that TNaA would always work against minion as long as there's no nazgul-attack involved.

In the rules it does state that the restriction against minions is also made for thematic reasons. One could argue that it's strange is nazguls use the Fury of the Iron crown against other ringwraiths. For example.

the issue is, should V-cards be regarded as the same cards, or as different cards. If they're different, then there's no problem I guess, if they're not, then it should be specified in rules or on the card what the playing restrictions are or aren't any longer (like Black Enemy's Wrath V boosting earth hazards)
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
marcos
Council Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Thorsten the Traveller wrote:Ok so if the card title is the same and it's no manifestation therefore, then rules apply. But mele rules write that Nazgul Abroad has no effect on a ringwraith player for example. What's the status of cards played from under Nazgul Abroad V then? Where does it say this only applies to vanilla cards like Marcos says?
http://www.councilofelrond.org/forum/vi ... .php?t=572

take a look there
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Ex Council Chairman
Posts: 1764
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Ah, I guess Frodo should have done that indeed :wink:
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Frodo
Ex Council Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:09 am
Location: NYC, NY

Jambo's solution for Black Horse sounds perfect to me. It's a really odd card text that does not exactly fit into the global Virtual Card rules created. Btw, I will make a thread about Virtual Card Rulings in the regular (non development) forum, stickied.

But just to clarify a few of these:

Any card making reference to another card title in its text is considered to be referring to the virtual version as well.
--For example: Many Colored Robes can grab First of the Order (V) and First of the Order (original).
--Another example: They Ride Together (V) can grab Black Horse (V) and Black Horse (original).

Rulings on cards include only the original versions of those cards, unless a ruling mentions the virtual version (V).


Frodo
Locked

Return to “Development”