Council of Elrond

The Old Thrush says that it can only be plaed on attacks with a normal prowess of 13 or more. What about maia attacks? They have a printed prowess value of >=13 but if they attack a hero company, they are -3? Is the thrush now playable or not? I guess I dont have to tell you I am talking about a Fallen Alatar deck.
Thanks!

Although it's only indirectly related, I found this while searching in the digests:

11. Can I actually play The Old Thrush on a 17-prowess Traitor?
*** Yes, I think your interpretation is correct. [Normal: 'as written on the card'; Card says: his+10; so you have an attack of 13+ prowess to play the Old Thrush on]

Since the -3 against hero companies is written on the card, seems like maias wouldnt have enough prowess to be affected by Old Thrush.

tee-hee. Watching that game right now and Fallen Alatar killed Saruman creature. Best hunt ever seen!

Manuel wrote: 11. Can I actually play The Old Thrush on a 17-prowess Traitor?
*** Yes, I think your interpretation is correct. [Normal: 'as written on the card'; Card says: his+10; so you have an attack of 13+ prowess to play the Old Thrush on]

I dont think this is a related topic. A traitor is a permanentevent creating an attack and thus does not have a printed prowess value in the bottom left corner. A maia is such a card. And I guess that makes a big difference. I still - desperately - need an answer to this question!

Since the -3 against hero companies is written on the card, seems like maias wouldnt have enough prowess to be affected by Old Thrush.

As far as i know, Manuel's words are right.

domse wrote:

Manuel wrote: 11. Can I actually play The Old Thrush on a 17-prowess Traitor?
*** Yes, I think your interpretation is correct. [Normal: 'as written on the card'; Card says: his+10; so you have an attack of 13+ prowess to play the Old Thrush on]

I dont think this is a related topic. A traitor is a permanentevent creating an attack and thus does not have a printed prowess value in the bottom left corner. A maia is such a card. And I guess that makes a big difference. I still - desperately - need an answer to this question!

I think that it is absolutely related.

CRF, Errata (Cards), Traitor wrote:Card Erratum: Replace the last paragraph with "This card is discarded when a character fails his corruption check." Two Traitors have no extra effect and are both
discarded with the next failed corruption check. Traitor cannot be revealed as an onguard card. This is an attack with the same race as the character attacking, and a normal prowess of ten plus the character's prowess. Characters facing a Traitor when it is not their turn may not play resources, but may still tap for full prowess.

CRF, Rulings by Term, Normal wrote:Normal means as written on the card, not considering other card's effects. Note that this definition only applies to effects refering to card texts.

Underlines mine.