Page 1 of 1
Wizard's Ring
Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2016 6:44 pm
by Khamul the Easterling
CRF says:
Card Erratum: Replace "Ignore any effect that would discard this item" with "Cannot be stored,
stolen, or transferred."
Yet, technically, 'stolen' doesn't seem to be defined. One could assume that "Thief" can steal items, but Thief's text is
.. For each successful strike, an item held by the defending company must be discarded (...)...
So, if a company with Wizard's ring is successfully attacked by a thief, a Wizard's ring can be discarded, right?
Otherwise, what is meant by stolen?
Re: Wizard's Ring
Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2016 8:43 pm
by Mordakai
I think this card was errated because ignorign any effect that discards effectively avoids the possibility of corrupting the wizard, because, if the wizard gets corrupted (discarded or eliminated from play) the ring should be discarded.
By this errata the idea is avoiding the wizard getting rid of the ring by any means (wich should be storing it, transferring it to other character or being discarded by any other card mechanic, wich, in the moment it was faqed, i think only Thief and Burglar existed).
I would say no, thief cannot force the Wizard's Ring to be discarded.
Re: Wizard's Ring
Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2016 9:53 pm
by Konrad Klar
There are two occurrences of word "steal" in rules.
MELE wrote:Company vs. Company Combat - When one player is a Ringwraith and his opponent is a Wizard (see Using MELE with METW), combat can occur between companies (see Company vs. Company Combat). After such a combat, if your opponent's company has only wounded characters you may attempt to "steal an item." To steal an item, you must tap a character in your company that was involved in the combat. Then, you can force your opponent to discard an item of your choice in his company that was involved in the combat. Finally, if you have a manifestation of the discarded item in your hand, you may play it with the character you just tapped.
Neither rules, nor cards make difference between discarding of item according to Thief, Brigands, Were-Worm, Drowning Seas.
Re: Wizard's Ring
Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 7:44 pm
by Khamul the Easterling
Mordakai wrote:....
By this errata the idea is avoiding the wizard getting rid of the ring by any means ...
I agree that the intention of the erratum was as you say. But intentions are not acceptable as interpretation of rulings. There are many examples where intentions were probably different from the way cards can be played legally (Paths of the Dead, Sneakin' , ...) I need some more convincing reason to accept that a successful strike from Thief cannot lead to a Wizard's Ring being discarded
