Jump to content



Photo

New player still unclear about duplicates


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#21 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,582 posts

Posted 30 May 2011 - 08:07 AM

Serazu said:

What about characters that come out of Shadows, then? Can they trigger LDC? I guess not, since they are not probably considered "played".

Exactly.



#22 Serazu

Serazu

    Member

  • Members
  • 332 posts

Posted 30 May 2011 - 08:19 AM

Thanks again to all of you.



#23 Drew Tuzson

Drew Tuzson

    Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 05:17 AM

 so this is a stupid question but if i have a duplicate character on the field and he has 4 power counters on the original card and then dies do the counters stay in play on the duplicate or do they go with the original card?



#24 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,769 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 05:29 AM

Drew Tuzson said:

so this is a stupid question but if i have a duplicate character on the field and he has 4 power counters on the original card and then dies do the counters stay in play on the duplicate or do they go with the original card?
Um, you have this backwards...

If you have unique character A in play with duplicate B on it, when character A dies, you discard duplicate B in order to save the character. The original card never leaves play - the duplicate does. And since it was saved, it never leaves play -- and was never actually killed -- in any way. So power, attachments, etc. stay because the character never left play, leaving you no reason to do anything to it.

Consider this: there is a character versions and an attachment version of Grey Wind. Let's say you play the character and dupe it with the attachment (completely legal - playing dupes from your hand only looks for a matching card title, not card type). If using dupes meant killing the original and leaving the duplicate in play, what would you do when the original character left play, leaving the attachment version?

So keep that in mind: using a dupe to save the original character makes the card you used as the dupe leave play, not the card you played originally.

 

 



#25 Drew Tuzson

Drew Tuzson

    Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 05:38 AM

 ok that makes more sense.  thank you.  just to clarify, it is legal to play a dupe as long as the card title is the same.  you still have to pay the gold cost as well correct?



#26 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,769 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 06:34 AM

Drew Tuzson said:

 ok that makes more sense.  thank you.  just to clarify, it is legal to play a dupe as long as the card title is the same.  you still have to pay the gold cost as well correct?
Um... what? Gold cost? You seem kind of mixed up here.

Here's the whole thing, bullet pointed, in review. It more or less paraphrases the rule book:

  1. These rules for playing dupes only apply to unique cards (ones with a black flag symbol before the title).
  2. You must have a unique card in play that you own and control.
  3. You must have a copy of the same unique card -- as determined by title -- in your hand.
  4. When it is your turn in Marshaling, you may attach the copy in your hand to the copy already in play. This is considered "playing a dupe" and doesn't cost you any gold.
  5. If that card would be killed, discarded, returned to hand, returned to deck, returned to Shadows or otherwise removed from play, you may discard the dupe to save the original copy.
  6. The duplicate does, and pretty much means, nothing else beyond this "save" function.
  7. Since the original copy is "saved," whatever effect tried to remove it from play is considered to never have been successful. The original copy thus never leaves play to being with.

I'm not sure I can explain dupes any more clearly than that.



#27 Drew Tuzson

Drew Tuzson

    Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 07:05 AM

 that is the clarity i have needed!  thank you!



#28 Bonus Card

Bonus Card

    Member

  • Members
  • 145 posts

Posted 22 August 2011 - 08:07 PM

ktom said:

Drew Tuzson said:

 ok that makes more sense.  thank you.  just to clarify, it is legal to play a dupe as long as the card title is the same.  you still have to pay the gold cost as well correct?

Um... what? Gold cost? You seem kind of mixed up here.

 

Here's the whole thing, bullet pointed, in review. It more or less paraphrases the rule book:

  1. These rules for playing dupes only apply to unique cards (ones with a black flag symbol before the title).
  2. You must have a unique card in play that you own and control.
  3. You must have a copy of the same unique card -- as determined by title -- in your hand.
  4. When it is your turn in Marshaling, you may attach the copy in your hand to the copy already in play. This is considered "playing a dupe" and doesn't cost you any gold.
  5. If that card would be killed, discarded, returned to hand, returned to deck, returned to Shadows or otherwise removed from play, you may discard the dupe to save the original copy.
  6. The duplicate does, and pretty much means, nothing else beyond this "save" function.
  7. Since the original copy is "saved," whatever effect tried to remove it from play is considered to never have been successful. The original copy thus never leaves play to being with.

I'm not sure I can explain dupes any more clearly than that.

 

My question is about dupes that voluntarily return to shadows. Especially the new Jaqen. If he is returned to shadows in a way that is not within his game text, then what happens to his "stolen" identity. For example if the shadows baratheon ashaii card was to turn him back into shadows, would the "stolen" character identity just go back into its owners dead pile? Also if shadows cards have attachments would the attachments go into their owners dead/discard piles? I hope thats clear enough, my guess is yes to both questions.



#29 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,582 posts

Posted 22 August 2011 - 08:21 PM

The "stolen identity" attaches to Jaqen as a duplicate. Normal duplicate rules apply. If Jaqen is discarded by Sister of Truth, the dupe goes to its owners discard pile.



#30 davidlian

davidlian

    Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 22 August 2011 - 09:13 PM

 OKay, have another question to this thread.

Do duplicates count as attachments when counting attachments for things like "The Prince who was promised" or "Flame-kissed"?



#31 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,582 posts

Posted 22 August 2011 - 09:17 PM

Duplicates do not count as attachments; it's in the FAQ.



#32 thorin_81

thorin_81

    Member

  • Members
  • 112 posts

Posted 22 August 2011 - 09:22 PM

davidlian said:

 

 OKay, have another question to this thread.

Do duplicates count as attachments when counting attachments for things like "The Prince who was promised" or "Flame-kissed"?

 

 

No, duplicates are not attachments (even the duplicate of an attachment isn't an attachment). Attachments are a different type of card.

 

Now I have a question too:

Lt's say I steal a unique character with one or more duplicate on it and then my opponent declares against me (and win) a military challenge. I decide to kill that unique character. If I understand correctly I can decide not to save the character from being killed, because duplicate gives the ability to save to the character, that now I control, so I can kill him and don't activate the saving response.

Is this right?



#33 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,582 posts

Posted 22 August 2011 - 09:32 PM

thorin_81 said:

 

Now I have a question too:

Lt's say I steal a unique character with one or more duplicate on it and then my opponent declares against me (and win) a military challenge. I decide to kill that unique character. If I understand correctly I can decide not to save the character from being killed, because duplicate gives the ability to save to the character, that now I control, so I can kill him and don't activate the saving response.

Is this right?

That's correct. The ability to save a character with a duplicate is a gained Response: of the character (see FAQ). Because it's a Response, it's optional, and because it is a gained ability of the character, the controller of the character would decide if he wants to trigger it or not.

Compare this to the following example: Let's say you take control of a Stark character that has Nymeria attached to it. You can decide to kill the character for MIL claim, but as the attachment has not changed control, your opponent gets to decide if he wants to trigger Nymeria's ability to save the character.



#34 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,769 posts

Posted 23 August 2011 - 02:03 AM

Ratatoskr said:

That's correct. The ability to save a character with a duplicate is a gained Response: of the character (see FAQ). Because it's a Response, it's optional, and because it is a gained ability of the character, the controller of the character would decide if he wants to trigger it or not.

Compare this to the following example: Let's say you take control of a Stark character that has Nymeria attached to it. You can decide to kill the character for MIL claim, but as the attachment has not changed control, your opponent gets to decide if he wants to trigger Nymeria's ability to save the character.

Keep in mind that this explanation only works for duplicated uniques that you take control of because you also gain control of the duplicates themselves (it's in the FAQ). Discarding the dupe is a cost of the save, and you cannot pay costs with cards you do not control. So even though you control the character's "gained Response," if you didn't also control the dupe, you couldn't pay the cost of that save.

Other than that, yes, all Responses (and thus, pretty much all saves) are optional.



#35 Kelemvor

Kelemvor

    Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 23 August 2011 - 01:45 PM

So to make it clear in my head...

Say we have a character with a duplicate and the milk of the poppy on him....does that mean that the player cannot trigger the "response" to save him , or can he?

 

And if we have bowl of brown, on a character with duplicates, can the player or not trigger the response to save the character?



#36 schrecklich

schrecklich

    Member

  • Members
  • 657 posts

Posted 23 August 2011 - 04:01 PM

Kelemvor said:

So to make it clear in my head...

Say we have a character with a duplicate and the milk of the poppy on him....does that mean that the player cannot trigger the "response" to save him , or can he?

 

And if we have bowl of brown, on a character with duplicates, can the player or not trigger the response to save the character?

Milk of the Poppy blanks a character's text box.  Gained abilities are not added to the text box.  They are just gained.  So Milk of the Poppy has no effect on using Duplicates (or any other gained ability).

 

Bowl of Brown prevents any effect from being triggered and so prevents the Response associated with saving a character via a duplicate from being used.



#37 sabrefox

sabrefox

    Member

  • Members
  • 105 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 03:30 AM

ktom said:

So even though you control the character's "gained Response," if you didn't also control the dupe, you couldn't pay the cost of that save.

 

I am unclear how a situation would arise where you control a character but not the duplicate. As ktom already pointed out , the FAQ states: (3.25) Taking Control of a Card With Attachments Any time control of a card switches via a card effect during a game, the new controlling player gains control of said card and all duplicates.  The FAQ also states, in part: (3.27) Unique Cards and Changing Control Duplicates can only be played or put into play on cards you own and control.

3.27 appears to prevent any player from playing a dupe on a character whose control has changed from the owner - so the only way for a charater whose control has changed to even have an dupe on it is to have had it prior to the change - meaning the controller would control the dupe as well.  What am I missing?

While we're on the subject of duplicates, I wanted to get some input on dupe stragety.  Somewhere in my previous forum searches I got the impression that duplicates only applied to characters.  I imagine it came from the fact that once a character goes into the dead pile, any other duplicates of that card become unplayable; whereas locations and attachments are never killed (save Deathbound) and thus nothing prevents you from putting another copy of that card back into play.  Perhaps the advantage of duping locations and attachments was lost on me at the time. 

Understanding now that locations and attachments CAN be duped, I want to make sure I understand the implications in choosing whether to play a second copy of a unique location/attachment as a duplicate, or to hold it in my hand to replace said card if and when it leaves play.  

Duping: On the plus side, obviously, is the save response, as well as not having to pay a second marshalling cost.  On the negative side, an effect that prevents or cancels the save will make me lose both the card and its dupe.

Holding:  On the plus side, when the card leaves play, I can simply replace it next marshalling phase.  On the negative side, the cost to marshall it is gold I wouldn't have had to spend if I duped it instead, and it is subject to discard effects while in hand.

Is there anything else that plays into this decision?



#38 radiskull

radiskull

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,360 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 07:02 AM

You have to consider the risk of losing the card you're holding in your hand (instead of duping) to the claim of an Intrigue challenge.  Also, while I have cancelled dupe-saves before, I think the risk of that happening is generally small (IMO).



#39 sabrefox

sabrefox

    Member

  • Members
  • 105 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 07:42 AM

And it would seem that it also depends on the particular card.  For instance, the unique attachment Ice reads "While attached character is participating in a challenge, kneel and discard Ice from play (cannot be saved) to choose and kill another participating character." Although meeting all the requirements for a duplicate, doing so would be a waste since it cannot be saved.  So maximizing the effect of having 3 copies of Ice in one's deck would mean replacing the attachement each time it got discarded.

I feel that in order to know the best way to use a card, you have to know why the card was designed.  In this case, I'd say it is unique to prevent you from arming multiple characters with it It simultaneously, and its effect ensures that it can only be used only once per challenge phase, thus preventing you being able to use Ice's effect twice in the same challenge to kill multiple participating characters (being two powerful).



#40 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,769 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 08:02 AM

The original observation that you have to control the dupe as well as controlling the "original" in order to use the save was more of an observation on the explanation that had been given not being generally applicable to all "take control" save situations. For the most part, you will not ever control a character without also controlling the dupe.

sabrefox said:

And it would seem that it also depends on the particular card.
Depends a lot on card type, too. Since characters are more likely to hit the dead pile than an attachment or location, it is much more important to dupe unique characters than it is to dupe unique attachments and locations.

sabrefox said:

I feel that in order to know the best way to use a card, you have to know why the card was designed.
I'm not sure that's always true, especially in a game like this with such an open architecture. For example, Carrion Bird was almost certainly designed to be a limiter on Summer and Winter by being, at the time, the only way to counter an opponent's use of the Black or White Ravens without having to play a season-themed deck yourself. But it's BEST use was as a 1-STR, 1-cost, weenie card with Stealth and a MIL icon. You throw three of them in your deck, and you really don't care if you EVER see a Black or White Raven. In fact, the absolute best use for it, before its errata, was as part of a trait manipulation combo that turned into ultra-cheap targeted character removal.

So I don't think that you need to know why a card was designed in order to know the "best" way to use it - because the "best" way to use a card can often have nothing to do with why it was designed, but rather on the total environment (which is always changing), as well as the specific deck you are using.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS