Jump to content

GrumpyStranger

Members
  • Content Count

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About GrumpyStranger

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Szczecin, Zachodniopomorskie, Poland
  1. No, it does appear mandatory. The reason it is spelled this way is probably Teclis and his ilk - you cannot do the second part if you somehow got around applying that point of damage, either through redirection or voodoo magic.
  2. After a new turn begins (and all 'at the beginning of a turn' events finish resolving) you have an action window before anything else happens where you can trigger the dreamer. There's a detailed timing sequence precisely placing action windows in relation to resource collection and other stuff in the 1.5 FAQ if you have any further questions of the kind.
  3. There is no limit to using his ability, so yes, you can trigger it twice to get two extra power where ever it is, or three if for some reason you want it dead.
  4. No. The sentinel leaves play simultaneously with everything else, so it can't trigger it's own action. Same case as with troll vomit and dwarf rangers.
  5. It gains hammers in addition to its printed power and any bonus it might have had at the moment.
  6. Yes, it says 'damage', so the first point of damage from any source is redirected. Therefore, to kill this unit, you have to assign it one more point of damage than it has remaining HP.
  7. Effects that put into play other cards do not bypass card placement limitations. In this case, the Envoy can not be put into play into the battlefield zone, since it's 'Quest zone only', so it just stays where it was, at the top of the deck.
  8. Yes, SoT action would trigger and need to be added to the current action chain when the currently played development would not yet be quite in play. Since for all purposes SoT's text field is at this moment blank, that does not happen. At least that much appears from the faq. The card is powerful enough without being immune to morrslieb cycle's poster supports anyway.
  9. Right, I think we learned not to interpret rules after driving a car for the most part of the day. That aside, let's get back to the issue at hand. As the timing structure outlines, when an action window starts, the first thing you do is to create a chain of actions that met their trigger prior to this action window, and after the previous one. Both players take turns to add actions to the chain, which resolves (in a 'last in-first out' order) after both players pass adding further actions. Now, up until now I thought actions that met their trigger would indeed fall into the same 'simultaneous effects' bin, but the timing sequence is pretty clear on this - even though they met their trigger at the same moment, they still did that before the action window, and should be treated as such. Obviously, this does not apply to forced and constant effects, since they activate automaticaly, and should be resolved as under the 'simultaneous effects' section.
  10. You are of course correct. I was trying to divine the answer from the simultaneous effects section, and didn't think about checking the timing structure. I stand corrected and shamed. Both Players take turns putting the triggered actions on the chain. The chain part is particularily interesting- players take turns putting triggered actions on it starting from the active player, but since it's a chain, it resolves from the last added action, which means that in your first scenario (equal number of triggered actions put on chain from both card types) boiling blood triggers first. Yet again sorry for messing this up for you.
  11. The wording seems a bit iffy (or that might be cause I'm not a native speaker), but after re-reading the faq, it would appear that the active player resolves all his actions before the other player gets to resolve his. So, to reiterate: -You heal your units before any takes damage from the attachement. -If both sides have multiple copies of cards in question (initiate and boiling blood respectively), you end up with massive overhealing followed by a very dead unit/s EDIT: The more I read into the second case the more the exact wording puzzles me. Above you have the most logical conclusion I could come up with based on the faq, but I'd wait and see what the rules guys on this forum have to say about this.
  12. Right. Oversimplified it a bit. A bit much. To quote the faq: When two card effects trigger at the same time. The player whose turn it is currently applies his in any order of his choice. Then, the opponent applies his card effects in any order of his choice. So yes, basicaly the active player resolves his effects, then the opponent resolves his, in any order they please. Keep in mind that this only applies to effects of the same kind- forced effects will always resolve before actions, and after constant effects. Sorry for confusing you.
  13. In case there's multiple effects of the same kind (actions in this case) triggering at the same time, the active player choses the order in which they're resolved.
  14. The way it's worded right now, it would appear that every damage token that's already been applied counts as two for whichever action might check the number of 'damage on the unit', on top of being double damage as far as killing the unit goes. Before it's applied though, it still counts as a single token for toughness and redirection purposes. I'm rather unsure how one would handle healing though. Personaly, since the FAQ states that healing works by 'removing damage tokens from a target unit', I'd interpret that as 'healing one damage removes one damage token from the unit'. Which would mean that in this case healing one point would remove two points of damage in the form of a single token. As far as assigning enough damage to kill the unit, I've got nuthin'...
  15. In short, yes. Basicaly, when a development is destroyed/sacrificed, it leaves play as a development, but enters the discard pile as whatever it used to originaly be faceup. That does bring up the question what would a development under Kairos leave play as- would it trigger any 'unit leaves play' actions?
×
×
  • Create New...