Jump to content

.Zephyr.

Members
  • Content Count

    309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About .Zephyr.

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Mazowieckie, Poland
  1. Its not nitpicking. Eidolon is not an attachment, Eidolon is an event, that creates an attachment in the process. If it was like Parallel universe I'd agree with you, but its not. Big part of effect is not attachements text. And this FAQ entry was added for Stygnian eye to cover its duration. But maybe its intended to apply here.... i'd say no, but maybe. There is a point about ">attached card< gives you control of another player’s card" i still think its not attached card that gives control, its effect of an event that was already resolved that gave control, and attached card effect is only: "Attached character loses all icons and gains Invulnerability. No skill checks can resolve at a story at which attached character is committed." that has nothing to do with control. but the event happens to be printed on the same card... i think an official ruling would be nice here and wording FAQ entry to be more clear on this. And definitely going insane seems like a big issue, as I initially thought character leaves play too, but there is no rule to justify that, so i think it stays in play.
  2. a) back from the dead is another card, Eidolon is not back from the dead... so lets read what is on the card, rather than what we would like to see there... b) The control isn't granted by attachment, the attachment text doesn't have any part about controlling character, control was granted by event part
  3. I'm active player. I commit Jian Shi to story A, I commit Victoria to story B. Opponent blocks Jian Shi committing Umr at-Tawil to story A. I choose to resolve story B first, during T struggle i use Jian shi ability to commit him to story B. Now, do i have to resolve story A? I don't have characters there now, but i had Jian Shi at the begining of story resolution box. Urm... says "Response: After Umr at-Tawil readies", if story will not resolve, he will not win A and will not ready and will not trigger. (and will stay exhausted) I do not stop any story while it resolves... Is this clear?
  4. I'd have to ask Damon every 2-3 days or so. But i'm not playing in tournaments, I tend to write long posts and keep asking till i get a clear answer that shows some general mechanisms in a clear way. I don't think asking a designer makes that much point in this case. If he had a group of ruling experts i'd gladly ask them, but i'd prefer designer had more time to actually design, not solve all ruling problems... I really think there should be someone in the team, other than designer himself, who looks just at making rules more clear, making card text as simple as it can, and making rulings/erratas. The point about different person is quite key here, as designer knows what he designed, so for him rules seem clear, for some other person not so much. (Obviously he'd need to consult designer often.) Also often my problems have already been cleared like Mummy+Necro thats in the FAQ and i missed it. So even if i intended to ask Damon id ask here first just to be sure i'm not reinventing the wheel. Back to the topic: About stopping story resolution - I also dont stop story once it starts resolving, unless it's won. I just want to make sure I haven't missed something and other ppl play like this as well. I'm also asking is there any consensus on those weirder issues. What would you rule if you were a judge and i'd play this Jang Shi to prevent Umr at-Tawil ability from resolving as story where I had Jang Shi, but used his ability before this story started resolving. Um at-Tawil triggers or not? [to be clear, Jang shi is not triggered when his story resolves, Jang shi is triggered when the other story resolves, before his story started resolving; thats the point here; I think your answers missed that (or i missread them)] PS I'd give up, but i really hate quarreling about rules during play, and i really like the game So im asking from time to time hoping that when i understand this games rules better i'll get less quarrels during actual play
  5. There is no exact time to make this check specified, thats what i'm asking about... About Jang Shi, so were on the same page I have Jang Shi at story A I have some guy at story B I resolve story B first, trigger Jang Shi to go to story B. Story A haven't started resolving. Do i have to start resolving story A next (I dont have characters there now, but i had one at the begging of story resolution box)
  6. I think if it leaves play character goes back to normal. I see no rule to do anything with the character so IMO it stays in play insane. If it was owned by opponent it is still controlled by you IMO, as eidolon attachment text doesn't say anything about control, and event part didn't specify duration, so for "take control" effect i think its permanent. But I'm not sure there are that many card effects that destroy your own characters. Sacrifice, yes, destroy, not that much. Mummy and Khopesh come to mind. Better ask designers though. Might be totally wrong on this one.
  7. I'm not talking about leaving story with no characters. I'm talking about Active player commiting, defender commiting, then active player "running away". Especially as defender can win I struggles or have abilities that trigger during struggles like Umr at-Tawil, so it might be important. Like you know, i commit Jiang Shi, opponent commits Umr at-Tawil hoping to hurt my hand, i trigger Jiang Shi removing him from the story and going else ware. Is A still resolved?
  8. FAQ says: Stories will resolve only if the active player has characters at that story. When is this condition checked? If you commit: Harry Houdini Action: Pay 1 to remove Harry Houdini from a story he is committed to. Then, ready him. Then opponent commits, then you use his ability. Does the story resolve? (No?) If your characters are gone because of T or C struggles does story stop resolving and there is no A or I struggle? (No?) If you play guys like: Jiang Shi Disrupt: Before you resolve a (T) struggle, pay 1 to commit Jiang Shi to that story without exhausting it. If Jiang Shi is already committed to another story, uncommit it. To change story leaving no one behind before it was chosen to resolve, does the story resolve or not? In short: when exactly is this condition checked?
  9. I feel a bit stupid for missing the FAQ describing this interaction directly. Thx for clearing it.
  10. With new Yog pack you can use: Scholar from Yith -> Frozen Time And its less stupid than it sounds when you run Yog mill deck Blanked Forgotten Shoggoth might even happen in real game now. And placing Yhtians in discad pile or deck might decide a win if Interselar migration happens to be close to deck size. That's why i hate "it doesn't matter in current card pool" ruling arguments.
  11. I've recently played with Yog-Shub. One of the tricks I run is: Living Mummy Forced Response: After Living Mummy enters your discard pile from play, wound all characters. with: Shocking Transformation Action: Sacrifice one of your characters to search your deck for a non-Ancient One character and put it into play. Then, shuffle your deck. and • The Necronomicon: Olaus Wormius Translation Action: Sacrifice attached character and shuffle The Necronomicon back into your deck to put into play all characters from your discard pile with less skill than the attached character. To wipe the board and get some characters of my own at the same time. I think it works as cost is payed before effect takes place. But then i thought about response window that happens really late. And then forced response happens faster, but maybe still not fast enough to go between paying the cost and the effect itself. I'm not 100% sure it works anymore. What do you think? (I hate CoC timings..., love the game though) Also when i hit: Expendable Muscle If Expendable Muscle would be wounded or go insane, instead attach it to a character you control. Then, Expendable Muscle becomes an Attachment support card with the text: "Attached character gains Toughness +1 and Willpower." Can it protect another character when mummy hits them both? Passive effects have really weird timing...
  12. Is it? I agree many times clicks are worth more than 1 credit. I find the calculations in first post a bit weird so I'll post my analysis: Kati is obviously more efficient than clicking. If you place 3, then take 3 you get 1 more than clicking for cash twice, and its the least effective way to use her. So no matter the cost you'll eventually make more. The question is how much more and when she breaks even. The point is, whats her initial cost. It's: 2 credits + click to play her + draw action as you have one card less. Let's assume it's worth about 4 credits. (1 click + 1 card value depends on deck, but 2 creds is some rough estimate) If you place 3, take 3 you'll earn 1 extra. So you need 8 turns to break even. But its the worst she can do. If you place 3,3, take 6, you'll net 3 extra cash. Resulting at -1 in 3 turns. +2 in 6 turns. If you place 3,3,3, take it. You'll net 5 extra, giving you +1 in 4 turns. (note, after 4 turns of using Kati you're only 1 credit above clicking for cash, and those 9 credits are missing from your pocket until turn 4 - she does slow you down early) But the more you wait the more you profit. Also after breaking even she earns really good money. The bigger "secret" costs with her are: - its a resource, you need to really care for tags - you don't get the cash immediately, so you can lose trace, etc you'd win with "normal" econ card - once per turn means it's a long term econ, wont help you when you need cash in shorter time window - once per turn means you have 3 clicks left, if all you want to do is make money whole turn long MO will be better Long term though its more efficient than MO. 3,3, take 6 is as efficient as clicking MO, and if you click longer it gets better. I really love the card - for Criminal and anarch, as criminal loves putting pressure, so don't want to spend much clicks on econ each turn. Same with noise, you want income, but playing all the viruses etc takes much click. Despite her problems Kati is the best cred per click card in the game. And it stays until trashed providing you econ in mid-late game and freeing of the burden of drawing to get one time econ cards. (Armitage is also one time econ IMO) Edit: +1 credit/click gain relative to clicking is MO efficiency not basic click for credit efficiency... 0 cred/click gain relative to clicking is basic efficiency...
  13. Slight correction: black dog enters play commited, you cant respond to black dog with black dog. Also he's really nice with Negotium Perambulans in Tenebris :> But the idea I agree with: black dog is interested in the act of commiting characters, not how many are commited at any point in time. If some characters were already commited (becouse of Voice of the Jungle for example) Black dog is interested in how many "new" characres are commited, not how many ware there already, or the total number of characters.
  14. I disagree that its clear - its quite complicated IMO as this discussion shows. The case when your opponent control rift is very intersting, also first question is about rift and infirmary being controlled by different players… My main point was this timing structure detail - disrupts between initiation and resolution. I guess posting FAQ section header is not enough for some ppl… [guess im bad at reading] About: "if its not your rift and controller chooses to destroy infirmary first disrupt has already altered the effect." i need to use more periods and commas: "If its not your rift. [Rifts] Controller chooses to destroy infirmary first. [infirmary's] Disrupt has already altered the effect [of Rifft so its too late]" But this FAQ disrupt timing might be overriden if designer intends this interaction to behave differently. Maybe each card destruction having its own initiation, disrupt, resolution sequence or something. This contradicts FAQ guidelines a bit, but sometimes such rulings are made for some less common effects. So untill you ask designer you never know… [edit] Ok, i was quite sure player triggering an effect chooses, not controller of said cards… This is wierd IMO as there is still a question of the exact order of characters leaving play. Whos characters get destroyed first? Can other side react? Is it one from one side then one from other? I cant find a case where it would matter now, but such stuff often starts being a problem with introduction of new cards. Ok got one: Rift + forgotten shoggoth with Infernal obsession - attaching something to shoggoth would require blanking his text but it could be done i think. (unless cannot have attachments does count after getting text back, not 100% sure here but i think its like invulnerability and dmg, you cant get one, but if you have it already it stays) When Obsession is destroyed shoggoth will change sides during resolution of effect and might change other players options … idont remeber how was Rift vs Forgotten Shoggoth ruled, anyone remembers?
  15. I wouldnt use word "definitely" when talking about CoC disrupt timing… Its far from clear IMO. Infirmary has a replacement that changes destroy effect, so you should be able to trigger it before Rifts effect even resolves, enabling you to save any MU characters, the order of cards destruction doesnt even matter here, as disrupts are triggered between initiation and resolution (see FAQ "The Action Window in Detail" section) so if its not your rift and controller chooses to destroy infirmary first disrupt has already altered the effect. [but maybe if infirmary is destroyed its alteration is cancelled, i dont think so but maybe, those rulings tend to be problematic and FAQ explanations sometimes lack necesairy clarity and precission] At least thats what i think. To be sure ask using ruling link (and post answer here pls)
×
×
  • Create New...