Suzume Tomonori

Members
  • Content count

    430
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Suzume Tomonori

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday
  1. You we’ve got two players in Hiroshima, but that’s a bit pricey for a day trip.
  2. Additionally, since dash is unmodifiable it has been recently ruled that cards that switch a character's military and political stats cannot do so if either stat is a dash; switching would be modifying.
  3. Hm... in other situations you have an issue where the card's effect can't legally resolve (you can't dishonor someone who is already dishonored, for example.) However here the card's effect does indeed resolve, it's just that an increase of zero is pointless. I'm not sure whether this constitutes a change in game state or not; a bonus is applied, but since it is zero it doesn't really matter. It feels like it should be a legal play (you are burning an otherwise useful card, after all) but I'm not sure how this interacts with the "must change game state" rule. I'm interested in hearing other thoughts on this myself.
  4. Twinstar answered above that you play attachments as actions, and this means you cannot play them as reactions to your character entering play at any time (unless the card says otherwise; I am not aware of any such card being in the game at the moment, however.) Are you coming from the old CCG? The old CCG had a "rule of presence" that required you to either have a character in the conflict or bring one in with an action for that action to be legal, but the LCG has no such restrictions. You can play events from your hand even when you have no characters in the conflict, or even use abilities from characters you control but who aren't in the conflict (or for that matter, use abilities on characters that are bowed) as long as the text on the ability doesn't require the character to be "participating." Another note on playing characters from your hand (which, since they are played as an action, can be played during any action window outside of the Dynasty phase, even before and after each conflict): during a conflict you even have the option of playing a character from your hand and putting them into play into your home instead of the conflict. These caveats add a lot of options to resolving conflicts that for me took a long time to wrap my head around because I played the old CCG and was used to the way things use to work in that game. Once you get a good grasp of how many options you have available, the strategy of conflicts changes a great deal.
  5. A tricky question. I'd be wary of setting the bid to be considered zero even with a no-honor exchange provision. Zero is not intended to be a possible bid without card effects to manipulate it that way. By making a new possible bid you end up changing a game mechanic that the game was designed with in mind (i.e. that base bids are from one to five.) More to the point, using Contigency Plan to drop your bid to zero to dishonor out your opponent when they are at one honor is a thing, and unscrupulous players fearing such a loss could "accidentally" make an illegal honor bid to get a zero if zero was the punishment for an illegal bid. Now, "Consider the bid a five but the player draws no cards" would be a pretty punishing rule.
  6. No, they don't. They seem to avoid having their staff look at forums at all, which means usually a question comes up, someone sends an e-mail for an official ruling, then they post it here.
  7. Don't get me wrong, I definitely see the its uses. But Forgotten Library is putting an extra card in your hand for free, which is saving you honor (thus effectively giving you resources) and giving you a card to do something with right now. I'm not saying the Lighthouse is bad, but there are some situations where I think the Library is going to be better. Though I suppose Lighthouse is really good in a tournament environment for figuring out your opponent's deck.
  8. Getting an official inquiry to put here on the forums seems like the best thing to do. But yeah, if it turns out the ruling is that blanking a text block doesn't actually blank certain text then I will be very surprised. It's one thing to have game terms that mean certain things that are not obvious to the un-initiated or timing effects that get down to the nitty-gritty, but this seems like a clear case of just applying the plain English as written.
  9. Do you remember the reasoning that the poster gave? It seems pretty clear to me that Cloud the Mind would unambiguously remove the limitation on being an attacker, but am I missing something?
  10. Holy crap that is annoying. But I'm not sure it's better than just drawing a card off of Forgotten Library.
  11. I can quite read it; something about looking at the top of your opponent's deck?
  12. Playing casually with only one friend and no hopes of a competitive scene in our city (Hiroshima) we both got two cores and are playing two core 30/30 decks at the moment. I like the way it forces us to really prune unnecessary elements from our decks, but we still have enough in clan cards that we don't have to rely in neutral personalities so much. We originally talked about trading with each other for playsets of our favorite clans, but with splashing I find myself wanting a playset of all clans if we go to 40/40.
  13. On the topic of decklists, are the decklists for the top of clan players available anywhere? I'm particularly curious about Phoenix.
  14. Or, something else that would make it clearer on first glance is to add "TN" e.g. "TN 3 (Earth TN 1, fire TN 6)"
  15. Seconded. I'm reading the book in order and am reading techniques now. I had no idea where to find this information because it's introduced before it's explained in the text (I had to come here to confirm what it meant.) Since it shows up so much in resisting effects, it might be good to introduce it or add a reminder about what the parentheses mean under the explanation for resisting.