Saga Journey to the cross-roads Oliphaunt text

[Lecitadin 282]

First, is it me or this quest super hard in pure solo?

 

I've noticed something on the card text of the Oliphaunts from the 9 Men of Harad cards. 

The text says : ''Cannot have attachments or take more than 3 damage each round. "

 

If you look at the text from the Mumak from the Southrons encounter deck (in the Into Ithilien quest), the text says :

"No attachments can be attached to Mûmak. Mûmak cannot take more than 3 damage each round."

 

The or in the Oliphaunt text tells me that I have a choice between no attachment or only 3 damages per round.

Do you agree?
 

Edited December 16, 2015 by Lecitadin

[Seastan 1,324]

No, I don't think that's how or works. If I were to say "I can't run or jump" it implies that I can't do either.

[Lecitadin 282]

Well, I tried!... The only way I could win this quest (and I made 2 mistakes with traveling effects) in pure solo was to let the 3 Oliphaunts under the Black gate (after a lot of tries and deck tweaking, with a lot of Ents on the table), meaning that you must engage all other ennemies that show up.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Lecitadin

[DukeWellington 312]

The proper word is "nor".

[monkeyrama 133]

Nor would only work in that sense if it was preceded by neither, no? So 'This card may neither do X nor do Y'. The way the card is worded works for me, defining the two things that the card cannot do (or have etc.).

[cmabr002 292]

Nor would only work in that sense if it was preceded by neither, no? So 'This card may neither do X nor do Y'. The way the card is worded works for me, defining the two things that the card cannot do (or have etc.).

 

Both are grammatically correct and actually can have the same meaning.  The only difference is that the word "or" can cause confusion on precisely what the intended meaning is.  This is what we have here...however, based on the plethora of encounter cards that say you cannot do x, y, or z (Sacked, for example) I am fairly confident the intended meaning is that you cannot do any of them as opposed to only being restricted from doing one of them.

 

When you use "neither" you must use "nor" (as opposed to or) but you can use nor without using neither.

Edited December 16, 2015 by cmabr002

[Lecitadin 282]

Thanks for all the answers!! The term "or" was a little confusing for me (I'm French Canadian), and I guess I forgot LOTR LCG rule of thumb : "if it screws the player, than it's the way to play it." 

[monkeyrama 133]

 

Nor would only work in that sense if it was preceded by neither, no? So 'This card may neither do X nor do Y'. The way the card is worded works for me, defining the two things that the card cannot do (or have etc.).

 

Both are grammatically correct and actually can have the same meaning.  The only difference is that the word "or" can cause confusion on precisely what the intended meaning is.  This is what we have here...however, based on the plethora of encounter cards that say you cannot do x, y, or z (Sacked, for example) I am fairly confident the intended meaning is that you cannot do any of them as opposed to only being restricted from doing one of them.

 

When you use "neither" you must use "nor" (as opposed to or) but you can use nor without using neither.

 

 

Ah, quite right, I forgot that 'cannot' also has the required negative sense for the nor to follow...English, not like it's my first language or anything

[gpd924 10]

Yeah, it's a crazy quest that's causing me to sell my collection.  I can't find any deck that will beat it, and I'm not willing to play through over 10 attempts, which is ridiculously excessive to beat any of these quests.