Shelob's Poison & Prince Imrahil Ally

[13nrv 147]

 

Text : When Revealed: Attach to a hero you control and exhaust that hero. (Counts as a Condition attachment with the text: “Limit 1 per hero. Treat attached hero’s text box as blank, except for Traits. Attached hero cannot ready.”)

 

 

Text : While there is a hero card in your discard pile, Prince Imrahil loses the ally card type and gains the hero card type.

 

Imagine Caldara is in my discard pile ... Looks like an infinite loop ??? Ally then Hero then Ally then Hero then Ally etc ...

 

So because i don't want to have a game blocked by this loop of passive effect :

 

1) Prince Imrahil stay ally

2) Prince Imrahil stay hero

3) Prince Imrahil isn't a valid target for this treachery due to generation of an infinite loop with no ending

[cmabr002 292]

This is a really good question, but I don't think any of us can know the answer to it for sure.  Right now, it does create an infinite loop until the developers tell us how they wish to resolve it.

[13nrv 147]

I agree

 

Someone can forward the question to the developers ?

 

The real question is : When facing to infinite loop what do we do ?

I think that this situation can occurs on some other situations.

 

If I remember in Magic, you can't initiate an effect if it generate a loop without an ending.

[cmabr002 292]

If I remember in Magic, you can't initiate an effect if it generate a loop without an ending.

 

That's a pretty reasonable rule...I sorta wish we received that ruling when we were all discussing the infinite willpower loop with Galadriel and that Baggins sphere event instead of distinguishing between player and encounter made lasting effects.

[dr00 88]

i would personally rule it as a legal target for Imrahil when it comes into play but falls off immediately when he is blanked and becomes an ally, since, like the blanking and readying effect, it's also 'limit 1 per hero'

i have this feeling that they'll rule it that it simply blanks Imrahil completely though and reverts him back to an ally (but who can still ready)

instead of distinguishing between player and encounter made lasting effects.

oh god i hated this ruling so so much. 'it makes the game easier to track'

actually, it makes it more difficult (which is fine tbh, but that should have been the stated reason), makes bookkeeping more difficult (which is the opposite of what they said), and is less intuitive (insert angry face)

[13nrv 147]

 

If I remember in Magic, you can't initiate an effect if it generate a loop without an ending.

 

That's a pretty reasonable rule...I sorta wish we received that ruling when we were all discussing the infinite willpower loop with Galadriel and that Baggins sphere event instead of distinguishing between player and encounter made lasting effects.

 

Where is this ruling ?

[dr00 88]

If I remember in Magic, you can't initiate an effect if it generate a loop without an ending.

 

That's a pretty reasonable rule...I sorta wish we received that ruling when we were all discussing the infinite willpower loop with Galadriel and that Baggins sphere event instead of distinguishing between player and encounter made lasting effects.

Where is this ruling ?

one of the recent FAQs when they had the erratum for Horn of Gondor iirc

[13nrv 147]

Where one of the recent FAQs when they had the erratum for Horn of Gondor iirc

 

Arf the hated ruling on Horn of Gondor ... still angry ... :angry: :angry: :angry:

[cmabr002 292]

 

 

 

If I remember in Magic, you can't initiate an effect if it generate a loop without an ending.

 

That's a pretty reasonable rule...I sorta wish we received that ruling when we were all discussing the infinite willpower loop with Galadriel and that Baggins sphere event instead of distinguishing between player and encounter made lasting effects.

 

Where is this ruling ?

 

one of the recent FAQs when they had the erratum for Horn of Gondor iirc

 

 

It's here (in section 1.55), but the ruling doesn't help us resolve your question.

[dr00 88]

Where one of the recent FAQs when they had the erratum for Horn of Gondor iirc

Arf the hated ruling on Horn of Gondor ... still angry ... :angry: :angry: :angry:

that whole FAQ was a big mess. the worst part of Horn of Gondor was how so many cards were nerfed previously because of how they interacted with it, but they were all nerfed instead of HoG time and time again, only to finally nerf it anyway

i tried and failed not to get started on this again lol. still angry as well.

[alogos 171]

Someone can forward the question to the developers ?

 

 

On it.

[13nrv 147]

 

Someone can forward the question to the developers ?

 

 

On it.

 

Thanks mate

[Seastan 1,324]

1/√2 ( |hero〉+ |ally〉)

[Kakita Shiro 992]

I'm not really seeing the loop here. If he is a Hero, Imrahil gets blanked and then no longer checks for a hero in the discard pile for his own status and becomes an ally again.

[13nrv 147]

I'm not really seeing the loop here. If he is a Hero, Imrahil gets blanked and then no longer checks for a hero in the discard pile for his own status and becomes an ally again.

 

The condition card said :

 

"Treat attached hero’s text box as blank"

 

If Imrahil become an ally, the text box is not blanked by the condition. So he become a hero, but now the condition blank the text. So he become an ally, but now the text is not blanked by condition. So he become a hero, but now the etc ...

[alogos 171]

There is Caleb's answer:

 

I’m not prepared to make a general, broad-sweeping rule based on this one instance, but in this particular case I would rule that Imrahil is reverted to ally status while he has Shelob’s Poison attached.

 

Edited January 16, 2017 by alogos

[NathanH 350]

The sensible approach is probably to change Shelob's Poison to say "character" rather than "hero".

[Flrbb 75]

I did not see the loop either - until I realised, the Shelob card reads "hero", not character. I'd solve it this way: when attaching, the Imrahil is a hero, so it is a valid target. After attaching I just keep him as an ally, because "cannot gain hero state anymore". But this is just my very own solution.

[Lecitadin 282]

You just attach it to another hero.

[RichardPlunkett 81]

You just attach it to another hero.

But if Imrahil remains a Hero, he is the ideal candidate since he has no other useful text.

[Lecitadin 282]

 

You just attach it to another hero.

But if Imrahil remains a Hero, he is the ideal candidate since he has no other useful text.

 

 

''If" he can stay a hero... 

 

Don,t we all love game loops?