Pit Trap

[JJ48 6,817]

All this because the developers didn't distinguish between one-time and ongoing restrictions.  Couldn't they have just used two different phrases to indicate which they meant?  "Attach to X" vs. "May only be attached to X" for instance?

[starrius 122]

2 hours ago, GoblinGuide said:

And Ambush says "put those characters into play as participating characters" even though you can choose only one. Does that mean that if you choose only one character Ambush doesn't do anything?

But you missed the beginnin of ambush.

 

Choose up to 2 scorpion characters.

That makes the rest of the card still work.

 

Cards taken out of context with the rest of it's card can be used to dispute anything

[LuceLineGames 131]

10 hours ago, JJ48 said:

All this because the developers didn't distinguish between one-time and ongoing restrictions.  Couldn't they have just used two different phrases to indicate which they meant?  "Attach to X" vs. "May only be attached to X" for instance?

"Attach to" and "May only be attached to" are both constant checks.   "Play on" is the one-time play restriction.  They did use two different phrases to indicate which they meant.

[JJ48 6,817]

1 hour ago, LuceLineGames said:

"Attach to" and "May only be attached to" are both constant checks.   "Play on" is the one-time play restriction.  They did use two different phrases to indicate which they meant.

Then why didn't they use "Play on" for Pit Trap?  I still contend that "Attach to" is a poor choice for a constant check.  Being attached can be a state that is constantly checked, but the act of attaching itself is an action that is performed and is completed.  If they want to rule that "Attach to" means the condition must be continuously checked, they can, but it just unnecessarily confuses things because that's not a natural usage of the word.

[twinstarbmc 717]

On 12/1/2017 at 3:32 PM, GoblinGuide said:

But that is exactly what the ruling says: that you can't declare elements of the ring's elements. If you WotP the Earth ring that is also Air your opponent can't declare an Earth or Air conflict for the rest of the phase, but if they can still declare Void and put in their own Seeker of Knowledge and WotP won't care.

Hang on hang on. I think I misread. I think we're talking about if you use Way of the Phoenix during a conflict while Kaede and the Seeker have added elements to the ring. Ok, no, that makes sense and is "fair." 

[LuceLineGames 131]

On 12/3/2017 at 11:58 AM, JJ48 said:

Then why didn't they use "Play on" for Pit Trap?  I still contend that "Attach to" is a poor choice for a constant check.  Being attached can be a state that is constantly checked, but the act of attaching itself is an action that is performed and is completed.  If they want to rule that "Attach to" means the condition must be continuously checked, they can, but it just unnecessarily confuses things because that's not a natural usage of the word.

Pit Trap wording was a mistake which is why it has been errata'd. The new version of the card uses 'play'.

[JJ48 6,817]

37 minutes ago, LuceLineGames said:

Pit Trap wording was a mistake which is why it has been errata'd. The new version of the card uses 'play'.

Well, it's a start, then.  I still think they should change "Attach to" to something a bit more descriptive to remove any further confusion.

[agarrett 239]

4 hours ago, LuceLineGames said:

Pit Trap wording was a mistake which is why it has been errata'd. The new version of the card uses 'play'.

  I'm sorry, but has there been official errata. I see the stuff of cardgamedb, but a designer email may or may not be treated as official in a tournament. Has FFG put something up that shows official errata yet? I hope so, but hadn't seen it - you're post makes me hopeful it's around somewhere...

[Khudzlin 710]

CardGameDB is owned by FFG.

[starrius 122]

2 hours ago, Khudzlin said:

CardGameDB is owned by FFG.

I didn' think they managed it though? Doesnt make it official either

[Khudzlin 710]

10 minutes ago, starrius said:

I didn' think they managed it though? Doesnt make it official either

The images are provided by FFG. The quality is just too good for a scan.

[Yogo Gohei 622]

Looks pretty official to me.  An actual announcement somewhere would have been nice.

[Yogo Gohei 622]

smh at "Attach to a character"

Thank you for that FFG.  Very helpful.

[Ser Nakata 345]

Wait, is this considered an official erratum?

[Khudzlin 710]

58 minutes ago, Ser Nakata said:

Wait, is this considered an official erratum?

I think it should, though I'd be more comfortable with a mention in an FAQ (which still doesn't exist, afaik). FFG owns CardGameDB and provides all card images posted on it (which are then used in the various online deckbuilders). Also, no one would play Pit Trap as printed, because it's a weaker and more expensive version of Fiery Madness that goes away at the end of the conflict (or when attached character is sent home).

[Yogo Gohei 622]

1 hour ago, Ser Nakata said:

Wait, is this considered an official erratum?

That they would slyly change the image and not draw any attention to it at all is absolutely shocking to me.

But, yes, this appears to be official errata.

[Mirith 1,303]

3 hours ago, Yogo Gohei said:

That they would slyly change the image and not draw any attention to it at all is absolutely shocking to me.

But, yes, this appears to be official errata.

Given that they've been doing developer rulings via email as well, I wouldn't describe it as "Sly" as much as just some disconnect within their communications policy.  I'm guessing one of the Devs saw the mistake and wanted it fix, but isn't allowed to publicly announce anything.  More likely someone dropped the ball.

[Japara81 4]

I personally think that having to search in Cardgamedb for rules is blatantly idiotic. 

EVEN IF that site is managed and owned by FFG, an "official errata" document should be available on the main site of FFG. 

Plus this game has an incredible amount of badly written cards and/or interpretation corners which I was not expecting,  as if the rules team and the developers team didn't speak to one another.

[Fu Leng 58]

well they sure as **** need to make it official or Crab is gonna get screwed if they walk into a tourney with 3 of these is their deck! Gee's FFG take care of it!

[Schmoozies 1,143]

14 minutes ago, Fu Leng said:

well they sure as **** need to make it official or Crab is gonna get screwed if they walk into a tourney with 3 of these is their deck! Gee's FFG take care of it!

They sort of did, if you check the QR code version of the card its the updated (working) version.  They just need to communicate that to people now.

[Fu Leng 58]

thanks!   thats kinda what I'm ******* about, they need to communicate it! Grrr

 

[Fu Leng 58]

Gees they **** the word H  E double toothpicks and Bit**in 

I'll clean up my act