Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Daenarys

Ambush from the Plains/ Duplicate question

39 posts in this topic

and am also frustrated by how this e-mail has now undone what was "common knowledge" within the community and that this is how rulings are handled in the first place.    

I'm frustrated by this as well. There was really no need to obfuscate a pretty clear situation by introducing a never-before-heard-from interpretation out of the blue.

 

Maybe we should write to Damon and Nate and ask them to reconsider? I guess I will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this extends to Catelyn Stark (LoW) and Khal Drogo (CS), a non self-referential effect would affect all characters with the name, regardless of controller.

agktmte likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this extends to Catelyn Stark (LoW) and Khal Drogo (CS), a non self-referential effect would affect all characters with the name, regardless of controller.

 

This ruling keeps getting worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catelyn and Drogo would be self-referential only unless they come in and attach as a dupe, in which case it should return opponents's Catelyns and Drogos with this new ruling (as well as the now duped Catelyn and Drogo).  Correct?

Edited by agktmte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If this extends to Catelyn Stark (LoW) and Khal Drogo (CS), a non self-referential effect would affect all characters with the name, regardless of controller.

 

This ruling keeps getting worse.

 

 

Pray i don't alter the ruling any further.   

Ratatoskr, mdc273 and doulos2k like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If this extends to Catelyn Stark (LoW) and Khal Drogo (CS), a non self-referential effect would affect all characters with the name, regardless of controller.

 

This ruling keeps getting worse.

 

 

Pray i don't alter the ruling any further.   

 

You, Ser, win the Internet. Congratulations.

Slothgodfather likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New FAQ is out. They made the decision.

If a character enters play through an effect
like Fiery Kiss (TOC F47) that would cause
that character to leave play at the end of the
phase or round, but the character enters play
as a duplicate (because the player already
owns and controls another copy of that
character), what happens at the end of the
phase?


The check, "if that character is still in play"
cannot be made, as the card entered play as a
duplicate. The duplicate remains in play at the
end of the phase.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm a little afraid to ask FFG questions.)) Will I receive the right answer?))

BTW, how often does this happen? Wrong answers, I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, Damon's answer wasn't wrong. It was a ruling he gave. As an FFG employee responsible for rulings, his answer would stand.

 

That said, it's apparent that after the uproar it caused (including Ratatoskr emailing Nate and Damon), they decided to rule in favor of the community understanding and they codified it by putting it into the latest FAQ so there would be no further doubt what the official word is.

 

But... if you're asking, how often does what we're told via the Rules link get changed when a new FAQ is released? Not terribly often, but it does happen. The rules link is still the official source outside of the FAQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0