Ambush from the Plains/ Duplicate question

[Ratatoskr 34]

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.

[Khudzlin 734]

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.

[doulos2k 26]

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.

[agktmte 0]

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 October 11, 2013 by agktmte

[Slothgodfather 270]

 

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.   

[doulos2k 26]

 

 

Pray i don't alter the ruling any further.   

 

 

Nicely done, Ser. Nicely done.

[Ratatoskr 34]

 

 

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.

[Ratatoskr 34]

I wrote to Nate and Damon regarding this, and Nate wrote back. This will be addressed in the upcoming FAQ update.

[sWhiteboy 18]

FAQ?!!??!

[Mitya 0]

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.

 

[doulos2k 26]

And there was much rejoicing!

[Mitya 0]

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.

[doulos2k 26]

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.

[Bolzano2 0]

It happens often when you ask to Damon. Less often if asked to Nate.

Edited October 25, 2013 by Bolzano