Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
cparadis10

Unnoficial FAQ

7 posts in this topic

Edit: and of course I misspelled unofficial in the topic line ... Mondays

Now that development has ceased, I have updated my printer-friendly FAQ to try to correct some typos in the originak FAQ and more imprtantly, to include material not in the official FAQ, mostly from the deckbox forums. I have moved some material around and tried to include general rule clarifications in the general FAQ sections while reserving the final section for specific card questions. As usual, changes are in red. If anyone sees any errors or has any suggestions, please let me know.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8j0M9w0F8VJWkFybUYwR3ZrUkk/edit?usp=docslist_api

Edited by cparadis
Junglecat, Oodako67, Kaine82 and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Legends section where it explains, "A legend’s power is considered to be equal to the number of power icons it has in its weakest zone..." the example given (Malekith) has the same power in all zones. Perhaps a Legend like Cron or Wurrzag would be better to illustrate this?

cparadis10 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slaanesh's Domination answer is incorrect:

 

Card Effects Resulting in Playing Cards (v1.8)
When a card effect allows the playing of a card during the resolution of an action chain, this does not create a new action chain. Instead, any played card resolves as if it is part of the original chain. You cannot respond to it with more actions, as a chain is being resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My printer will appreciate your efforts, thanks a lot!

 

"A unit questing on a quest that is moved to a different zone or removed from play will remain in its zone after the quest is moved or removed from play." (p. 10)

 

It's easier to read like that:

 

"A questing unit will remain in its zone, if that quest is moved to a different zone or removed from play."

 

 

And I'm not sure, if that Soul Stealer question still is - or ever had been - correct:

 

Q: If a unit already has Soul Stealer (EC 117) on it, and I play a second Soul Stealer onto that unit who controls it?

A: If you play Soul Stealer on a unit that has already been stolen, then your effect and your opponent's effect cancel each other out and you will regain control of the unit.

 

I think, this creates an illegal game state (2 players controlling the same unit) and therefore that unit is removed from play.

Though, the "rule" I'm referring to isn't that good, because it leads to another problem:

 

Q: If I have a Veteran Sellswords
(CC 38) in my battlefield, what
happens if my opponent has a unit
with Paranoia (CaC 78) attached to
it in his corresponding zone?

 

A: The Veteran Sellswords are
unable to move to the zone, but
they must move to the zone. This
creates an illegal game state and the

(p.21, official FAQ 2.2)

 

versus

 

If a unit causes an illegal state when it enters play, then that unit is immediately sacrificed.

(p. 11, official FAQ 2.2)

 

Sellswords obviously aren't entering play which means that at least one of these sentences is wrong or imperfect.

Edited by Gnomeschool
cparadis10 likes this

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