[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4772: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4774: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4775: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4776: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
Council of Elrond • View topic - CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Moderator: Thorsten the Traveller

CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Thorsten the Traveller » Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:25 am

To get the ball rolling on the topic of what rules issues have arrisen recently that might require a NetRep Ruling or even a CoE Erratum, I'll list the most important ones here. We'll also ask the NetRep-team to contribute what they see as the major issues.

I'll be editing this post as we proceed. Please feel free to post your suggestions.


MELE Rules that do not apply to FW:
issue coined, potentially game-changing consequences, as of yet unclear.

One Ring strike cancellation:
issue mostly thematic, might need a ruling if deemed important enough (or even CoE Erratum).

How many on-guard cards can be revealed:
issue coined, potentially game-changing consequences. It seems actually clear, but also goes against current common practise.

Healing Herbs:
issue coined, as of yet unclear, might need a ruling (or even CoE Erratum).

Cannot be duplicated exploit:
issue coined, as of yet unclear. If so, might need a ruling.

Different manifestations during Draft:
issue seems clear, is not big in effect, but might need a ruling.

Hazard limit: During opponent's m/h phase, the number of hazard cards that you may play on one of your opponent's companies is that company's hazard limit.
This rules vagary has had no real game-changing consequences so far only because everybody has ignored it. Might require CoE Erratum: play against, not play on a company.

Declaring movement to a site in play:

issue seems clear, many people (including me) is/was playing it wrong, might need a ruling

Meaning of moving during organization phase:
issue coined, as of yet unclear. If so, might need a ruling

Freeze the flesh:
issue coined, as of yet unclear. Card doesn't work as written, needs errata

Limited site use for FW companies?:
and

Open to the Summons:
Needs clarification that it allows one to start the game with an agent character in the starting company.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Chairman
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby the Jabberwock » Sat Apr 15, 2017 2:40 am

Thanks for getting the ball rolling with this beast of a project Thorsten! I also think that once the new web page and forum is up and running, we need to open this discussion up to the whole community and allow everyone to submit suggestions for rules clarifications and errata that needs to be looked at.

Here are a couple off the top of my head that I would like to see cleared up. I will post more after I have an opportunity to do some digging. Sorry, I don't have links at the moment, but will try to find them later.

A Chance Meeting & We Have Come to Kill: Can these be used to bring in a character during any phase while at a site, or only during the organization phase? I think it is commonly played as being allowed at any time (I believe the Spanish community plays it this way, Marc and Jose-san can correct me if I'm wrong); however, I'm not sure which interpretation is the most in tune with the rules, and which interpretation is the most beneficial and enjoyable for game play.

A Malady Without Healing: It is commonly allowed to use this card to target an opponent's character. This seems like common sense and very logical. The card itself states "non-Wizard" and "if target character is a hero" which (to me at least) clearly shows the intended design of this card is to be able to target your opponent. However, there is a rule about not being able to target your opponent's characters with your own resources, so an argument has been made to not allow this use for this card. I feel it needs a clarification one way or the other.
the Jabberwock
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Bandobras Took » Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:32 am

Here's the Hazard Limit discussion:



@Jabberwock: The last I heard was that one of the player guides/companions that ICE published mentioned that Chance Meeting could be used outside the organization phase. Were it not for that, the rules are actually pretty strongly (though not incontrovertibly) against it, but an ICE publication can be considered a good indication of ICE intent.

As for Malady, being able to play it on opponent's characters is indeed a violation of rules with no justification, and the Akhorakill deck is pretty broken. However, since everybody has always played it that way, nobody has enforced the proper interpretation. The card is useful for getting rid of a character you don't want in your company. The phrase about killing a hero has validity for FWs, and Dark Minions is sufficient to show that ICE released content with future expansions in mind.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards .
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Non-voting member
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Jose-san » Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:22 pm

User avatar
Jose-san
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Bandobras Took » Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:07 pm

That's actually a common debate of rules interpretation throughout games generally: the "It doesn't say I can't!" philosophy vs. "Does it say that you can?"

P.S. The rules actually outline two ways to bring characters into play: through the organization phase, with home site restrictions, or in the site phase, as the result of an influence attempt. If there are other methods, we don't know what the procedure is. The actual issue is whether Chance Meeting/WHCtK *enable* character play or *modify* character play. As mentioned, there's indications in supplemental material that the former is what they meant to be the case, though my hunch is if they saw how it's used today, they would turn to the latter regardless of their original intent.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards .
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Non-voting member
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Jose-san » Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:43 am

User avatar
Jose-san
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Logain » Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:43 am

Theme of the game is to travel, have opponent play hazards to simulate encounters, then play some marshalling points during the site phase if company is not weary & wounded from said travel.

To me squatting, heavy roadblock (one that bloks opponent several turns and tap his sites), replacing normal creatures by detainment in one's hazard deck to avoid giving kill points away, and most untapping mechanisms during the site phase (Cram, WHCTK / A chance meeting) all go against that said theme of the game.

I know, going back on track theme wise would be a big change ruleswise (or in adding some meta cards in the non DC sets), but i still wanted to have my opinion appear on this page ^^
Logain
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:58 pm

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Jose-san » Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:16 pm

Other topics:

Declaring movement to a site in play: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2938
issue seems clear, many people (including me) is/was playing it wrong, might need a ruling

Meaning of moving during organization phase: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2937
issue coined, as of yet unclear. If so, might need a ruling

Freeze the flesh: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2916
issue coined, as of yet unclear. Card doesn't work as written, needs errata
User avatar
Jose-san
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby the Jabberwock » Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:40 am

Open to the Summons: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2957

Needs clarification that it allows one to start the game with an agent character in the starting company.
the Jabberwock
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: CoE discussion; Rulings and/or CoE Erratum

Postby Shapeshifter » Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:12 pm

Limited site use for FW companies?:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2934
and
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2932
User avatar
Shapeshifter
Council Member
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Germany


Return to CoE Rules & Errata

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron