Search found 1450 matches

by Thorsten the Traveller
Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:28 am
Forum: Worlds
Topic: Worlds 2018 in the Netherlands
Replies: 3
Views: 263

Re: Worlds 2018 in the Netherlands

Great! you should know there's a special rule, people who have won Worlds 3x or more get a -6 TP penalty in qualifiers :-) We'll probably round up sunday at 3 pm. From Heemskerk it's an hour trainride to Amsterdam Airport (4x per hour). But, since anybody coming by car will be passing Amsterdam Airp...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:15 am
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: The One Ring strike cancellation
Replies: 8
Views: 559

Re: The One Ring strike cancellation

Hmm, it doesn't alter the number of strikes nor their prowess, nor any other properties of the attack, so one is inclined to say no.

If only CRF would have read "or a strike of the attack"...
It might be better to change the rule than individual cards, then again, sometimes it might not be.
by Thorsten the Traveller
Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:07 am
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: The One Ring
Replies: 5
Views: 163

Re: The One Ring

As the Jabberwock said, there will be another opportunity to change The One Ring minion version next year. But if this one is voted down, to accept a proposal for MV will be less likely. The ROC will not bring the same items up for voting each year just to give it another try. Besides, if this propo...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Thu Jun 07, 2018 9:15 am
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Freeze the flesh
Replies: 8
Views: 235

Re: Freeze the flesh

Perhaps also it wasn't clear what exactly your concern was. Is it thematic, or mechanic? Basically you're saying a character can first be eliminated by bc and Freezed, while he can be corrupted and Freezed again later that turn? I suppose so, but it's a) far-fetched, b) now also possible, c) not the...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Sun Jun 03, 2018 10:57 am
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Replies: 19
Views: 281

Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!

Not that it is a justification in itself, but in current (tournament) practise people do play FFF and follow up with a Tidings of Bold Spies, a good combo especially with Whole Villages Roused or Awaken Defenders. But since combos are always tricky, the on-guard use is still more frequent. Moreover,...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:45 pm
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Replies: 19
Views: 281

Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!

Both Searching Eye (revealed as On Guard) and FEAR! FIRE! FOES! (2nd effect) have target that does not exist in M/H phase. It does not have a target during m/h hazard phase in the existing version, but I assumed we agreed that was due to sloppy wording, not on purpose. In Shapeshifter's version it ...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:01 am
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Replies: 19
Views: 281

Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!

However, the question is also, why add limitations if they are not strictly needed? So I prefer the erratum proposal to follow Shapeshifter's suggestion.

@ Konrad. Would it really need that on-guard clause though? Searching Eye does not affect the automatic-attack, this one does.
by Thorsten the Traveller
Thu May 31, 2018 3:25 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Freeze the flesh
Replies: 16
Views: 552

Re: Freeze the flesh

or stuff along these lines. that includes adding MP pile in the reference, and a body check. MP pile and Out-of-play are direct pinpoints, so that works (same for NsANsP), but right now there's nothing. As we're discussing in the Out of Play proposal, the character could be back in your cardbinder....
by Thorsten the Traveller
Thu May 31, 2018 3:18 pm
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: The Fortress of Isen
Replies: 6
Views: 128

Re: The Fortress of Isen

thanks :wink:
seems I'm a bit overworked.
by Thorsten the Traveller
Thu May 31, 2018 12:46 pm
Forum: Rules Questions
Topic: Freeze the flesh
Replies: 16
Views: 552

Re: Freeze the flesh

Why is this card "playable on a character" in the first place? You need to get the card first from somewhere out of play. Should it not be "playable on a character in your out-of-play pile", or simply "playable if a character in the shadow-magic using character's company was eliminated this turn. Re...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Thu May 31, 2018 12:32 pm
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: The Fortress of Isen
Replies: 6
Views: 128

Re: The Fortress of Isen

What about Guarded Haven?
by Thorsten the Traveller
Tue May 29, 2018 9:35 am
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Old Road
Replies: 51
Views: 490

Re: Old Road

Help me out and save me some time, where exactly can this rule (or ruling) be found: "Resource short-events and permanent-events can be played at any time during your turn as limited by specific card text." Your current (last) proposal does still mean that the Haven site must tap? I do not want to s...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Mon May 28, 2018 9:32 pm
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Old Road
Replies: 51
Views: 490

Re: Old Road

If character would tap to attempt as main effect then the playing of Old Road will not be such synonymous. Yes I know this line of reasoning, though I'm not sure I agree with it entirely, but in other cases you seem to resolve this by changing 'to' into 'and.' Not 'tap to', but 'tap and make an inf...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Mon May 28, 2018 8:15 pm
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: Old Road
Replies: 51
Views: 490

Re: Old Road

playing the Old Road should be synonymous to influence attempt, allowing to reveal On Guard card in response Agreed, and I've already written the erratum proposal in such a way as to make this clear. But we like to make clear for the voters what the consequences are of voting against the proposal, ...
by Thorsten the Traveller
Mon May 28, 2018 2:44 pm
Forum: Annual Rules Vote - Submissions
Topic: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!
Replies: 19
Views: 281

Re: FEAR! FIRE! FOES!

So the issue remains whether the alternative effect was indeed meant to be only an on-guard surprise, or not. In my opinion Konrad is correct here, and this not only reflects the theme of the card better but also the common praxis, as it is in fact the way the card is mostly played (though strictly ...

Go to advanced search