Deep Mines

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Deep Mines

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Sun May 27, 2018 9:05 am

Antonio has a mean One Ring characterless deck, just dumping resources on the table (Armories etc), while waiting for characters to appear at Lórien, then Lucky Search for a ring at Mount Doom with an almost empty playdeck. He's been making lots of friends with this deck :-)
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Deep Mines

Post by Bandobras Took » Mon May 28, 2018 2:48 am

I wonder what he does with it after Lucky Searching, since none of the dunk cards would be legally playable . . . :)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

User avatar
the Jabberwock
Council Chairman
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Deep Mines

Post by the Jabberwock » Thu May 31, 2018 6:07 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:03 am
If you want to make possible a moving to Deep Mines from site connected via Gnawed Ways, then remove first "only". :)
Wouldn't the text of Gnawed Ways over-ride the Deep Mines text which states "may move to this site only from one of your...."?

After all, Gnawed Ways specifically states it is played on a Deep Mines site and that it creates an adjacent under-deeps site.

Or is your opinion that Gnawed Ways only creates a one-way adjacent site given the way Deep Mines is worded (meaning you can only leave the Deep Mines site, but cannot enter it using Gnawed Ways)?

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 1958
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Contact:

Re: Deep Mines

Post by Konrad Klar » Thu May 31, 2018 8:53 am

the Jabberwock wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 6:07 am
Or is your opinion that Gnawed Ways only creates a one-way adjacent site given the way Deep Mines is worded (meaning you can only leave the Deep Mines site, but cannot enter it using Gnawed Ways)?
Yes.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

dirhaval
Posts: 554
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:39 am

Re: Deep Mines

Post by dirhaval » Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:39 pm

I like to look at the intent of Deep Mines for fallen-wizards through the lens of the canon.
Saruman first needed the confidence of security before any mining. Thus, Saruman was not a wandering
wizard anymore and likely stayed at Isengard or nearby annoying Treebeard with walks in the forest.

I need the Deep Mines card to keep the protected wizardhaven requirement to give fallen-wizards access to the richness of the Under-deeps.
However, moving "up" to a replay surface site after the surface site has been discarded (e.g. Call of Home discarding lone character, Hidden Haven, and Guarded Haven) is acceptable to me.

However, I like to note that movement (by the card owner) to the Deep Mines requires a protected Wizardhaven AND from that protected Wizardhaven. Thus, shuttling between Deep Mines and a replay non-protected Wizardhaven is not possible.

Gnawed Ways though allows moving away from a non-surface sited Deeps Mines, but not returning to that non-Wizardhaven protected surface site Deep Mines. Gnawed Ways nullifies this requirement for an opponent moving to an opponent's Deep Mines.

Post Reply

Return to “Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”