Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Errata issued by the CoE, open discussion of candidate rules for errata, and submissions for the Annual Rules Vote.
marcos
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by marcos » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:11 pm

for now i can also think on ruse and more sense than you.

Sauron
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:27 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Sauron » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:14 pm

marcos wrote:for now i can also think on ruse and more sense than you.
I assume you mean the strike assignment part of ruse?

marcos
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by marcos » Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:16 pm

of course

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Bandobras Took » Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:45 am

Also Helm of Her Secrecy in the case of Nazgûl Auto-Attacks, Motionless Among The Slain, Adunaphel Unleashed, and Gold Chains In The Wind.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

User avatar
Shapeshifter
Council Member
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:16 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Shapeshifter » Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:20 pm

About the playtesting thing: IIRC we have decided (or wanted to?) that every new errata issued by the CoE shall be playtested for some time (half a year?) before it will become really official. If it fails the playtesting phase the errata will be withdrawn then. I think we should add something like this to the newly rewritten charta.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Bandobras Took » Mon Mar 07, 2011 1:38 pm

One of the worst things you can do to any process is drag it out longer than a couple of months. Usually, that turns it into a slow death. Half a year is overkill on playtesting if you're serious about it. If you're not serious about it, why bother?
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Jose-san
Council Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Jose-san » Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:12 pm

Bandobras Took wrote:One of the worst things you can do to any process is drag it out longer than a couple of months. Usually, that turns it into a slow death. Half a year is overkill on playtesting if you're serious about it. If you're not serious about it, why bother?
I agree with Ben on this one. Two months seems more than enough.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by miguel » Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:31 pm

So can we make this a package deal? It would be silly to change the rules regarding auto-attacks, while leaving the cards with multiple effects thingie hung out to dry.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Bandobras Took » Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:10 pm

Sounds fine.
When facing an automatic attack, you may only play resources that state they are playable on an attack or strike or a character/company facing such. You may not play such a resource if it specifies it may not be played on automatic attacks. When facing an attack created by a card with multiple effects, you may only play resources that state they are playable on an attack or strike or a character/company facing such.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:56 pm

miguel wrote:
So can we make this a package deal?
Sounds ok. You hinted this would be "a big change with some ramifications", but I have not seen those personally.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

miguel
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by miguel » Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:28 am

Thorsten the Traveller wrote:You hinted this would be "a big change with some ramifications", but I have not seen those personally.
(i) changes in facing automatic-attacks need to be applied to facing attacks from cards with multiple effects as well
(ii) these changes will create (new/old) decktypes that currently do not work (Sojourn in Shadows active RW)
(iii) they will also alter the way people can get past some requirements to get MPs (cards affecting strike assignment vs. Smoke on the Wind)
(iV) they will overturn digests directly regarding the matter
(v) they will affect the interpretation of related rulesmatters (what's playable in the strike sequence)
(vi) anything else that might come up in playtesting

Those seem like pretty big changes to me, but I do think this is good for the game.

User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Erratum Proposal: Cards Playable On Automatic Attacks

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:21 am

ok, I can see that from the perspective of a rulesmeister this would seem like a big change :D

Well Akhorahil was already Sojournying his way through middle earth, now he can misguide some Hobbits at Bag End, great!, Some more active RW's is not a bad thing. Motionless Among the Slain on Smoke on Wind, sounds like a real navy seals operation :D
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules & Errata”