166
Rules Discussion / Re: Armory and Royal Armorer
« on: February 12, 2018, 01:31:04 PM »
Good. Thanks everyone.
Always nice to see I was reading something right.
Always nice to see I was reading something right.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
If my FM with ForceField attack creature with Reverse Attack, my mage will get this attack through ForceField?
Curses can counter anything, even lets you avoid having to roll dice.
"Your Mage" has started falling a little out of favor, as it has been firmly established that your mage and you the player are synonymous.
This is an interesting idea. I agree with Santar and Coshade that it depends on our interpretation of "one of your creatures". If we take that to mean a creature that you control, then you could put it on a Mind Controlled creature. This could have the weird affect though that if the creature gets free of the Mind Control before the Chant of Rage is destroyed, then the Hate token would end up on an enemy creature and thus not be destroyed when Chant of Rage is.
I'm pretty sure that that interaction is not intended. But then there's also the weird interaction where if we interpret it as a creature you own, you could put it on a creature your enemy has stolen from you with Mind Control. That isn't really desired either. You could also argue that it should be limited to a creature you both own AND control.
I'm honestly not sure which of these three positions I would promote, nor am I positive if there's ever been a ruling on what "your" means in the past. I want to say it means something you control, so it would work exactly how Kaarin suspected, but I honestly don't know for sure. The safest answer, I think, is the third option requiring both owning and controlling. Does anyone have previous examples of similar wording?
Deathlock still in here, even if i don´t use it much and it just got nerfed some.