September 28, 2024, 06:10:41 PM

Show Posts

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.


Messages - Arkdeniz

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 19
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.

167
Rules Discussion / Armory and Royal Armorer
« on: February 12, 2018, 05:16:22 AM »
Just want to check my understanding here.

the Royal Armourer gives a +1 Armour token to a soldier that does not already have one, while the Armory just gives +1 Armour.

The Armoury’s power will not interfere with the Armourer’s power, correct?

A Vet token gives +1 melee and +1 armour. Does that count as an Armour +1 token for the purpose of the Armourer? I assume it is something different again.

168
Player Feedback and Suggestions / Re: New weapon- Dual Blades!
« on: February 07, 2018, 01:41:10 PM »
And open to all the Mages. Don't forget that.

169
Rules Discussion / Re: reanimate and summoning circle
« on: February 06, 2018, 03:38:50 PM »
Ooh. Good catch. I hadn't picked up the different wording on the two spells.

It is a little pity that you can't keep track of where the bodies lie on the arena floor, and animate them from where they lie. It would be a nice trick to catch the enemy unaware, having a zombie suddenly stand up in their zone.

170
Rules Discussion / Re: reanimate and summoning circle
« on: February 06, 2018, 02:10:58 PM »
The Codex clearly states that the reanimating creature is taken from the discard pile and placed face down in the zone it was destroyed in, and then turned face up and summoned back into play at the end of the round.

So I would say no, the Summoning Circle is not an option.

171
Rules Discussion / Re: Gerard Matrange
« on: February 02, 2018, 01:47:03 PM »
Everyone is right. In the text on Matranga's card "they" = "your mage".

172
Rules Discussion / Re: Avoid attack from Reverse Attack
« on: February 02, 2018, 01:43:58 PM »
If my FM with ForceField attack creature with Reverse Attack, my mage will get this attack through ForceField?

The Forcefield effect occurs before the Avoid Attack step.
The Reverse Attack occurs during the Avoid Attack step.

So the Forcefield would not stop the Reverse Attack hitting your mage.


173
General Discussion / Re: What you think are the schools from this Mage?
« on: February 01, 2018, 05:52:03 AM »
Having had a second look at the picture, I sense an Eastern theme to expand on the Meditating Monk, which is Holy or Mind.

So I am picking a major in mind/force and a minor in holy.

174
Mages / Re: favorite mage
« on: February 01, 2018, 12:17:48 AM »
Curses can counter anything, even lets you avoid having to roll dice.

There is a reason why warlock is my no. 2 :)

175
Mages / Re: favorite mage
« on: January 31, 2018, 03:01:56 PM »
Easily the Necromancer.

My MW circle agrees with me that my dice rolling has been, over all the time we’ve played, below par.

Necromancer has more ways to deal damage without rolling those $&*@& dice!

176
OCTGN is not following the rulebook on this one.

It is clearly stated in the Setup rules on p5 of the rulebook that mages are chosen before the initiative is rolled.

177
Rules Discussion / Re: Mind control and chant of rage
« on: January 30, 2018, 02:43:26 PM »
"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.

It surely cannot be entirely synonymous. You are someone sitting at a table playing a card game. Your Mage is a character running around an arena lobbing spells. I would have thought only one of those two individuals can have a discard pile, and it is not "Your Mage".** Some metagame concepts creep in around the edges.


**Unless, I suppose, we picture the mages as actually casting from pages torn out of their spellbooks and throwing the pieces of paper on the ground as they go. I guess that could work.

178
Rules Discussion / Re: Mind control and chant of rage
« on: January 30, 2018, 06:10:01 AM »
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?

I have found various uses of "your" on the spell cards. There are:

Your Mage*
Your spellbook
Your discard pile
Your opponent
Your zone
[type of spell] your mage controls
Your mana supply
Your choosing/your choice
Your spells
Your Challenged enemy
Your next attack
Yourself
Your effect roll

Only Chant of Rage refers to 'your creatures', rather than 'friendly creatures' or 'creatures you control'.

I would like to think that 'your creature' must mean something other than 'creature you control', or else the latter phrase would have been used since it is commonly in use on other cards.

The only thing I can think it might mean is 'a creature that came out of your spellbook' (i.e. a card you as a player own). The only rationale I can think of for this is that if the creature you Mind Control is destroyed, it does not go onto your discard pile, but the opponent's, since it is their card after all, and not *ahem* yours. The phrase 'your discard pile' is used several times to distinguish between the two piles.

There is a wide inconsistency in usage between "your mage" and just "your". They clearly almost always mean 'your mage' rather than 'you the player' (or else their would be interesting connotations for spells like Smite), but I argue you have to make exceptions for the more metagame concepts of 'your creature' and 'your discard pile'.

All this is a long winded way of saying "I think Zuberi's second theory is probably right, odd as it may seem".

But who knows? This is a very interesting question.

*in passing I note that the Ivarium Halberd refers both to 'this mage' (being the target) and 'your mage' (being the caster) - thus in theory if they were playing together in a variant match an arena mage could cast it on to an academy mage, who would thus gain one attack die more than if if they had cast it on themself. This contrasts with similar Academy weapons, such as the Johktari Hunting Knife, which use the term 'this mage' throughout.

179
Spells / Re: favorite conjuration
« on: January 30, 2018, 05:29:44 AM »
Phew!

I was worried I'd missed something.

180
Spells / Re: favorite conjuration
« on: January 30, 2018, 12:52:18 AM »
Deathlock still in here, even if i don´t use it much and it just got nerfed some.

Has something happened to Deathlock recently?

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 19