| |
| Author |
Message |
| OneFathom |
![]() Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:36 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 426
Location:
|
| I’m pretty sure the starting fellowship is illegal simply because of the "and/or" text of the ents. With Quickbeam, his text specifically says his twilight cost is -1 for each Unbound Hobbit AND ent you can spot, making him free with the 3 unbound hobbits and Merry/Pippin’s game text. However, with the other Ents, if I’m not mistaken, you either spot the Ents OR the Unbound Hobbits, not both. Quickbeam’s text allows you to spot both, but not the other ents. Seriously, do you really think Decipher would allow the FP player to have an 8 person starting fellowship. The text is tricky, I can understand, because it does seem, at first, like you could. I’m pretty sure there was a ruling a while back saying you either spot Unbound Hobbits or Ents, but not both. Quickbeam is the only exception. Anyone please feel to correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am. Sorry to break it to you man. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| macheteman |
![]() Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:17 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 1200
Location: The Jungle
|
| actually, i think we had this discussion before, and bib said that it worked. i could be wrong though... |
Check out my best article The Utterly Corrupt Corruption,
If at first you don't succeed...Sky-diving isn't for you.
"Combat is dangerous. It tends to interupt your breathing process."
ROLF!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| CarpeGuitarrem |
![]() Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:42 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Posts: 3361
Location: Franciscan University of Steubenville
|
| Hmm...I remember that it was up on the D boards, I don’t know that they ever clarified it. |
| "ok, change of plans. the Cobracards christmas party is coming to my house, and we’re gunna teach FM how to hunt." (mm) |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Elessar's Socks |
![]() Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 4:47 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 349
Location:
|
Quickbeam’s text has been clarified to "or" as well, I think partly because people were arguing that you had to spot BOTH an Ent and an unbound Hobbit to get the reduction.
The consensus in other threads and forums is that you don’t have to spot just one race. Not sure if that’ll be convincing, though, the rulebook really should’ve used an example.
Gartax wrote: in that shadow side you have 1 big problem cycling.
Because of spotting recrirement
Troll need you to spot an orc or minion except tower troll and the Cave troll
The trolls will be spotting the Keyward, with the Freeps in charge of cycling.
Goblin Hordes was left out to redline the deck, but I should probably be running it anyway. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| NBarden |
![]() Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:41 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 5468
Location: I don't know...
|
OneFathom wrote: I’m pretty sure the starting fellowship is illegal simply because of the "and/or" text of the ents. With Quickbeam, his text specifically says his twilight cost is -1 for each Unbound Hobbit AND ent you can spot, making him free with the 3 unbound hobbits and Merry/Pippin’s game text. However, with the other Ents, if I’m not mistaken, you either spot the Ents OR the Unbound Hobbits, not both. Quickbeam’s text allows you to spot both, but not the other ents. Seriously, do you really think Decipher would allow the FP player to have an 8 person starting fellowship. The text is tricky, I can understand, because it does seem, at first, like you could. I’m pretty sure there was a ruling a while back saying you either spot Unbound Hobbits or Ents, but not both. Quickbeam is the only exception. Anyone please feel to correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am. Sorry to break it to you man.
You’re wrong. We’ve had this one before and the fellowship stands. If you want me to, I can dig up a link. |
 -Trade With Me
 Add the popcorn smiley to your sig, help it achieve world domination.
What if the hokey pokey really IS what its all about? 
As I lay in bed staring at the stars last night, I thought to myself, "where the heck is the ceiling?"
 Spotlight on....Sense of Obligation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| macheteman |
![]() Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 11:18 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 1200
Location: The Jungle
|
| even though it works, i don’t think that it’s the best fellowship to pair with the trolls. plus it puts a perfectly standard shadow into expanded format. it would be more effective if you narrowed down what it will be facing by keeping it standard. |
Check out my best article The Utterly Corrupt Corruption,
If at first you don't succeed...Sky-diving isn't for you.
"Combat is dangerous. It tends to interupt your breathing process."
ROLF!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| NBarden |
![]() Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:10 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 5468
Location: I don't know...
|
Yeah, try this one on for size.
Gimli, Bearer of Grudges
The Ring of Rings
Gandalf, Leader of Men
Aldred, Eored Warrior
Gondorian Prowler
Saved from the Fire x 4
Calculated Risk x 4
Citadel to Gate x 2
Have Patience x 3
Eowyn, Lady of Ithilien
Aragorn, Driven by Need
Eomer, Eored Captain
Riddermark Javelin x 2
Aragorn’s Bow, Ranger’s Longbow
Anduril, Sword that was Broken
Gimli’s Battle-Axe, Trusted Weapon
Rohirrim Mount x 2
Coif x 2
Sword Rack x 2
The point is to burn the prowler to grab Gorn, bow and Anduril. With that mini engine set up, begin machine gun fire.
Then discard the javelins and mop up with Eowyn and a Rohirrim Mount.
The deck is designed to filter and cycle like crazy as well. Saved from the Fire and Calculated Risk are designed to filter through like crazy. |
-Trade With Me
Add the popcorn smiley to your sig, help it achieve world domination.
What if the hokey pokey really IS what its all about?
As I lay in bed staring at the stars last night, I thought to myself, "where the heck is the ceiling?"
Spotlight on....Sense of Obligation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| OneFathom |
![]() Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:22 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 426
Location:
|
NBarden wrote: OneFathom wrote: I’m pretty sure the starting fellowship is illegal simply because of the "and/or" text of the ents. With Quickbeam, his text specifically says his twilight cost is -1 for each Unbound Hobbit AND ent you can spot, making him free with the 3 unbound hobbits and Merry/Pippin’s game text. However, with the other Ents, if I’m not mistaken, you either spot the Ents OR the Unbound Hobbits, not both. Quickbeam’s text allows you to spot both, but not the other ents. Seriously, do you really think Decipher would allow the FP player to have an 8 person starting fellowship. The text is tricky, I can understand, because it does seem, at first, like you could. I’m pretty sure there was a ruling a while back saying you either spot Unbound Hobbits or Ents, but not both. Quickbeam is the only exception. Anyone please feel to correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am. Sorry to break it to you man.
You’re wrong. We’ve had this one before and the fellowship stands. If you want me to, I can dig up a link.
NB:
Actually, if you wouldn’t mind, I would be very interested in reading the ruling on that. If it has already been discussed ... and the ruling still stands ... that’s fine, but I would like to read a more thorough explanation on it. If you get around to it, awesome, if not, no biggie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Gartax |
![]() Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 9:24 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 98
Location:
|
I know NB is right.... for official answer i don’t know, maybe searh on decipher board....
also i am not a master in grammar nor of english since it is not my first language
I ll give it a try
Ent Horde’s twilight cost is -2 for each Ent or unbound hobbit you can spot
see that like a loop. for spotting in LOTR are not done simultanioustly, but one at a time.
so the question is what can i spot ( Ent or unbound hobbit) so my first spot is an ent. My secound is an unbound hobbit..... and so on.....
hope i help and that i am right.......... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Elessar's Socks |
![]() Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:14 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 349
Location:
|
Your explanation sounds good, Gartax.
Here’s a confirmation from Bib: link.
I wonder if "for each A and each B" (somewhat clearer than "for each A and B") would be clearer than the "for each A or each B" the rules are using now. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are UTC - 4
|
|
Forum index » Lord of the Rings TCG » Open Lord of the Rings Discussion