The Last Homely House

Middle-Earth => Archives of Minas Tirith => Topic started by: Yanko Markovic on July 30, 2010, 05:57:18 PM

Title: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Yanko Markovic on July 30, 2010, 05:57:18 PM
Faramir's Sword says "Each minion skirmishing Faramir at a battleground or forest site is roaming" The minion is romaing until what? Until the skirmish is over? But the ability just states it, it doesn't have "skirmish:".

Secondly, can I use "Phase:" actions if the requirement to use that action is "until the start of the X phase"?
In other words, can I use Guarded to discard all minions I make roaming with Madril?

Oh, and this one just came up: Is this starting fellowship legal? (I'm starting to doubt it)

Faramir, Captain of Gondor
Halbarad, Ranger of the North
Madril, Defender of Osgiliath
Ranger of the White Tree

Thanks
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on July 30, 2010, 06:02:22 PM
1)  The minion is roaming while the skirmish against Faramir is occurring.

2)  No, if something lasts until the start of the phase, it ends as soon as that phase starts.

3)  No, costs too much.  Take out Faramir (if the ring-bearer has less than 9 resistance) or Ranger of the White Tree (if the ring-bearer has at least 9 resistance) and you're ok.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Yanko Markovic on July 30, 2010, 06:06:45 PM
Weird, then why do some people put Guarded in IB decks? Nevermind...

Are you sure about the starting fellowship? Halbarad says that while the rb is res 9 or more, his twilight cost is -1, becoming cost 2; while Ranger of the White Tree says he is cost -2 while you can spot a guy with cost 3 or more, which wouldn't be the case.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on July 30, 2010, 06:08:11 PM
Who is your ring-bearer?
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Yanko Markovic on July 30, 2010, 06:11:37 PM
Frodo. Nevermind, I know it's illegal :P

But even if it was Isildur or Boromir, he can't be res 9 even with TRoR.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: TheJord on July 30, 2010, 08:58:51 PM
That starting Fellowship would work with a resistance 9 RB.

Faramir, CoG = [3]
Halbarad, RotN = [4] - 3+1
Madril, DoO = [4] - he costs 0
Ranger of the White Tree = [4] - he also costs 0, -1 because of Faramir, and -2 because you can spot Halbarad, whose twilight cost is 3. You could start 4 of these guys in this setup.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Witchkingx5 on July 31, 2010, 12:35:51 AM
exactly, the starting fellwoship works. But much stronger is a felowship like that:

any RB e.g. Boromir, BoC

Faramir, CoG
Denethor, Lomt
Madril, DoO
Gondorian Prowler x4

legal in Expanded and Open. Typical IB starting fellwoship.

oh, and the reason why guarded is in those Deck is pretty simple. Either way, you get threats for Madril, and on the other side, you can still discard minions bearing cards like Soldier's Cache.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on July 31, 2010, 06:00:46 AM
That starting Fellowship would work with a resistance 9 RB.

Faramir, CoG = [3]
Halbarad, RotN = [4] - 3+1
Madril, DoO = [4] - he costs 0
Ranger of the White Tree = [4] - he also costs 0, -1 because of Faramir, and -2 because you can spot Halbarad, whose twilight cost is 3. You could start 4 of these guys in this setup.

In that case, if the ring-bearer has at least 9 resistance, then it seems that Halbarad's twilight cost is still 2 at the time you try to play Ranger of the White Tree.

I was basing this on the way the following sentence in the rulebook is worded.  Were you interpreting this a different way?

Rulebook:
"Cards already in play that affect another card’s twilight cost have that effect only when the card to be modified is coming into play."
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Witchkingx5 on July 31, 2010, 08:49:31 AM
he just pointed the whole thing out wrong. Ranger of the white Tree spots Faramir, who's Twilight cost is 3. Amen.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on July 31, 2010, 09:49:45 AM
he just pointed the whole thing out wrong. Ranger of the white Tree spots Faramir, who's Twilight cost is 3. Amen.

Faramir, CoG is not an unbound [Gondor] companion, he is a ring-bound [Gondor] companion.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: ket_the_jet on July 31, 2010, 11:44:01 AM
exactly, the starting fellwoship works. But much stronger is a felowship like that:

any RB e.g. Boromir, BoC

Faramir, CoG
Denethor, Lomt
Madril, DoO
Gondorian Prowler x4

legal in Expanded and Open. Typical IB starting fellwoship.

oh, and the reason why guarded is in those Deck is pretty simple. Either way, you get threats for Madril, and on the other side, you can still discard minions bearing cards like Soldier's Cache.

Even stronger would be:

Boromir, Bearer of Council
Faramir, Captain of Gondor
Denethor, Lord of Minas Tirith
Madril, Defender of Osgiliath
Gondorian Prowler
Gondorian Prowler
Gondorian Prowler
Gondorian Prowler

There's your karma. Ripe as peaches.
-wtk
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: stimpy on July 31, 2010, 12:39:06 PM
he just pointed the whole thing out wrong. Ranger of the white Tree spots Faramir, who's Twilight cost is 3. Amen.

Faramir, CoG is not an unbound [Gondor] companion, he is a ring-bound [Gondor] companion.

I agree, that starting lineup costs 1 too much.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: TheJord on July 31, 2010, 03:11:53 PM
Twilight modifiers only apply when a card is played, as Tbiesty quoted. Therefore, Halbarad has a posted cost of [3].
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on July 31, 2010, 03:28:13 PM
"Cards already in play that affect another card's twilight cost have that effect only when the card to be modified is coming into play."

Since the rule says another card, I'm not so sure.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: TheJord on July 31, 2010, 03:29:29 PM
Halbarad's cost is only affected when he is coming into play. That should make it clear.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on July 31, 2010, 03:44:29 PM
If that is the case, it should be spelled out more clearly that cards affecting their own twilight cost also only affect it when it is coming into play, to avoid confusion.

Does anyone disagree that this is indeed the way it works?
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: MR. Lurtzy on July 31, 2010, 04:06:46 PM
It's not unclear.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Elessar's Socks on August 01, 2010, 03:03:36 AM
The use of "another" in the ruling does seem to leave Halbarad out, but I believe the intent here was to apply the same to him.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: Tbiesty on August 01, 2010, 05:45:44 AM
The use of "another" in the ruling does seem to leave Halbarad out, but I believe the intent here was to apply the same to him.

I agree.  Using the word "a" instead of "another" would clarify that.
Title: Re: Question about permanent-like effects and phase actions
Post by: stimpy on August 01, 2010, 07:21:10 AM
"Cards already in play that affect another card's twilight cost have that effect only when the card to be modified is coming into play."

Since the rule says another card, I'm not so sure.

Right, Halbarad is twilight cost 2, by his own text.