The Last Homely House

Middle-Earth => Archives of Minas Tirith => Topic started by: sgtdraino on March 30, 2014, 10:08:10 AM

Title: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: sgtdraino on March 30, 2014, 10:08:10 AM
Wondering what happens when Bound to its Fate is played, and Erland, Advisor to Brand is in play. Does Bound to its Fate do nothing, because it cannot look at or reveal cards from hand? Or does it automatically add a burden, because there are no revealed cards?
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: Legion on March 30, 2014, 11:04:02 AM
It does nothing. You did not do the first part of the text, so no burden gets added. I use Erland in my Last Stand deck and I've seen this happen.
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: exarrkun on March 31, 2014, 03:06:58 AM
I think you can counter this by playing porter troll. The FP cannot reveal cards to you, even if they have events, so a burden would be added. Can anyone confirm this?
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: Haszor on March 31, 2014, 05:13:25 AM
I think you can counter this by playing porter troll. The FP cannot reveal cards to you, even if they have events, so a burden would be added. Can anyone confirm this?
Pretty sure they could still prevent the burden, as Erland says that the shadow player cannot reveal cards, and porter troll doesn't directly reveal the card, but rather gives the other player the option to reveal.
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: sgtdraino on March 31, 2014, 09:08:38 AM
Sounds like Erland's a pretty good counter to the various Orc corruption decks!
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: Ringbearer on April 01, 2014, 01:15:53 PM
I would look at it the other way. Since you cannot reveal the hand, the free peoples player cannot discard a revealed event and thus has to add a burden. You have to do as much as possible.
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: bibfortuna25 on April 01, 2014, 11:44:24 PM
Ringbearer's got it right. Since FP cannot discard an event with BTIF, a burden gets added. Porter Troll isn't a problem with Erland though, since FP is the one doing the revealing. Great question!
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: sgtdraino on April 02, 2014, 07:03:07 AM
That is kind of what I suspected. I gather that Gemp currently doesn't do it that way?
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: exarrkun on April 05, 2014, 03:12:00 AM
bibfortuna25, I follow the reasoning behind the porter troll, but erland also says a shadow player cannot look at cards in the FP player's hand.
So even when the FP player chooses to reveal an event from his/her hand, the shadow player may not look at it. Therefore the card isn't revealed to the shadow player.
Perhaps I'm misinterpreting the text, English is only my 3rd language...
Title: Re: Bound to its Fate vs Erland, Adviser to Brand
Post by: bibfortuna25 on April 05, 2014, 06:13:39 AM
When the Shadow player plays BTIF with Erland in play, Erland prevents the FP's hand from being revealed. FP cannot discard an event, because no events were revealed. Therefore, a burden must be added.