LotR TCG Wiki → Card Sets:  All 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 → Forums:  TLHH CC

Author Topic: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality  (Read 6195 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

January 21, 2009, 04:08:57 PM
Read 6195 times

Zoskan

  • *
  • Information Offline
  • Orc
  • Posts: 31
Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« on: January 21, 2009, 04:08:57 PM »
Bill Ferny, Swarthy Sneering Fellow game text says: Nazgûl are not roaming. What happen then if Faramir, Bearer of Quality wounds himself to make a Nazgûl roaming when Bill is in play? Is the the Nazgûl gonna be roaming or not???
« Last Edit: January 21, 2009, 04:28:16 PM by Zoskan »

January 21, 2009, 04:56:31 PM
Reply #1

Kralik

  • Guest
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2009, 04:56:31 PM »
It's the paradox of the millennium!

The solution? Don't play Expanded. :P

January 21, 2009, 05:08:04 PM
Reply #2

TheJord

  • League Director
  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • King
  • Posts: 2294
  • High King of Rules
    • GamesCobra
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2009, 05:08:04 PM »
I think this particular quandry is similar to the question not long ago about 'preventing' wound and 'not being able to take' wounds.

Bill Ferny, SSF says Nazgul cant be roaming. Faramir pays the cost of his action, but his effect is nullified by SSF.
"The rule of Gondor is mine!"

January 21, 2009, 05:45:54 PM
Reply #3

Zoskan

  • *
  • Information Offline
  • Orc
  • Posts: 31
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2009, 05:45:54 PM »
I'm thinking too that Bill should nullified Faramir's special ability if he targets a Nazgûl but I can't find a specific rule to support that theory. At least, Faramir could always make Bill roaming.

January 21, 2009, 06:03:24 PM
Reply #4

FM

  • Future Judge
  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4074
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2009, 06:03:24 PM »
Don't they have yes-no interaction? I recall it existed bck in the day... Basically, when two abilities say "yes" and "no" to something, the "no" prevails. So if a minion is unable to gain fierce and you play a card that says it makes it fierce, it won't be fierce. If a card says to wound and they can't take wounds, they don't take wounds. Same with Bill.

January 21, 2009, 06:20:24 PM
Reply #5

Elf_Lvr

  • ******
  • Information Offline
  • Lord
  • Posts: 3628
  • Rhythmic Ringwraith
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2009, 06:20:24 PM »
I guess since Bill just says "Nazgul are not roaming" you could really make one roaming - it'd just be un-roaming-ed immediately after.
Happy Hunting!
Remember Cobracards.com.
Thou cannot unjack what doth hath been jacked. - Menace64
"To die's the day worth livin' for!"
Maybe you guys can find a bard and have your story of heroic Balrog proximity put into verse.

January 21, 2009, 06:26:32 PM
Reply #6

Elessar's Socks

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1353
  • "I see...I look foul and feel foul. Is that it?"
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2009, 06:26:32 PM »
I'd use what FM was saying, although the rulebook might not explicitly cover it. Tossing another example in there, if Shelob HL prevents a companion from being assigned to a skirmish, Mauhur RH won't be able to assign himself to that companion. So my feeling is that, based on precedence, the "no" from Ferny will also stand.

January 22, 2009, 12:50:21 AM
Reply #7

lem0nhead

  • Vegetarian Cannibal
  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4205
  • Juicy Fruit
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2009, 12:50:21 AM »
It doesnt really matter if the effect occurs whilst Ferny is on the table. He flatly stops nazgul from roaming and nothing can prevent that. Its like having something out that says your conditions cant be discarded and then you play a card that says discard a condition. You cant overule a card unless it specifically says you can, i dont think.
Ban shampoo, demand real poo.
That's like having "Some Who Ride Ponies" as a Rohan follower. ~ Dain Ironfoot.

January 22, 2009, 03:08:44 AM
Reply #8

Gil-Estel

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • King
  • Posts: 2267
  • Abuser of the Force
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2009, 03:08:44 AM »
« Last Edit: January 22, 2009, 03:10:23 AM by Gil-Estel »
..."Elves seldom give unguarded advice, for advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise, and all courses may run ill"...

January 23, 2009, 04:46:45 AM
Reply #9

Vroengard

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 424
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2009, 04:46:45 AM »
OK, but this is definetly more clear than the original comparison, I mean, when you cannot wound, you cannot wound. This does not leave space for discussions. But thanks for the original question GIl- Estel. Good to know

January 23, 2009, 07:22:15 AM
Reply #10

Pepin The Breve

  • Well-spoken Gentlehobbit
  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bill Ferny, SSF vs Faramir, Bearer of Quality
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2009, 07:22:15 AM »
  Bill have an active text that states that Nazgul are not roaming. As long as Ferny´s text still there (and active) there is no way that Nazgul can be roaming cause he insert a new condition (state) to the game. If some card nullifies Ferny´s text (like Phial of Galadriel, SG) then Nazgul can become roaming, cause that condition no longer exist.