Characters vs. Followers Name Game

[Anvar]

Agree with Thran. Note that the Saruman follower cannot be given Saruman's Staff, despite the fact that it says bearer must be Saruman. This is because of the rule that Followers cannot bear cards.

Anvar

[MR. Lurtzy]

Ah, then what about whisper in the dark? Followers do seem to be able to bear cards.

[Elessar's Socks]

Whisper in the Dark overrides that rule since it specifically allows a follower to bear it.

Bit off-topic, but this reminds me of the debate over whether O Elbereth! Gilthoniel! allowed the Ring-bearer to cancel his skirmish (after the no-cancel rule was newly minted). IIRC the official stance was that LotR has no "Golden Rule" about cards overriding the rules. (So basically since O E! G! was printed before, obviously it wasn't supposed to work--but if it was printed after, it'd obviously be meant to?) The rulebook maintains "As skirmishes involving the Ring-bearer cannot be canceled..." as its reasoning, but eh... generally cards > rules.

[Thranduil]

I have a feeling that Whisper in the Dark was a card they made without any thought whatsoever - mainly because of its total lack of cultural reinforcement, ridiculous combo with Servant of Sauron, and direct contradiction of the rules... 

Thranduil

[DáinIronfoot]

Wait, you mean Decipher got LAZY near the end and made cards that blatantly showed that? Heresy!

[Elessar's Socks]

Pft. Wish they'd done the same with White Hand Sieger. I thought taking control of a site was a requirement to play it. I was in the midst of getting the cards for an awesome Land Had Changed deck, when a post on CC finally set me right.

[Kralik]

I thought taking control of a site was a requirement to play it. I was in the midst of getting the cards for an awesome Land Had Changed deck, when a post on CC finally set me right.

That's what it seems to say... what does it mean, then?

[Elessar's Socks]

As in, you must have a site controlled before you can play it; I was thinking when you play it, you must take control of a site.

[MR. Lurtzy]

that would be highly broken.