Such a weight to carry

[ket_the_jet]

But you can use Sam, Faithful Companion to search infinitely for Bill the Pony.

"If a loop contains one or more optional actions and one player controls them all, that player chooses a number. The loop is treated as repeating that number of times, or until another player intervenes with his own action, whichever comes first.

A player wishes to repeatedly use the ability of Sam, Faithful Companion ("Fellowship: Play Bill the Pony from your draw deck."). He chooses a number of times this action will take place. The action is treated as repeating that number of times unless another player intervenes with a different action."

-wtk

[Witchkingx5]

Of course you can, this reminds me to Yu-Gi-Oh! where you can play a Spell: "Add 1 Warrior-type (...) from your Deck to your Army (RotA) and you actually CAN play this one even if you know that there's no such card. In that case, your opponent has to go through your whole deck and check if there aren't any possible cards.

[Smeagollum]

Yeah but an infinnite loop is not allowed !

[legolas3333]

yes they are, think of erkenbrand's horn, sam, faithful companion and the bridge of khazad-dum*, they let you infinitely search through your draw deck even if you have no followers, balrogs or bill the pony.

[TheJord]

These are not infinite loops. Smeagol, Slinker and Anduin Banks* is. Searching your deck for nothing is not an infinite loop as there is no outcome to loop.

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

yes they are, think of erkenbrand's horn, sam, faithful companion and the bridge of khazad-dum*, they let you infinitely search through your draw deck even if you have no followers, balrogs or bill the pony.

On the contrary, that is precisely the action that was banned as "stalling" in the ruling I heard earlier.

[Smeagollum]

yes they are, think of erkenbrand's horn, sam, faithful companion and the bridge of khazad-dum*, they let you infinitely search through your draw deck even if you have no followers, balrogs or bill the pony.

On the contrary, that is precisely the action that was banned as "stalling" in the ruling I heard earlier.

2nd

But Jord, wouldn't it be an idea to see if we can contact Dan or Jan Bonawolski. On those days he was the brandmanager if I remember correctly. Maybe he can give intel on some rullings? And maybe he would like to help the pc. If we don't ask we never know right?

[HawkeyeSPF]

Dan Bojanowski?

[Smeagollum]

Dan Bojanowski?

That could be him.. didn't remember his correct name

[TheJord]

Stalling and infinite loops are two very different things.

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

Stalling and infinite loops are two very different things.

That's what I thought when the ruling first came out, but apparently Decipher thought otherwise. I think they just wanted to stop Sam, FC from being abused in telepathy decks, and instead of adding a new rule dealing with ineffective "play from draw deck" actions (which is what they should have done), they decided to bend the rule against stalling to get the result they wanted without having to complicate the game with a new rule. 

[Elessar's Socks]

The shuffling could serve a legitimate purpose with Forewarned, but I doubt it's fun watching your opponent shuffle all game, or dealing with situations where one player wants to just grab the target card, whereas his opponent (in the lead) wants the game to go to time by not skipping steps.

[Sam, Great Elf Warrior]

The shuffling could serve a legitimate purpose with Forewarned

Yeah, that's precisely the purpose that Decipher apparently didn't consider legitimate (maybe they thought it was overpowered).

[Smeagollum]

Well we could ask right?

http://www.facebook.com/danbojo

[TelTura]

the rulebook says that there's no penalty for even "choosing not to play a card you find" when searching through the draw deck...

There is no penalty if you don't find (or choose not to play) a card you are looking for in your draw deck.

was this ever reversed?