Post your Gemp-LotR bugs here

[bibfortuna25]

Is there anything in any of the rules that states this? I could see arguments from both sides, as you haven't addressed the fact that Wulf was not in play at the moment the skirmish was won.

I'll start looking into the rules myself, as this could affect several other situations (though few others happen quite this way - playing a minion during the skirmish phase).

There doesn't need to be a specific ruling for this case. The text on the cards is clear. Both Wulf and the Hillman Mob are optional actions, and each action has the same trigger. Wulf comes into play during the same window of time in which you are using the Mob's text, so it doesn't matter if Wulf was not in play previously.

It's the exact same situation as a card that says "Each time X wins a skirmish, draw a card." If the card you drew is a response event for X winning a skirmish, you can play it.

[dmaz]

Thank you for the explanations!

bib: I understand your point, but I still think it would have helped a little to have some kind of specific ruling, because I argue that the text isn't VERY clear based on the rules.

I just read through all of the comprehensive and current rulings, and have concluded that you could rule it either way based on this:

The rules clearly state that AFTER you resolve a skirmish, you may perform actions from cards that are IN PLAY that are responses or actions to the win or loss of a skirmish.

The rules also state very clearly the process of playing a card, which states that a card is not in play until it goes through a process of payment, etc, and then hits the table.

Thus one could argue that because it was NOT in play when the skirmish was resolved, and other in-play cards performed their actions, that it should not be able to "ride on the coat tails" of Hillman Mob.

I'd say if the lotr tcg online game worked that way, then it must be the way that decipher designed it (if they even cared that much about the rules at that point), but to say that it's completely clear, and that they come into play during the same window of time is complete speculation, in light of the actual rules that we have.

Both are completely logical and have backing in the printed rules, and I think all we have to fall back on is the processes that played out in the original lotr tcg online.

[bibfortuna25]

Well, the game state doesn't care what the state was like before Wulf came into play. Each response action is done individually. You perform one, do whatever it says, then you look among the various cards to see if there are any other responses to do. Since Wulf was introduced during this response step, that means he is a valid target to use.

"The rules also state very clearly the process of playing a card, which states that a card is not in play until it goes through a process of payment, etc, and then hits the table. "

Correct. When you activate the Mob's text, you play Wulf from hand, take out however much twilight you have to, and then Wulf is fully in play. Only after the action of playing Wulf is resolved can a player then take the next optional response to the Mob winning.

[dmaz]

bib:

Thanks for the clearer explanation. I felt kind of simple having to have it explained bit by bit, haha, but it does make sense now, and kind of matches with the rest of the way the game is played (i.e. each player gets to take turns playing events, taking action, etc one at a time, until all are finished).

So for one final question, related to this. Let's say, the fellowship player also has a response card to the win/loss of a skirmish. Would the fellowship player get to play their response first, then the shadow player, alternating until all are done?

Thanks again guys for all of the clarification and patience with me

[bibfortuna25]

Free Peoples always gets the first opportunity to respond to a given situation. The order of operations goes like this:

If there are any automatic responses to a given situation, FP chooses the order in which they occur. A common automatic response to a minion winning the skirmish is placing a wound. Other automatic responses would be cards like Uruk Rager. FP chooses whether the wounds go first, or the Rager's text.

Once all the automatic responses are done, then we move to optional responses. FP gets the first chance to perform an action, followed by the Shadow player, and so forth until both players pass in succession.

Once all optional responses are done, then the skirmish is finished and we move on to the next one.

[Legion]

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=Legion$0mbfu1v3mbw6lkdz

Hi everyone.  I seem to have lost initiative twice in the same action, which doesn't seem right.  My Fellowship is at site 5.  I have 5 cards in hand, and my opponent has Streaming into the Field.  He plays 2 orcs, which would cause me to lose initiative (so Hardy Garrison should trigger).  I shadowplay as the second hits the table.  and unheeded to kill off the orc.  I trigger Hardy Garrison to wound the other orc.  But now it happens again!  I think what has happened is the event was considered in my hand after I played it, and its effect had occurred.  That would have caused me to lose initiative twice.  Not sure if it's meant to work like that, though.

[sgtdraino]

When I moved from Site 4 to Site 5 (Neekerbreekers' Bog), Destructive Orc did not exert, even though the text of Neekerbreekers' Bog states, "When the fellowship moves to here, heal each character who has resistance 5 or more and exert each other character."

Replay link:

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=sgtdraino$xq5qhe45cabqtltk

[Zielak]

In my game with etrezac I had a weird bug. It happened twice, on sites 8 and 9. When I killed his Watcher, the tentacle discarding trigger have gone mad.
http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=ZielakPL$mprbtjzyxfr148z4

[Skeeve]

I have two bugs to report.  The first, Barrows of Edoras, when used, does not allow you to bring a card into hand with Barliman Butterbur afterwards.  I had this happen once yesterday, and I thought it was a fluke, but it happened this morning as well:

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=Skeeve$r83kaezcrjdu9aoe

You can see at site 3, I used the Barrows, then used Barliman, which of course you would normally do at this site when you need to use Barliman, after Barrows, not before.


The other bug is Windows in a Stone Wall (which has been on-going, I know).  It is a fun card, but I would like to see it fixed for sealed leagues.  Sadly, I have no link for it, but ShadowSpawn might (it has fallen off of my Game History list).  What happened was:  I had 2 WiaSW in hand.  I played one, and it only let me exert non-ents to play it.  I exerted legolas, and it played on legolas.  Same with the second one I had in hand.  Lego never got to see it go off.

Thanks for your support!

[Ringbearer]

First is not a bug but the rule of 4. Since you draw 4 cards during fellowship, Barliman activation doesnt allow you to take the card into hand.

[Skeeve]

Hmm I thought it was from deck into hand.  Probably something that would slip irl.  I suppose Ever My Heart Rises and Gandalf's Cart, and Shards of Narsil would count as well.  Good to know, thanks!

[Eukalyptus]

You're supposing right Rule of 4 applies to both drawing and taking into hand.

[Shapeshifter]

In a recent Fellowship game Arwen, Daughter of Elrond fought an uruk-hai on site 2 and was using Gwemegil to prevent an overwhelm. My opponent discarded 2 cards, but it didn't seem to have any effect and Arwen was killed.

Replay: http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=Gildor$hkvfz8iijr7xxtnd

[hsiale]

The minion was Troop of Uruk-hai. Companions skirmishing this minion don't get strength bonuses from weapons. Gwemegil is a weapon so it could not pump Arwen during this skirmish (and she didn't get the regular +2 strength either).

[bibfortuna25]

I don't have a replay available, but in one recent game, my opponent lost initiative during the regroup phase with Glimpse of Fate in play. When he double moved, my minion was still strength -4. The strength reduction shouldn't have stayed in effect for the double.