Yeah, wrong example. But you should get my drift.
26 2011-07-04 21:44:32
Re: Church of Sigmar and Visit the Haunted City (7 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
27 2011-07-04 10:55:47
Re: Church of Sigmar and Visit the Haunted City (7 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
When you "pay", resources come out of your pool. VTHC doesn't make you pay resources from itself, it tells you to discard resources from itself. For Church of Sigmar, it doesn't matter what the cost of the card effect is (none, paying resources, discarding/removing resources, corrupting your own unit, dealing damage to your own unit, or whatever), it simply makes you pay 1 resource in addition to that cost, even if that cost doesn't originally include paying resources.
28 2011-07-02 00:10:40
Re: DE: when opponent discards card/s from his hand (2 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
Whenever a card is discarded from hand, its owner is considered to be the one discarding it. See the Helbane's Raiders entry in the Rules Summary.
29 2011-07-02 00:06:46
Re: Greyseer's Lair (1 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
It's the latter. Greyseer's Lair is a Skaven card, so once it has been played, the next Skaven card that turn is not the first. And it can't reduce its own cost.
30 2011-07-01 23:57:27
Re: LOEC vs KAIROS (4 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
daniello_s wrote:
Ok, so with Loec attached it is treated as development - we know that.
Now Kairos comes to play and it's effect affects this development - but how?There are couple options:
1. Loec is dominating and despite Kairos in play this development-unit has no power/HP
2. Loec and Kairos work 'together' - because of Loec development-unit has no power but because of Kairos it has 2 HP
3. Kairos is dominating and despite Loec attached this development-unit has 2 power and 2 HP.Which situation is correct?
2. is correct. You always apply the net effect of two or more constant effects without trigger conditions. So in this case, the unit is a development that also counts as a unit, it has 2 HP (from Kairos, Judgement doesn't affect HP) and no power (Judgement's "loses all" negates any power gains from Kairos or other cards), and is considered to have a blank text box.
31 2011-06-18 15:48:20
Topic: Bug Report: W:I "Order/Destruction Only" cards (0 replies, posted in Site Discussion)
For about half of the neutral cards in question, their "Order only" or "Destruction only" is considered a trait. This is incorrect, since it is rules text.
32 2011-06-18 13:51:36
Topic: Bug Report: W:I Legends (1 replies, posted in Site Discussion)
Bloodletter has no image preview. Malekith has Disciple of Malekith as preview, Morathi has Morathi's Pegasus. They all three have the correct images on their individual pages though.
33 2011-06-02 13:11:36
Re: when Night Goblin Fanatic attacks (2 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
"When this unit attacks" means "immediately when this unit is declared as attacker". So you declare attackers, and in the following window the Fanatic's action is resolved. Before the attacked player has to declare defenders. Which might not be much of a factor though, since the Fanatic deals his damage to each unit in the defending zone, not just each defending unit.
34 2011-04-17 16:41:06
Re: Slave Pen (sacrificing unit ruling) (13 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
Non-combat damage is applied as soon as it is assigned. But during combat, there's an action window between assigning and applying. So yes, you can sacrifice a unit to Slave Pens that has damage assigned to it during combat before that damage is applied. And the damage is gone then, it does not get transferred to another unit or the capital.
35 2011-04-15 05:26:02
Re: Action Time of Doomsayer of Morr - Ruling (3 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
No, the Doomsayer has to be in play for its trigger to activate. When multiple units are destroyed by the same effect, they all leave play simultaneously, so the Doomsayer is already gone when the death of another unit could trigger him.
36 2011-04-13 21:37:19
Re: Bash 'Em! (2 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
"This turn" refers to the turn during which the card is played. You play it during your turn, you get an additional battlefield phase. No one but you can attack during your turn, no matter how many battlefield phases you have. If, for some reason, you play the card during an opponent's turn, he gets another battlefield phase, but you still can't attack during his turn.
While there certainly are many cards with less than optimal wording, I wouldn't count this one among them. But if you regularly play with more than 2 players, it's no surprise you run into difficult situations, since there are no official rules for these games.
37 2011-04-13 12:43:47
Re: chaos gods thematic decks...viable? (3 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
Well, yeah, they probably will be weak. You won't be winning serious tournaments with a self-imposed restriction like that. But if it's what you enjoy, nothing's to keep you from constructing these decks for casual play. Naturally, it'd be best if you have opponents who won't go at you with their finely-tuned killer decks, but who are into thematic decks too.
38 2011-04-08 13:31:27
Re: Restricted List Published... (6 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
It isn't. You said "1 of each", that's quite the difference.
39 2011-04-07 10:59:09
Re: Restricted List Published... (6 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
tnkflx wrote:
In short, the following cards are now restricted (meaning you can only use 1 of each in your deck)
No, you can have only one card from the list in your deck, but of that card, you can have the normal number of copies (three, usually).
It's a good idea, and many of the cards are obvious choices. I don't currently understand why they picked Soul Stealer.
The Empire decks many people are complaining about these days won't be harmed too much by this.
40 2011-04-06 22:06:29
Re: Very Complex Timing Example (3 replies, posted in Warhammer Invasion)
Great, if headache-inducing work.
One minor point:
Entropy wrote:
Kris declares an attack against Tom’s quest zone. Kris declares Troll Slayers, Sea Guard Captain, and Spawn of Itzl as attackers. Declaring attackers triggers the Triggered Actions on Sea Guard Captain and Spawn of Itzl. These will go on the chain in the next available action window. Since nothing else triggers off of attackers being declared, play proceeds to the next Action window. Kris must now put his triggered actions on the chain, or he will lose the opportunity to play them. He puts Sea Guard Captain’s ability on the chain, then puts Spawn of Itzl’s ability on, targeting the Slayers of Karak Kadrin.
The Slayers are in the battlefield, so Spawn of Itzl can't target them when attacking the quest zone, right? The target has to be valid when the action is declared, not only when it resolves.