Nature's Revenge against FW havens like The White Towers
Moderators: Jambo, Moderators
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy
It DOES make sense ONLY about Ents attacking Isengard but NOT ALL other attacks !miguel wrote:Jaded wrote:No that only means, CoE digests are full of mistakes and rules made out of nothing.
The ruling makes perfect sense to me. Ents attacking Isengard weren't cancelled...
Anyway, is there a way to obtain an "official" response to that question before our "italian championship" ? It's pretty important ...
thanks again,
mm75
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy
It's impossible since fall of ICE. Me and my frieds play the way I mentioned above, probably some people play CoE's way. Choose your way. In Poland people who organise tournaments have the right to "legalise" any rule they want - they just mention it before. It is also a good way to have "last resort man" during tournament - the one who know the rules and has last word if a problem arise.
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy
I know that ... i hoped there were something "more or less official abotu that card" the problem here is to find a solution.
Sergio: what do u think about it?
The "master" of Italian council against me ... we need to find a solution fair for both 8) (actually fair for the game
)
mm75
Sergio: what do u think about it?
The "master" of Italian council against me ... we need to find a solution fair for both 8) (actually fair for the game

mm75
- Sly Southerner
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 10:19 am
- Location: Adelaide, Australia
That would be the CoE ruling.melkor_morgoth75 wrote:I know that ... i hoped there were something "more or less official abotu that card"

If you are confused about it or want to confirm it then you e-mail teh NetRep.
If you arent happy with that then you may be interested in making an Unofficial Errata Proposal (UEP). That would not be official at all but is a good way to stimulate discussion and get an idea of what other people think of the current ruling. :D
So that's where that southerner is hiding...He looks more than half like a goblin.
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy
I agree that the automatic cancelling ability of the unprotected wizardhaven would be overrided. However, I also have a couple of questions -Nature's Revenge
Permanent-event
Playable on a site in a Wilderness that normally is a Border-hold or a Shadow-hold, or on a non-protected Wizardhaven in a Wilderness . All versions of the site become Ruins & Lairs and each gains an additional automatic- attack: animals - each character faces 1 strike with 7 prowess. Discard this card when the site is discarded or returned to its location deck.
Can this card be duplicated on any given site giving two automatic attacks in the process?
What happens if Guarded Haven is subsequently played on a wizardhaven that already has Nature's Revenge on it? My assumption is this couldn't be done since the wizardhaven has become a :R:
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy
Ok, thanks but i have a question here ... are all those UEP legal for example in the world championship? Or they are just legal for "who wants" to accept them for their council?Jambo wrote:For all things UEP, visit the Optional Rules forum and check out the stickied topics at the top of the forum. It should be relatively self-explanatory.melkor_morgoth75 wrote:Interesting ... how can i do that? Sorry but never done before :oops:
mm75
mm75
Do you agree that changing site's type removes site's special abilities, or just in this case?Jambo wrote: I agree that the automatic cancelling ability of the unprotected wizardhaven would be overrided.
Yes, it's not easy, you should change it's type first (to :B: :S: :H: ) so the card is again playable.Jambo wrote: Can this card be duplicated on any given site giving two automatic attacks in the process?
If it's stillJambo wrote: What happens if Guarded Haven is subsequently played on a wizardhaven that already has Nature's Revenge on it? My assumption is this couldn't be done since the wizardhaven has become a :R:

-
- Posts: 1968
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 9:07 pm
- Location: NY
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy
That is what i wanted to know Zarathustra wrote:The NetRep, Chad Martin, makes rulings that are as official as anything can be. Of course, you may play by any rules you like, but at Worlds we use the NetRep's rulings, and many national councils do so as well (the Italian one included, as far as I know).

Ok, so ... it seems that NR is a must against ANY FW decks

mm75
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 1275
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:03 pm
Actually, since, Nature's Revenge has that lovely "normally" when it refers toJaded wrote:Yes, it's not easy, you should change it's type first (to :B: :S: :H: ) so the card is again playable.Jambo wrote: Can this card be duplicated on any given site giving two automatic attacks in the process?


Not really. It won't work at all against Isengard (go figure) or Rhosgobel, since they're not in Wildernesses. You have to set up your hazard portion to change the region type before you can play it on Isengard, and more often than not it'll be protected by then. Rhosgobel starts protected. Fallen Gandalf normally has to do with Free-Holds, and you don't find too many of those in Wildernesses, either.melkor_morgoth75 wrote: Ok, so ... it seems that NR is a must against ANY FW decks
-
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:49 pm
- Location: Italy