[UEP Accepted] Stinker playable after My Precious attack

To share and discuss non-standard rules, from the simplest of house rules to the more serious Unofficial Errata Proposals.

Moderators: Jambo, Tegarend, Moderators

Post Reply

Stinker should be playable after a failed attack by My Precious?

Sure, he can be tamed by whoever is the better of him
No way, because...uh, well no way!
Total votes: 12

Thorsten the Traveller
Posts: 359
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 1:17 pm
Location: Tilburg, The Netherlands

[UEP Accepted] Stinker playable after My Precious attack

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:24 pm

Well, Summer has ended and everybody has returned from their expeditions and frivolities, so time for another UEP!

Name: Stinker playable after My Precious attack

Status: Proposed

Proposal maintainer: Thorsten the Traveller

Categories: Play, Consistency, Theme, Fun

Errata:  My Precious, Scout Hobbit
[2/9; -1 kill MP; 4 mind; 0 direct influence; +4 corruption mod; Home Site: Mt. Doom, Shelob's Lair, Goblin-gate, Moria]
Unique. Manifestation of Gollum. Agent. May take an extra agent action (not counting against the hazard limit) each time he normally takes an agent action. If he attacks successfully against a company with a ring, he and a ring (attacker's choice) are discarded. If My Precious attacks and fails but is not defeated, the defender may tap a character in the target company to play Gollum or Stinker (My Precious is discarded). Any player whose character eliminates My Precious receives -1 kill MPs.
Problem:  If My Precious is in play by opponent, a minion has no chances to play Stinker.

Solution: Stinker may be played after an unsuccessfull strike by My Precious.

Pros: Consistency; it would be the same way for minions as for heroes. More probability for minion to play Stinker, and important ally for minions, who have few allies and ever fewer allies worth 2 MP. Minions have no way of discarding/removing agents, thus playing Stinker is a good way to avoid the nuisance of My Precious.

Cons: none that I can think of. The only issue at stake is whether an opponent would let My Precious attack a minion player at all and not just keep him face up and do nothing. Under current rules, his attack would just be detainment after all. But he might at least attack ring companies (odd as that may be: "Give it us precious, it is ours!"). Question then is, do you want to give these decks, especially One Ring decks, another thin line of defense.
Thematically, one might say that 'defeating' a detainment attack would not be enough to take My Precious into Stinker. nb. A detainment attack cannot be defeated, but the clause simply states that My Precious' attack must fail.

Consistency: see up, and see theme.
Gameplay: My Precious might not be a real threat to minions as detainment, but he might still be a nuisance, and there is no way to deal with him (can't kill or discard him). So now you could.
Theme: I think it's fair that minions can also tame Smeagol and play Stinker, in the same way heroes can with Gollum. Gollum was captured and brought before Sauron after all, and was also in league with Shelob, so he could very well be tamed by minions.

Voting started at: 09/10/09

Voting ends at: Roughly 10/10/09
Last edited by Thorsten the Traveller on Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:57 am, edited 2 times in total.

Vastor Peredhil
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:09 pm
Location: Kempen Germany

Post by Vastor Peredhil » Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:14 pm

you must add a poll thingy so people can vote on it, you noob  ;)

mfg Nicolai

Thorsten the Traveller
Posts: 359
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 1:17 pm
Location: Tilburg, The Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:27 pm

Keeping you sharp  :wink:
well you could have mentioned what you think either way, democracy is older than poll options in meccg....
'Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo

Bandobras Took
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:03 pm

Post by Bandobras Took » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:13 pm

Voted yes on this one; it's good from a consistency standpoint.

Thorsten the Traveller
Posts: 359
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 1:17 pm
Location: Tilburg, The Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:56 am

Unanimity, how wonderful! Seems this is a very clear cut issue. Thanks to all who voted, now put this UEP to use people!
'Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo

Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:12 pm
Location: A hole in the south of the Netherlands

Post by Qapla » Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:52 pm

The only con is the amount of cheese for a Balrog player.
That doesn't stop me from saying ok.
HeglumeH QaQ jajvam!

User avatar
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 11:24 pm

Post by Ringbearer » Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:05 am

Well, at a hazard player vs hog, you dont have to let it attack, you can just leave it plotting at shelobs lair or so ;)
Player of killer hazards no-one else ever dares to play :D

Post Reply