post for 20 June 2002

Bowed personalities and items [JEFF]

On July 19th, Jeff Alexander wrote So now we have an issue with Items: keep playing them the way we have for six years, or make them work like Spells because they're conceptually more similar than they are to Followers?

On page 43 of the dark allies rule book it states.

Some actions are performed by cards in play, while others are performed directly by a player. To determine who performs an action, follow the first rule below that applies. 1. Actions on a personality or Follower are performed by that card. 2. Actions on an Item, Spell, or Ancestor are performed by the personality. ::snip::

To me this seems to say that items on bowed personalities can not perform actions,

Actually, it says that Items never "perform" actions, period.

while saying that followers on bowed personalities can perform actions. Since this is in the rulebook, what exactly is this discussion about? Could someone please fill me in on what I am missing.

The problem is that it goes against a long and consistent ruling precedent -- furthermore, one that has influenced card design -- almost by accident. It's a clean solution, but it's also a big change, and I don't like doing those without first getting a good idea of the repercussions.

Snowy Fields

snowy fields prevents players from playing more actions than they have units in the battle does this also apply to reactions taken to opponents actions?

Reactions are actions. So, yes, they'd count against the number of actions you're allowed to take while Snowy Fields is in play.

Come HOW MANY At A Time? And WHAT the Scout?

I do, however, have another question, and this IS Evil. I, the Evil Dragon, am playing Phoenix. I am playing Phoenix because I HATE the Dragon Clan. I hate them because I am Evil. So I kick them when they are down. The Dragon take umbrage. They attack the Evil Dragon. The Phoenix defend the province NEXT to the one they attack with all the might they can muster, but primarily with Riake and others. Can you see what will happen? The Dragon could not. Hoshi commits to put the Coup de Grace on my fortified province. Could I, Evil as I am, suck Hoshi from the attack with Riake and kill him with Slaughter the Scout, even though I have no defending army? As an addendum, is it possible to use Block Supply Lines on an attacker when I have no defending army? My belief is that the first case is acceptable (moving a unit to affect a battle I am in), but the second is not (moving a unit from a battle I'm not in to their home, where I also am not). Am I right? Perhaps. Perhaps not.

question: Moshi Kalani & In Search of the Future

Relevant cards:

Moshi Kalani: Mantis Clan Samurai . Naval Kalani gains +1F while in an army with at least one other Naval card.

In Search of the Future: You may play this card during a battle in which you have no units. Battle: Lower all current Force bonuses for cards in this battle to 0, except bonuses to or from cards attached to them.

CASE 1: Moshi Kalani with Ivory Isles Mercenaries (naval follower) attached, attack.

In Search of the Future (ISOTF) is played.

A - Then the Kalani bonus is still 1, because comes from a card attached to Kalani. B - Then the Kalani bonus drop to 0, because the bonus is printed on Kalani.

B. The souce of the bonus is Kalani, regardless of the fact that it counts cards attached to her.

Is it my imagination or was this a light week for questions? My guess is you're saving all the hard ones for this weekend, because you know I'll be in Sacramento and Vaughn and Zen will be handling the Q&A while I'm gone...