If the Barbarian casts a Spell it has gone from his character, the Spell can be negated by Counterspell. His ability prevents Spells he holds from being affected by other players Spells, fact.

Does not say "spells he is holding" in the FAQ just says "spells", surely the Barbarian spell he is casting is still his spell - he's the caster I do not see how it can not be his when its cast? hardly a "Fact".

I do agree that the FAQ is super vague on this issue though.

Seriously? If the Barbarian has Spells (or Objects & Followers) in his possession, they cannot be targeted by another players Spells; this is determined by the special ability of the Barbarian. However, if the Barbarian casts a Spell it is no longer in his possession and can be negated by a Counterspell. This is how it should be handled. You are trying to twist the FAQ to fit your own opinion, whereas I am not...

Zeeech settle down man..

I do not see it as "twisting" the FAQ, just going by what the FAQ and the barbarian card says. Why its it the Spells in his possession? and if so why didn't the barbarian card just say "Spells in his possession" or even "Cannot cast spells" if that was the case.

So like I said before is it by design or text error? Who knows.

You can argue the FAQ was meant to mean "in the characters possession" but I could then argue that the barbarian card was worded the way it was to allow it. Given no other hard ruling it can go either way.

But I do see your point totally.

The safe answer seems to be the spell cannot be countered, the never to be updated FAQ would have to specifically address this one. To my knowledge they have never differentiated a spell being cast as no longer belonging to the casting character and thus no longer under any penalties or benefits thereof.

This is why I stated from the beginning it is complicated. Once a spell has been cast it has never been defined if the spell is an extension of the caster or it is its own entity. I would have to lean towards the spell, like most things in the game are an extension of the character.

The odds of this combination coming up in a game are miniscule but with the amount of expansions and cards we have, this is precisely why the world needs an updated FAQ. I am sorry, but I have never seen a game with so much support get so little support in the form of "official" moderation. It is a little ridiculous IMO. There are literally hundreds of questions I have run across on here or BGG that the communities come up with reasonable responses but we should have an FAQ.....

Totally.

I'm willing to concede the point about the spell being countered, funny how it went to this when I started this thread about if the barbarian can take the wand or not.. So I'm gathering its a Yes he can and a Yes it can be countered if the barbarian casts the spell with the object-follower.

The safe answer seems to be the spell cannot be countered, the never to be updated FAQ would have to specifically address this one. To my knowledge they have never differentiated a spell being cast as no longer belonging to the casting character and thus no longer under any penalties or benefits thereof.

But they could differentiate spells as held by characters and held by objects/followers.

My vote is no it cannot be countered

We should actually petition ffg to update the FAQ. Jedi Knight is right, this is ridiculous, we all buy what is verging on 20 expansions gladly, a couple ffg guys spending an afternoon to address a myriad of issues shouldn't be a problem IMHO

We should actually petition ffg to update the FAQ. Jedi Knight is right, this is ridiculous, we all buy what is verging on 20 expansions gladly, a couple ffg guys spending an afternoon to address a myriad of issues shouldn't be a problem IMHO

Who is good at writing petitions? I'm not I would say to many "@^#" and the such.

The way I see it is...

If you let him take and use the wand, the spell can be countered.

Reasoning- If you are going to give the wand/spell the ability on can being affected by spells, then you must also give the wand the rest of that ability of not being able to gain/have spells.

The way I see it is...

If you let him take and use the wand, the spell can be countered.

Reasoning- If you are going to give the wand/spell the ability on can being affected by spells, then you must also give the wand the rest of that ability of not being able to gain/have spells.

I'm sorry but I don't understand your reasoning but I agree with your conclusion.

If this ever occurs in our game we'll play it like that. Once the spell is cast it's no longer protected by the barbarian's ability and can therefore be countered.

No, the Barbarian cannot take Titania's Wand, as that would amount to him having a Spell, which is forbidden by his ability. The fact that the Spell remains on Titania's Wand is irrelevant: by picking up the Titania's Wand, the Barbarian would have a Spell card.

Much more straightforward and complication-free interpretation.

Just like a good character isn't able to have the Runesword by storing it on a Bag of Carrying...

But your interpretation is completely wrong. Nothing forbids him from taking and using a magic object.

The Barbarian cannot have Spells

Having Titania's Wand makes the Barbarian also have a Spell (you can't take Titania's Wand and not its Spell)

ergo the Barbarian cannot have Titania's Wand.

This is basic reasoning, I fail to see how your response addresses it.

The Barbarian cannot have Spells

Having Titania's Wand makes the Barbarian also have a Spell (you can't take Titania's Wand and not its Spell)

ergo the Barbarian cannot have Titania's Wand.

This is basic reasoning, I fail to see how your response addresses it.

But the Spell from Titania's Wand does not count against your Spell limit for holding Spells, or allow other Characters and effects that can look the Spells "Held" by other Characters, (we get this from the Genie rules in the FAQ because both the Genie and the Wand are worded the same in regards to the Spell they come with being cast and being held) so if it does not count as "Held" there does it count as "Having" the Spell?. It just says "treat the Spell as though you had cast it" when you cast it. And it does not say the Barbarian can't cast Spells he can just not have Spells.

So in effect the Barbarian can cast Spells he is not "Holding" or he has. And the Wand counts as the Character not "Holding" the Spell otherwise such effects would still work.

Then you have the prob of course can that Spell be effected by other spells?

Exactly

The Barbarian cannot have Spells

Having Titania's Wand makes the Barbarian also have a Spell (you can't take Titania's Wand and not its Spell)

ergo the Barbarian cannot have Titania's Wand.

This is basic reasoning, I fail to see how your response addresses it.

I personally would go with this. but thats just my personal opinion of course

The Barbarian cannot have Spells

True

Having Titania's Wand makes the Barbarian also have a Spell

No, the item has the spell, not the character. There are numerous objects and followers which hold spells on their own.

Interestingly, there's no a single instance where an object or follower casts a spell, spells are always cast by characters. But holding spells is permitted by non-characters.

This is basic reasoning,

Not really...

Yep after going through this again no where does it say on Titania's Wand "that you count as having, holding, owning or otherwise having the Spell on the wand it just says the Spell is placed on it and you treat the Spell as though you had cast it. So the Barbarian can take the Wand.

This came up with Wyrd Path and any other Destiny discarding effect. Wyrd Path says "You count as having this Destiny for as long as you are on this Path" hench you have the Destiny and then because you have it, it can be discarded with other targeting Destiny discarding effects. But the Titania's Wand does not say "You count as having this Spell for as long as you have this wand".

Yep after going through this again no where does it say on Titania's Wand "that you count as having, holding, owning or otherwise having the Spell on the wand it just says the Spell is placed on it and you treat the Spell as though you had cast it. So the Barbarian can take the Wand.

This came up with Wyrd Path and any other Destiny discarding effect. Wyrd Path says "You count as having this Destiny for as long as you are on this Path" hench you have the Destiny and then because you have it, it can be discarded with other targeting Destiny discarding effects. But the Titania's Wand does not say "You count as having this Spell for as long as you have this wand".

Yep after going through this again no where does it say on Titania's Wand "that you count as having, holding, owning or otherwise having the Spell on the wand it just says the Spell is placed on it and you treat the Spell as though you had cast it. So the Barbarian can take the Wand.

This came up with Wyrd Path and any other Destiny discarding effect. Wyrd Path says "You count as having this Destiny for as long as you are on this Path" hench you have the Destiny and then because you have it, it can be discarded with other targeting Destiny discarding effects. But the Titania's Wand does not say "You count as having this Spell for as long as you have this wand".

Care to add some actual text instead of posting a Meme purely designed to trivializes my before post?

If this is about the whole "Wyrd Path" rule issue, I was just using its "count as having" as a example to the "Barbarian taking the wand" rule issue.

Yep after going through this again no where does it say on Titania's Wand "that you count as having, holding, owning or otherwise having the Spell on the wand it just says the Spell is placed on it and you treat the Spell as though you had cast it. So the Barbarian can take the Wand.

This came up with Wyrd Path and any other Destiny discarding effect. Wyrd Path says "You count as having this Destiny for as long as you are on this Path" hench you have the Destiny and then because you have it, it can be discarded with other targeting Destiny discarding effects. But the Titania's Wand does not say "You count as having this Spell for as long as you have this wand".

Care to add some actual text instead of posting a Meme purely designed to trivializes my before post?

If this is about the whole "Wyrd Path" rule issue, I was just using its "count as having" as a example to the "Barbarian taking the wand" rule issue.

Yep after going through this again no where does it say on Titania's Wand "that you count as having, holding, owning or otherwise having the Spell on the wand it just says the Spell is placed on it and you treat the Spell as though you had cast it. So the Barbarian can take the Wand.

This came up with Wyrd Path and any other Destiny discarding effect. Wyrd Path says "You count as having this Destiny for as long as you are on this Path" hench you have the Destiny and then because you have it, it can be discarded with other targeting Destiny discarding effects. But the Titania's Wand does not say "You count as having this Spell for as long as you have this wand".

Care to add some actual text instead of posting a Meme purely designed to trivializes my before post?

If this is about the whole "Wyrd Path" rule issue, I was just using its "count as having" as a example to the "Barbarian taking the wand" rule issue.

And there you go . That's just plain disrespectful.

Lol Osbo I think we'd make great real life friends. Ten out of ten

Lol Osbo I think we'd make great real life friends. Ten out of ten

You know I agree . But then again you once said "I'm liking uvatha more and more" so your statement can I gather change very quickly.

But I do not agree with the "Ten out of ten" of course, because that's just more "school room banter" just as bad as posting silly memes without posting something with at least some content.