The recent rules on the Warp Lightning Cannon has gotten me to take a closer look at attachments and how they are played which has brought up a lot of questions. Let’s take a look.

CORE SET

Dwarf:
Organ Gun – “Attach to a target unit.”

Empire:
Knight Training – “Attach to a target unit in your battlefield”

High Elf:
Blessing of Isha – “Attach to a target unit.”

Chaos:
Sadistic Mutation – “Attach to a target unit you control.”
Cloud of Flies – “Attach to a target unit you control.”
Horrific Mutation – “Attach to a target unit you control.”

Orc:
Choppa – “Attach to a target unit in your battlefield.”

Dark Elf:

CORUPTION CYCLE

Dwarf:
Gromril Armor – “Attach to a unit”

Orc:
Warpaint – “Attach to a target unit in your battlefield.”

Neutral:
Warp Lightning Cannon - “Attach to a target unit.”

If I missed any please let me know.

So we have these options:
“Attach to a target unit.”
“Attach to a target unit in your battlefield”
“Attach to a target unit you control.”
“Attach to a unit”

Let’s start with the first one, “Attach to a target unit.” This is the one possessed by the Warp Lightning Cannon. According to the recent ruling this card can be played on any unit in the game. This means that Organ Gun and Blessing of Isha can played on any unit in the game as well. Unlike Warp Lightning Cannon I don’t see a benefit to playing these cards on enemies, but possibly in a multiplayer game with teams???

Next is “Attach to a target unit in your battlefield.” This one seems unnecessary to me. Since the basic rule is that you can only play units, support and developments into your own zones why do you need “your battlefield.” Why not simply the battlefield? The cards that can be played outside of your battlefield should be the ones with the disclaimer cause the core rules already covers the fact that you can only play support cards into your own zones. Things like the Warp Lightning Cannon and Organ Gun should say “Attach to a any target unit.”

Third is “Attach to a target unit you control.” To me this falls under the same category as “Attach to a target unit in your battlefield.” It shouldn’t need the disclaimer because the core rule already covers this.

Lastly is “Attach to a unit.” Gromril Armor. So as far as I can understand it this doesn’t have the targeting keyword so it isn’t affected by cards that are keyed off or affect targeting? Can anyone see how this would be useful in the game currently cause I’m not finding it?

Anyways what are other people thoughts on the various play methods for attachments? See any other reasons for some of the options?

Later,

Wraith428

wraith428 said:

Target unit + battlefield = any unit in any battlefield. Attachments with this wording are meant to be used for your Units in your BZ. "Battlefield" is also a limiter in what zone you can play it on, no Choppas into KZ or QZ for extra power for example.

Dam said:

I think you misunderstand me.

I think it should have said "Attach to target unit in battlefield." Not "... your battlefield." It doesn't need the disclaimer "your" because according to the core rules you cannot play a support card into any zone that is not yours. Cards that can be played outside of your zones should be the ones with the disclaimers because they are the ones breaking the core rules and thus card text would be needed for them to do so as card text supersedes the rules.

I just think they went about it backwards. They put in disclaimers for things that were already covered by the rules and didn''t put disclaimers in for things that really need them.

Both the Warp Lighting Cannon and Organ Gun say "Attach to target unit." By the rules in the core that means they cannot be played on units outside of your three zones. There is no disclaimer that tells us that this card text should supersede the rules as something like "Attach to target unit controlled by any player" would or something to that effect.

However this is obviously not the case by the recent WLG decision. I just don't see their logic as their breaking from one of the core concepts of the game, play rules as written unless card text tells you otherwise. Instead with attachments we have play rules as written only if the card text supports the rules as written.

Later,

Wraith428

W248,

That's a very good point. This ruling does take a support card, that needs to be played into one of your zones if it is coming out of your hand according to the rules and somehow expects us to assume we can break the rules when targeting a unit.

I belief this takes the concept of targeting a unit too far. When we play tactics, they may target units, but tactics don't get played into any zone. You basically pay for a action, same as you would for any card you played into a zone that has an action on it.

If they mean for this card to be able to be played into an opponents zone, the card should state so specifically. If it doens't, then we should assume that WLC would only be playable into one of our zones, and not our opponents because the rules say so.

That was my point but I couldn't word it properly in the other thread. This is a poorly thought-out ruling, imho. And that's the main thing I'm most worried about with this game.

I'm finding it a fairly easy adjustment to make. The way I conceptualize it now is that the base rule ("play in one of your three zones") is a play restriction that applies to cards that have an independent existence (i.e., aren't attached to another card). The mere existence of the text "Attach to a (whatever)" creates a different play restriction, which supersedes the base rule entirely.

In other words, I suspect we've been trying to combine the base-rule play restriction with the card-text play restriction in a way that the writers of the core set rules simply didn't anticipate.

When viewed in this way, the specific words used on all the cards referenced by the OP make sense and are necessary. This lends credence, in my mind, to this way of looking at the designers' intent.

So where does that leave me emotionally? I consider it fair, although uncharitable, to criticize the rules writers. (It's so easy to be a back seat driver!) But speaking for myself, this strikes me as a "rule clarification" rather than a "ruling," which makes a world of difference compared to, for example, the rule change on Toughness (which I do not like).

I hope the next version of the FAQ will be a lot more generic that just "cards X, Y and Z may be attached onto any unit in play". An erratum adding to the basic rule a sentence explaining how Attachment Support cards are played will be much more understandable from a CCG-player's point of view. (something like "you can play non-Attachment support cards only in your own zones. Attachement support cards may be played to any zone their targeted attaching card are in.")

BTW, are Attachments still played into one given zone ? What units am I allowed to target if my "Dwarf Cannon Crew" (DCC) spotted a "Gromril Armor" (GA) with its Forced ? A unit in the same zone they DCC entered play in ? or any unit in play ? or none (and GA returning to my deck) ?

Martin_fr said:

DCC's wording states "put it into this zone, if able", which to me suggests GA has to go into the same zone at DCC, though could be any Unit in that zone.

In the game as it exists now is there a difference between Organ Gun "Attach to target unit" and Gromril Armor "Attach to unit." Are their cards that could affect Organ Gun based on the targeting key word?

Wraith428

There are cards that cannot be targeted by some things. So it does matter on whether the cards target or not.