Cain_hu said:

Doesn't seem right if you go by the wording. Damage has already been assigned, so it isn't "next 2 damage assigned" at that point IMO.

My issue exactly. It seems like the Powers that Be, who come up with these rulings are getting a little crazy with the in-between Actions rulings. Ugh. Just what I feared. First the dorky Attachments ruling, now this.

That being said, maybe I'm just missing something. But I like it when a unit that actually receives enough damage to die, actually dies before getting to do one more thing - I find that awkward from a gameplay standpoint AND a thematic standpoint.

I should clarify, I don't consider the WLC ruling to deal with an "in-between actions" ruling. My grumble is that there is too much going on that relates to timing in this game and in my experience, that leads to players having to perfectly know every possible rules translation and interpretation in order to pull off gimmicky crap in tournaments and such. Let the cool stuff in the game come from the card interactions not timing crap.

Dam said:

You're right Dam, it shoud be "next 2 damage dealt to your capital".

I think the Flagellants is a templating issue - I suspect they wanted it to work that way but it doesn't as written. Here's what I think it should say (errata ftw, I guess?):

Action: Sacrifice this unit to cancel the next 2 damage dealt to your capital this turn.

I pretty much agree with cyberfunk's assessment of the set. The Deathmaster is the strongest card in the set, and it's not close. He is severely undercosted. At 0/1 (instead of 2/2) he would still be playable in Skaven decks - as is, he is plain ridiculous.

While the High Elves did finally gain another playable unit (albeit, as cyberfunk says, only if you have a HE board), the Assault on Ulthuan is looking like it's going to be the Savage **** and Pillage of Ulthuan at the moment. Let's review what seems to be the core race abilities.

High Elves

• Sitting in a tree.
• K-I-S-S-I-N-G.

Dark Elves

• Killing people.
• Taking their stuff.
• Hating everyone.

Yeah. There's going to be so much blood in the ring the Dark Elves will need scuba gear to kill off the last couple of High Elves.

Clamatius said:

They are a dying race .

Sadly, looks like the second pass in row of a BP for me, only one I'd really care for is the Great Unclean One (maybe Reaper Bolt Thrower for when Ulthuan comes out). However, paying the price for essentially 2 cards doesn't appeal to me.

It's a pity that with a Core Set and 4 Battle Packs one still can't build a decent HE-centered deck, while a DE-centered deck is fully viable (mine using a Chaos Capital plays very well once I have some DE loyalty icons into play).

Hopefully the next set will bring enought HE cards to play them (unless something goes really really wrong with that expansion).

@Fiendish: could you confirm us that each BP#4 comes with 3 copies of The Great Unclean One.

www.tabletopgamingnews.com/2010/02/26/33967

Won't have to wait til next BP for HE & DE boards it looks like

i can wait til end of month for the genocide & sacking of Ulthuan

Martin_fr said:

It has 3 copies of The Great Unclean One. I was surprised at this myself.

Dam said:

Isn't it possible to split the BP with people from your group ? That way you'll only pay a fraction of the cost and get the cards you want.

thx for the spolier... we are still waiting for the Tooth and Claw BPs here in Aus

Wytefang said:

Well no damage is "done" until it has been successfully applied, we know this and accept it as a basic tenent of the game. If you dislike this, this is most definitely not the game for you. The action window in between has been with the game from the beginning and is what allows for depth of combat, otherwise the game is really about throwing down meat shields and bruisers once we hot the battlefield phase.

A unit that has been assigned damage has damage tokens placed near it, not on it. That does not happen until the apply damage step and after any relevant cancels have removed any damage necessary. Think of it this way, assigning damage is swinging the sword and releasing the arrows, but no one has been hit yet. There are still opportunities to dodge, take cover, raise shields, etc.

Wytefang said:

"Timing crap" is what makes the cool cards work. The timing on all of this stuff is pretty standard fair in CCG -styled games. If you don't know when to play a card you don't know how to use the card. There is no difference but an emotional one between knowing that it is best to use Card A in situation B, and using card A during player action window C when event B has already happened but event D has yet to happen.

That is the difference between a skillful player and a lucky player. If it is just card text then whoever gets the cards they need first wins. If it is a skillful player they will use their cards when they will gain the most use out of them, this includes when their opponent is unaware that there is a whole in their game plan.

dormouse said:

But that's my point, precisely - timing isn't what should be (always) relied upon for strategic play. I'm not referring to "General Timing" like knowing that your opponent is building up a huge force so you should probably put units in all your Zones to prepare for the attack. What I dislike is when players have to sit and fiddle with minute sub-moments in-between every aspect of the game in order to pull of wonky combos. My issue is that things like this card's capabilities should be much more readily apparent, such as the way that two different cards combine to create different abilities, rather than having to have every single momentary action-pause in the game memorized. It's that kind of mindset and those types of Munchkin players that drive me (personally, your mileage may vary) nuts when it comes to CCGs.

It's also hard to properly explain so perhaps I'm just not verbalizing my annoyances with this type of card ruling/issue.

Cain_hu said:

I don't know that this is true at all - there's no reason that you wouldn't see Grimgor Ironhide in the QZ or KZ - those are very solid Zones for him to be in depending upon the game situation when you can play him.

Cain_hu said:

Not sure that it's limited by the Target keyword though - in this card's case, there's no way to know whether or not they were specifically keying in on the Targeting keyword. But it'd be good to get a ruling on this. Much like playing the WLC on your opponent's Units wasn't specifically denied, I would imagine that this card wouldn't specifically be denied the ability to damage multiple units simply because the word "targets" happened to be used.

Cain_hu said:

I've been proxying Caught the Scent and it just isn't terribly useful without a dedicated DE deck utilizing the Capital and so forth.

Some good observations here, Cain_Hu.

Clamatius said:

What troubles me is that we only found out about this error because of the article. Nobody would play the card the way it was intended if Flagellants hadn't been featured in the card of the week article. Who knows how many cards are there with the same problem ?
Don't get me wrong, I really love this game but, like others mentioned, it needs some stardard wording templates to avoid these inconsistencies.
Here's a little example from the latest battlepack:

Silver Helm Detachment
This unit enters play with 3 resource tokens on it.

War Hydra
Place 5 resource tokens on this unit when it enters play.

Same instruction, completely different wording.

Deathmaster Sniktch
Action: Corrupt this unit to destroy one target unit with fewer remaining HPs than the number of skaven cards in play.

Someone brought this up in the news section but I'm in doubt about it: Does skaven cards in play refer to skaven cards in play you control or all skaven cards in play including the ones from your opponent ?

Gerson said:

I'd assume only the ones you control, but until an FAQ comes out about it we'll just have to wait and see

cyberfunk said:

Maybe I'm missing something here but why would this Unit be any worse against DE or Chaos as a Defender in a battle??

As a sidenote, it's painful for me to read your Magic-stylized vernacular in your assessment of this new BP. Ugh. Painful. But I've enjoyed your perspective and insight, overall, so it all balances out. Though for the record, I think you're a wee bit too negative, in general. )

deviant-dj said:

Why would you assume that? It's pretty clearly written, I think. Skaven cards in play does not have any kind of limiter associated with its use, thus Sniktch counts all Skaven cards in play. Going to be slugfest when two Skaven decks play each other but that's probably to be expected, thematically, with a Skaven Vs. Skaven match-up.

Re: weakness of the Hydra to DE and Chaos

The Hydra dies to We Need Your Blood, Vile Sorceress and Horrific Mutation. That's why he says it's weak against those factions.

Gerson said:

Actually...before the article came out, I replied in this thread how awesome it was that they could soak 4 damage... I had already seen that Flagellants were awesome soakers.

Knowing timing and rules can lead to creative ways to using cards (=

Wytefang said:

Anything effect that deals non-combat damage (e.g. Flames of Tzeentch) will assign and apply its damage simultaneously, so there will be no window to use the Hydra's action. Anything that gives it -1HP (e.g. We Need Your Blood) will kill it as well.

Other than "fatty" and "bounce" I don't think I used too many Magic-derived terms in that post, and even those are in pretty wide circulation in other CCGs. I mean, I wasn't tapping guys for mana or anything. I await your Magic-to-Warhammer dictionary so I can expunge, er, I mean extirpate, er, no eradicate, um... get rid of... all of my vestigial Magic phrasology.