Just now, Poposhka said:

Not sure I understand so feel free to correct me, but using a card means:

- creature: Fight or Reap or Action/Omni or Unstun

- artifact: Action/Omni

Yes, that's what I ment when reffering to the pages 6-7 of the rulebook. But the word use probably makes most people think like "you let me use this object for 1 hour", so I can use it for 1 hour, not just 1 time. Yeah, the game specificaly classifies using cards as fighting, reaping, action/omni etc...

I'll use myself as the exemple. I'm brazilian. I read "use 2 mars this turn" My first natural thought is "great, I can use this creature anytime this turn" instead of "oh, I get one ~action~ with it" Don't know if you get what I'm trying to say...

5 minutes ago, Mushra93 said:

Yes, that's what I ment when reffering to the pages 6-7 of the rulebook. But the word use probably makes most people think like "you let me use this object for 1 hour", so I can use it for 1 hour, not just 1 time. Yeah, the game specificaly classifies using cards as fighting, reaping, action/omni etc...

I'll use myself as the exemple. I'm brazilian. I read "use 2 mars this turn" My first natural thought is "great, I can use this creature anytime this turn" instead of "oh, I get one ~action~ with it" Don't know if you get what I'm trying to say...

"Use" is defined in the rules. There's no need to try and come up with outside definitions for it or assume any other definition applies. When a card says you can "use" something else, it is referring to the definition given in the rule book. i.e. you can fight/reap/action/omni with that card.

On 11/27/2018 at 9:09 AM, twinstarbmc said:

What the card says: "You may use up to two other Mars cards this turn."

What the card does not say: "You may use Mars cards up to two times this turn."

By english, probably

By rules, unlikely

A 'Use' is a clearly defined game term, each 'Use' does a specific thing.

@Poposhka looks like me attempt of explanation wasn't very succesful

I think the whole point here is if we are able to use the card more than once per turn. " you may use up to 2 Mars this turn" Do you get a use (fight, reap, unstun etc...), or can you utilize the card this turn as much as you like. I'm here again trying to look at how it could be seen for other people. The first time I read all the cards (before reading the rulebook) I thought I could use the card, ready it again by other effects and chains more uses.

After reading the rulebook you can see that "use" is a definition for those "action" (fight, reap,...). You can use this card, you can take an action with it.

I was aware of the definition of "use" with respect to Keyforge when I made my comment stating that I think you can use the same card multiple times.

Using a more specific definition for a verb does not stop "two" from being an adjective in this context.

I can understand why someone could have meant the opposite when writing the card. If this was a non repeatable action, then using an adjective would be equivalent to using a adverb. But Keyforge's previous rulings make me read the card as written and not as intended.

Reminder: What   the card says: "You may use up to two other Mars cards this turn."

Example:

If I went on a run with Steve, then one will Phil, and then another with Steve.

Matching card sentence structure: I ran with two other people today.

Matching what others are claiming: I ran with another person three times today.

7 hours ago, Mushra93 said:

@Poposhka looks like me attempt of explanation wasn't very succesful

I think the whole point here is if we are able to use the card more than once per turn. " you may use up to 2 Mars this turn" Do you get a use (fight, reap, unstun etc...), or can you utilize the card this turn as much as you like. I'm here again trying to look at how it could be seen for other people. The first time I read all the cards (before reading the rulebook) I thought I could use the card, ready it again by other effects and chains more uses.

After reading the rulebook you can see that "use" is a definition for those "action" (fight, reap,...). You can use this card, you can take an action with it.

Yep use is the specific use action. What seems to be limited by the wording in this case is the number of mars-cards that can be used (with the specific definition of use) rather than the number of times that action can be taken on mars cards.

I sent a rule interpretation request and got an official ruling from Card Developer Brad A. at FFG:

Quote

In particular Combat Phermones is granting permission to use a creature [sic] during that turn. If you have an effect that readies one of the Mars cards affected by the Combat Pheromones (Such as John Smyth), you will be able to use that card again.

Hope that helps!

Brad A.

There you have it folks. You can use the same card multiple times if you can ready it multiple times.

16 hours ago, player2492442 said:

I sent a rule interpretation request and got an official ruling from Card Developer Brad A. at FFG:

There you have it folks. You can use the same card multiple times if you can ready it multiple times.

It wasn't how I interpreted it at first glance, but after thinking about it and reading this thread I was persuaded that the card grants permission to use 2 CARDS, not permission for 2 USES of mars cards. Nice to have confirmation... hope to see it and a lot more in faq updates where everyone can easily like, look it up, and refer to it.

---

OK, let me propose an analogy: Deipno Spymaster.

Deipno Spymaster lets you pick a creature that you may use, from outside the active house, this turn.

If that creature had Rocket Boots, could you use it twice, or just once?

Deipno spymaster doesn't tell you to use it NOW, it says that you are able to use that creature this turn.

It effectively (though not actually) makes that creature count as one of the active house this turn.

Same goes for Combat Pheromones.

1 hour ago, msieder said:

whoever Brad A is, he is wrong.

😂

Until Brad Andres tells you otherwise, that’s how combat Pheromones works. If you disagree, I suggest you send your reasoning for it to FFG.

Just now, Palpster said:

😂

Until Brad Andres tells you otherwise, that’s how combat Pheromones works. If you disagree, I suggest you send your reasoning for it to FFG.

Until they publish a ruling, the matter isn't decided.

7 minutes ago, msieder said:

Until they publish a ruling, the matter isn't decided.

Oh it is, unless you change Brad’s mind by building your case. Until you do, an answer to a rules question from him is enough for any Marshal to rule it the same way, which I’m sure you will argue over. Good luck mate 😉

This is going well...

Yeah - it's nice to get feedback from the devs. But we can't all agree and play the same way until the information reaches a more official location. Players can't be expected to troll around forums, and facebook posts, and personal emails, and twitter responses, to integrate all of the rules that have been clarified.

1 minute ago, saluk64007 said:

Yeah - it's nice to get feedback from the devs. But we can't all agree and play the same way until the information reaches a more official location. Players can't be expected to troll around forums, and facebook posts, and personal emails, and twitter responses, to integrate all of the rules that have been clarified.

Something that has also has happened many times in the past, for many other games, a busy dev responding to 100s of emails and rule questions may give a response that isnt the official ruling after further deliberation.

2 minutes ago, saluk64007 said:

Yeah - it's nice to get feedback from the devs. But we can't all agree and play the same way until the information reaches a more official location. Players can't be expected to troll around forums, and facebook posts, and personal emails, and twitter responses, to integrate all of the rules that have been clarified.

i know we're not playing worlds or anything yet, but how can / should tournament rules questions be resolved?

10 minutes ago, Poposhka said:

i know we're not playing worlds or anything yet, but how can / should tournament rules questions be resolved?

How: with 0 room for interpretation. That means a comprehensive rule set that covers every conceivable corner case. Bumping it to that level of competition would be putting the horse before the gravy. Icing? Dammit...

22 minutes ago, Poposhka said:

i know we're not playing worlds or anything yet, but how can / should tournament rules questions be resolved?

the normal procedure is an official FAQ that is routinely updated.

On 11/27/2018 at 12:39 PM, Poposhka said:

Not sure I understand what you're getting at, so feel free to correct me, but using a card means:

- creature: Fight or Reap or Action/Omni or Unstun

- artifact: Action/Omni

One nitpick. Unstun is not an action. You use a stunned creature (reap fight action) and that action does not happen, instead you remove the stun.

How does the rules applies tout Stampede in this case ? Can the same creature be used 3 times to trigger the effect ?

15 hours ago, Bananaskovitch said:

How does the rules applies tout Stampede in this case ? Can the same creature be used 3 times to trigger the effect ?

Stampede: "If you used 3 or more creatures this turn, steal 2"

No. Stampede requires you to have used 3 different creatures. In your example you have only used 1. It's the exact same logic as Pheremones. To get the other behavior, they would write something like:

"If you have used a creature 3 or more times this turn, steal 2" and "You may use mars cards up to 2 times this turn"