Hey guys and dolls,

So me and a friend had a somewhat heated argument today which he refuses to back down from about the phrasing of 'You may ready and fight with a neighboring creature.'

I told him that meant you chose a friendly creature and use the chosen creature to do a fight action. His interpretation is that you chose a friendly creature to fight with alongside with the creature that has the effect. So for example he argues that if you use a Grey Rider to make friendly creature X fight the Grey Rider will also join in on this fight.

If I am wrong I will fully concede but a clarification on the will settle the argument.

Bonus question: If you use the ability 'You may ready and fight with a neighboring creature.' Can you chose a creature that ordinarily wouldn't be able to fight; for example a Xanthyx Harvester next to a non Mars creature?

You are correct on the first count. It causes another friendly creature to take the fight action. However, any use limitations on creatures such as Xanthyx Harvester or Giant Sloth still prevent it from fighting is they have not been fulfilled. This also applies to situations like a Groggins against only 3 creatures and the middle one has Taunt.

Note also: this prevents them from being used, but not from readying. If they can't be used, they'll still be readied (unless an effect says they can't).

Brobnar has a few plays abusing this.

Ah, more templating issues. First, I will keep it simple and say that the others have already covered the question properly.

The following is just me killing time at work until the holiday weekend starts.

"You may ready and fight with a neighboring creature." Seems simple enough, but depending on how you parse the sentence you can end up with:

• "It says may, so I will ready and not fight"
• "I don't want to ready my creature, but I will still fight with it"
• "Why would I want to fight my own creature? I guess in a pinch it lets me ready and if it doesn't die, then I can use it for something else"
• "I will ready the neighboring creature and then use it to fight something else"
• and as you mentioned, but I never thought of "I will ready and fight with (meaning along with) the neighboring creature against something else"

As far as I am aware, there are cards that let multiple fights happen during resolution, but they are still 1v1 fights. Even the cards that let a single creature fight multiple times as handled one at a time.

From the rules:

It states that "each of the two creatures...", so until there is an addition to the rules when some card is eventually created that allows more that one creature to fight on each side, I would hold ground with this evidence.

Anytime something like this comes up it reminds me of another game I had a similar issue with a friend. The game was called Tomb, and one of the cards said something like "Recruit up to three characters". I was on the side of "Recruit until you have three characters" as having a large party was very good and as an early action could make the game very lopsided. My friend was on the side of "Recruit three characters or until you have max party size." We went at it for about an hour before I let him have it his way and he ran away with the game. To this day, either of us can just mention "up to three" and trigger the other one for laughs.

On 7/3/2019 at 10:42 AM, KandyKidZero said:

Anytime something like this comes up it reminds me of another game I had a similar issue with a friend. The game was called Tomb, and one of the cards said something like "Recruit up to three characters". I was on the side of "Recruit until you have three characters" as having a large party was very good and as an early action could make the game very lopsided. My friend was on the side of "Recruit three characters or until you have max party size." We went at it for about an hour before I let him have it his way and he ran away with the game. To this day, either of us can just mention "up to three" and trigger the other one for laughs.

And now you know why lawyers exist.