5 hours ago, Elrad said:

Thank you for answering, @DarthofZA .

26) Regarding Odinson/Thor Identity card :

I know I tend to overthink things constantly but if I found Mjolnir in my discard pile, do I shuffle my deck (guess the answer is YES) ? Second, If I found it in the discard pile, do I put back my discard pile into the deck and then shuffle it ?

Technically, you should shuffle your hero deck, but if you haven’t looked at it or effected the card order in any way prior to using the ability, you don’t really need to - it’s still randomised. You just shuffle the remains of the deck itself unless an effect tells you to shuffle the discard pile into the deck.

59 minutes ago, mike8104 said:

Got a couple rules questions too:

1. When damage is dealt by a villain (not an attack), can allies take it since they also count as "characters" under the players control? I know allies can defend attacks but the language for taking indirect damage suggests it's possible for direct damage. Asking in regards to stage III Norman Osborn flipping and the "deal 4 damage to each player." Doesn't specify "hero," "identity," or a "character."

2. Can a hero or ally of that player attack a minion engaged with another player? The rules say an attack can be directed to any enemy but for some reason I thought I read somewhere that minions engaged with other players were intelligible.

1. Allies can take indirect damage dealt to you. The damage from Norman III flipping to Goblin has to go to your identity card, whichever form you’re in, so make sure you have enough health first!

2. Yes, you can target minions engaged with other players unless an effect specifically says you can’t.

Thanks again for answering all our question :-)

That said your reasoning does work every time you don't actually look up any deck in search of a precise card. I'm playing against Klaw and just realize I just had to take the top card of the discard pile to resolve the drawn card effect and stupidly I shuffled the deck...Only Asmodeus know what i'll draw now haha.

Hum...

27) I played with another guy the other day, He's played a lot of Magic and LCG's but something He often did just puzzles me : When He was searching His discard pile he was mixing it and it changed the order they had appeared in that pile (let's say he looked past 8 cards until He found what He was looking, He then put the 8 top cards at the bottom of the discard pile letting a previously discarded card being the top most). That's not allowed in my opinion, yes ? Because doing So, Pepper Potts would then become overpowered if Ironman's player could ix his discard pile to always have Force, Energy and the like as top card.... What's your thought ?

20 minutes ago, Elrad said:

Hum...

27) I played with another guy the other day, He's played a lot of Magic and LCG's but something He often did just puzzles me : When He was searching His discard pile he was mixing it and it changed the order they had appeared in that pile (let's say he looked past 8 cards until He found what He was looking, He then put the 8 top cards at the bottom of the discard pile letting a previously discarded card being the top most). That's not allowed in my opinion, yes ? Because doing So, Pepper Potts would then become overpowered if Ironman's player could ix his discard pile to always have Force, Energy and the like as top card.... What's your thought ?

There are a few cards in the game that reference the discard pile order, but not many. I think so long as he's not playing Iron Man there's no real reason to be careful with the order of the discard pile yet, but you're right it's technically against the rules to move cards around.

Edit: I suppose I should clarify: if Iron Man is being played by anyone, any player with tech cards in their deck (Spider-Man, Black Widow, Captain Marvel, and potentially protection players with Energy Barriers) should be careful not to mess with their discards, as Stark Tower can target other players.

Thanks for answering @SpiderMana

And another one for the day :-)

28) I had a bit of a case with this card :

The situation was this one : Iron Fist has two damages on him. I decide to have him attack Klaw who has :

I played the sequence in this order, tell me if I'm correct or wrong :

1. I exhaust Iron Fist
2. I choose to attack
3. Response : I apply the Response effects on Iron Fist card : I Stun Klaw and deal 1 damage to him
4. I Resolve the Attack Action and deal the 2 damages .
5. Retaliate : I apply the Retaliate effect on Solid-Sound Body and deal 1 damage to Iron Fist
6. Iron Fist has now 3/3 damages on his card, He dies.
7. If Iron Fist was alive I would apply the 1 damage consecutive to his attack action

I guess I applied the rules as they are stated in both the Learn to play and the Rules References books.

38 minutes ago, Elrad said:

• I exhaust Iron Fist
• I choose to attack
• Response : I apply the Response effects on Iron Fist card : I Stun Klaw and deal 1 damage to him
• I Resolve the Attack Action and deal the 2 damages .
• Retaliate : I apply the Retaliate effect on Solid-Sound Body and deal 1 damage to Iron Fist
• Iron Fist has now 3/3 damages on his card, He dies.
• If Iron Fist was alive I would apply the 1 damage consecutive to his attack action

They've clarified when asked that Iron Fist's 'Response' should actually be an Interrupt. So it does resolve before Iron Fist's actual ATK damage (relevant in case of tough, mostly).

As for the rest, I *believe* retaliate does trigger before the consequential damage, but also I don't know that this matters unless you've got extra consequential and a tough card on the ally.

Also, I think you choose to attack with him, and then exhaust him as a cost to attack, technically.

So My sequence is correct, if I read you well :-)

Also your're right, allies get dealt the consequential damage after the full resolution of their action. It's clearly stated in the Learn to Play booklet.

And thirdly, it's already written : "When Iron Fist attacks" so I concluded they were talking about having chosen to attack, so when you choose that branch and course of action and before its resolution. The resolution being the Application of Iron Fist ATK value to the enemy. so it was logic to say that the Response would be applied in between those two steps. Don't know why Interrupt would be more clear. Maybe because Interrupt does apply before the action takes effect and then is more clear than their definition of Response which begins by "after the action/effect, etc."

29 minutes ago, Elrad said:

Don't know why Interrupt would be more clear. Maybe because Interrupt does apply before the action takes effect and then is more clear than their definition of Response which begins by "after the action/effect, etc."

Right, it doesn't really work for things to trigger at the exact same time, so if they intend for an effect to happen before something it needs to be an interrupt, and if they want to label something a response, it should say "after" such and such.

1 minute ago, SpiderMana said:

Right, it doesn't really work for things to trigger at the exact same time, so if they intend for an effect to happen before something it needs to be an interrupt, and if they want to label something a response, it should say "after" such and such.

haha it's a logic Class we're making and attending here

So, @SpiderMana , you didn't answer by yes or no : is my above sequence good or not ? :-) (sorry for bothering you haha)

8 minutes ago, Elrad said:

So, @SpiderMana , you didn't answer by yes or no : is my above sequence good or not ? 🙂 (sorry for bothering you haha)

I think the first two should be switched, for the reason I mentioned in my original reply. Everything else looked good to me.

hum... ok... I'm not sure anymore (need to sleep Zzzzz). You would put the interruption before the "choose attack" ? I mean to me both Response and Interrupt would be at step 3 of the above sequence even if Interrupt would fit more than Response that many people could expect to happen after having dealt the actual ATK

3 hours ago, Elrad said:

• I choose to attack
• I exhaust Iron Fist
• Interrupt : I apply the Interrupt effects on Iron Fist card : I Stun Klaw and deal 1 damage to him
• I Resolve the Attack Action and deal the 2 damages .
  
  [Here is where a Response would fit. The card would say “Response: after Iron Fist attacks”]
• 
  Retaliate : I apply the Retaliate effect on Solid-Sound Body and deal 1 damage to Iron Fist
• Iron Fist has now 3/3 damages on his card, He dies.
• If Iron Fist was alive I would apply the 1 damage consecutive to his attack action

Here ya go

Oh like that :-D

But I don't think so, see page 12 of the learn to play :

On 7/10/2020 at 4:01 PM, Elrad said:

Thanks again for taking the time to answer me 🙂

You're welcome, Elrad! Thanks for taking the time to read it. I know I posted quite the wall of text. Like I said, hope it helps

On 7/11/2020 at 11:05 AM, FearLord said:

Technically, you should shuffle your hero deck, but if you haven’t looked at it or effected the card order in any way prior to using the ability, you don’t really need to - it’s still randomised.

Even though the deck is still randomized, you're affecting the draw order of the cards whenever you shuffle the deck. If a card the player is looking for goes from the bottom of the deck to the top or vice versa when they shuffle, the game will play out differently. The player will never know cause they never see how the card order shifts, but it makes a difference. It may seem trivial and nitpicky, but I'd still strongly recommend shuffling the deck. Just my two cents.

2 hours ago, The Archangel said:

Even though the deck is still randomized, you're affecting the draw order of the cards whenever you shuffle the deck. If a card the player is looking for goes from the bottom of the deck to the top or vice versa when they shuffle, the game will play out differently. The player will never know cause they never see how the card order shifts, but it makes a difference. It may seem trivial and nitpicky, but I'd still strongly recommend shuffling the deck. Just my two cents.

I disagree here.

Yes you are affecting the deck order, but if you don't know the order of the deck, it is in a random order. Technically, if you did an extra cut after each shuffle, you're affecting the deck as well. Is that legal? What constitutes enough shuffling? If you're not getting at what I'm saying, the point of a shuffle is to randomize the deck. To give each card in the deck a 1/(cards still in deck) chance to come out next. Shuffling it again if you haven't looked at any of the cards doesn't change that. The cards are still random.

Thanks for answering and commenting all of you.

That said @DarthofZA and @The Archangel I have to agree with both of you, even though, at the end of the day I think I should "respect" the rule and shuffle the deck even though I didn't have a peek at it. @The Archangel is strictly following the rule while you, @DarthofZA , you're using your logic to state the fact that an untouched randomized deck is still randomized, dot. But by shuffling it, you redstribute the randomization. So chance for one car/40 to get drawn next is randomised again and again. And while I' agree with you this is kind of a one-armed bandits game....only that pulling the lever does just randomise the chances of getting three bananas internally....

Ok I think I got very unclear. Let's conclude by saying that I choose, from now to shuffle de deck as per what's written on the card. It can be a hit or miss on my next draw but well. That's the game, right :-)

Just so as you know, Elrad, I appreciate this thread. One of the best ways to be sure that you understand something really well is being able to teach it to other people, or answer their questions.

4 hours ago, Elrad said:

But by shuffling it, you redstribute the randomization. So chance for one car/40 to get drawn next is randomised again and again.

I think this is the misunderstanding. “Redistributing randomness” does not make sense. Random is random.

As long as you thoroughly shuffled your deck at the start, so that each card really does have a 1/40 chance of being next, additional shuffles do not matter. They do not make the outcome any more or less random.

If we are betting on the flip of a coin, whether I flip a coin now or in 5 minutes does not matter. Yes, the outcome will be different, but it is still 50/50.

Your argument is like saying it matters when the coin is flipped. Would it matter?

9 hours ago, DarthofZA said:

I disagree here.

Yes you are affecting the deck order, but if you don't know the order of the deck, it is in a random order. Technically, if you did an extra cut after each shuffle, you're affecting the deck as well. Is that legal? What constitutes enough shuffling? If you're not getting at what I'm saying, the point of a shuffle is to randomize the deck. To give each card in the deck a 1/(cards still in deck) chance to come out next. Shuffling it again if you haven't looked at any of the cards doesn't change that. The cards are still random.

To answer your question, it's bad form to shuffle after the cut, the purpose of which is to conceal the bottom card which might otherwise be known to the dealer.

In a cooperative game or single player game, this probably only matters if you want to avoid the possibility of unearned knowledge by you or other players.
If you can shuffle without seeing the bottom of the cards, it shouldn't matter.

If this were a competitive situation? It'd be a disqualifying move to reshuffle, cheating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_(cards)

4 hours ago, zeezeeman said:

I think this is the misunderstanding. “Redistributing randomness” does not make sense. Random is random.

As long as you thoroughly shuffled your deck at the start, so that each card really does have a 1/40 chance of being next, additional shuffles do not matter. They do not make the outcome any more or less random.

If we are betting on the flip of a coin, whether I flip a coin now or in 5 minutes does not matter. Yes, the outcome will be different, but it is still 50/50.

Your argument is like saying it matters when the coin is flipped. Would it matter?

I mean, if you don’t want to shuffle, nobody is going to force you to do that, but the outcome of the next turn will be different, generally, if you do shuffle than if you don’t. This mostly “matters” if you’re aware of what the next cards are (Falcon or Heimdall)

You absolutely can rerandomize a random deck. What's the purpose of shuffling at all? It's to change the order of the deck and the outcome of how they will be drawn. Regardless of whether you look at the cards or not, a deck has completely changed order when you shuffle it. How the game will play out has now been changed. It's the new, unique card order and draw outcome that defines a "rerandomization".

In regards to Marvel Champions and other LCGs, the shuffle IS all about the card order and not just the drawing odds of the top card or if you don't know the card order.

When you shuffle a normal, playing card deck, call out a card and draw the top card, you have only a 1/52 chance it's the card you called. If you shuffle it back in and perform the same shindig, it's still a 1/52 chance. The deck doesn't care or remember the first time. Odds remain the same. However, you have a 1/52 chance of any card being in any location in the deck. The Ace of Spades could be the first card, the last card or the 35th card. If you shuffled the deck, unless you're a sleight of hand magician or card mechanic and purposefully manipulate the deck, you also only have a 1/52 shot that ace stayed in the exact same location in the deck after the shuffle. This means the odds of that drawing that card earlier or later than its original spot are 51/52. In fact, the odds that your deck remains in the exact same order is astronomically small. When applied to Marvel Champions, it means your playthrough will be altered each time you shuffle because the order of when you draw your events, your allies, your upgrades, your resources, etc., has been completely, uniquely changed. This is the key point I'm trying to make and why the shuffle is meaningful regardless of the the draw odds or the knowledge of the card order. Play with your hero deck face up and RAW to see my point in action.

The more important reason is it is an excellent habit and practice to read your cards and perform everything they say on them. I'm not a huge rules stickler, but FFG is notorious for the particular wording of their rules and cards. One word can completely change a ruling and/or outcome. I've experienced too many times where card effects have been missed or misinterpreted because the card wasn't read and followed top to bottom. It could be because a new player didn't pay attention or a seasoned vet simply didn't remember the card correctly. It has caused negative experiences for players and even ruined some games unfortunately. So I highly recommend following the wording of Odinson's ability and shuffle the deck based on that alone if the rest of my post is trivial or a bunch of nonsense.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

To answer your question, it's bad form to shuffle after the cut, the purpose of which is to conceal the bottom card which might otherwise be known to the dealer.

In a cooperative game or single player game, this probably only matters if you want to avoid the possibility of unearned knowledge by you or other players.
If you can shuffle without seeing the bottom of the cards, it shouldn't matter.

If this were a competitive situation? It'd be a disqualifying move to reshuffle, cheating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_(cards)

I mean, if you don’t want to shuffle, nobody is going to force you to do that, but the outcome of the next turn will be different, generally, if you do shuffle than if you don’t. This mostly “matters” if you’re aware of what the next cards are (Falcon or Heimdall)

To be clear, you must shuffle the deck if you have any knowledge of the order of cards from an effect like Falcon or Heimdall or something similar. At that point, the deck being reshuffled matters because those cards should no longer be where they were before.

It doesn’t matter if you have no prior knowledge of the deck order, even though it will change the card order, because it’s still random, and functionally, random is random. That said, it’s probably a better habit to shuffle it every time to avoid accidentally forgetting to shuffle it when you do need to rather than the other way around.

No one is arguing that shuffling again won't randomize the order again. The point is that if the deck is already random, a shuffle doesn't make it more random, it is just random again. If something goes from random to random, you haven't actually changed anything. Regardless of what card is drawn next, it still has an equal chance that it could be any card in that deck. Doing another shuffle if you don't know the location of any card in the deck does change the order of the cards, but it doesn't change any odds of any card being drawn. Therefore, it is unnecessary.

7 hours ago, The Archangel said:

In regards to Marvel Champions and other LCGs, the shuffle IS all about the card order and not just the drawing odds of the top card or if you don't know the card order.

This is not true in the Arkham Horror LCG. The game state is considered the same if the players do not know what the order of cards is in a deck before and after a shuffle (source: FAQ v1.7, first paragraph on page 11). Therefore, in AH:LCG it is explicit that you would not have to reshuffle your deck in a similar situation. i.e. the purpose of shuffling a deck is to ensure that the players have no knowledge of the order of the cards, irrespective of what the actual order of the cards is.

I wouldn’t object to someone either shuffling their deck or not shuffling their deck if they already have no knowledge of the order of the cards. I think the argument for getting into the habit of doing everything a card says is reasonable, to make sure that you never inadvertently skip something when it does matter.