Do these two combine? And if yes, in which ways? I'm a little confused on the topic.

Blessings of Tzeentch: Action: Sacrifice a unit. If you do, you may search the top five cards of your deck for any number of units and put one of them into play at random (you choose which zone). Then, shuffle the other cards back into your deck.

I take it, that what you do is search those five cards and pick out the units and then pick one of them at random to put into play? The wording is a little wonky I think, as it sounds like you could decide only to pick one unit among the five card and then randomly pick that one. In any case, if you have:

Scout Camp: Kingdom. Whenever you search your deck, you may search for an additional card.

Does that mean you can play 2 units at random? Or do you draw 6 cards among which to pick units? Or does it just not combine at all?

You search for an additional card, you don't get to put it into play. In other words, you'd get a random unit from the top 6 cards.

Hm. Does that mean that with Dark Visions (Action: Search the top 5 cards of your deck for a card and put it into your hand. Then shuffle your deck). Also just gives you a sixth card to pick amongst? That doesn't seem to be what Scout Camp says. Or at least I think it could be read either way. As in 1/6 or 2/5. If it is 1/6, then how does Scout Camp work with say Ancient Map (Action: Search your deck for a quest card, reveal it to each player, and add it to your hand. Reshuffle.)?

Just trying to get a hang on the terminology in this game.

It helps with the searching part but not with the actual putting stuff into play/your hand/etc part. So it helps Dark Visions but not Ancient Map since with Ancient Map it allows you to search an extra card... as well as your whole deck. The wording is pretty confusing.

Scout Camp is pretty bad as is, IMHO, but some people seem to like it. Now, if it did actually work for putting multiple things into play/hand/etc with one card then it would be very solid and quite possibly overpowered.

Scout Camp with Chittering Horde does let you search 6 cards and pull any skaven you find. Potentially this could give you an additional card.

-Bernie

edderkoppen said:

I am still curious to the answer to this part of his question. Since it doesn't say reveal, it seems to me I could search the top 5 cards, find 5 units, pick only one and have opponent choose it at random, then shuffle the other 4 units back into my deck?

This is a simmering argument that has lost a little steam of late but was never truly settled. The munchkin crowd wants to do exactly what you mentioned, and the gamesman crowd wants to play by the rules. Because the wording of all these "Search X cards..." effects allow for abuse, of course there are those who will abuse them.

To be clear, I DO NOT currently work for any game production companies. But I can tell you from experience that cards such as Blessings of Tzeentch and Dwarven Cannon Crew are intended to find ALL copies of the described card. Any player who conceals any eligible cards found in the search is cheating. Plain and simple. How can anyone honestly argue that breaking an unenforceable rule is not breaking a rule? You see what I'm saying?

Overseer Lazarus said:

You do know about the official answer on DCC, right?

I sent in the Blessings of Tzeentch question twice and have never gotten a reply.

I agree that both Blessing and Cannon Crew seem to intend that you have to find all elligible cards. The current ruling on Cannon Crew is that you can choose to fail to find a support card if you want and that ruling makes it seem as if you should be able to do the same for Blessing.

Really I dont care which way this is ruled, I would just like a ruling.

Sorry fellas. I've stated before that I don't recognize private communications as "official rulings". At the Orlando Regionals, I required ALL cards to be shown in every search that named a card type. Dark Visions was exempt because the player can take any card they find, so there is no illegal concealment possible. No offense meant to anyone, I assure you. But if we can't get a regular update released as an official document from the company containing the latest batch of rulings and errata, then we're going to keep playing the game with sound reasoning within our own community.

The only regret I really have about the course we're on at this point regarding rules clarifications is that it's outright killing the social infrastructure of the game. It goes entirely without saying that a tournament scene is unsustainable without an exhaustively comprehensive Floor Rules Official Document, but the social environment where this fantastic game REALLY shines is degrading into a collection of "infinite Earths" where the rules on my planet only apply here, and when one planet's inhabitants cross over to another, we've got a Crisis on our hands. (Wow, fanboy supreme, that's me. ) Fortunately for me, I seem to be presently playing in the largest grouping of players in my area, so we have plenty of different buddies to play against and we all use the same rules and rulings. But I really feel for the 2- and 3-man minigroups who finally meet some new guys to play against, but the new guys are using the Double-Secret Probation Rules they got in an email from someone at the Home Office. Now the other group is completely outta gas against the new guys because everyone's decks are built to function in their own rules set and no one else's.

We play that ALL cards MUST be revealed in a card-specific search, fully, whether or not you find a single eligible card in the bunch. We'll keep playing that way, too, and not out of defiance. But because interpersonal relationships and fair play mean a heckuva lot more to our folks than rules lawyering does. We actually rather look down on rules lawyering, truthfully.

Nate made a ruling for AGoT that any cards searched for had to be revealed to your opponent, and prior to the main TO for Gencon and a couple of other major events required the cards to be revealed to a TO. I'm not sure if James will make any similar rulings, but I was disappointed by the DCC interim ruling.

Which brings me to the other point I try and go by the email responses James sends out knowing that until they are in the FAQ they are interim rulings intended to smooth out playing... but in tournaments the official documents are the Rulebook, the FAQ, and any other official released addendum available on the FFG support page. Any other rulings need to be verified by the TO, including emails from James.

WHAAAAAA?!?!?! dormouse and I agree on a major topic?! Inconscheivable! I've always had a really good feeling about you 'mouse. I don't care what Wytefang says about ya.....