Can you still use Permanent Setup Attachments boons in the Saga if you're using The Burglar's Turn contract? Are they ever really in your deck if they must be "attached to the specified hero at the start of a game." It would be a bummer if using the Burgar's turn in the campaign ruins the funnest part of the sagas.

Since the contract only specifies deck, it should work fine as long as there are no attachments in the deck at the time the Contract is played. This should allow the Permanent Setup boons to be played before the contract is played.

Heck, with Caleb's current everything-happens-at-the-end timing, you can include *regular* attachments in your deck, and then play Burglar's turn if they all end up in your hand!

6 hours ago, dalestephenson said:

Since the contract only specifies deck, it should work fine as long as there are no attachments in the deck at the time the Contract is played. This should allow the Permanent Setup boons to be played before the contract is played.

Heck, with Caleb's current everything-happens-at-the-end timing, you can include *regular* attachments in your deck, and then play Burglar's turn if they all end up in your hand!

Hmm. I believe the contract with the passive abilities are placed with the heroes first, triggering "your deck cannot include attachments". The opening hand, then quest setup and then contract setup. Though that would be a baller move, to dodge the contract.

On 5/2/2020 at 4:32 AM, dalestephenson said:

Heck, with Caleb's current everything-happens-at-the-end timing, you can include *regular* attachments in your deck, and then play Burglar's turn if they all end up in your hand!

I don't think this is how Contracts or Contract Timing work. Otherwise, Grey Wanderer would be a literally unplayable contract, wouldn't it? The rules do not allow for you to build a deck with only one hero, so you need the Contract's deck-building rules and exceptions already in effect in order to even legally get past Step 2 of set-up with only one hero. Whatever ways in which Contracts work in practice, it has to be such that it is in effect for deck construction well before Step 2 of set-up, I think. Which means you couldn't try to "sneak past" the attachment ban of Burglar's Turn by getting all attachments into your starting hand. You simply couldn't have Burglar's Contract affiliated with a deck that had any attachments in it even before drawing starting hands.

47 minutes ago, EBerling said:

I don't think this is how Contracts or Contract Timing work. Otherwise, Grey Wanderer would be a literally unplayable contract, wouldn't it? The rules do not allow for you to build a deck with only one hero, so you need the Contract's deck-building rules and exceptions already in effect in order to even legally get past Step 2 of set-up with only one hero. Whatever ways in which Contracts work in practice, it has to be such that it is in effect for deck construction well before Step 2 of set-up, I think. Which means you couldn't try to "sneak past" the attachment ban of Burglar's Turn by getting all attachments into your starting hand. You simply couldn't have Burglar's Contract affiliated with a deck that had any attachments in it even before drawing starting hands.

Actually I think the rules have always allowed you to play with 1 - 3 heros? Back when secrecy came out 1 or 2 hero decks were kind of encouraged I believe.

17 hours ago, EBerling said:

I don't think this is how Contracts or Contract Timing work. Otherwise, Grey Wanderer would be a literally unplayable contract, wouldn't it? The rules do not allow for you to build a deck with only one hero, so you need the Contract's deck-building rules and exceptions already in effect in order to even legally get past Step 2 of set-up with only one hero. Whatever ways in which Contracts work in practice, it has to be such that it is in effect for deck construction well before Step 2 of set-up, I think. Which means you couldn't try to "sneak past" the attachment ban of Burglar's Turn by getting all attachments into your starting hand. You simply couldn't have Burglar's Contract affiliated with a deck that had any attachments in it even before drawing starting hands.

One hero has *always* been legal. Not viable, but certainly legal. You'd see experimental decks with one hero sometimes even before Strider came out.

With the *original* contract timing (setup with the heroes), the deck building constraints contained in the contract text absolutely would prohibit violators in the deck. This means (as originally designed) that you couldn't combine One Ring with Burglar's Turn -- the One Ring is in the deck, the contract is put out "along with heroes", and the One Ring's setup is "immediately after placing heroes" per Shadow in the East rules. So contract would precede One Ring.

But now that Caleb has foolishly pushed everything back to after encounter setup, order of post-step-seven should be player chosen, so you should be able to do One Ring *before* playing the contract. So as long as there are no attachments in your *deck*, it doesn't matter if attachments are in your hand for Burglar's Turn. So long as there no allies in your *deck*, it does not matter if allies are in your hand for Forth the Three Hunters! Technically, non-unique allies have *always* been legal in a Fellowship deck, the contract only restricts you from playing them or putting them into play. You could still include them for readying Kahliel, or for letting a partner deck play Stand & Fight to get extra Outlands, etcetera.

If you think it violates the spirit of how contracts were designed, I don't disagree, but it's a foreseeable side-effect of Caleb's misbegotten ruling. Or if you prefer, it gives you the *flexibility* of being able to play a one-ally or one-attachment deck, opportunistically using the contracts when you were lucky enough to get that card in hand instead of deck.

Even with original contract timing at the Place Heroes step, isn't that also the same time when permanent boons are attached? So couldn't you theoretically choose the order and attach permanent boons first?

The saga rules say (concerning cards in deck with "beginning of game" setup instructions) that you fish it out of the deck and follow its instructions "before drawing his [your] first hand". I think that is most logically timed immediately before drawing the first hand rather than interposing itself between placing heroes and placing the contract that's put in place "along with the heroes" per original design rules -- but I also think there's just no good *reason* to forbid using both Permanent Boons (an integral part of playing the campaign) and also the Burglar's Turn contract (a unique playstyle that isn't remotely overpowered or saga-breaking). So if I were Caleb, I would allow Permanent Boons to be used with Burglar's Turn.

Frankly, the same reasoning applies to the One Ring/Burglar's Turn interaction. Considering that the discoverer of the One Ring is *the* canonical Burglar, disallowing the Burglar's Turn/One Ring interaction is a horrible thematic fail.