Perfecting the Spell, HE Tactic

Action:"Put the top card of your deck into play facedown as a development. Then, look at the top X cards of your deck and put them back on the top or bottom of your deck in any order. X is the number of development you control."

Source:
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=2435

Could I put a part of those cards back on the top of my deck and the others back on the bottom of my deck?

example:

If I look at top 5 cards of my deck, could I put 3 of them on top and 2 of them on the bottom of my deck?

or I must put those 5 cards all in top or all in bottom?

Well, the word "OR" in there pretty much indicates that it is one OR the other.

From a semantic point of view I think you have to put all X cards either on the top of the deck or all X cards on the bottom of the deck:

AND (Action 1, OR (Action 2, Action 3)), where

Action 1: look at the top X cards of your deck

Action 2: put them back on the top

Action 3: put them back on the [...] bottom of your deck

But I have my doubts about the logical rigour that FFG applied to its card texts...

I assume that you can put some on top, some on bottom if you choose (just because that ability is really underwhelming otherwise). You can interpret that "or" 2 different ways, and I don't see a way of knowing for sure without someone asking Lukas.

"Action: Put the top card of your deck into play facedown as a development. Then, look at the top X cards of your deck and put them back on the top or bottom of your deck in any order. X is the number of development you control."

After looking at the top X cards, you put THEM (top X cards) back on top OR bottom. Seems pretty clear. I guess you can try an interpret that in some other way. Doesn't seem like it would be the correct interpretation. Just my opinion though.

'Them' can as likely refer to each card in particular just as it might to the revealed cards as a whole. Also, without numberless graves, putting cards on the bottom of one's deck in any order is pretty pointless, unless you're about to get decked, in which case it's only marginally less pointless. We really do need an official ruling on the intention behind this card.

Just got a reply from Lukas, it was as I expected:

"You can put some on the top and some on the bottom."

what's the deal with getting replies from him!? I asked over two weeks ago about Teclis + Comet of Casandora and he hasn't replied!

Dunno, I was already talking to him about something else, so I just asked this. You could try re-submitting your question. He's usually pretty responsive, though I know he is really busy trying to get some things ironed out before Gen Con.

They really need to start being more specific in their wording. Geesh. Either way. I like the card.

GrumpyStranger said:

The only reasonable use I can see of putting cards in the bottom of your deck, for order, would be if you are searching for a particular card, didn't get in the top 5, so you put them all in the bottom in the hopes of drawing it that much quicker.

And I agree with Doc9, careful work is needed to avoid these open ended, subject to interpretation texts.

Doesn't make picking their order any less pointless.

Sometimes getting the whole meaning behind the card within that teeny text box might be a bit tricky to achieve. I'm content having Lukas answering any questions that might arise almost on the go, meself.

Thanks for clarification.

Then I think this card is useful I'll find the place of my HE deck for this card.

Hello!

I have question about Comet of Casndra's. How many damage point it deatt?

My question is based on this things from rule book:

1.

"A card cost is determined by adding the card printed cost (...) and its loyality cost"

2.

CARD ANATOMY KEY
1.
2. Cost: The number of resource tokens a player needs to pay in order to play this card from his hend.
3.
4. Loyalty Icons: An additional varible cost to play the card that can be reduced by controlling cards that are loyal to this card's race (...)"

And on the card:

Reveal the top 2 cards of your deck. Deal X indirect damage to each player. X is the total printed cost of the revealed cards. Then, put the revealed cards on the bottom of your deck.

If comet will work in this way it will be very VERY hard card but will go in the same way as in Warhammer Battle Game -> Huge demolish.

Please advice is Loyality points added to dealt demage by Comet of Casandra's or not.

Printed cost is the actual cost of the card (i.e. the printed number), it does not include the loyality cost

But total printed cost.

Is this only mean sum of two cards?

Yep. Total "printed cost" means the sum of both printed costs. If loyalty would be included, they would say "total cost".

Your short replay convince me the most.