Master Rune of Dismay: "Kingdom. Opponent's units cost 1 additional resource to play."

Tunnel Fighter: "You may sacrifice 3 developments to lower this unit’s cost to 0"

If my opponent has 2 Master Rune of Dismay in play, then I play Tunnel Fighter with sacrifice 3 developments.

Do I need pay 2 additional resources?

Not sure. I'm tempted to say yes though.

If Master Rune of Dismay said "Increase the cost of units played by your opponent by 1", we'd have to take the net of the two effects, and "increase by 1" and "reduce to 0" would result in cost 0. But the way it is written you could say it doesn't change the cost (the top left number on the card). So the Rune's effect would be similar to loyalty, it adds to the cost, but isn't considered part of the cost for other card effects. Note that cards like Tunnel Fighter, Grail Knight, Blood Summoning or We'z Bigga! tell you to "lower the cost", not that cards "cost x resource less to play".

However, if that was the intention, it could have been worded similar to Church of Sigmar, i.e. "Your opponent cannot play units unless he pays an additional 1 resource per unit". So maybe it does change the cost and the wording just isn't perfectly clear.

I would think you don't need to pay extra, because the Rune of Dismay is always there, whereas the Tunnel Fighter effect happens right before you pay the cost. i.e. the Rune adds 2 all the time, but then you sacrifice 3 developments and it brings it down to zero. Tunnel Fighter doesn't say "reduces printed cost" which could be an indication that it works on already modified costs. This is really just a feeling on how it could work though, not saying my interpretation is any more valid than Mallumo's.

I'm not sure this question can be answered under the current rules, needs a clarification from Lukas.

thanks both of you, guys.

I did send my question by below "Rule Question" link on the next day I post. but not get any reply yet.

Tunnel Fighter's ability only applies to its printed cost. You will have to pay an additional resource for each Master Rune of Dismay in order to play it.

Hope that helps,

--
Lukas Litzsinger
Associate LCG Designer
Fantasy Flight Games
[email protected]

Since we are talking about cost, mind if I change the subject a bit?

Tunnel Fighter is a good example of a card's wording that makes me suspicious. If I lower his cost to 0, it is like playing a 0 cost card (E.g., Walking Sacrifice) with 3 loyalty, right? So I would have to pay to meet the loyalty requirement if I didn't have the loyalty, even if I made his cost 0.

Ok, so I feel like I am right about that, but I have been known to be horribly wrong about the most basic **** in this game. SO IF THAT IS CORRECT, then what is the deal with cards like Slaanesh's Domination? It reads "Action: Reveal up to three cards at random from one target opponent's hand. You may play any tactics thus revealed as though they were in your hand for no cost.". Does that mean that no cost is different from 0 cost (I'd say yes) and that zero cost means "No resources will be leaving your pool to play these cards"? (Again I'd say yes).

Otherwise it's a bit of a silly card, as you would need to pay a ton of loyalty to play your opponents cards AND the two resources you need to play Slaanesh's Domination. SOOOOO, in my mind, zero cost and no cost are different things, which 0 cost meaning the number on the top left corner of the card is 0 and no cost meaning completely free. Thoughts?

HappyDD said:

I meant to say "…and that NO cost means "No resources will be leaving your pool to play these cards"? (Again I'd say yes)." not zero cost

NVM, the answer to this exact question is in the FAQ.