I don't see this addressed in any FAQ entries, so I wonder if anyone has heard this question brought up before, and if an official or close to offical answer was ever presented:

Bathe In Blood, a DElf card from Assault on Ulthuan, states that it must be played on a DElf unit, and "sacrifice that unit at the end of the turn". Since the card does not state that you must control the chosen DElf unit, I could essentially play Bathe in Blood on an opponent's DElf unit. However, I can only imagine doing so in order to get it sacrificed at end of turn. But since I am the one playing Bathe in Blood, the clause about sacrifice is refering to me, and as far as I understand this game and what sacrifice means in real life, a player cannot sacrifice another player's unit. So is it supposed to be impossible to play Bathe in Blood on an oppenent's unit but not expressly implyed by the card wording, or did the design team probably think that the card wording would make it absolutely undesirable to do so anyway (forgetting that future cards and strategies could change that)?

The card reads:

Choose one target (DE) unit. Double that unit's power until the end of the turn. At the end of the turn, sacrifice it.

The target is a dark elf unit. Any dark elf can be targeted since it isn't specific to your units or your opponent's units.

Until the end of the turn, that unit's power is doubled.

At the end of the turn, the unit is sacrificed.

Based of the wording of the card, I would say that you can play it on the opponent's unit. The last part of the card that orders the sacrifice of the unit would be directed to the owner of the unit that the card was played on.

But, this is of course, just a guess.

This is in the rules summary at http://deckbox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=232:

Q. Can you play this on an opponent's unit? If so, is it sacrificed?
A. Yes, you can, but you can only sacrifice your own units, so the "at the end of the turn" effect will have no effect.

Ah, thanks. Does deck box have official answers, or is that the strict interpretation based on current rules (i.e. not necissarily the intention of the card creator )?

Everything in deckbox is based on an answer from a developer (with the exception of the detailed combat/non-combat damage steps that I just wrote to help people out). Some of them are not cited because they are just from conversations I had with Lukas.

In some cases, its possible that the ruling is not what the devs originally intended for the card, but once the card is written, it works however the rules dictate it works, and to make it work the way they originally wanted, they have to errata it. Duregan Thorgrimson is an example of a card where that happened.