Play in any opponent’s zone, under his control. Forced: At the beginning of your turn, you must sacrifice a non-development, non-quest card in this zone, if able. Action: At the beginning of your battlefield phase, skip the rest of your battlefield phase to destroy this card if a unit is questing here.

Can the non-development, non-quest card be the card that is attached to the Heroic Task? It is not considered to be out of play. Also can you sacrifice cards that have been attached facedown as experience?

Not 100% certain on this, but I don't think Experience or the card under Heroic Task is considered to be "in-play"? You definitely can't sacrifice cards that are not in play. If they are considered 'in-play', then I would think you can sacrifice them.

I think it needs to be clarified whether those cards are in play or not (for example units attached to The Unending Horde aren't considered to be in play).

I think in both cases the attached cards are in play, because the cards and rules don't say otherwise. Also, the rules sheet that comes with Days of Blood says "Experience have the support card type with no cost, loyalty, traits, or text.", there'd be no need for that if they weren't in play.

Thanks Mallumo.

Mallumo said:

Yeah, seems pretty clear cut that Experience is in play then. I think the card under Heroic Task is probably not intended to be in play. It uses similar language to Experience and Unending Horde, yet Experience is explicitly given a Support card type. On the other hand, HT is missing the "these cards aren't in play" qualifier that UH has. This may have been a case of there not being enough space on the card. I can't think of any other example where a card is in play with no card type though, which leads me to think that card isn't in play.

Entropy it would be great if you could get a precise answer regarding the card attached to the Heroic Task

Ok, I'll ask Lukas about both of these.

Entropy42 said:

It's probably approaching the point where we need a rules 2.0 and an FAQ 2.0, there are lots of once-off rulings in existence now such that the FAQ can contradict itself for specific cards. If such a project were to be player driven I would volunteer to proof read / help as much as a rules n00b like myself could.

Mallumo and I have talked about doing this, but have gotten no traction on it from FFG. I've considered taking my condensed rulebook and just remaking it as a more streamlined thing. I've been looking recently into doing it online in a forum, rather than as a PDF, so that I can just have mouseovers on all the cards. But Deckbox's forums have very few formatting options, and I don't like the way cardgameDB does its mouseovers (also, its mouseovers don't work for WHI yet).