I tried getting some clarification on this in another thread, but it didn't go anywhere, so let's try again.

This came up during my last play through of the "Battle of Five Armies" and Bolg.

I took "immune to player card effects" to mean that cards that did direct things to him (like lowering his stats or direct damage via Gandalf or Descendant of Throndor) could not be used. Likewise, one couldn't get any affect from something like a Forest Snare on him. However, I'm not so sure about cards like Hands Upon the Bow, Great Yew Bow, or Dunhere that let you attack enemies in the staging area.

Bolg has to be damageable by attacks, or else you could never win, and those cards just let a hero make an attack. I'd say Bard's -2 Defense power couldn't be used against him, but using the Yew Bow to declare him as the target of an attack isn't the same thing as affecting him with the card. The Yew Bow is affecting Bard, Bolg is being affected by the attack.

So long as there are no Bodyguards in play, I think smacking Bolg before stage 5 is a legitimate way to go. I'd love to hear what others say on the topic though.

this is a good question and one i believe has been asked in the past, so perhaps other players will remember an offical ruling

personally i agree with you. immunity to card effects protects from direct effects, however hands upon the bow targets the character, and only the enemy indirectly

if you have not luck here send a ruling request in, id like to know this also

rich

I think that targeting an enemy in the staging area is prohibited by encounter cards with "immune to player card effects".

Since you can only choose a target in the staging area to attack while the player card effect allows (like Dunhere, Hands upon the Bow or Great Yew Bow), you just cannot choose such enemy with above-mentioned immunity as a legal target.

Also, the quest card 5B explicitly states: "While Bolg is in the staging area, it is considered to be engaged with the first player." The designer's intention should be that the players cannot attack Bolg unless they are in stage 5B.

tydussin said:

I'm not sure regarding the first part of your response, hence my query, but this part I strongly disagree with. This just specifies who Bolg is engaged with, making him a more involved threat, but there are SO many ways to attack an enemy in the staging area (including a card that came in the same box as Bolg) that a condition for engagement is far from a clear intention regarding whether or not an enemy can be attacked otherwise.

I'm of a mind to agree with gatharion with regards to how immunity works. I think this is the most murky, grey area of the rules that currently exists, and I imagine every player group enforces it slightly differently. I'd like to see a whole article from the developers devoted to how immunity is supposed to work!

tydussin said:

You can make the same argument for cards that add attack or defense power: "You can only attack that enemy with 5 attack power if you have +2 damage from Dwarven Axe. Otherwise, the attack value is 3. Hence that +2 attack is a card effect and should be ignored." But we do know that these cards do function against immune targets, since they only interact with the character, and not the enemy in question. I believe we even got a ruling awhile back that a card like Burning Brand does work, since the shadow card being canceled is not immune to its effect.

It's really not a clearly defined rule, though. The little paragraph in some of the box inserts needs a lot o expansion. Until that happens, my suggestion is to go ahead and play the way that makes the most sense to you.

GrandSpleen said:

Right. An enemy like Smaug the Magnificent becomes a LOT harder to take down if I can't use attachments or events that boost my character's attack values. Or even someone like the Erebor Battle Master who has a built-in effect that increases his own attack value.

GrandSpleen said:

I totally agree that card's effect like Dwarven Axe is not affected by the enemy or location's immunity to player card effects.

My point is that while a card is immune to player card effects, it cannot be chosen as an eligible target of those effects.

The effects of the Cards such as Dwarven Axe or Khazad! Khazad! do only interact with the targets stated in those cards as "Attached hero" or "a Dwarf character", not anything else. When judging whether anything can be chosen as an eligible target of the card effect, just the stated target on the card should be considered, in my opinion.

Say core set hero Thalin with the text: "immune to player card effects", he won't benefit from Dwarven Axe even if it is attached to him. He cannot be chosen to benefit from Khazad! Khazad! either.

Dunhere's text: "can target enemies in the staging area when he attacks alone"

Hands Upon the Bow's text: "immediately declare it as an attacker against an enemy in the staging area"

Great Yew Bow's text: "choose an enemy in the staging area, make a ranged attack against that enemy"

All those effects have the same targets: "enemy in the staging area". If an enemy is immune to such effects, it cannot be chosen as those effects' eligible target either, at least in my opinion.

I also agree that it is important for the designer or developer to clarify the intentions of such immunity wordings.

It is pointless to try to guess, just contact support for such questions.

tydussin said:

That's just not true. The target character is directly affected by getting a boost to their attack value, but if you then make an attack with said character it is interacting with an enemy card and the enemy is being affected by the attachment/event in the form of taking more damage then it otherwise would.

has anyone contacted caleb? i wouldnt mind doing it if no one else has

rich

richsabre said:

I sent a message a few days ago. No response as of yet.

I got a response from Caleb:

"Cards that allow players to attack enemies in the staging area like Great Yew Bow and Dunhere instruct the player to 'choose' or 'target' an enemy in the staging area first. By definition, enemies that are immune to player card effects cannot be targeted or chosen in this manner.
In regard to Bolg, his immunity to player card effects prevents him from being damaged or removed from play before the players reach stage 5. The only way Bolg can be defeated is by making normal attacks against him at stage 5 where he is considered to be engaged with the first player.
Cheers,
Caleb"

I'm still a bit confused about the distinction being made here, but it's a ruling.

It also means that I haven't legitimately beaten the Battle of Five Armies yet.

Thanks for that, gatharion. I find it hard to parse, as well. Dunhere, for example, says "Dunhere can target …." rather than using language like "Choose an enemy." Given what he says about Bolg, this must apply to Hands Upon the Bow as well. That card does not use language like "choose" or "target," and rather just states that you can declare an attack against an enemy in the staging area. But I'm starting to get a sense that that doesn't matter. If it says immune, it looks like you just can't do anything to it outside of standard game rules (normal attacks in combat phase, normal engagement checks, etc).

The 'golden rule' in the game manual says that card text trumps rules in the manual. Perhaps an appropriate way to conceptualize immunity is that it rebuffs the golden rule. Anything that would interact with a card outside of standard game rules won't apply. Might be kind of rough, but I'll think about it…

As for Bolg, I also went into Battle of Five Armies planning to assassinate him before stage 5. It didn't pan out though -- none of the right cards came out, and then his bodyguards filled the staging area. As a result, I do have a legitimate win under my belt

There has been an updated ruling:

"Hi Thaddeus,

With all the confusion surrounding immunity -- even among the developers -- I think it might be useful for them to just release a checklist of all cards that can and can't be played when an immune enemy or location is involved!