Alba3
E Destroy 1 foundation: If this attack deals damage, your opponent must play a non-attack as their next form or pass.

Does this indicate that they must play a non attack *card* (as one could argue that "play...as a form" would indicate), or can they simply play the F ability on something else and totally dodge [step] it?

play a non-attack as their next form, i would read that as play a non-attack [Card] as their next form, since you play abilites from your staging area but it is telling you to PLAY a non-attack... so thats how i would rule it.

PS: check your e-mail we need to get that trade worked out by saturday or we may have to call it off...

N.J.

Referring to playing a non-attack as a form strongly implies it needing to be playing a card , since that wording would be largely useless if it applied to form abilities too.

They have to play a non-attack card from their hand as a form to satisfy the condition.

edit: there is one distinction though - they could play a split card with an attack side as its non-attack side, for example they could play the action side of Omnidirecitonal Cluster Bomb, which they wouldn't be able to do if it said "non-attack card " outright.

Tagrineth said:

not argueing, just looking for clarification.

Now Olcadan's Mentoring is clearly a "non-attack form". I think the problem is "using" olcadan's F is not technically "playing" a non-attack as a form. It is "Forming" with a card in your staging area.

Is "playing" a card defined somewhere as playing a card from your hand, and not "playing" an ability on a card in your staging area?

If thats the case isn't there a card that states "players may not play abilities on foundations in their staging area"?

found it

Is there some sort of silent errata on Alba3? Is there something in the TR that clears this up?

I am really looking forward to the new TR lol.

Thanks in advance

This doesn't need any help from the TR, it just takes 30 seconds of logical thought. Not everything HAS to be codified rigorously when it just makes sense given some thought.

Yeah, i know, you guys are gonna disagree with me on that, but I really don't think every tiny little nuance of every single card interaction HAS to be clarified and TR'd.

Tagrineth said:

it just seems there is nothing "clear" that signafies you can't Form with Olcadan's Mentoring as your next form.

To me it is like Harrier Bee, its obvious that the idea was that your opponent does not discard if you do not have another one in your hand, but thats not the way it functions.

It seems like Alba SHOULD function so that you must play a non-attack form from your hand.

Would forming with Sakura get around Alba? Would you have to form with Sakura, and then play the card from your discard pile (or a card from your hand)?

Again, not trying to argue. Not trying to say "the developers meant to do THIS isntead". Just looking for clarification so that i can apply that to other cards in the future; for deckbuilding, etc.

I completely understand that the developers meant for you to have to play a card, im just looking for rules to back it up.

Thanks again

Well Harrier Bee is a different matter entirely as its text flatly contradicts any other interpretation.

one more question. Say i attack and you E with alba. Once my attack resolves, can i Olcadan's Mentoring (or other F from another foundation) then pass? or MUST i play a non-attack from my hard as my next form? (this goes back to the sakura question)

You can't play a form ability.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking when looking at it. It says they have to "play" a non-attack, as opposed to "they cannot play an attack as their next form".

Glad it works that way =D

so again to clarify, when using a F on something like olcadan's, that is considered "played" correctly?

Not trying to argue Alba, more curious for things like Reaction windows. If something read, "R: After your opponent plays a form" would them using owlface trigger that?

thanks

Smazzurco said: