Card Text:

Interrupt: When both players are done placing edge cards, and before edge stacks are revealed, switch edge stacks with your opponent for the resolution of this edge battle.

Q: Can this card be used even if the DS player chose not to contribute any cards? If so, then what if the DS player is the defender and did not commit any units to the engagement, and is therefore unable to contribute any cards?

edit: this has been confirmed by nate that both players need to have at least a single card in their edge stacks to swap.

Not quite. A switch can only take place if there are two items available to switch, so in this case, both players must have at least 1 card in their edge stack to allow the switch to occur. (I've previously confirmed this with the development team.)

So if the defender has no units in the engagement, therefore no cards in his edge stack, the card can't be played.

Not quite. A switch can only take place if there are two items available to switch, so in this case, both players must have at least 1 card in their edge stack to allow the switch to occur. (I've previously confirmed this with the development team.)

So if the defender has no units in the engagement, therefore no cards in his edge stack, the card can't be played.

I thought I remembered seeing this but wasnt sure, thanks for confirming.

We'ra already ask to FFG. Nate French response :

Reversal of Fate / Edge stack
In order to have edge stacks to switch, both players must have at least 1 card in the stack. In other words, if there are no cards in it, a player does not have an edge stack.
Source : Nate French

Honestly this is not the best worded card. It really should say this.

When both players are done placing edge cards (both players must have place at least 1 edge card), and before edge stacks are revealed, switch edge stacks with your opponent for the resolution of this edge battle.

Worst worded card to date in this game then....

That's a bold statement in a game that also contains Trench Run.

You can't have a stack of 0 cards. That makes no sense. I never would have played this card any other.

"Look at my stack of nothing, it's huge!"

Honestly this is not the best worded card. It really should say this.

When both players are done placing edge cards (both players must have place at least 1 edge card), and before edge stacks are revealed, switch edge stacks with your opponent for the resolution of this edge battle.

I understood it correctly. To me, it seems straightforward that you can't have an edge stack without any edge cards.

Sometimes I wonder if people try to question wording just to make a fuss. Not directed at you, Baz, just wondering in general. (Keep up the great work on TableFlip!)

You can't have a stack of 0 cards. That makes no sense. I never would have played this card any other.

"Look at my stack of nothing, it's huge!"

When you begin a game, you have the discard pile's area on your board and there nothing in it.

So what ?

You can't have a stack of 0 cards. That makes no sense. I never would have played this card any other.

"Look at my stack of nothing, it's huge!"

When you begin a game, you have the discard pile's area on your board and there nothing in it.

So what ?

Yes, the area, but no actual pile.

This is a pretty obvious ruling, in my mind. I don't know why there is such a discussion around it.

You can't have a stack of 0 cards. That makes no sense. I never would have played this card any other.

"Look at my stack of nothing, it's huge!"

When you begin a game, you have the discard pile's area on your board and there nothing in it.

So what ?

Area and stack are completely different things. I have a play area even if I have not played any cards but I do not have any cards in play.

I am confused how anyone could be confused by this card. Maybe it's good they ruled already.avoids the kind of stupid debate that Trench Run made.

You can't have a stack of 0 cards. That makes no sense. I never would have played this card any other.

"Look at my stack of nothing, it's huge!"

When you begin a game, you have the discard pile's area on your board and there nothing in it.

So what ?

Area and stack are completely different things. I have a play area even if I have not played any cards but I do not have any cards in play.

I am confused how anyone could be confused by this card. Maybe it's good they ruled already.avoids the kind of stupid debate that Trench Run made.

I think some people just like to argue. If people just stepped back and looked at the card in a 'spirit of the law' kind of way, 90% of these arguments wouldn't start.

Yes Saej. Illuminate the poor unbeliever I am.

Area and stack are completely different things. I have a play area even if I have not played any cards but I do not have any cards in play.

I am confused how anyone could be confused by this card. Maybe it's good they ruled already.avoids the kind of stupid debate that Trench Run made.

In the state, it's strictly the same thing.

We have one game's element that exists with nothing in it ( discard pile ), so why not for the edge stack ?

Same thing with Edge[x]. A player in an engagement with Col Serra has Edge[1] at the beginning of this engagement. If the opposing player has not an unit with Edge[x], that player still has Edge[0].

This last example is just here for reminding an important thing : 0 is a value. If there is a value for something, this something exists.

Therefore, a player could say : "I have 0 card in my edge stack" and played Reversal of Fate.

No matter for me if played like this, 'cause there's a value.

In brief, Nate ruled. Case closed.

But I think it was a good question. Better question than I saw in the last FAQ : can I remove a 3 damage token when a card says "remove a damage token"...

If we think of it as null instead of zero, as in edge [null] (ie doesn't have the edge keyword) and a null edge stack (ie doesn't have an edge stack), then the issue goes away! :-)

I totally would have thought that you could switch a stack of zero cards. I don't see why a zone (edge stack, play area, discard pile, deck, hand, etc.) has to have a card in it in order to exist. To me, it's like saying 'switch apple baskets' when a person has an empty basket. Sure, there are no apples, but you can still switch baskets.

I won't make a fuss, because there has been an official ruling, and I'll abide by it. But I don't think it's oh so obvious that it works that way.

It's the same ruling as they've had for previous LCG's, so consistency is a consideration. I knew the switch definition from LotR: LCG, so (in turn) it would have surprised me if it had been ruled any other way.

Wow. I didn't think that there would be this much energy around this tiny question. I am simultaneously glad and sorry that I brought it up.

I'm sorry that I brought it up, because it has caused so much grief from people who don't like clarifications on cards that they think that no one could ever misinterpret. (How could they? The card makes perfect sense, right?)

However, I'm glad that I brought it up, because apparently not everyone was interpreting it the right way after all! Thank you, GooeyChewie, for validating my initial question.

This is precisely why I ask these sorts of seemingly trivial questions. I like to get these things sorted out before they can become issues during gameplay. Unfortunately, in doing so, it became an issue anyway. Oh well. Better luck next time, I guess.

Regardless of semantics over whether an edge stack should be considered to exist without any cards in it, it's a good ruling simply because the card would be too powerful otherwise. Playing *something* into your edge stack absolutely should be part of the cost of the event.

seriously, this thread needs locked. the ruling is in, opinions no longer matter, and mine was wrong but either way it was all good as far as I was concerned.