Reasons for sacrificing towers

By gertat, in Warhammer Invasion Rules Questions

I have just recently started to listen to the Winvasion podcast and there they talked about tower like Outlying Tower and about the reasons they must be sacrifed if you control à none racialcard.

They sad that that even meant develepments.

They hoped that would change in the next FAQ.

Does anyone if t this has changed?

http://deckbox.org/whi/Outlying%20Tower

It has changed:

All instances of “If you control a non-[faction] card...” should read “If you control a faceup non-[faction] unit or support card...”

Thanks

My brother wanted me to ask if this also means quest cards?

Should you asume that it applys even to quest cards or should you go strictly on the words and that it olny applys to Units and supportcards.

As it written, units and support cards, so you don't loose "towers" to invasions (snots, cults, beastmen) and neutral quests (Heroic Task for example).

So... i take it that when War boar is in play in a battlefield: ( Battlefield. Treat all quest cards in play as if they are also support cards.), then the quest become a support card and the opponent are forced to sacrifice their non-orc (sacrificable tower) if they were given control of snotling invasion/ pleasure cult/beastman incursion. right?

Could be a neat trick if these towers gets common

Nice, didn't think about this one, although War Boar is crap :P

In ànother recently posted question by myself I asked about how has control over attatchments attached to the other player.

The answer was that the player how played the card keeps control of the attachment.

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/72675-judgement-of-loec/

Isnt it the same with quest played in the opponents zone.

Does the opponent get control over that card?

Play in any opponent’s zone, under his control.

Edited by Virgo