Hi,

Last year, Caleb ruled that you can still play attachments on locations that are immune to player card effects . If a card cannot have attachments, then it will read "Cannot have attachments." However, cards that are immune to player card effects will be immune to the abilities of attachments. So you can play Power in the Earth on the Troll Cave, but it will have no effect on that location. Card like Ancient Mathom and Path of Need work differently because they don't affect the location, so their abilities will still work.

However, this ruling has changed in FAQ 1.5:

Q: Can I play an attachment on an enemy or location that is immune to player card effects.
A: No. Playing an attachment on a card is a form of targeting, and cards with "immune to player card effects" cannot be targeted by player cards.

I have sent the question to Caleb and will report if the FAQ updated rule is an error or if effectively he has reconsidered his ruling. I liked the original one though.

I agree with FAQ immune locations or enemy cannot be choose as a target. More logic for me.

I agree with FAQ immune locations or enemy cannot be choose as a target. More logic for me.

This is not completely exact: you can still use Quick Strike to attack an immune enemy to player effects. That is in the FAQ (just under the immune location ruling), and the idea is that Quick Strike targets a player's character, not the enemy.

The initial ruling by Caleb concerning the location was similar: you can attach a card to a location, but effects that target the location do not apply. On the other hand, effects that target a character still apply, such as in Ancient Mathom. Caleb even specified that if a card cannot have attachments, then it will read "Cannot have attachments." I found this ruling more consistent with the Quick Strike ruling above.

I agree with FAQ immune locations or enemy cannot be choose as a target. More logic for me.

This is not completely exact: you can still use Quick Strike to attack an immune enemy to player effects. That is in the FAQ (just under the immune location ruling), and the idea is that Quick Strike targets a player's character, not the enemy.

The initial ruling by Caleb concerning the location was similar: you can attach a card to a location, but effects that target the location do not apply. On the other hand, effects that target a character still apply, such as in Ancient Mathom. Caleb even specified that if a card cannot have attachments, then it will read "Cannot have attachments." I found this ruling more consistent with the Quick Strike ruling above.

Yes quick strike alredy have 3 times change the rules form the begin. But here is everything alright. You dont target any enemy you target a character.

Yes quick strike alredy have 3 times change the rules form the begin. But here is everything alright. You dont target any enemy you target a character.

That is exactly my point regarding the location ruling change. The original ruling by Caleb is to authorise attachments, ignoring effects on the location itself, but allowing effects that target the characters. The latest FAQ ruling reverses this and makes the location ruling inconsistent with the enemy ruling.

Yes quick strike alredy have 3 times change the rules form the begin. But here is everything alright. You dont target any enemy you target a character.

That is exactly my point regarding the location ruling change. The original ruling by Caleb is to authorise attachments, ignoring effects on the location itself, but allowing effects that target the characters. The latest FAQ ruling reverses this and makes the location ruling inconsistent with the enemy ruling.

But i think for now rules more stable and logic. Is only thing i dont like and dont agree with designers: now surge, doom and Guarded apply only when they cards revealed from the encounter deck. I hate everything what make game more easy.

Hi,

Last year, Caleb ruled that you can still play attachments on locations that are immune to player card effects . If a card cannot have attachments, then it will read "Cannot have attachments." However, cards that are immune to player card effects will be immune to the abilities of attachments. So you can play Power in the Earth on the Troll Cave, but it will have no effect on that location. Card like Ancient Mathom and Path of Need work differently because they don't affect the location, so their abilities will still work.

However, this ruling has changed in FAQ 1.5:

Q: Can I play an attachment on an enemy or location that is immune to player card effects.

A: No. Playing an attachment on a card is a form of targeting, and cards with "immune to player card effects" cannot be targeted by player cards.

I have sent the question to Caleb and will report if the FAQ updated rule is an error or if effectively he has reconsidered his ruling. I liked the original one though.

Hey Zeb,

Have you had any reply yet from Caleb? As I'd like to know the official awnser to this

Hi, I just kindly received an answer from Caleb. Indeed, they revised the initial ruling:

Yes, we have reconsidered our original ruling and decided that players cannot play attachments on locations that are immune to player card effects as attaching a card to a location is targeting that location. The previous ruling was contradictory to the rest of the restrictions of "immune to player card effects" and this ruling keeps it consistent.