All Individual Card Rulings at TLHH

[mardukra]

Allowing followers to bear WitD is not hard to understand.

Have you read the rulebooks? You should, as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Are you referring me to the notoriously lacking paragraphs in the Hunters Starter Rulebook?  The entire block itself has suspect wordings and this latest rules insert is no exception as we are all aware.  Of all the discussions this one I find the most ridiculous as the intent of the card is not even disputed. 

The first sentence under bearer in the Comp. Rules states that some conditions tell you which sort of card you can play them on.  As if that's even needed as the card is quite clear.

[MR. Lurtzy]

Allowing followers to bear WitD is not hard to understand.

Have you read the rulebooks? You should, as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Are you referring me to the notoriously lacking paragraphs in the Hunters Starter Rulebook?  The entire block itself has suspect wordings and this latest rules insert is no exception as we are all aware.  Of all the discussions this one I find the most ridiculous as the intent of the card is not even disputed. 

The first sentence under bearer in the Comp. Rules states that some conditions tell you which sort of card you can play them on.  As if that's even needed as the card is quite clear.

Jesus Christ. Do none of you read the rules? "Followers may not bear cards" That is clear. Let's look at that again. "Followers may not bear cards." Now, you should (but obviously don't) see that WITD does not overrule that, because IT DOES NOT GRANT PERMISSION. It states who the bearer can be. It does not say followers can bear this card.

[MuadDib85]

Again, Decipher printed this card to be used and should be. Anyone who wants to use WITD in games against me it is fine. Maybe just don't play against MR. Lurtzy and everything will be fine... he seems to be the only one who gets bent out of shape about an obvious mistake on Decipher's part.

[MR. Lurtzy]

I personally don't have a problem with the card itself, so long as it gets an errata to make it playable. The problem I have is with people who blatantly ignore the rules, just because it seems convenient.

[MuadDib85]

Yeah I see that and it is valid. Here is the big BUT though..

There will never be an official errata, so if you don't want it banned why not just accept the mistake and move on..?


EDIT: Seems to me that the only choices with nothing official in the works are:

1. Ban it
2. Use it

You say you don't want to ban it...

[MR. Lurtzy]

I've always viewed WITD as similar to FOA, in that it is not officially banned, but is still unusable.

[MuadDib85]

Banned/unusable, either way a perfectly good card is wasted.

Rules aside, unless you run at least 3x Saruman, Servant of Sauron (one of the cheapest cards out there ), WITD is a huge gamble anyway. Seven card slots is alot when you might be facing Ring-bound Hobbits.

So I say let it be used. Big deal.


EDIT:

Play a Wizard even if another copy of that wizard is in your dead pile.

Bearer Must Be A Follower even though followers cannot bear other cards.

[MR. Lurtzy]

Banned/unusable, either way a perfectly good card is wasted.

Well yes, but that's Decipher's fault, not mine.

Remember it's not the card that I have a problem with, but the "ignore the rules when it seems convenient" #$&*@!.Anyways, like FOA, this is one of the few cards that I personally am considering for an "unofficial" errata of sorts, which would be something like "followers can bear this card".

[MuadDib85]

What, ignoring the rules that can never be changed because the people that made them don't give a crap? Those rules...

A gentlemen's agreement is the best you will achieve, and the result of that agreement will be 'followers can bear this card'. So really, what will be different from the way it is now? Nothing.

[MR. Lurtzy]

It's all or none.

[Anautikus]

A gentlemen's agreement is the best you will achieve...

[jdizzy001]

so then what is the agreement?  use them or no?

[MR. Lurtzy]

so then what is the agreement?  use them or no?

What are you talking about?

[chompers]

All players will never agree on the same thing .. the constant disagreement on this site is evidence of that .. in the end it all comes down to personal choice. In the whole scheme of things WitD may not be a big issue for most of us as we may not play a format that supports this card.

I plan to use the Unofficial Rulebook but whether others choose to do the same remains to be seen. Tbieisty's work on this is good enough IMO to give it a chance.

[Gerontius]

Quite frankly, I still don't get what Lurtzy and Mauddib are even arguing about...
Does anyone actually have a problem with Tbiesty issuing a clarification in his rulebook? That seems like the simplest solution.