about "stay her appetite"

Marcos · Post by **Marcos** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:12 pm

i only was looking for a way to discard opponents allies for my FW raddy deck

since the attack is detainment vs hero, and, as i said before, i've been told that detainment attacks cannot be defeated, it seemed a nice way to get rid of allies and double my MPs for a big juicy 6-0 hehe

man, i won't get turned off of the game, i've been playing it for a long time (more than 10 years) and i really like it...

Konrad Klar wrote:
Lidless Eye, Starter Rules, Combat, Defeating An Attack wrote:A detainment attack from a creature is never defeated and the creature's card is always discarded after the attack is resolved.

LIdless Eye, Using MELE with METW, Combat, Marshalling Points wrote:A Wizard player does not receive marshalling points for defeating a creature with an "*" next to its marshalling points or for defeating a detainment attack.
Underlines mine.

Only detainment attack from a creature cannot be defeated.

konrad's clarification is pretty clear to me, i will play like that until someone quote the logic behind CoE diggest 82

Jambo · Post by **Jambo** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:30 pm

Better off playing it with the +2 as per the card's original text too. The nerf to make it +5 is makes it rather rubbish.

Sly Southerner · Post by **Sly Southerner** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:09 am

So we ignore very specific CoE rulings now? I guess anyone can play however they like but to me that makes things even more confusing.

Bandobras Took · Post by **Bandobras Took** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:52 am

Sly Southerner wrote:So we ignore very specific CoE rulings now? I guess anyone can play however they like but to me that makes things even more confusing.

Once again, though, this forum is for unofficial answers to rules questions.  Therefore the "we" in your comment is rather ambiguous, itself.

For an official ruling on the apparently contradictory CoE rulings previously mentioned, the NetRep must publish such in a digest.  However, pending actions of the CoE are not the domain of this forum.

Because there is room for doubt in this instance (we are not ignoring any specific CoE ruling, but rather weighing it against another specific CoE ruling), any individual may express his agreement with one point of view or another without any fear of reprisal or any trace of authority.

Sorry for another long and boring post.  Hopefully, this won't become a habit.

Jambo · Post by **Jambo** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:46 am

Sly Southerner wrote:So we ignore very specific CoE rulings now? I guess anyone can play however they like but to me that makes things even more confusing.

Hi Adrian,

Players can do whatever they like when they play as long as they're in agreement. If however, you're playing in a tournament then you have to abide by the tournament rules, which in general means following the crf and CoE rulings.

Konrad definitely raises a very good point here, but the NetRep and the CoE site in general is quite quiet at the moment.

Marcos · Post by **Marcos** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:15 pm

Sly Southerner wrote:So we ignore very specific CoE rulings now? I guess anyone can play however they like but to me that makes things even more confusing.

that CoE diggest doesn't have any logic behid it, that's why i prefer to ingore it until anyone else explains why that attack cannot be defeated and the ally discarded (wich would be better for my deck btw

)