EntrepeNinja

So- to add fule to the fire, and because I DO have the stat cards in front of me- Decoy card: Which has the same two arguments that both sides have laid out- 1. Decoy replaces it's card with the AoD's card. 2. That the Decoy can take Actions as was it was Colette, Avatar of Deception. The first point reinforces that they are the same model, the second that they are not. The first line of shell game reads: So again, the argument can be made that technically revealed or not, they're ALL the master. I just think that is against the idea of shell game, and if it's just supposed to help with survivability, and increase activations, then it's sort of counter to what (I feel?) is the nature of her mechanism. Great response time, by the way! Thanks for the discussion. Would it be a good idea to re-post on the rules forums as well?

I've been searching for anyone else running up against this, and haven't found much. I know she hasn't seen much practical use yet, but I'm curious about popular opinion: aColette vs. anybody with Deliver a message Strategy. Assuming you can get to Avatar without being delivered to, what would happen if a model tried to deliver a message to a decoy? Technicaly they all share the same card, and therefore the same model, but as she is the avatar of deception, wouldn't it make sense that the message not be delivered unless it was delivered to the right one? I think if the ruling goes she can monty her way to some real confusion around the board, that this would be a really good use of the Colette avatar, but if the ruling goes to any one of them being a deliver target, it triples your chance, and totally trump the effectiveness of shell-game. What do you guys think?