Jump to content
  • 0

September 2014 FAQ


Justin

23 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 1

Yes. If the new ruling is that the suit from the RJ is that it "counts as printed on the card for all intents and purposes", then that would make it go away due to Nether Fluctuation. Hence the need to rephrase it if it's not supposed to work like that.

But Nether Fluctuation only affects the suits printed on the stats, it has no effect whatsoever on the suit in the card itself. It may remove the crow from my Ml action to activate Infect, but it does not stop an 11 of crows, or in this case, a red joker deciding to be a crow to add the suit and let me trigger Infect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I love the RJ ruling for Nix.  Kinda figured the RJ would count as the suit it was pulled for, but if it helps clear up gray for some people then good times.

 

So sad that there even needed to be an entry on the "X inches counts as within X inches", but if one sentence prevents arguing - then I guess it's better for the cosmos as a whole.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

So sad that there even needed to be an entry on the "X inches counts as within X inches", but if one sentence prevents arguing - then I guess it's better for the cosmos as a whole.

 

Yeah, I was surprised too by that one. There are much murkier rules interactions that didn't make it to the FAQ. This needs only elementary school "science".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I may just have been playing it wrong, but does Nether Fluctuation always prevent any and all triggers from Ca, Ml and Sh action? I always played it as if only the printed suits were ignored.

 

If it's supposed to be as I read it, then this FAQ effectively made Nether Fluctuation work with the RJ and may want to be adressed in the next FAQ. If it's always supposed to prevent all suits from any source, then nevermind and I've been playing it wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I may just have been playing it wrong, but does Nether Fluctuation always prevent any and all triggers from Ca, Ml and Sh action? I always played it as if only the printed suits were ignored.

 

If it's supposed to be as I read it, then this FAQ effectively made Nether Fluctuation work with the RJ and may want to be adressed in the next FAQ. If it's always supposed to prevent all suits from any source, then nevermind and I've been playing it wrong.

 

No I am pretty sure it just strips the built in suits from your Ca, MI, and Sh stats.  I don't see how that conflicts with the Red Joker ruling or changes the way you would play it though, maybe you can explain a bit more? 

 

If you are talking about where it says the suit counts as printed on the card for all intents and purposes, I am pretty sure it means the Red Joker card as that was a topic of debate in the threads about whether or not you can summon Teddy with Leave it to Luck. (Whether or not the joker counted as being a Mask or not when you chose Mask)

 

Maybe I am just misunderstanding you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

But Nether Fluctuation only affects the suits printed on the stats, it has no effect whatsoever on the suit in the card itself. It may remove the crow from my Ml action to activate Infect, but it does not stop an 11 of crows, or in this case, a red joker deciding to be a crow to add the suit and let me trigger Infect.

 

This is what I was saying, Nether Fluctuations removes the built in suits from your Ca, MI, and Sh stats.  It doesnt remove the suit from the card you flipped off the top of your deck.

 

  The bit about the Red Joker suit counting as being on the card for all intents and purposes is really just wording that is there because Tannens "Leave it to Luck" specifically calls out a "mask card" and people were arguing over whether the Red Joker counted as a mask or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Nether Flux: Enemy models within :aura 4 of this model ignore any suits associated with their Ca, Sh and Ml stats.

 

Associated with is in my mind not necessarily the same thing as built-in. And even if it's supposed to be built-in, then the RJ is with this FAQ ruling just that, built-in. It's possibly a mistake yes, but right now RJ suits does not work when within the Flux aura.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I cant comment on how associated is supposed to read but I really don't think you are reading the Red Joker erratta correctly. 

 

When it says the RJs suit is on the card, it is not referring to the character card, it is referring to the Red Joker card and saying that it counts as though the suit was literally printed on the RJ card if it isnt already. 

 

So while I don't know about a dispute over nether fluctuations, the way I am reading this erratta, as long as nether fluctuations IS only built in suits, the RJ is not affected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Nether Flux: Enemy models within :aura 4 of this model ignore any suits associated with their Ca, Sh and Ml stats.

The only suits associated with Ca, Sh, and Ml are the printed suits for those stats.

All cards have suits printed on them, but those suits are associated with the card flipped, not the printed statistic. They are added to the Final Duel Total regardless of the statistic you use in the duel itself.

Wouldn't Nether Flux be worded far, far differently if it was intended to remove card suits as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I've always assumed that "associated" with related only to the suit on the stat card that was built into the action. I'd not have realised it was ambiguous until you pointed it out.

 

I checked the Counterspell ability that Rasputina has, though, and that says "lose all suits printed in the CA" which is clear.

 

Neverhteless, the reason I suspect that it is only the printed suits that are lost, is that in your interpretation Seregon, Nether flux could be re-worded to say, "models within the aura cannot activate Ml, Sh, or Ca triggers". I think this would have the same effect, and would have been cleaner and more intuitive if that was the intended effect.

 

Worth FAQing though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Nix is hating the Red Joker more harshly than I thought. Don't know why the 3" thing was FAQ-worthy though, it helps a bit, I guess... 

 

There's a locked discussion thread if you really really need to see an example of the "Is exactly three inches within three inches?" question....  :blast

 Although the "Base contact is zero inches away" part of the answer may be the more important part of the answer, as far as geometry wars are concerned.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

There's a locked discussion thread if you really really need to see an example of the "Is exactly three inches within three inches?" question....  :blast

 Although the "Base contact is zero inches away" part of the answer may be the more important part of the answer, as far as geometry wars are concerned.  ;)

 

No thanks, I like being sane. Base contact is 0" might be important in some cases indeed..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information