|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 17, 2008 10:29:34 GMT -5
As of 4-17-2008, this is official errata from the company pertaining to cards that affect Type One fromat: HIGLANDER :THE GATHERING SET ------------------------------------------ HtG #187- The Prize (is listed Arms and Tactics though) - You may remove this card from the game to shuffle your discard pile into your endurance. HtG #197 - Arms and Tactics - You may remove this card from the game to play defenses against multiple attacks, even if there are cards preventing you from doing so. HIGHLANDER :THE CORE SET ------------------------------------ HS1 #042- Guillotine - Object - Discard this card from play to search your discard for one card titled Head Shot and put it into your hand. HS1 #051- Pistol (MC) - R2 - Ranged Attack - One Hand Icon - This attack may be played even if disarmed. This attack does one damage. HS1 #112 - Single Handed Broadsword - Weapon Lock - R4 - Edge - Play in conjunction with a block. Retrieve up to three basic attacks from your discard and put them into your hand. You may not play any attacks this turn. HS1 #232 - Zachary Blaine - Master Thief - S2 - Event - discard any number of cards from your hand. Your opponent must discard an equal number of cards from thier hand. HtG #280 (should be HS1 #280) - Pistol (MR) - R2 - Ranged Attack - One Hand Icon - This attack may be played even if disarmed. This attack does one damage. HtG #281 (should be HS1 #281) - Pistol (ML) - R2 - Ranged Attack - One Hand Icon - This attack may be played even if disarmed. This attack does one damage. HIGHLANDER :THE SEARCH FOR VENGENCE ------------------------------------------------------ HSFV #03P - Amergan - Event - Play in conjunction with a Weapon of Choice non-special attack that cannot be a power blow. That attack is now a power blow and does three damage. That attack cannot be a head shot. HSFV #13P - The Curse - R1 - Situation - Place a special card your opponent has in play under this card. That card is ignored while under this card. If this card leaves play, return the card underneath to your opponent's discard. {{ THIS CARD IS CURRENTLY BANNED FROM TOURNAMENT PLAY }} Headswillroll
|
|
|
Post by davester64 on Feb 17, 2008 11:32:58 GMT -5
April 17? Or February 17? Dave
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 17, 2008 20:49:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by davester64 on Feb 17, 2008 21:39:16 GMT -5
Sorry, man...I was just confused why a ruling would be made 60 days before it takes effect. But then I am easily confused... Dave I do so love how every mistake I make is pointed out so no one misses it. Thanks Dave, appriciate it. Not! Headswillroll PS- It is supposed to be 2/17/2008.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 18, 2008 6:41:34 GMT -5
It's cool, Dave, I was just messing with you. ;D Thanks for catching it. Headswillroll
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 20, 2008 5:51:28 GMT -5
As of 2/18/2008 the following rule is passed down from the company for Type One format. You may use either 1ed or 2ed unbugged versions of the same card, however, you may only have one version or the other in your deck. Headswillroll
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Feb 23, 2008 2:19:40 GMT -5
Referring to the actual announcement: We are currently working on and reviewing a Cross-Edition Card List that will outline what cards are considered 2nd Edition replacements of 1st Edition cards. The official ruling for treating these cards is the following: You may include either the First Edition or Second Edition of these cards in your deck, but may not include both Editions. Simply put, if a card is on our Cross-Edition list then you may either play the First Edition Version or the Second Edition Version. Whichever version you play, you get that version's text and restriction (i.e. Boom Boom, Kirk Matunas, Iman's Stalk, etc.). Its our hope that this list will be out and official with the release of the 2nd Edition Online Rulebook (tenative release date of March 1). People running tournaments will be encouraged to printout the list for their regular players that do not have access to the online forums. In the future, this cross-edition listing will be updated with the release of each new set. (in the original thread at highlandertcg.proboards81.com/index.cgi?board=df&action=display&thread=1202159990&page=3) This rule is coming, but will not be in effect until there is a Cross-Edition Card List.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 24, 2008 9:20:37 GMT -5
Brent and Greg, will you clarify, because some of us are reading this in different ways. I posted the ruling back on 2-18-08 for the type one format. There has been no dispute up until Friday night. Apparently, on the previous Friday some people heard design team members saying that this doesn't take effect until March 1st. Now, apparently, one of our group, and not a member of the company, is saying that it doesn't take effect until this list is "officially" posted. Others of us have interpreted it as saying the rule is in effect and that a list will be out to simplify it in the future, hopefully March 1st. So, my question to you is, Which way is this to be understood? Is it: 1- Any versions can be intermixed until this list (which is supposed to simplify things for inexperienced players) comes out. 2- When playing a card that has been made in both 1ed and 2ed, you may play up to the restriction number of that card, but must choose only one version to put into your deck. 3- When playing a card that has been made in both 1ed and 2ed, you must use the 2ed version, as it is an updated version and superceeds the original. This all came into question, regardless of the Type One forum rule stating that any new rules would not take effect until the tournament after a new ruling is announced. The story is Design Team members told some players that they didn't have to do it just yet. I guess what I am trying to say is that we cannot run this way. There are reasons why it was decided and approved by the company to handle rules decisions/changes/updates this way. It is pointless to post an official ruling, then have the Design Team counter it without letting the whole of the community know. Scottr, I am not doubting what they told you, but when I posted the rule change back on 2-18-08, there was not dispute or clarification by any of the Design Team, or anyone for that matter. It was cut and dry. So, if you want to argue this, go for it, however if you look in the original postings on this forum, it will state that no new rulings take effect until one tournament after the ruling is announced and known by all. It is also stated that the tournament director is supposed to have a current copy of all pertinent rulings and errata for anyone who missed the change. So, in your arguement, at last Friday's tournament, you could not have done it since this "verbal" change was not known by all, including the tournament director, and not notified to the rest of the group in that area. Brent, Greg, we talked about this a few weeks ago, and I was told the direction you are going with this, that is cool, and goes along with the rules change I posted. But, when you are going to change things, would you please let the community know, instead of just one or two people who obviously kept it to themselves trying to pull a fast one by using your "verbal" quotes to try to sidestep the entire Type One Rules Set? This was a problem in the end of the original game with TCG, people getting ticked off and leaving the game because certain company employees would change rules every tourney to give themselves the advantage to win. I am bringing this up so that we do not have a reoccurance of those days. Headswillroll
|
|
|
Post by dbaker on Feb 24, 2008 11:24:46 GMT -5
This is in reference to some of the following cards: Boom Boom, Kirk Matunas and COnnor's Master Block. Can a deck have the max of 1st ed and the Max of 2nd edition cards in it? To me they are the same cards and are restricted to the number allowed.
|
|
|
Post by Brent Bailey on Feb 24, 2008 21:06:20 GMT -5
At a tournament, I told everyone how the rules will work once the rulebook and cross-edition list is delivered. That is how it will work once everyone has access to the official rules. Until then, its really up to the players and tournament director to decide. We've made no 'official ruling' on this point yet, only to say that there will be an official ruling in place once the cross-edition list is out.
If anyone has any questions about this, please let me know. I understand it is difficult to all be on the same page when there is not anything official out to guide everyone, but we are working as quickly as we can to get something out to the players.
Thanks,
Brent
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Feb 24, 2008 21:16:23 GMT -5
Brent and Greg, will you clarify, because some of us are reading this in different ways. I posted the ruling back on 2-18-08 for the type one format. There has been no dispute up until Friday night. I read the actual post, and did not see your copy in this thread - and the problem is that it was oversimplified, and it lost some important meaning. If we are going to have an official errata thread in here, populated by a non-official poster, I think we will need to use exact quotes and links. Apparently, on the previous Friday some people heard design team members saying that this doesn't take effect until March 1st. Now, apparently, one of our group, and not a member of the company, is saying that it doesn't take effect until this list is "officially" posted. Others of us have interpreted it as saying the rule is in effect and that a list will be out to simplify it in the future, hopefully March 1st. I assume this refers to Jerry, because I only said you had misunderstood the original post - my explanation had nothing to do with speaking to anyone. Scottr, I am not doubting what they told you, but when I posted the rule change back on 2-18-08, there was not dispute or clarification by any of the Design Team, or anyone for that matter. It was cut and dry. Brent's post was very clear (I'll put that aspect in the next post), and the fact that no one responded to your version doesn't really mean much - Brent's post is able to make a rule, other versions of it aren't. (This goes back to why I feel exact quotes and linking will be needed) So, if you want to argue this, go for it, however if you look in the original postings on this forum, it will state that no new rulings take effect until one tournament after the ruling is announced and known by all. It is also stated that the tournament director is supposed to have a current copy of all pertinent rulings and errata for anyone who missed the change. So, in your arguement, at last Friday's tournament, you could not have done it since this "verbal" change was not known by all, including the tournament director, and not notified to the rest of the group in that area. Actually, the ruling you were looking to see enforced was the 'new one', but this overall paragraph confuses me. The only thing I said was that you had misunderstood Brent's post, and that the 'equivalency list' needed to exist before the 'choosing between 1ed and 2ed version' could be chosen. (Again, I'll toss that in a second post, to try to keep it clear)
|
|
|
Post by scottr on Feb 24, 2008 21:21:56 GMT -5
Brent responded while I was typing, so I won't belabor the point. What I was trying to say (pulled from Brent's original quote, above):
"We are currently working on and reviewing a Cross-Edition Card List that will outline what cards are considered 2nd Edition replacements of 1st Edition cards. The official ruling for treating these cards is the following:
You may include either the First Edition or Second Edition of these cards in your deck, but may not include both Editions."
The point I was making Friday: 'these cards' are the ones on the Cross-Edition Card List. If there is no list, there is nothing to say they are the same card, and there is nothing forcing you to choose between editions at this time.
Brent, thanks for clarifying, we look forward to the list, I had wanted to clarify this in case the date on the list slips (and there are any T1 tournaments in the mean time).
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcmurray on Feb 24, 2008 22:44:45 GMT -5
This reminds me of that age old question: which came first, the rulebook or the errata?
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 25, 2008 6:24:03 GMT -5
The headache did James. As for you Scottr, you can point fingers at me all you like, because I don't really care. What I did in my post was explain my situation and vantage point. Obviously, I interpreted it wrong on when certain things take place, however, as I stated before, no one felt they needed to correct it or clarify it. Now, just because I don't put the "Original Post" with a Rules errata/change/clarification doesn't make it "not official". I am not good with the whole copy/paste thing, so just retype it out. I do get all the confirmations I can prior to posting. Just because they are not in public view does not mean it doesn't happen, as there is this neat little thing on this forum called "Personal Message", and Brent, Greg, and Thorr can attest to me using it with them. As far as the Friday tournament went, It was looked at as there is an undisputed written rule on the forum that everyone is aware of, and then a second hand "verbal" rule told by two players that no one else is aware of. I totally agree with Dallis' decision, regardless if you like it or not. I think that everyone should be able to play on a level field. Two things, and then I will be done on this subject. #1- Why is it that the people that only gripe about how things are done in this game are the ones that do nothing to help the game? #2- Scottr, I was referring to you when I said "pulling a fast one". You want to know why? It is quite simple, you and Jerry were made privy to the intent of Brent's post a week in advance, but yet neither of you felt it was needed to be addressed to other players through email or a phone call or on the forum. Now, either way it did not help your last place finish, now did it? Headswillroll PS- Thank you Brent, for the clarification.
|
|
|
Post by headswillroll on Feb 25, 2008 6:28:06 GMT -5
As of 2/18/2008 the following rule is passed down from the company for Type One format. You may use either 1ed or 2ed unbugged versions of the same card, however, you may only have one version or the other in your deck. Headswillroll Due to a misunderstanding, until further notice, this ruling is not to be used in sanctioned Type One format until the Clarification/Crossover list has been released and confirmed by the company. Sorry for any confusion. Headswillroll
|
|
|
|