Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Warhammer: Invasion» Forums » Rules

Subject: Atharti Night Maiden + Sacrificed target rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jefferson Pinheiro
Brazil
flag msg tools
Consider the following situation:

1) player A puts a unit of cost 2 into play.
2) Player B triggers http://deckbox.org/whi/Atharti%20Night%20Maidens on that unit.
3) Player A triggers http://deckbox.org/whi/Slave%20Pen and sacrifices the unit the Atharti would steal.

The action chain resolves now. The unit of cost 2 is sacrificed first, then the Atharti's action must resolve. However, the unit she would steal is no longer in play, so, from my understanding, this creates an illegal state and the Atharti should be sacrificed as well. Am I correct?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Schwarz
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think Slave Pen can interrupt the Atharti Night Maidens' theft. So, player A couldn't use Slave Pens because they no longer control the stolen unit, but I could be wrong.

EDIT: Nope. I was thinking of one of the other LCGs, Warhammer doesn't have Reaction or Interrupt abilities. It looks like interrupting the process would actually cancel the Night Maidens' action, so they'd stay in play.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vladimir Lehotai
Slovakia
Piešťany
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think she should be sacrificed. The slave pens make the another player sacrifice the target and since actions played in response resolve first, Asharti Night Maiden has no target to attach to, which means she has nothing to attach to and therefore is removed.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maik Hennebach
Germany
Frankfurt
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
ixiguis wrote:
Consider the following situation:

1) player A puts a unit of cost 2 into play.
2) Player B triggers http://deckbox.org/whi/Atharti%20Night%20Maidens on that unit.
3) Player A triggers http://deckbox.org/whi/Slave%20Pen and sacrifices the unit the Atharti would steal.

The action chain resolves now. The unit of cost 2 is sacrificed first, then the Atharti's action must resolve. However, the unit she would steal is no longer in play, so, from my understanding, this creates an illegal state and the Atharti should be sacrificed as well. Am I correct?


I don't think you're correct, things are actually simpler: the Atharti Night Maidens action cannot be resolved, so it is not resolved and the Maidens stay where they are. That's all. No illegal state, just an action that is effectively canceled because it cannot be resolved.

To give a more obvious example: if the Atharti Night Maidens action would be canceled by, for example, a Mage of Loec, you would not sacrifice them either.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ste gee
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Maik is correct in that the Atharti Night Maidens would stay in their corresponding zone, as the target is no longer there.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.