Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game – Return to Mirkwood» Forums » Rules

Subject: Attercop, Attercop rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Captain Olli
Austria
Vienna
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here is another Question regarding "Return to Mirkwood":

"Attercop, Attercop" is engaged with a player guarding gollum. Now control of gollum changed and the question came up, whether or not "Attercop, Attercop" stays engaged with the first player or "disengages" in the encounter phase and attacks the player guarding Gollum at the moment.

Ty!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Fanchi
United States
Saint Paul
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I believe it will move from whomever it's engaged with to engage the player with Gollum.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bart Rachemoss
United States
Silver City
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Perhaps this was already clear to everyone, but just in case it was not, I wanted to clarify when the text on Attercop, Attercop kicks in.
Attercop, Attercop wrote:
Forced: At the beginning of the encounter phase, Attercop, Attercop automatically engages the player guarding Gollum, regardless of his threat.

If player-A controls Gollum when Attercop, Attercop is in the staging area then Attercop, Attercop engages player-A at the beginning of the encounter phase. If, later on during the encounter phase or during the combat phase, control of gollum moves to another player, Attercop, Attercop stays engaged with player-A (unless she is moved by the effect of a card like A Light in the Dark).

At the beginning of the encounter phase of the next turn Attercop, Attercop will engage whichever player is guarding Gullum at that time. Barring card effects, Attercop, Attercop will stay engaged with that player until the start of the next encounter phase. And so on.

6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Figo 3434
msg tools
Does anybody know why Attercop has an engagement cost of 44 although he automatically attacks the player with the lowest thread count?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Hartmann

Wien
Austria - EUROPE
msg tools
mb
Figo3434 wrote:
Does anybody know why Attercop has an engagement cost of 44 although he automatically attacks the player with the lowest thread count?


Actually it attacks the player controlling Gollum, regardless of threat. Still, the question remains why there is a threat value of 44 on the card anyway, since some player has to have control of gollum in the given scenario.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bart Rachemoss
United States
Silver City
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SiameseFun wrote:
Still, the question remains why there is a threat value of 44 on the card anyway, since some player has to have control of gollum in the given scenario.

Even if the engagement cost is not relevant in the current game and even if you can't imagine how it could possible become relevant later on, IMO it is much better for FFG to give it an engagement cost than to leave it blank.

The game is complicated. The rules are in the rule book and FAQ and also in the text of many of the cards. As they make new cards, the rules change because of the text on the new cards. IMO it is important to not make unnecessary special cases. For example, if they ever want to be able to make a card effect that uses the engagement cost of engaged enemies then you want all enemies to have an engagement cost even if it is not currently being used.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Micah Paroni
United States
California
flag msg tools
Having a really high engagement cost helps to ensure that it gets a shadow card if the encounter deck is running low.
 
 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.