PROPHECIES OF CHRIST (Spoiler thread)

[Bobbert]

Going by that, would the following be a legal play?

I attack with any hero. My opponent Martyrs them. I play Chariot, rescue a prophet in my territory, and add Elisha to battle from Reserve.

[Watchman]

Going by that, would the following be a legal play?

I attack with any hero. My opponent Martyrs them. I play Chariot, rescue a prophet in my territory, and add Elisha to battle from Reserve.

Yep.

[Reth]

Do we really need that distinction between attacking and rescuing resp. defending and blocking?
Of course it opens more variety but beside this - are there any other reasons?

[Kevinthedude]

Do we really need that distinction between attacking and rescuing resp. defending and blocking?
Of course it opens more variety but beside this - are there any other reasons?

Not sure I understand your question; putting more specific definitions about how the game works into the rules is always a good thing. Attacking, rescuing, defending, and blocking all describe very distinct things.

[Reth]

So what are the exact distinctions between attacking and rescuing/battle challange resp. blocking and defending?

[Kevinthedude]

So what are the exact distinctions between attacking and rescuing/battle challange resp. blocking and defending?

Attacking and defending can refer to any battle while rescuing and blocking only refer to rescue attempts.

[Reth]

Sure but for any battle I can also say: Rescue Attempt/Battle Challenge and Blocking (since for me defenders also block a Battle Challange not only Rescue Attempts).
Of course it needs more space and does not provide distinction between the additional terms "attack/ing" + "defend/ing" - but it describes all scenarios quite well and precisely IMHO.

[RedemptionAggie]

In general, "if attacking" saves about a line over "if rescuing or making a battle challenge", since there's not really a good way to shorten "battle challenge". When you've only got a max of 5 lines to work with, that's significant.

In this particular instance, "if attacking" eliminates questions about whether a battle is a battle challenge while you control no characters in battle, and whether you are "making" a BC if it started as an RA.

[Watchman]

So what are the exact distinctions between attacking and rescuing/battle challange resp. blocking and defending?

Attacking and defending can refer to any battle while rescuing and blocking only refer to rescue attempts.

Actually, per the REG, blocking refers to attempts to stop rescue attempts or battle challenges, not just rescue attempts.

@Reth - Here’s a simple answer to your question:

Attacking = refers to the player beginning a battle, which is done through a rescue attempt, battle challenge or a taunt
Defending = refers to the player who is being attacked and is done by blocking a rescue attempt or battle challenge, or a taunt

[Reth]

Thanx! You're right, I forgot about the taunt - the space topic I was fully aware of as said above.

And for distinction:
If I understood correctly having such terms allows also for differentiation when usability of a SA shall be restricted to a certain kind of attack / defend (i.e. "While rescuing..." would not trigger when battle challanges take place or taunts are blocked with Heroes).

[Watchman]

Thanx! You're right, I forgot about the taunt - the space topic I was fully aware of as said above.

And for distinction:
If I understood correctly having such terms allows also for differentiation when usability of a SA shall be restricted to a certain kind of attack / defend (i.e. "While rescuing..." would not trigger when battle challanges take place or taunts are blocked with Heroes).

Correct.

[Red Dragon Thorn]

Decided the drop the last spoiler of the day here, another Minor Prophet who kind of fits with the rest of the days previews:

Spoiler (hover to show)

[Bobbert]

Seems good.

[Kevinthedude]

Seems good.

Since the only condition is that an evil character is in battle, can you discard your Assyrian while Nahum is already in battle?

[Red Dragon Thorn]

Seems good.

Since the only condition is that an evil character is in battle, can you discard your Assyrian while Nahum is already in battle?

Yes, you can always pay a cost, even if you can't get the benefit.

[Kevinthedude]

Seems good.

Since the only condition is that an evil character is in battle, can you discard your Assyrian while Nahum is already in battle?

Yes, you can always pay a cost, even if you can't get the benefit.

I guess my new favorite troll deck is machine gun Nahum then.

[Red Dragon Thorn]

Seems good.

Since the only condition is that an evil character is in battle, can you discard your Assyrian while Nahum is already in battle?

Yes, you can always pay a cost, even if you can't get the benefit.

I guess my new favorite troll deck is machine gun Nahum then.

I'd be more worried about it if Woes wasn't a thing

[Watchman]

I’ve updated the spoilers list. If there any that have been spoiled but are not on the list please let me know which ones and which thread they’re in. Thanks 👍

[Kevinthedude]

The image for Necromancer won't load for me, not sure if the link is broken or it's something on my end. All the other links seem to still function.

[Gabe]

The image for Necromancer won't load for me, not sure if the link is broken or it's something on my end. All the other links seem to still function.

I think it’s becuasr the URL has .cm instead of .com.

[Watchman]

The image for Necromancer won't load for me, not sure if the link is broken or it's something on my end. All the other links seem to still function.

I noticed that earlier. The code/address itself is fine. Must be something wrong on the LoR side.

Gabe is right; I didn’t see that o missing. I fixed the .com issue. The link works now.

[Bobbert]

Not particularly important, but I noticed we can't vote on this thread anymore. Is that a subforum thing?

[Watchman]

Not particularly important, but I noticed we can't vote on this thread anymore. Is that a subforum thing?

I noticed that too but don’t know why they disappeared. I would assume it does have to do with the subforum. Gabe, can you advise please?

[Crashfach2002]

I’ve updated the spoilers list. If there any that have been spoiled but are not on the list please let me know which ones and which thread they’re in. Thanks 👍

Thanks Derek!  I’ve been trying to keep up, but the last two weeks have been stupid busy for me.  Glad someone else is able and willing to keep it all organized!

[Watchman]

No prob, Chris; my pleasure! Thanks for stepping in early on to keep the list updated.