12-09-2009, 12:10 PM | #1 |
Join Date: May 2008
|
... And Its Little Friends
Card Text: "Play this card, with a monster from your hand...
Each other player may add a monster as long as the new monster's level is lower than the original one." Question: Is this scenario legal? * Player A is fighting a level 10 monster. * Player B plays "And Its Little Friends" and places a level 20 monster into combat. * Player C places a level 9 monster into the combat. The level 20 monster is the part that I'm looking for clarification. I'm wondering if the "as long as the new monster's level is lower than the original one" part of the card applies to the monster that "And Its Little Friends" is initially played with, or only to additional monsters. Thanks in advance! -Merc |
12-09-2009, 01:12 PM | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
only against the primary monster
In your scenario, only monsters under level 10 can be applied Now you could drop the wandering monster card to get the level 20 down then put and its little friends on him .:) |
12-09-2009, 01:46 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
From the scenario you describe, here is how I interpret the card.
Player A is fighting a level 10 monster (played however, say by kicking down a door) Player B plays "And Its Little Friends" and places a level 20 monster into combat. Player C play level 9 monster (little friend) Player A now has the option to also play a Monster of level 19 or lower. Here's another example that would work. Player A is fighting a level 10 monster (played however, say by kicking down a door) Player B plays "And Its Little Friends" and places a level 8 monster into combat. Player C play level 6 monster (little friend) Player A now has the option to also play a Monster of level 7 or lower. Because the card specifically says Play this card, with a monster from your hand... The "little friends" refer to that monster played by Player B... kind of like playing a Mate card... it's directly associated with the monster played with it.
__________________
**************** **I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess. -Red Green, the man's prayer |
12-09-2009, 06:55 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Macungie, PA
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
I can't seem to find the post where this was discussed, but I'm fairly certain, that we explained that the "original Monster" refers to the first Monster in the combat and that all the Monsters played because of this card have to be of lesser Level than the that first Monster. The problem is that "little" and "friends" appear all over the place.
|
12-10-2009, 04:28 PM | #5 |
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
So we have three different staff interpretations of the card. Should we, for all intents and purposes, just take MunchkinMan's ruling as the official one?
|
12-10-2009, 05:17 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brazil
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
MM e Andrew's are the only official rules here. The MIB are NOT staff, nor in any position of making oficial statements =)
__________________
Igor Toscano MiB: #1602 |
12-10-2009, 06:57 PM | #7 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Macungie, PA
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
Quote:
Nothing like the holidays to fry my brain. . . |
|
12-10-2009, 07:18 PM | #8 |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
Yes I never intended to be making an official ruling, which is why I said it was my "interpretation" :D
__________________
**************** **I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess. -Red Green, the man's prayer |
12-10-2009, 11:12 PM | #9 | |
Join Date: Aug 2009
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
Quote:
Although you first agreed that "The card is referring to the monster that it was played with, not the Monster(s) that were already being faced." and then later said that the friends are "supposed to be of a lower Level than the original Monster, meaning the Monster in the combat before this card was played." so I am not sure what the actual ruling was. Perhaps the second ruling was after you had a chance to confer with the PTB? |
|
12-11-2009, 06:40 AM | #10 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Macungie, PA
|
Re: ... And Its Little Friends
Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|