... And Its Little Friends

[mercinary]

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

[Solelron]

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 .:)

[blipadouzi]

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.

[MunchkinMan]

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.

[Duck of Many Things]

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?

[bonetm]

MM e Andrew's are the only official rules here. The MIB are NOT staff, nor in any position of making oficial statements =)

[MunchkinMan]

Originally Posted by bonetm

MM e Andrew's are the only official rules here. The MIB are NOT staff, nor in any position of making oficial statements =)

Yes. And I said "we" in my post as I can not remember if it was Andrew or I who covered this. And, I'm hoping to get any internal insight Andrew might have in case I'm forgetting something we discussed here or elsewhere.

Nothing like the holidays to fry my brain. . .

[blipadouzi]

Originally Posted by bonetm

MM e Andrew's are the only official rules here. The MIB are NOT staff, nor in any position of making oficial statements =)

Yes I never intended to be making an official ruling, which is why I said it was my "interpretation" :D

[Kirt]

Originally Posted by MunchkinMan

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.

February 2009; here

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?

[MunchkinMan]

Originally Posted by Kirt

February 2009; here

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?

The later ruling is probably after discussions with SJ and Andrew, so let's go with that.