slick said:

 Yeah ellyrik that is another card that makes all 2hp units and below worthless.my friend plays destro most of the time so im kinda used to gettin corsaired,hekarti-ed,sacced,hounds,bombed and everything destro can throw at your units.So the only way is to play some unit protection cards or else ill be complainin on the forums all day why my units wont seem to stay in play for more than one turn.

 Empire resists quite well with Chruch of Sigmar and Iron Discipline

Sorry guys, but supports played with Gathering The Winds will be discarded after they are played:

Q: How does the card Gathering the Winds (BQ 10) work? If I use it to play a Spell, when does the Spell resolve and can my opponent cancel it? Can I play more than one Spell with it?
A: The Spell is played when the resolution of the action chain reaches the spot where Gathering the Winds was triggered. The played Spell cannot be canceled or responded to. It will be resolved and discarded.

We have to stick to the rules.

 Good one virgo now everyone can sleep soundly again

Gathering the wind doesn't explicitely discards spells. So I think the ruling has omitted the case of a non tactic spell.

And alright Iron discipline cannot be played in reponse to the spell but can be played in response to the Gathering action. Another unit can still be targeted by the spell.

Ellyrik said:

The FAQ says it does.

Ellyrik said:

Maybe Gathering the Winds wasn't meant for playing non tactic spells. Just wondering…

I don't mind whatever the official ruling turns out to be. Was never really a threat anyhow. Seems odd that some people got so worked up over the idea of JoL being played multiple times.

Doc9 said:

So people won't miss them

Mullumo, Entropy42 where art thou?

It looks like Mallumo was response #1 and then Entropy weighed in later and agreed. As far as "Will Judgement of Loec go in the discard pile at the end of the turn if I used Gathering the Winds to play it?" I think the answer is no. It's obvious, to me, that the FAQ citation about Gathering the Winds is referring to spells in the discard as the card type "tactics", which most of them are. If you play a spell out of your discard, and the spell were a tactic, that FAQ is just telling you to discard it as you usually would play a tactic. That's what Gathering does: let you play cards from your discard pile that are "spells", most of which are tactics, as if they were in your hand and you played them as normal.

The added language in the FAQ of "…then discard it" is seemingly purposefully redundant so that people don't think, for some reason, that the tactic would not return to the discard pile. Unfortunately, there is now a situation where some could argue support cards should go to the discard pile because they were played by Gathering. Anyway, that answer is not going to be satisfying to people who will repeatedly point at the FAQ and say "There, it says right there to discard the spell", as if spells are now their own magical type of card when filtered through Gathering, regardless of the original card type. So hopefully they change the FAQ the necessary two words to resolve this unnecessary confusion either way.

HappyDD said:

Why would it be so?

HappyDD said:

No, supports and units played as if they were in your hand must be played during the owner’s Capital Phase. That's not how Gathering works. Also where can I find full rules for necromancy keyword?

HappyDD said:

Why would people think that the tactic returns to their hand?

A lot of assumptions, it almost looks like you're trying to house rule the card

Virgo said:

Because the alternative is strange and an exercise in ridiculous rules and counter-rules for very specific situations. What I am saying is that according to the standards you are employing the FAQ is written sloppily with regard to this card. There is nothing about playing a card from your discard pile that insinuates it should be discarded if you used Gathering the Winds, so you would do what you normally do given the card type once you play it. The way the FAQ is written seems to be a step-by-step set of instructions, which works if the spell (as most spells are) is a tactic. I'm saying that without the FAQ no one would suggest a spell that is a support should be discarded after it is played, that's sort of like adding extra text to Gathering, which would more appropriately be a card errata.

Virgo said:

So this is sort of what I'm talking about, the fact that in context you know what I am talking about yet insist on bludgeoning the sentence to death with excessive specification. I'm guilty of playing loose with the language, maybe I shouldn't bother weighing in on rules questions if that's the case, but if you want to play it like this then I would have to specify everything every time I say it. So in this case what I suppose I should have said is:

"That's what Gathering the Winds does: let's you play cards from your discard pile that are "spells", any time you could take the action identified on Gathering the Winds that triggers when you remove the resource tokens you have accumulated with previous executions of its forced action. When playing these cards from your discard pile you have to treat them as if you are playing them from your hand, which of course you are not, so, for example, you would have to discard a tactic after its action resolves as you normally would. If you are taking the action on Gathering the Winds to play a spell card which is also a support, then you would acknowledge the permanency of said support, as you normally would if you were to play it from your hand, when you play it from your discard pile. Thus, said support, when played by Gathering the Winds, should not enter the discard pile upon resolution of the action on the spell. That means that the ability to play Judgement of Loec from your discard pile on your opponent's turn and have it behave as it normally would if you had played it on your turn, while paying all costs, is a desirable characteristic of Gathering the Winds."

I don't like typing all that out because I figured people know what I meant. Rules discussions don't have to turn into legal encyclopedias. I just re-read this and it makes me sound like a jerk, but I'm trying to go for deliberate absurdity here.

Virgo said:

I am making the assumption that, in this case, the FAQ is not as clear as it should be since it doesn't explicitly cover the "spell is a support" situation, nor does it cover "spell is a unit" or "spell is a quest" or "spell is a legend" cases, which might happen in the future, who knows? I'm not sure I'm house ruling, since I am not making up any extra rules. I'm just saying that reading the FAQ I would infer that specific example is about playing a spell as a tactic and the question is one of timing, not of card trait overruling card type. My personal taste is that it shouldn't have to be elaborated upon, but your reasoning is that more clarity is better, so I can't really hold that against you. In my opinion, that line about discarding is included for completeness as opposed to being a specific Gathering the Winds rule covering every spell. In your opinion the letter of the law is that Judgement of Loec will be discarded immediately, which wouldn't normally happen, because of the wording in the FAQ.

Anyway, if that line in the FAQ is leading to a situation where it could be interpreted as discarding a spell that is a support card, then it has to be officially fixed to say clearly one way or the other.

There is nothing about playing a card from your discard pile that insinuates it should be discarded if you used Gathering the Winds

Nothing except the FAQ

The way the FAQ is written seems to be a step-by-step set of instructions, which works if the spell (as most spells are) is a tactic. I'm saying that without the FAQ no one would suggest a spell that is a support should be discarded after it is played, that's sort of like adding extra text to Gathering, which would more appropriately be a card errata.

Just like adding the rule that spells played from Gathering cannot be canceled or responded to?


Anyway, if that line in the FAQ is leading to a situation where it could be interpreted as discarding a spell that is a support card, then it has to be officially fixed to say clearly one way or the other.

Unless it is fixed the FAQ takes supremacy over desirable characteristics of the cards. Spells (not Spell tactics) are resolved and discarded. Loec can still be used to remove units from the quests, clear them from tokens or even damage.
 

Virgo said:

Ha, ya exactly, I see your point… I guess I'm gonna have to play the card as you suggest. This game is always playing with my emotions.

Virgo said:

Saying that attachment spells CAN be played with GtW but are immediately discarded after they enter play is not a clarification; it would be an erratum to GtW. Saying that spells played with GtW cannot be responded to is simply a clarification of existing timing rules; they can't be responded to because the current action chain is already resolving. 

I'm not saying FFG can't choose to issue an erratum without labeling it as such, but I'd be pretty surprised in this case. I'm sure somebody has already sent a query to FFG and we'll have clarification one way or the other. 

I certainly don't think it matters much for balance reasons. There are plenty of sillier things to do with GtW at the moment.