At least they're starting to post some news (even if it's not for our game).

Memetix said:

i asked this, and posted about it, on another thread when it comes to locations that are immune to player effects; my guess is it works the same way as it does here.

Dain - which thread is that?

In the mean time I've sent the following question to the rules team ….

I have a query about how to interpret "immune to player card effects", I suspect this phasing will be used again (i.e. Beorn) and I'm not sure how far reaching the phrase 'Cards with the text "immune to player card effects" ignore the effects of all player cards.' really is.

Here's a scenario
Smaug (the battle for laketown) attacks and the revealed shadow card is Esgaroth Wharf (Shadow: Attacking enemy gets +2 att, then it makes an additional attack after this one).

The defender has a burning brand.
"While attached character is defending, cancel any shadow effects on cards dealt to the attacking enemy."

So Smaug gets +2 att from the shadow effect then burning brand cancels this effect. No problems so far …. but what happens next?
Option 1: Smaug's immunity means he ignores the effect of a burning brand, meaning that the shadow card is not cancelled.
Option 2: Smaug's immunity does not affect the burning brand because <some reasonable reason here>.

What if the defender has a Dunedain warning (+1 Def), will the defender still get the bonus?
What if I attack Smaug with a character with a Rivendell Blade, does Smaug get -2 Def? What happens if I cast Heavy Stroke on an attacker on Smaug, will it ignore the effect (the extra damage)?

In order to answer these questions and possibly lots more in a similar vein, I think I/we need a better definition of "immune to player card effects" that clearly describes the extent (or range) of this trait, one that works for Smaug and Beorn and any future cards with this trait.

if i may post on dains behalf as i came across it again the other day

Message flagged
Wednesday, August 22, 2012 12:05 PM
Hi Matthew,
Good question. You can play attachments on locations that are immune to player card effects. If a card cannot have attachments, then it will read "Cannot have attachments." However, cards that are immune to player card effects will be immune to the abilities of attachments. So you can play Power in the Earth on the Troll Cave, but it will have no effect on that location. Card like Ancient Mathom and Path of Need work differently because they don't affect the location, so their abilities will still work.
Thanks for asking,
Caleb
 

Memetix said:

I still think my interpretation is justified…
But I am interested to see if they have an official ruling that addesses the issue…

Memetix said:

Again, since BB does NOT interact with Smaug (but the shadow card directly, which happens BEFORE any bonuses would be applied), there is nothing for him to ignore.

Memetix said:

THIS one IS a great question that I could see going either way.  The defense boost doesn't target Smaug specifically, but since he IS engaged/attacking directly to the defender, I could see the defense boost being negated.

Memetix said:

Because the -2 Def would target Smaug, then here he absolutely would ignore the text of the blade (this would also negate the text of a card like Mirkwood Runner, IMO)

These last couple questions do seem like much better examples of when Smaug's "immunity" would either be definitely in effect, or at least questionably so…

Good thoughts!

I've had a reply from Caleb and then a quick email exchange to confirm my understanding.

First reply from Caleb

Smaug's immunity does not affect shadow cards, it only protects him from card effects. Burning brand targets the shadow cards and not Smaug, so it still works. The +1 defense from Dunedain Warning modifies the attached character, not Smaug, so it still works. An example of cards that wouldn't work against his immunity to card effects would be Radagast's Cunning or Feint because they try to modify Smaug.

I then asked

In the Hobbit expansion it defines the term "immune to player card effects" as.
Cards with the text "immune to player card effects" ignore the effects of all player cards. Additionally, cards that are immune to player card effects cannot be chosen as targets of player card effects

If I've understood you correctly, the first sentence isn't correct. Smaug doesn't ignore the effects of all player cards. If he did, he would ignore the effects of a Dunedain warning on a defender. Actually he only ignores the effects of player cards that would directly affect him.
So Rivendell blade won't lower his defense, Mirkwood runner will not get around his defense and Heavy Stroke can't add more damage to him because they would all affect him and he is immune to those effects.
Dunedain warning on a defender affects how much damage the defender will take and therefore is not ignored as it doesn’t affect Smaug, it affects the defender.

If I've got that right then a clearer definition could be

Player card effects can neither target nor affect cards with the text "immune to player card effects".

Is that right?
 

And the reply was

What you described in your example accurately describes how Smaug's immunity interacts with the game.

I'm happy that I now understand the term and even though Caleb didn't comment on my updated definition of the term I will be using it from now on when interacting with Smaug (and Beorn).

Player card effects can neither target nor affect cards with the text "immune to player card effects".

Soooooooo…….

….. gold star for me??

Maby a dumb question from a new lotr LCG player, but how can you get the hold of these cards?

Best Regards

 Erllar :) 

Erllar said:

Not a dumb question.

At the moment they are not available. But if they follow the same as they did with last year's senario at GenCon, then it should be available by the end of this year/stat of next as a print on demand.

Look for Massing at Osgiliath

ok, Thank you, good sir :)