Rules Update 1.5 in Marvel Champions

[@D20Woodworking]

Quick Rules Clarification at 17:36 Attack Against Allies specifically refers to enemies that attack Ally cards. I don't think I clarified that very well but just important to note.

[@boardgametime3727]

Excellent video, thank you so much! 🎉

[@Bumbum_Inspector]

With the stun and confuse rule, the way I look at it is that the way the status cards are worded with "instead discard this card," the stun or confuse card would technically become the "target" of the attack or thwart to remove those status effects from yourself, if that makes sense.

[@TheVlad1616]

That’s how it works now, but seems odd you can play an attack event that targets a minion to clear a stun, when there are no targets. Not sure I’ll follow that rule in my solo play though. (To me) if there are no minions, you can’t attempt to attack one while stunned.

[@sonajxsonaj]

I am excited to watch your playthroughs using these updated rules.

[@D20Woodworking]

Hopefully I actually get them right haha

[@MarvelChumpion]

I've noticed that they inconsistently use the cost arrow when sometimes they want to use it as a "this then that" separator. Example is the errata on berserker barrage or steel fist.

[@grumpyjester]

I find the "Stunned" and "Confused" rules pretty clear, thematic, and reasonable. Spiderman doesn't need robbers present to clear his head, he just needs a bit of time.

[@D20Woodworking]

That’s fine it just contradicts what the article states. Also. Get over here saying it targets minions but it doesn’t haven’t to isn’t the most clear thing. I get why they do it but the confusion for some is there and I can see why

[@JJEMcManus]

For something that has taken two years to get out it seems rather arbitrary. I have no problems with syntactic changes. That just comes with the territory. However, altering player decks because it is no longer convenient for the designers, Cosmo & Go For Cs in this case, is hubris. These “problems” were apparent to the entire MC community before the last rules update and they went unaddressed back then. Why is that? The embarrassing issue with Wolverine’s claws for example when it became public knowledge that their own play testers were house ruling the setup. Yet Hawkeye, an archer, doesn’t setup with a quiver is both ludicrous and is not true to the character. Hulk is another example where a hero, arguably the strongest in the MU, was severely nerfed before publication for reasons that to this day remain unstated. How many cards have we seen since then that claim to “fix Hulk”? It is as if these changes mostly relate to heroes newly released and yet to be published. If FFG would like to republish cards that drastically change the card text I would be more than willing to consider entering them into my collection. Until then rulings made at my house table are final. Rules changes made by fiat by FFG and without open and regular community feedback are, as I said above, arbitrary. This is especially true for a game that doesn’t employ PvP or tournaments, neither of which I want for MC.

[@marvinp90]

Funny it had a lot of changes I did already like with set up. If an obligation came out at set up I would just shuffle it back in. No sense over shuffling every game due to a slight possibility that only affects a few villains. Same with Permanent cards. It is funny how much people argued about the Permanent key word

[@mitch-TO]

This is my first time looking at a rules update for this game. I’m actually shocked to hear the 1.4 rules update made it so defense cards counted as defending. I’ve always played like that because it seemed to make the most sense. Kind of like how playing an attack card is attacking. So if I’m stunned and I play an attack card, that attack is muted. That’s how I play. Is that correct? Or have I been too hard on myself? Either way, thanks for the video. I’ll try to apply these rules to future games. I love that this is a cooperative/solo game, so rules updates are entirely optional, but I suppose it’s time I update what I’m doing.

[@D20Woodworking]

yeah the defense thing is so nice now. If you are stunned and play an attack event the event just takes care of the stun. Of course, happy to help!

[@mitch-TO]

Edit: I’m noticing that most of these rules updates are things I was already doing. Like requiring a valid target to initiate an ability that mentions a target. That always made sense to me. I’m glad they clarified, because I know a lot of people love to “game” the system. I’m more of a thematic gamer, so things need to make sense for me. Swinging at an non-existent minion just doesn’t work for me. I don’t mind when people game the system and play differently than me. If it’s fun for them, then great. But I’d hate for the game to be balanced around those loopholes. If the designers began making villains who were impossible unless you gamed the system, I’d be upset.

[@marvinp90]

@@mitch-TO Yeah while most games talk about using the grim rule I loved seeing in the Witcher boardgame I just got saying if there is a question about a rule go for whatever makes the most thematic sense which is what I usually do so long as it doesn't break the game

[@TheVlad1616]

@@mitch-TO most of these are clarifications vs actual changes.

[@mrsuitcase9799]

Have FFG stated if they are going to print this new version in future print runs?

[@D20Woodworking]

They haven’t yet

[@jaywlkrr740]

🐐🐐🐐🐐🐐

[@kshockley68]

FFG: we’ve published a new RRG with clarifications and new rules. Me: nice! But you’ve created new confusion on other issues. FFG: we’re FFG, this is what we do. Me: my bad.