Might be worth a FAQ entry/errata - RAW, both the tactics zone itself and Field Control have trigger timing of "when an NCU claims a zone." When resolving simultaneous effects, the active player's effects go first - so the active player would get the chance to resolve the Maneuver zone in its entirety before Field Control does anything, if their opponent played it. I'm guessing this isn't the intent, so it should probably get cleaned up.
RAW Field Control doesn't work on opposing NCUs
- Thread starter Hecaton
- Start date
Lleman
New member
For the record, the card in question:
I think you're looking too hard at issues where no issues lie, namely that it is impossible to contest Field Control is, in this very case, a counter to the claiming of the 'horse' tactical zone, and as such supersedes the initial zone effect. Same goes for any such counter cards which are clearly and implicitly supplanting an initial target effect after a player does a specific trigger action (zone claimed, card played, start/end of..., etc.).
My 2c.
I think you're looking too hard at issues where no issues lie, namely that it is impossible to contest Field Control is, in this very case, a counter to the claiming of the 'horse' tactical zone, and as such supersedes the initial zone effect. Same goes for any such counter cards which are clearly and implicitly supplanting an initial target effect after a player does a specific trigger action (zone claimed, card played, start/end of..., etc.).
My 2c.
Nah, the timing issue is still in question.
Alliser Thorne
New member
Ok, so just to get this out of the way, your question is actually the statement: "If I play the card this way, it literally does nothing" and you're making an argument for that?
I just want to be clear here what you're trying to gleam/gain here because this doesn't seem like a question anyone is going to ask, more that you're trying to find issues where there aren't any.
I just want to be clear here what you're trying to gleam/gain here because this doesn't seem like a question anyone is going to ask, more that you're trying to find issues where there aren't any.
Yes, and my point is that the language should be cleaned up in the FAQ/errata, because I'm 99% sure that wasn't the intent. There's an issue in the sense that the wording is sloppy.
And just to elaborate here, when you follow the resolution of effects in order, like we're told to in a bunch of other rules sources, the effect just doesn't work. How do you think players should resolve that? Just ignore it?
Like I drop Craster on the Maneuver zone and say I'm using his replacement effect. My opponent plays Field Control. I get to resolve my effects in order - first I resolve the effect which changes the effect of the zone to what I want, then I resolve the zone's effect and heal a unit 2 and draw a card. By the time my opponent resolves their effect, it's too late. This even applies without a replacement effect - I play Craster on the maneuver zone and decide not to resolve his ability, then my opponent plays Field Control. I then resolve my effects first - and have one of my units maneuver or retreat. Then my opponent goes to resolve Field Control and there's nothing for it to do.
I've pointed out an issue where there *is one*, as players who follow the resolution of steps as the rules state will always run into this problem. It's not a matter of "If I play the card *this* way" it's a matter of "the card just doesn't work as written." It's not like players even have the option to resolve it another way, since the active player's effects always resolve first. Whoever wrote the card wasn't aware of the ordering of effects in the rules; I'm doing my part to provide post-release QC because someone missed it before.
There are other cards that probably don't do what they're supposed to do exactly (Final Strike, Diversion Tactics) and others that are borderline nonfunctional because of clumsy wording (Remorseless Examples). If we could get some attention on this one maybe it's worth bringing the others up.
Last edited:
Resolving an effect means to apply it.
It this case, the steps are:
1. You claim the horse zone
2. You can apply an effect (the zone itself or a replace)
3. Your opponent can do the same (Field Control in this case)
4. You resolve the effect of the zone (which may or may not be changed by the points #2 and #3).
Example #1.
You claim horse, you don't play anything else, your opponent plays FC. The final effect is the one listed in Field Control.
Example #2.
You claim horse, you play a card (such as Endless Horde) or you use an ability from a unit (such as Outflank) or from the NCU claiming (such as Littlefinger), then your opponent plays Field Control.
You first apply your effect and then your opponent's (as usually done in every other similar case) so, at the end, the Field Control is the only one left.
I hope this helps.
It this case, the steps are:
1. You claim the horse zone
2. You can apply an effect (the zone itself or a replace)
3. Your opponent can do the same (Field Control in this case)
4. You resolve the effect of the zone (which may or may not be changed by the points #2 and #3).
Example #1.
You claim horse, you don't play anything else, your opponent plays FC. The final effect is the one listed in Field Control.
Example #2.
You claim horse, you play a card (such as Endless Horde) or you use an ability from a unit (such as Outflank) or from the NCU claiming (such as Littlefinger), then your opponent plays Field Control.
You first apply your effect and then your opponent's (as usually done in every other similar case) so, at the end, the Field Control is the only one left.
I hope this helps.
I appreciate the thought but that doesn't match up with how we know the zone is supposed to be resolved.
It actually does.
If you replace a zone twice, you only consider the last one (and the replacement is done in turn order), so Field Control comes in after the active player has replaced the zone text with his effect.
I think this is quite clear to (almost) everyone and I don't know how to further help you.
I agree with your "replace a zone twice" statement, but the problem is that the actual zone resolves before Field Control does. You resolve all of the active player's "when a zone is claimed" abilities first, and then all the inactive player's abilities. The problem is that the effect of the zone itself is a "when a zone is claimed" ability.
My point is: you replace and apply the "text" of the replacement, then your opponent does the same.
It's the same thing of rerolling the dice twice with abilities/effects/tokens. EG: you charge, you roll your attack dice, you reroll them, your opponent makes you reroll them via the Weakened token. You consider only the last results.
Applying a replacement effect means "change the text", so the active player changes the text and then the opponent changes it once more. After that, you do what the updated text's zone says.
It's the same thing of rerolling the dice twice with abilities/effects/tokens. EG: you charge, you roll your attack dice, you reroll them, your opponent makes you reroll them via the Weakened token. You consider only the last results.
Applying a replacement effect means "change the text", so the active player changes the text and then the opponent changes it once more. After that, you do what the updated text's zone says.
Last edited:
That's all well and good, but the effect of the zone itself resolves before Field Control does, but can be resolved after the active player's replacement effects.
You've got the timing overall wrong for this process. Your statement, while technically correct, is irrelevant, as the non-active player's effects will never be able to supercede the tactics zone's effect. It does not work like the situation with active and non-active player re-rolls, because there's no steps to follow - the effect of the zone itself is a triggered effect, a triggered effect that will always beat an opponent's Field Control to the punch.
Last edited:
The rulebook agrees with me and not you.
I would also like an answer to this. The existing timing mechanics as cobbled together over time create all of the problems Hecaton has listed.
GingerMammoth
New member
We faced this issue lastnight where by my Endless Horde was stumped by Feild control.
Where by this is not nice. Its clearly the intent of the card to 'counter' an NCU play.
Clearly it plays out you claim NCU slot.
You play card to change manouver to Endless Horde.
Then the non active player plays feild control again switching the nature of the NCU slot.
There is a problem in that one writing of this rule says you resolve all the active players rules first.
This wording clearly does not take into account 'counterplay effects' because there is literally no point countering something which has already played out.
So clearly it should be played in the spirit the card was intended and the counter effect card will cancel the first switch.
Exactly like 'Counter plot' for the Lannisters.
It's not nice. But it's the way it is.
I got stumped by it last night. It's a strong play. Hard one for free folk to suck up.
Counterplot very specifically says "Before Resolving That Card" in its triggering conditions. Field Control does not. Thus the question that keeps getting asked. Plus, in competitive situations, such as tournaments and leagues, where consistency matters, we can't keep making guesses as to intent. It is the same with Gilly. The intent seems to be you can use her once whenever you decide, but that isn't the way the card is written, and in the case of both Field Control and Gilly, they've had the '22 update to fix the wording on these cards and didn't. They also had the opportunity to add them to the FAQ and didn't. So what are we supposed to make of intent if they made no changes to the wording in either place, despite ample opportunity to fix them?
There are two steps for NCUs.
- Claiming a zone
- trigger zone effect
- Player A claims Horse
- Both players want to declare tactics card based on trigger “NCU claims horse”
- Player A declares first, then player B
- Player A uses card first, replacing zone effect with endless horde. Card is resolved. Also apply any influence abilities at this time.
- Player B uses card next, replacing zone again with field control. Card is resolved.
- Player A resolves the zone effect (field control in this case)
Last edited:
Incorrect. Endless Horde and the zone itself have the same trigger ("when a zone is claimed"), so they both resolve before Field Control does.
If things were as you described Influence effects could only occur before zone effects, and we know that's not true.
