Aragorn the Last Man (1 character deck) 1.0

• Versions
• 2.0
• 1.0

you cannot doublethorongil, its unique.

@doomguardIt is unique, but it can attach a second time if you've already played it on Aragorn and then target Aragorn with Helm of Secrecy to swap to another version of him.

As part of Helm of Secrecy's rules, it re-attaches all of the attachments to the newly swapped-in hero, which would re-trigger Thorongil's response, thus adding a second Aragorn variant to Thorongil.

And nothing in the rules on Thorongil say the first attached hero is every detached, barring Thorongil leaving play (but it remains in play the entire time during a Helm swap).

unique means, it is only allowed once in play. your version has it 2 times in play.

o.k. "move" is not the same, as "attach" if that is your argument.

as long there is no offficial rule, these are different wordings (for me).

text of the helm:

Action: Choose a hero you control and discard all tokens from it. Select a different non-, non- hero from your collection with a threat cost less than or equal to the chosen hero. Swap those heroes, moving all eligible attachments to the hero from your collection.

where do u read something of "attach" ? so no 2. attach, only 1 thorongi counts. (the text says "move" seems to me, that is was moved without additional attach.

Logically, "moving all eligible attachments" must include the attaching process, because otherwise "eligible" makes no sense.

What would be a "non-eligible" attachment, otherwise? The only time you determine whether an attachment is eligible or not is when it attaches:

examples:

"Attach to a Tactics hero" "Attach to a Warrior" "Attach to a Hobbit"

Those things don't get discarded if the Hero loses the said trait (e.g. imagine a Valiant Sword attached to a character who has had Diligent Noble played on them, and then they lose the Diligent Noble attachment to a shadow effect -- the "Attach to a Noble" Valiant Sword remains, because it only ever checks at the point of attachment, not passively throughout the game).

So if "moving" attachments doesn't require re-attachment (and checking eligibility at the time of re-attachment), then nothing would be an "ineligible attachment."

Checking for eligibility requires attempting to attach.

(as I understand it -- granted Helm and Thorongil are both sort of infamous for rulings questions)

i see it otherwise. there is another example, where a situation is "there" without the "way" to that point. it is "counts as engaged". at this state it is engaged and swaps the process of "engaging" (so no engage-trigger work)

i would interpret "move" as remain in play attached without the process of attaching. that makes the most sense to me (you only swap heroes, nothing else).

@doomguard The issue is that under your interpretation, there is no way to make sense of the "elligible" attachments portion of Helm of Secrecy, which I noted above.

Granted, end of the day, everyone can interpret the card as they see fit (as I don't think Caleb has officially ruled on this aspect of Helm).

@Imrahil13 I don't think "eligible" actually supports either reading.

If we're moving-not-attaching, then "eligible" is simply saying that any ineligible attachments should be discarded. The word is required, specifically because we wouldn't otherwise recheck.

If we reattaching, then plausibly "eligible" could be skipped, since it's implicit in the rules of attachment. But even then, it makes sense to explicitly state, since otherwise the golden rule might come into play.

thats what i am thinking too. and , in true solo you can handle it as u wish, playing multiplayer, there should be unity.