The Book of Lex Luthor (Injustice League)

[Arkham]

yea

[johnny139]

Yea

[tcglkn]

Yea

[LordVenoc]

Can we throw up an FAQ that removing a marker on Unjust tactics ignores a wound? My brain read it over three times while playing it before fully processing that that was supposed to be a piece of it. If that's been the wording before and we haven't done that, feel free to ignore that though.

Also, definitely had a brief moment where I thought (at a glance) the red dots in the comic art was cakes. Disappointment followed.

Yea.

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by LordVenoc

Can we throw up an FAQ that removing a marker on Unjust tactics ignores a wound?

Technically it ignores any wounds from the attack. But, yeah, there's a lot riding on the "instead" in that construction.

[LordVenoc]

Originally Posted by IAmBatman

Technically it ignores any wounds from the attack. But, yeah, there's a lot riding on the "instead" in that construction.

Yep. Definitely meant to say ignores the wounds. There's a lot of implication on the "instead" there that I lean on the FAQ doesn't hurt for clarity if that's not something we've done much before. Don't think it needs spelled out on the card though.

[Arch-vile]

I’ll add that in when I get to a computer, good call.

[Lord Pyre]

Love seeing this outfit of Lex's on a card!!

Yea

[Soundwarp SG-1]

Yea

His foot is missing in the mini art.

The 'In play' thing in the contingency plan power doesn't mean anything, it's just a weird thing old C3G cards do when people don't know what 'you control' means. If the idea is he can't save his own OMs it just needs to say 'When another Army Card you control has all its figures destroyed' or something like that.

[Arkham]

All feet are definitely there.

[Soundwarp SG-1]

Ah, his boot just has a crazy flair to it that makes it look cut off. My bad.

[Arch-vile]

It's the standard contingency plan wording. Certainly something we can trim down in the future if needed.

This passes

#1142