Normally you and I are not so staunchly opposed.

Whoa, guys.

1. It is correct that there is no specific rule that you can't have two Relics on a team, but...

2. Relics are a class of Immobile object.

3. Because of the objects in your force rules, you can only have 1 object of the Immobile type in your force.

3a. Since all Relics are Immobile objects, you can only ever have 1 Relic in your force, even though Relics are not specifically singled out in this case.

4. You cannot have 2 special objects with the same name in your force, and all Relics are also special objects.

5. The Flight Ring states: "Your force may include up to 3 of this relic regardless of its type."

5a. "...up to 3 of this relic..." allows the Flight Ring to ignore rule #4.

5b. "...regardless of its type" allows the Flight Ring to ignore rule #3.

6. Other relics do not have any rules which allow them to be added to a force that already includes an immobile object, and since the Flight Ring is still an immobile object, a second object that isn't a Flight Ring can't be added to the force. What order the objects are added in doesn't matter at all. Other relics cannot violate rule #3.

For the Flight Ring to be included in a force with other relics would require the other relics to also have wording that allowed them to be included in a force with other objects of the same type.

I'm pretty sure I said that, twice. lol. In fact, I think a lot of people have, I just think there is something conceptually that Brightblade cannot grasp. It seems that Brightblade at least to me that if they are added regardless of type it doesn't matter what type they actually are, and as he stated he doesn't believe there is a "Relic" or I guess "Immobile Object" check. It's making for some good, if mostly circular, discourse, at least.

He's applying the "regardless of type" check to all objects in the force. But all immobile objects would have to be able to ignore the object type requirements to be able to mix and match them.

As it is, the check works like this...

Ring: "I'm immobile, are there any other immobile objects on my force? Yes? Well, I don't care."

Hammer: "I'm immobile, are there any other immobile objects on my force? Yes? I can't be here."

Thats what I tried to say in my previous post, but I guess it came out like a timing issue.

That's how I read it.

Honestly, it's hard to see threads like this as anything other than mining for loopholes.

Hey, mining for loopholes in the forum is how you keep people from springing them at big events.

Deride my interpretation all you want, I read the card and see that when you construct your force the Legionnaire Flight Ring doesn't count against the type of object restriction on the three objects you can have on your force.

I'm not deriding anything. I'm saying that you've been told that your interpretation isn't how it works. Multiple times. And yet here we are.

This is where your mistake is. The Flight Ring still counts against the type restriction, but the Ring gives an exception to the type restrictions for itself.