The power says "only one friendly character" - a replacement character is considered to be the same character as the replaced one - so in theory you could replace again because its the same friendly character being replaced.

Sorry still not understanding. It says "only one friendly character per game" and the character replacement or otherwise is friendly to itself, so how is this not a once per game thing?

It doesn't say once per game - it says one friendly character per game. If you replace Iron Soldier w/Iron Pharaoh (or whomever replaces whom I forget) - Pharaoh is still the same "one friendly character."

The wording looks to me like it only stops you from replacing those two - then trying to replace your other Iron chase that you have on your team, because then you would be attempting to replace more than one friendly.

As long as you replace the same one friendly character, it shouldnt stop you from replacing it multiple times.

But it could be ruled the other way - which I originally thought it was once per game, until someone else pointed out it doesnt say once per game.

Nothing???

i was hoping there might be an answer by now, as i JUST pulled the Pharoah. got him and the Viking... so i want to break it out.

I have them all now and would love to try and chain this together.

Can we at least get a "We are still looking into this" from someone?

i really hope it's allowed. it's so situational that i can't see it being that broken. Yeah if i were to roll 5/6 or 6/6 a lot it would be nasty... but at least in my case, it's more likely i'll never get the first roll to work.

I'm pretty sure they don't just randomly stop looking into questions. "Oops, well, this didn't get answered within a day, I guess we'll never know! Too bad guys, jury-rig your own rules!"

You say that until someone uses it against you. Then all of a sudden it'll be the dumbest ruling ever.

rpgambit already posted at least once that he was checking on it. When the rules guys have a definitive answer, they'll post it. I'm not sure what more you want from them.

I want the truth.

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

I'm not trying to be a dink about this, really, I'm just going to ask a question, as this is really the first rules issue I've looked into since...probably 2007. Does it normally take more than a week after "looking into it" to get a response? What's the reasonable amount of time to wait?

Until you get an answer.

The oranges don't usually forget about issues and they often tend to let the newest PG release answer the compiled "looking into it" questions. Since this one has recently been bumped with no response, I'm thinking there just isn't a resolution yet.

So far as a reasonable amount of time, that is subjective. The answer ranges somewhere from in between, when they are darn good and ready to when they actually have the answer nailed down which can mean that they haven't gotten an intentions ruling form GD or that they want all oranges to weigh in but haven't heard from them all yet. Basically there is no reasonable amount of time that is quantifiable in the way you want.