New Posts For Thread: Multiple Cavalry Mastershttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/18884806/Multiple_Cavalry_MastersDoes having more than one in play add additional instances of flanking beyond the second, i.e. do they "stack"?He stated that he was "fairly certain" when it's (the answer that he thought I was looking for) is printed right on the card - a card that both he and I had obviously seen before.In bold:1. I didn't know that, which is why I inquired about it.2. Nothhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/18884806/Multiple_Cavalry_Masters?post_id=321976374#321976374He stated that he was "fairly certain" when it's (the answer that he thought I was looking for) is printed right on the card - a card that both he and I had obviously seen before.In bold:1. I didn't know that, which is why I inquired about it.2. NothThu, 03 Apr 2008 21:37:57 -0500I agree entirely. There are enough posts with terminology errors where that actually makes a difference ("play" vs. "put into play", misuse of the words "destroy", the ambiguity of the verb "morph", etc.). In this case, there really was no ambiguithttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/18884806/Multiple_Cavalry_Masters?post_id=321976370#321976370I agree entirely. There are enough posts with terminology errors where that actually makes a difference ("play" vs. "put into play", misuse of the words "destroy", the ambiguity of the verb "morph", etc.). In this case, there really was no ambiguitThu, 03 Apr 2008 20:31:18 -0500How is asking whether something has a cumulative effect a pointless question? It seems like a perfectly reasonable question, if a fairly easily answered one in most instances, and one that far too many of the people who answer questions in this forumhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/18884806/Multiple_Cavalry_Masters?post_id=321976366#321976366How is asking whether something has a cumulative effect a pointless question? It seems like a perfectly reasonable question, if a fairly easily answered one in most instances, and one that far too many of the people who answer questions in this forumThu, 03 Apr 2008 20:07:28 -0500Your assertion that shoe's comment is sarcastic fails to convince due to lack of evidence. But that is besides the point:Given that multiple instances of Flanking trigger separately and have a cumulative effect, why wouldn't more multiple instances hhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/18884806/Multiple_Cavalry_Masters?post_id=321976342#321976342Your assertion that shoe's comment is sarcastic fails to convince due to lack of evidence. But that is besides the point:Given that multiple instances of Flanking trigger separately and have a cumulative effect, why wouldn't more multiple instances hThu, 03 Apr 2008 18:21:51 -0500I appreciate your sarcastic remark, but you failed to understand the simple question that asked, which was basically whether or not having multiple Cavalry Masters in play does anything, not whether or not multiple instances of flanking trigger separhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/18884806/Multiple_Cavalry_Masters?post_id=321976306#321976306I appreciate your sarcastic remark, but you failed to understand the simple question that asked, which was basically whether or not having multiple Cavalry Masters in play does anything, not whether or not multiple instances of flanking trigger separThu, 03 Apr 2008 11:18:46 -0500