Opposing cards cannot prevent you from using abilities on your support cards.

•Some card abilities use phrases that prevent an ability from being used. (e.g., Zeus, Khepresh, Isabella I of Castile.) These sorts of abilities are all subverted by Allt A'Bhonnaich.

•Additionally, several cards have abilities that prevent some kinds of effects from occuring: Vercingetorix, Reu Nu Pert En Hru, Pa, Prosveschenniy Absolutism. These abilities are also subverted by Allt A'Bhonnaich.

•There is an interesting case where both players have a copy of Allt A'Bhonnaich in play; each would contradict the other directly. In this case, we use the same rule we do for all other conflicting replacement abilities: the active player (or, outside of turns, the winner of initiative) has precedence.

Ok if an attack is made against a warrior that has Jabal Tariq in play and the attacking warrior has Allt A'Bhonnaich in play. If the defending player didnt have a defense bonus would Jabal Tariq not let the attacking player gain any kind of bonuses to hit. Even if the attacking player has a support card such as Damhan-Allaidh Leantalach in play??

•If you have no bonuses to your defense roll, and you have Jabal Tariq in play, the attack roll will get no bonuses. This includes card abilities and attack grid bonuses. Note that rerolls, replacement effects (rolling more dice, etc) are not bonuses.

•If the attacker has Allt A'bhonnaich in play, his abilities cannot be prevented, so any bonuses from support card abilities would apply, but bonuses from attack grids and warrior abilities would not if they increased the attack bonus past the defense bonus....

•Edit- Originally mis-posted; this paragraph is relevant to this question:

•Allt A'Bhonnaich would allow the attack roll bonuses from support card abilities to be used. Since your warrior's ability and your attack grid are not support card abilities, however, they would still be prevented if they would create or add to a total attack roll bonus that would be greater then the defender's defense roll bonus.

Ok here are the cards: , Thahe Huhuwanapin, Chehupahu Chanska, Allt A'Bohinnaich, Muramasa. I have the the armor, the club, and the Allt, and my opponent attacks me with the Muramasa. The damage can't be reduced, but my opponent can't prevent my ability that would reduce the damage. How would this work and why?

•Allt a'Bhonnaich prevents your opponents effects that would prevents your effects from working from working. Basically, anything your opponent's cards try to do that involves negating your effects, preventng you from using your abilities, or being the 'can't' to your 'can' does not work if you have allt a'Bhonnaich in play.

•In this situation, you would reduce your opponent's Muramasa damage to one (which is the minimum Thahe Huhuwanap'in can reduce damage to).

•If your opponent also had an Allt a'Bhonnaich in play, the winner of the argument would be the active player, or the player with higher initiative outside of either player's turn.

Assuming Peter has already chosen (in a previous round) the row or column where the warrior revealing Allt is located. What happens when Allt is revealed? Does Peter's ability stop Allt's ability "Opposing cards cannot prevent you from using abilities on your support cards" from being used? If not, why not?

•The ability on Allt can never be stopped, negated, or prevented by an opponent's card, because Allt does not allow that to occur. It doesn't matter when the negating or preventing effect occurs - Allt will 'defend itself' from any such ability.

•In your example, Allt would still be used as normal, and would have full effect.

I am confused. You said (emphasis mine). "There is an interesting case where both players have a copy of Allt A'Bhonnaich in play; each would contradict the other directly. In this case, we use the same rule we do for all other conflicting replacement abilities: the active player (or, outside of turns, the winner of initiative) has precedence." Since this is clearly not the case, what is the general rule for conflicting abilities?

•Actually, what I said about 2 competing copies of Allt has nothing to do with the Peter v. Allt scenario.

•With Peter v. Allt, you have a simple interaction: Peter tries to stop Allt, and Allt disallows that. This is the same result as Zeus v. Allt, or anythinig v. Allt, for that matter.

•In an Allt v. Allt scenario, each player's Allt is preventing that player's own cards from being affected by opposing negation abilities. That, in and of itself, doesn't create a contradiction. if one player does try to negate an opponent's ability, however, the negated player's Allt will negate the negation, which is not allowed by the other Allt. Thus, the contradiction, and the ruling.

So, if I have Shestoper and Allt, and my opponent has Thahe H (TH) and the Poison Knife, and I hit with 3 of the rolls, how much damage is dealt to my opponent? That is, does Allt mean that the 'deal this weapons damage for each attack roll that hits' can't be reduced by TH, or does Allt just mean that the damage is now set to 3, and can actually be reduced to 1 by TH....

•If I read this correctly, the question comes down to this:

•Is damage dealt by a Shestoper attack considered to be attack damage, and therefore able to be reduced by Thahe? Or is it considered to be damage from a card ability (since Shestoper reads 'deal this weapon's damage for each attack that hits'), and therefore not influenced by Thahe?

•The damage dealt by a Shestoper attack is indeed damage dealt by an attack. Shestoper's card ability simply explains how much damage that attack deals. Therefore, Thahe can reduce that damage.

•The bit about Dolch and Allt seems to be extraneous information. Dolch would set the maximum damage allowed by Thahe to be 1, but Allt has no influence on the situation at all.

Will Allt A'Bhonnaich prevent Baba Yaga's ability from working if the player who has Allt is using something like Pou Whenua, Pair o' Cutlasses, or any other cards that say you can spend actions to attack with them?

•Baba Yaga prevents her opponent from attacking more than once - if the opponent would be using card abilities to make those attacks, then Baba Yaga is preventing her opponent from using those abilities. Therefore, Allt will stop Baba Yaga from preventing those abilities from being used.

•As usual, in a conflict between Allt and a card that attempts to prevent another ability, Allt wins.