Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Any rule erratum or clarification submission for the upcoming 2019 ARV should be posted here.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Konrad Klar » Fri Sep 27, 2019 3:05 pm

If Open to the Summons can stay in in play, this means that:
One agent minion may be played with target company at a Darkhaven -- place this card with the agent
is not immediate action; it is ability that may be used later.
Instead of a normal character, during your organization phase you may bring into play one character (including a minion agent) with up to a 6 mind. Place this card with the character.
Why this possibility may not be used later?

How behave multiple Open to the Summon if not Cannot be duplicated on a given character.?
How behave multiple Thrall of the Voice due to lack of phrase Cannot be duplicated on a given character.?
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by CDavis7M » Fri Sep 27, 2019 4:02 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Fri Sep 27, 2019 3:05 pm
How behave multiple Open to the Summon if not Cannot be duplicated on a given character.?
The "Getting Ready to Play" procedure involves assigning 2 minor items to characters after the draft. Two minor items may be assigned to the same character. A player drafting 2 agents may have 1 of the agents bounce and be left with an extra copy of Open to the Summons. The phrase "Cannot be duplicated on a given character" on Open to the Summons indicates that two copies may not be assigned to the same character. Thrall of the Voice is not played in lieu of minor items.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Theo » Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:23 am

I still think the topic issue is covered nicely by the first 4 or so posts in this thread. The heart of the matter is whether you believe multiple Thralls create "cumulative" character-play-permission effects that have corresponding individual placement actions, or the same character-play-permission effect on which all of the placement actions attach themselves.

For me at least there is no doubt. The old River discussion seemingly establishes that cumulative effects are the default and passive condition effects are the exception. As far as I know, there are no other exceptions. Nothing about Thrall's character-play-permission effect resembles a passive condition. The required organization phase is a restriction, not phrased as an "if your organization phase occurs" conditional.

To other points:

I don't think the immediacy of the character-play-permission effect matters one drop; what matters is the longevity of the option. That is, if the play option is only immediate, then (just as e.g. A Chance Meeting) the playing of the character must occur as part of resolving the play of the Thrall, and there would be no way for multiple character-play-permission effects to simultaneously resolve. I assume this is what CDavis7M meant, but I want to use "immediate" resolution correctly. I personally don't see permission effects on permanent events to only have immediate resolution.

Placing Thrall on a character is not based on a passive condition. There is no condition for the placing action; it is simply structurally directed by the card to follow the play action. If placement was hypothetically based on a passive condition of any such character being played then indeed all Thralls would be placed (the placement of separate cards are not duplicate effects such as multiple Traitor attacks); because it is not, we must answer whether their respective character-play-permission effects are cumulative.

The parallel of the placement to the Rank Upon Rank bonus is poor. Note that the Rank Upon Rank rules quoted do not say that its effect is a passive condition, just that it is applied as a passive condition. That is, the reception of the bonus---which by its verb tense is NOT an action, so cannot be a passive condition---is (presumably*) the first declared effectaction in a new chain of effects to immediately follow the condition that allows the effectaction to be appliedoccur. *: At least, I can see no other meaning behind applying it as a passive condition. This is under the Theo Theory of Passive Verb Tense Usage, which is first presented in some other thread I don't feel like tracking down at the moment.

[edit: reviewing the Rank Upon Rank wording, I see that it in fact uses a present tense voice, although the verb word choice is probably the most passive possible.]
Last edited by Theo on Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Konrad Klar » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:38 am

Theo wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:23 am
There is no condition for the placing action; it is simply structurally directed by the card to follow the play action.
So what means:
Cannot be duplicated on a given character.
in text OttS?
If player uses ability of OttS 1, then structurally directed by the card to follow the play action from OttS 2 should not happen.
CDavis7M wrote: Thrall of the Voice is not played in lieu of minor items.

Right. It does not change the fact that both Thrall of the Voice and Open to the Summons are revealed during draft in the same manner as character cards are revealed. Open to the Summons cannot be played at time when otherwise minor items would be assigned to characters in starting company.

EDIT: Corrected misquote.
Last edited by Konrad Klar on Sun Sep 29, 2019 5:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2994
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Bandobras Took » Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:58 pm

There is no condition for the placing action; it is simply structurally directed by the card to follow the play action.
Which just happens to be the definition of a passive condition:
MELE wrote:An action that causes another action to take effect.
CRF wrote:A passive condition causes an action to happen as stated on a card already in play.
The play action causes the placing action to follow.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by CDavis7M » Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:59 pm

Let's pretend that the placing action was triggered by a passive condition based on the playing action.

If that were the case, then the placing action would be declared and resolved in the 2nd chain of effects occuring after the 1st chain of effects, which included resolution of the playing action.

What other action would be resolved in the 1st chain of effects? Well, the -1 mind action would be declared but could not be resolved because it would have no valid target. At which point, there is no need to place Thrall as a reminder of an effect that never occurred.

The effects of permanent events last as long as the event is in play, but their effects are not resolved multiple times, just once.


------

Regardless, a passive condition requires the triggering action (the passive condition) to be stated twice.

Once to create the action (either by rule or card text)

And again to establish it as a passive condition for some other action.

Thrall does not do this.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2994
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Bandobras Took » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 pm

*What* -1 mind action?
Clarification: For emphasis, a value used during play is often provided both in a card's text and in another place on the same card. For example, a character's corruption check modifier is stated both in the text and the lower right corner of the character's card.
On another note:
Regardless, a passive condition requires the triggering action (the passive condition) to be stated twice.

Once to create the action (either by rule or card text)

And again to establish it as a passive condition for some other action.
Again, imaginary rules don't really have a place in these conversations.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Theo » Sun Sep 29, 2019 5:30 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:38 am
Theo wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:23 am
Thrall of the Voice is not played in lieu of minor items.
Wasn't me.
Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:58 pm
There is no condition for the placing action; it is simply structurally directed by the card to follow the play action.
Which just happens to be the definition of a passive condition:
MELE wrote:An action that causes another action to take effect.
CRF wrote:A passive condition causes an action to happen as stated on a card already in play.
The play action causes the placing action to follow.
There is no causation, there is only succession. Or do you believe that all effect statements after the first on every card are triggered by passive conditions? If I put on my shoes and then I go outside, it does not mean that putting on my shoes caused me to go outside.

[edit: added example]
Last edited by Theo on Sun Sep 29, 2019 5:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Theo » Sun Sep 29, 2019 5:53 am

Konrad Klar wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:38 am
Theo wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:23 am
There is no condition for the placing action; it is simply structurally directed by the card to follow the play action.
So what means:
Cannot be duplicated on a given character.
in text OttS?
If player uses ability of OttS 1, then structurally directed by the card to follow the play action from OttS 2 should not happen.
Perhaps the passive verb tense of Open to the Summons suggests that it's placement should be implemented as a passive condition, when the character has been "played". Open to the Summons does not create a play action, only permits the result of a character being played. Unfortunately last year's vote on A Chance Meeting sullied this point.

Regardless, Thrall uses active verb tense to give permission to the player to play, as a replacement to the normal character play action. The player plays the character through the action permission of a Thrall, then the player places that Thrall on the character as next directed by that Thrall. There is nothing passive.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by CDavis7M » Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:58 pm

Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 pm
*What* -1 mind action?
Oh, you didn't see it? I'll copy it. Thrall of the Voice states "-1 to his mind to a minimum of 1."
MELE p. 40 wrote:Permanent-event - The effects of a resource permanent-event are immediately implemented. Its effects last until the card is discarded. Certain effects can cause a permanent-event to be discarded: these effects are given in the text of specific cards.
Modifying an attribute of an entity is an action that targets the entity. Thrall of the Voice includes the action of reducing the played character's mind by one. This modification lasts until Thrall is discarded.

This is similar to Lure of the Senses which states "Target character receives 2 corruption points." This action modifies the corruption point total for the character and it lasts until Lure of the Senses is discarded.

---------------------
Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 pm
Clarification: For emphasis, a value used during play is often provided both in a card's text and in another place on the same card. For example, a character's corruption check modifier is stated both in the text and the lower right corner of the character's card.
Oh yes, thank you for finding this. This clarifications describes how the attribute-modification-actions in the card's text are also placed elsewhere on the card for emphasis (as a reminder, so you don't need to read the card text again).

Of course, the number "2" in the bottom right corner is merely a reminder of the action created by Lure of the Senses -- "Target character receives 2 corruption points."

Just like how the Mind icon with a "-1" on Thrall is a reminder of Thrall's action "-1 to his mind to a minimum of 1."

These modifications are provided by the resolution of an action created by the card's card text, not merely by presence of a reminder elsewhere on the card.

---------------------
Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 pm
On another note:
Regardless, a passive condition requires the triggering action (the passive condition) to be stated twice.

Once to create the action (either by rule or card text)

And again to establish it as a passive condition for some other action.
Again, imaginary rules don't really have a place in these conversations.
This is not an imaginary rule. it is directly in the description of Passive Conditions.
MELE p. 88, parenthetical statements added wrote:Condition, Passive: An action (1st action, the passive condition) that causes another action (the 2nd action) to take effect. The triggered action will be the first declared action in the chain of effects (2nd chain of effects) immediately following the chain of effects (1st chain of effects) that conained the passive condition (the first chain includes the first action).
Therefore, a Passive Condition is defined by 2 actions. The Triggering action (ie, the passive condition, which is an action in first chain of effects) and the triggered action (an action in the second chain of effects).

When a card creates the 2nd action, it will define a 1st action as triggering the 2nd action.

Furthermore, you can tell that the actions created by Thrall's card text are not passive conditions because they all occur in the same chain of effects not 2 different chains).
MELE p.50 wrote:If the play of a card requires other actions (e.g., corruption checks), the actions are resolved in the order in which they appear on the card.
The play of Thrall of the Voice requires (1) a character-playing action, (2) a Thrall-card-placing action, and (3) a -1 to mind action. These actions are resolved in the same chain of effects.

None of these actions created by Thrall establish a 2nd action in a first chain of effects that would trigger them in a second chain of effects. Therefore, none of these actions have passive conditions.
MELE Companion, Passive Conditions,p. 62 wrote:These are called passive conditions because the actions they satisfy come into play only indirectly as a result of a decision made by a player
There is no indirect action that is the condition for "place this card with the character". It is not a passive condition.

-------------------------
Theo wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 5:30 am
Konrad Klar wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:38 am
Theo wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 3:23 am
Thrall of the Voice is not played in lieu of minor items.
Wasn't me.
It was me.
Theo wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 5:30 am
There is no causation, there is only succession.
I agree. Passive Conditions establish one action as the cause (trigger) for another action. One action referencing another action in the same chain of effects does not establish a passive condition.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by CDavis7M » Sun Sep 29, 2019 9:14 pm

Konrad Klar wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:38 am
CDavis7M wrote: Thrall of the Voice is not played in lieu of minor items.

Right. It does not change the fact that both Thrall of the Voice and Open to the Summons are revealed during draft in the same manner as character cards are revealed. Open to the Summons cannot be played at time when otherwise minor items would be assigned to characters in starting company.
It's true that both Thrall of the Voice and Open to the Summons can be revealed during draft. However, the rules allowing these 2 cards to be revealed, and the purposes for playing these 2 cards are different.
MEWH wrote:Starting Stage Cards

You must attempt to start with one, two, or three (your choice) stage resource permanent-event cards in play. These cards must have a combined total of 3 stage points. At least one of these cards must be non-unique. You may not start such a card if the conditions required to play the card do not exist. These cards should be revealed as if they were starting characters with duplicate unique cards being discarded.
Thrall is a starting stage card. It is not played in lieu of a minor item.

Open to the Summons is not a starting stage card. However, OttS "may be played with a starting company in lieu of a minor item." And then, if OttS will be played in lieu of a minor item "reveal it when starting companies are determined as if it were a character." Thus, OttS is revealed as a character during the draft and it is also played in lieu of a minor item (which are assigned after characters are drafted).

As I mentioned before, the Getting Ready to Play section states:
3) Place starting characters... (see also the Tournament rules on the draft process)

4) You may assign up to 2 non-unique minor items to your starting characters (i.e .. 2 items, not 2 to each character). These items must come from cards that you have not committed to your play deck.
Given that 2 minor items can be assigned to the same character and the possibility of 2 unique agents being revealed at the same time, there the possibility of a 2nd OttS being revealed during the draft without an agent to place it on. Therefore, there is the possibility of duplicating OttS on a single character when assigning it to the agent minion character during the "Getting Ready to Play Process" as a minor item. I see no possibility of duplication during "The Player Turn" process.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Theo » Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:34 am

CDavis7M wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:58 pm
Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 pm
*What* -1 mind action?
Thrall of the Voice states "-1 to his mind to a minimum of 1."
Not all effects are actions. Actions seem to be defined as activities performed by players. A card passively receiving something does not include any activity by a player, so is not inherently an action.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!
Double Standards.

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:48 am

Theo wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:34 am
CDavis7M wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:58 pm
Bandobras Took wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:32 pm
*What* -1 mind action?
Thrall of the Voice states "-1 to his mind to a minimum of 1."
Not all effects are actions. Actions seem to be defined as activities performed by players. A card passively receiving something does not include any activity by a player, so is not inherently an action.
Not all card effects are actions. Some effects include multiple actions. Some effects describe actions occuring outside of the card.

But Actions are not just performed by players. Actions are defined as "ANY activity in the game" (MELE p.87). Which includes actions taken by a player, and actions created by cards, and actions occuring within the game itself (eg M/H phase start and end)

As for Thrall and similar cards, an "action" also includes giving modifications to attributes (eg +1 prowess action targeting an attack). Including -1 to mind on Thrall. Mind is an attribute defined by the game. Modification to mind is an activity within the game, and thus, an action.

Sure, "passively receiving" is not an action. Any "receiving" is the result of an action performed on the receiving target.

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2994
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by Bandobras Took » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:58 pm

Theo wrote:If I put on my shoes and then I go outside, it does not mean that putting on my shoes caused me to go outside.
Thrall tells you to go outside once you put on shoes. There's no other way to go outside using Thrall.
CDavis7m wrote:Modifying an attribute of an entity is an action that targets the entity.
No, it isn't. +2 prowess against Orcs is not an action. +4 if held by a Dwarf is not an action. 15 GI is not an action.

+4 to corruption checks is not an action. I don't need to declare that Frodo has a corruption check modifier, and it doesn't need to resolve. It is simply one of the numbers used when making a corruption check, which is an action.

Bert having one less mind when Tom is in his company is not an action.

That doesn't mean that *no* modifications to attributes are actions targeting entities. It just means that some are, not all.
This is not an imaginary rule. it is directly in the description of Passive Conditions.
Nothing in what you quoted says that the triggering action has to be stated twice.
Furthermore, you can tell that the actions created by Thrall's card text are not passive conditions because they all occur in the same chain of effects not 2 different chains).
That's begging the question. I can tell they are passive conditions because they don't occur in the same chain of effects.
There is no indirect action that is the condition for "place this card with the character". It is not a passive condition.
Of course there is. Nothing directly forces a player to use Thrall's character play ability. It is indirect because it enables a possible action. That also, incidentally, means that it doesn't require any action when played.
Konrad Klar wrote:I agree. Passive Conditions establish one action as the cause (trigger) for another action. One action referencing another action in the same chain of effects does not establish a passive condition.
Can you provide an example of an action requiring another action to first be performed (on a card already in play -- passive conditions require that the card already be in play) that is not a passive condition? Just for comparison?
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: Thrall of the Voice: multiple on character clarification

Post by CDavis7M » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:31 pm

Bandobras Took wrote:
CDavis7m wrote:Modifying an attribute of an entity is an action that targets the entity.
No, it isn't. +2 prowess against Orcs is not an action. +4 if held by a Dwarf is not an action. 15 GI is not an action.

+4 to corruption checks is not an action. I don't need to declare that Frodo has a corruption check modifier, and it doesn't need to resolve. It is simply one of the numbers used when making a corruption check, which is an action.

Bert having one less mind when Tom is in his company is not an action.

That doesn't mean that *no* modifications to attributes are actions targeting entities. It just means that some are, not all.
I quoted the rules on permanent events and then made that statement on "Modifications". In context, I am only discussing permanent events. I understand that weapons and characters follow other rules. They are discussed in a different section of the rules. I understand that the sections and organization have meaning and that rules in one section don't necessarily apply to other sections (eg rules for resolving permanent events do not necessarily apply to the rules for weapons and characters, and that rules for playing factions do not necessarily apply to the rules for influencing an Opponent's resource)

------
Bandobras Took wrote:
Konrad Klar wrote:I agree. Passive Conditions establish one action as the cause (trigger) for another action. One action referencing another action in the same chain of effects does not establish a passive condition.
Can you provide an example of an action requiring another action to first be performed (on a card already in play -- passive conditions require that the card already be in play) that is not a passive condition? Just for comparison?
Passive conditions don't necessarily require the card to be in play, that is only true 99% of the time. The CRF clarification ( A passive condition causes an action to happen as stated on a card already in play.) is not the primary source of the rules, it is a secondary source. Ichabod had said as much in the Digests when people would try to contort his clarifications in the CRF to override the actual rules. Unfortunately the CRF doesn't include the context in which the clarification was made.

[quote"ICE Digest 123"]Before you confuse anyone, that is actually the secondary rule of
playability. The main rules of playability are:
[/quote]

So before we confuse anyone by mistaking the CRF clarifications as being rules, let's recognize that the rulesbook and the annotations are the primary sources on passive conditions and they override any conflicts with the CRF clarifications.

Therefore, short events and other out of play cards (creatures) can still have effects that can be triggered as a result of a passive condition for some limited time (eg until the end of the turn). What matters is whether the effect is in play (not the card).

The CRF statement describes the normal situation - passive conditions established by long and short events. That doesn't mean that a short event can't establish a passive condition. A short event clearly can establish a passive condition without being in play according to the actual rules on passive conditions despite the clarification of those rules that suggests otherwise. The CRF statement just means that the passive condition triggered effects of long events and permanent events are cancelled when the card is discarded (per the rules on Events).

If you play The Evenstar with Gates, each Elf gets +1 prowess and Evenstar is discarded. If an Elf enters play later by A Chance Meeting, that Elf will receive +1 prowess by Evenstars effect, triggered by the passive condition of the elf entering play, despite Evenstar not being in play.

----

As for actions that require other actions to be performed first but that are not passive conditions, there are several resourse events with examples. Anything that plays some entity and then modifies the attributes of that entity (eg Thrall, Helm of Her Secrecy, etc). Any card where the player makes a choice and then actions happen as a result of that choice (eg Riddling Talk, Riddle Game, etc). Even something as simple as searching your discard pile, choosing a card, and moving that card to your deck/hand, etc.

Post Reply

Return to “2019 Annual Rules Vote - Submissions”