Whoa, don't get me wrong here. I am not including some people when I say "we." You can tell who by the way that they vote.
Skill cards target character with skill
I agree that this could be made more clear. But your proposal makes it less clear as it confuses keywords with active conditions.
Here is a list of cards with "<Skill> only." with a period. This list will be a hint. I believe in you! Let me know if you can tell by the way that they are.
Cards where "<skill> only." must be an Active Condition (it cannot be confused with a keyword):
Here is a list of cards with "<Skill> only." with a period. This list will be a hint. I believe in you! Let me know if you can tell by the way that they are.
Cards where "<skill> only." must be an Active Condition (it cannot be confused with a keyword):
- Lordly Presence
- New Friendship
- Old Friendship
- Persuasive Words
- Many Turns and Doublings
- Muster
- Concealment
- Lucky Search
- Stealth
- Thorough Search
- Use Palantir
- Pledge of Conduct
- Block
- Lucky Strike
- Catch an elusive scent
- Hide in dark places
- Ruse
- Sneakin'
- Hoard well-searched
- All thought bent upon it
- Black Rain
- Crack in the Wall
- Focus Palantir
- Secrets of their Forging
- Wisdom to Wield
- Arcane School
- Pallando's Apprentice
- Hidden Ways
- Spies Feared
- The Ash Mountain Deeps
- The Misty Mountain Deeps
- The Ash Mountain Deeps
- The Mountains of Shadow Deeps
- The Undeeps of Anduin
- The White Mountain Cavern-ways
- Threats
- Squire of the Hunt
- A nice place to hide
- Orc stealth
- Test of Fire (Minion)
- Voices of Malice
- Crooked Promptings
- Honey on the Tongue
- Join with that Power
- Crept Along Cleverly
- Blow Turned
- Bold Thrust
- Swift Strokes
Last edited by CDavis7M on Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
You again seem to be falling back on cyclic logic.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
If this is confusing, I suggest reading the definition given in this wikipedia article.Theo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:32 pmWrong. I cannot tell the difference by the way that they are. I have no idea what you mean here. Please explain your basis for this conclusion based on indications in the rules texts, or I will conclude this is another of your opinions for which you falsely assume to be universal.CDavis7M wrote: ↑Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:17 am I agree. But only for those early METW cards (and METD Many Turns) that say "<Skill> Only" but dont have any actions in the card text referencing the skill. I disagree for later cards that use "<Skill> Only" as a keyword. You can tell the difference by the way that they are.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
Ok. Here's how you can tell whether "<Something> only" is an active condition for playing the card or not. "<Something> only" in bold italics is an active condition. "<Something> only" in non-bold italics is a keyword. However, you can confirm this:
- Identify the "<something> only" statement.
- Identify the statements that create actions (do this, do that, etc.)
- Identify the statements that describe the created actions (during this, if that, etc.)
- Identify statements that neither create actions nor describe the created actions (which includes the "<Something> only" statement, "playable on" statements, Cannot be duplicated, etc.)
- Then for each action, determine whether the action itself (not the card itself) requires the <Something> to be performed
Revising my previous response to the second question.Konrad Klar wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:30 pm Does Gnaw with Words require a sage (in first use)?
Is it a sage only card?
If so, is Gnaw with Words played by sage?
That is, Gnaw With Words card does not require a sage to play because it can be played without any sages in play. Thus it is not a "sage only" card.CoE #120 wrote: 4) Dominic asked: "Can I grab Mithril with Palantir of Annuminas? Crf says every card requiring a sage to play is sage only, but what about the possibility of a dwarf playing mithril...?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You put your finger on the problem. Mithril doesn't require a sage; it requires a sage or dwarf, so it cannot be fetched with the Palantir of Annuminas.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
- Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Gnaw With Words does not require for its first use "Sage or Diplomat".
Gnaw With Words does not require for its second use "Diplomat or Sage".
Adding to any existing Sage only card an alternative use that would not require sage skills would not render the card not Sage only.
Gnaw With Words does not require for its second use "Diplomat or Sage".
Adding to any existing Sage only card an alternative use that would not require sage skills would not render the card not Sage only.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
If Gnaw With Words said "Sage only." I would agree an alternative use should not change it from being "a sage only card". It does not.
The Gnaw With Words card requires for its play a Sage or a Diplomat. First or second use doesn't matter for the Sage Only CRF entry.
The Gnaw With Words card requires for its play a Sage or a Diplomat. First or second use doesn't matter for the Sage Only CRF entry.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make...
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
All players are welcome at Meduseld! https://theo-donly.github.io/MECCG/
- Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
We have only two controversial cards - Gnaw with Words and Ruse - and little of comparative material.
I think that Spies Feared is clear; it is not Scout only. Ranger only, but Scout or Ranger only) and if played on it does not require scout skills and it cannot be targeted by Searching Eye.
Mithril, Vein of Arda are comparable.
Neither of them require sage, Dwarf (no need to add "for any of its uses" because they do not have alternative uses).
I think that Spies Feared is clear; it is not Scout only. Ranger only, but Scout or Ranger only) and if played on it does not require scout skills and it cannot be targeted by Searching Eye.
Mithril, Vein of Arda are comparable.
Neither of them require sage, Dwarf (no need to add "for any of its uses" because they do not have alternative uses).
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
- Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
I think that some consistency would require either:
1.
Not treating of Spies Feared (even if it is being played on ) as a card requiring scout skills.
Not treating of Gnaw with Words as a card requiring the sage skills.
Only current use, or one of uses of the card requires the given skill, a card itself may be played without the given skill.
2.
Treating of Spies Feared (if it is being played on ) as a card requiring scout skills.
Treating of Gnaw with Words as a card requiring the sage skills.
Current use, or one of uses require the given skill. The requirement cannot be normally fulfilled by something else than the given skill.
1.
Not treating of Spies Feared (even if it is being played on ) as a card requiring scout skills.
Not treating of Gnaw with Words as a card requiring the sage skills.
Only current use, or one of uses of the card requires the given skill, a card itself may be played without the given skill.
2.
Treating of Spies Feared (if it is being played on ) as a card requiring scout skills.
Treating of Gnaw with Words as a card requiring the sage skills.
Current use, or one of uses require the given skill. The requirement cannot be normally fulfilled by something else than the given skill.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
- Konrad Klar
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 4362
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Wałbrzych, Poland
Address an issue directly.
If you do not like:
Both Tribute Garnered and Trouble on All Borders require a faction.
Stone of Erech requires a faction too (not targeting it as the two cards above mentioned).
If you do not like:
covering the Gnaw with Words, change the rule, do not stretch a logic.Any card requiring a sage to play is a sage only card.
Both Tribute Garnered and Trouble on All Borders require a faction.
Stone of Erech requires a faction too (not targeting it as the two cards above mentioned).
For better or worse, intent does not equate to law.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.