When an Attack is Created...

The place to ask and debate all rules issues related to MECCG.
Post Reply
User avatar
rezwits
Council Member
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

I have a question about when an attack is created, and modifying the "attack."

If I have an Attack that is 3 strikes at 9 prowess, or 3@9.

Once the Attack is created, you can no longer modify the Attack, correct?

Meaning let's say

Doors + Minions Stir + Orc-lieutenant, nothing before. His base is 1@7, but with Minions Stir he is 3@9.

Once we accept Strike Assignment time, a player would have to Marvels Told on Minions Stir, prior to that to get the attack back to 1@7.
There is a similar example in the MELE rulebook.

So once we start assigning strikes, a player can't go back and say, I want to use MT on Minions Stir and reduce the strikes down to 1@7. Nor could I the Hazard player, announce Minions Stir DURING the Assignment and change from 1@7 to 3@9, we are in Strike Assignment.

I have an issue with Wizard's Flame. I believe, this would have to be resolved before the strike assignment phase in a similar fashion, as this does not modify STRIKE(S) PROWESS(ES), but only subsequent Attack(s) Prowess, until EOT.

So you can't use this DURING strike resolution, but you could use something like: The Dwarves Are upon You!

Due to the wording, just my 2¢
As of 4/3/21 4:03:21
my current rulings foundation is based on:
All of the rules and rulings found in these PDFs at:
https://cardnum.net/rules
If you have other collected rulings that are not
listed please feel free to email them or PM me...
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

(you know my answers already, but posting here for discussion's sake :) )

My impression is that the restriction against Marvels Told on Minions Stir derives from:
CRF wrote:Any effect that would change the number of strikes for an attack may not be played after strikes are assigned. This includes cards that have other additional effects, and cards that only indirectly change the number of strikes.
Marvels Told on Full of Froth and Rage can happen in between strikes, though.* Or even during a strike if played by the defending character.

I believe Wizard's Flame applies to all attacks until the end of the turn, including any ongoing at the time played.

[edit *: when otherwise allowed; i.e. not during the middle of resolution of an event card that created an attack, such as The Windlord Found Me.]
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/
User avatar
rezwits
Council Member
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

rezwits wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:15 am So you can't use this DURING strike resolution, but you could use something like:
Actually, I made a mistake, you could "cast/resolve" the card DURING strike resolution, but I think it would/should only apply, to any further attacks until EOT.

As I was saying it doesn't modify "strikes" just attacks, and only the prowess of the attack.

Meaning an assigned Strike of 9 prowess, is just that a Strike of 9 prowess, not an Attack of 9 prowess, you're not assigned an Attack, you are Assigned a strike.
As of 4/3/21 4:03:21
my current rulings foundation is based on:
All of the rules and rulings found in these PDFs at:
https://cardnum.net/rules
If you have other collected rulings that are not
listed please feel free to email them or PM me...
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Theo wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:30 am Marvels Told on Full of Froth and Rage can happen in between strikes, though.* Or even during a strike if played by the defending character.
I think that Marvels Told on Full of Froth and Rage during strike sequence can happen only (if at all*) if Full of Froth and Rage resolves in the same strike sequence. I.e. in response to the the declaration of bonus to prowess from FoFaR. The action is an action caused by passive condition (in this case the passive condition is facing an attack of given race).
Because once applied to an attack, bonus to prowess from FoFaR does not depend on presence of FoFaR card.
Just like fact that a company has been returned by action from Snowstorm does no longer depend on presence of Snowstorm card in play.

*) of course assuming that modifying an attack's prowess as whole (not prowess of individual strike) is allowed in strike sequence.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:10 am Because once applied to an attack, bonus to prowess from FoFaR does not depend on presence of FoFaR card.
This is only true if such bonuses were applied via an action. I would say that the language of FoFaR (and Minions Stir) does not create any action but establishes a continuous passive effect. Similarly, for example, if Palm to Palm were removed from a company, the previously effected characters would no longer have increased mind.

This discussion also harkens back to https://councilofelrond.org/forum/viewt ... 738#p30211.
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/
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:10 am *) of course assuming that modifying an attack's prowess as whole (not prowess of individual strike) is allowed in strike sequence.
Yes, though there was no argument about this point before.
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/
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Theo wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:19 pm
Konrad Klar wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:10 am Because once applied to an attack, bonus to prowess from FoFaR does not depend on presence of FoFaR card.
This is only true if such bonuses were applied via an action. I would say that the language of FoFaR (and Minions Stir) does not create any action but establishes a continuous passive effect.
I'd say that, too. Unfortunately for all of us, ICE didn't say that, and thereby managed to confuse the hell out of me.

From the CRF:
Note that cards like Rank Upon Rank are applied as a passive condition, once an attack of the right type is in play. Therefore you can play and successfully resolve Ready to His Will in response to the declaration of Rank Upon Rank's effect.
To my mind, that's as ridiculous as saying "+2 to prowess vs orcs" relates to passive conditions, but there it is.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Bandobras Took wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:46 pm To my mind, that's as ridiculous as saying "+2 to prowess vs orcs" relates to passive conditions, but there it is.
Did you mean "+2 to prowess for orc attacks"?

I can imagine other methods of calculating (and deciding about order, that is important when one card/action adds/subtracts to an attribute, other multiplies the attribute, or when minimum/maximum is set), but passive conditions provide ready solution.

To my mind there is nothing ridiculous in the way in which short-events like Velocity of Haste, or Arouse Minions are working.
Their results are applied, they are discarded, but the results are not gone.
If we have a result of an action applied to an object, and not continuous effect affecting the object it is natural that the applied result does not depend on presence of card that caused it.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

The exact phrase on Gimli is "+2 prowess against Orcs."

In my mind, it isn't an action, just an effect that happens if the proper conditions are met. According to the CRF entry, though, it's treated like an action caused by a passive condition.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Bandobras Took wrote: Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:27 pm The exact phrase on Gimli is "+2 prowess against Orcs."

In my mind, it isn't an action, just an effect that happens if the proper conditions are met.
In my mind it is not an action.
Bandobras Took wrote: Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:27 pm According to the CRF entry, though, it's treated like an action caused by a passive condition.
I do not think so.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 3109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

I can only assume that "cards like Rank Upon Rank" are cards that give modifications under specific circumstances. I don't think it's cards that affect attacks, or else we have to assume that all cards that affect attacks are treated with passive condition process, which becomes untenable.
The game is flawed, but this does not mean it cannot be loved.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Thanks for the CRF reference, BT.

Beyond Palm to Palm, some additional fallout under this interpretation of "is increased" / "receives" from permanent/long events, just skimming through the METW hazards:

Balrog of Moria: second automatic attack of an in-play Moria continues to exist even if Balrog of Moria is removed.
Bane of the Ithil Stone: permanent doubling of palantiri corruption.
Corruption cards that state "character receives X corruption": permanent corruption. (The Burden of Time, Despair of the Heart, Lure of Creation, Lure of Expedience, Lure of Nature, Lure of the Senses, Morgul-knife, The Pale Sword)
Eye of Sauron: permanent increase in automatic attack prowesses of any site in play.
Fell Winter: permanent additional automatic attack for any border-hold in play.

... I think I'll suggest to those that I'm playing with that the CRF should be ignored on this one. :shock:
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/
User avatar
Konrad Klar
Rules Wizard
Posts: 4345
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:35 am
Location: Wałbrzych, Poland

Faced attack is an entity that exists in play by short time.
As such it potentially (not necessarily) may be a passive condition.
Entities like characters, or companies, or sites, or not faced automatic-attacks, exist in play permanently.
As such they do not qualify to be activators (passive conditions) of actions.

BTW. there is an errata for the quoted CRF entry.
We will not speak of such things even in the morning of the Shire.
User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Back to rezwit's original point with Wizard's Flame...

There is perhaps more to rezwit's thinking that I initially believed. A friend recently pointed out the following:
CoE #41 wrote:*** An effect that states that it reduces the prowess of an attack must be played before the strikes are assigned.
But this would contradict prior ICE and CoE rulings:
Rulings Digest 104 wrote: >1) Suppose a company is facing a wolf attack. A character bearing a *Star
>Glass* taps to reduce the prowess of the attack by 2. Strikes of the
>attack are assigned. The strike against the character with the Star Glass
>is resolved resulting in the character getting killed, the Star Glass is
>transferred to another character in the company. Before the next strike
>sequence, can this character tap to utilize the Star Glass to reduce the
>prowess of the remaining strikes of the attack by another 2 ?

Yes.
CoE #4 wrote:2. If a character is facing a strike from an attack, can he still tap to do something else relating to the attack (i.e. can Fatty tap to cancel another strike even if he's facing one himself, or could someone tap to use a Starglass to modify the prowess even if the bearer is facing a strike)?

*** CRF 15, Annotation 18 (Strike Sequence): " When a defending player chooses to resolve a strike against a particular character, the only actions that may be taken by either player until the strike dice-roll is made are the following: ... and the defending character may play resource cards that effect the strike. An action that has the condition that a target character tap, but which otherwise has an effect not outlined here, may not be declared at this point. This is true even if the recipient of the strike would be the target character tapping and thus receive -1 to his prowess."

"May play resource cards that effect the strike" is interpreted as "may initiate resource/character effects that effect the strike". If you didn't, Fatty Bolger would be useless. Thus, Fatty and a Star-glass bearer could tap for the appropriate effect even if they are targetted by a strike"
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/
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions & Debate (unofficial)”