CDavis7M wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 1:27 am
Theo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 12:39 am
I'm referencing: CDavis7M - "Stabbing Tongue of Fire - This is an item. Items are not played during the strike sequence." Maybe I'm missing the great wisdom you posses, so it would help if you could provide a reference and the deductive process for "Items are not played during the strike sequence."
See MELE p. 43.
Otherwise maybe you can point to the rules where items would be playable during the strike sequence?
Surely you didn't read your own reference page. I see no restrictions based on strike sequence (nor allowances based on not-strike-sequence) on that page. Or perhaps you could quote specific lines for something I missed?
---
Thanks for explaining the rest of your reasoning. Your framing of everything as a passive conditions explains a lot. At the end of the day I suppose we each have our own opinions about which of contradicting rules to preserve and which to revise, and play groups will do what they like, including how they rank the rulings hierarchy.
Through the conflicting language, I reason that body checks must be part of resolving a strike because one cannot know if a creature's strike is defeated until resolving the strike's body check.
An attempt to summarize CDavis7M bottom lines:
* Ignore "dice-roll" in Annotation 19.
Why:
1) No card exists that modifies a target body check dice-roll.
2) "The METW/MELE Companion shows the non-targeting effects operate by passive conditions."
3) Effects triggered by passive conditions during the resolution of a chain of effects cannot themselves resolve before the end of that chain of effects.
4) There being no cards that exist that could be played during the body-check chain of effects, conclude that Annotation 19 as literally written must be in error.
5) Furthermore, the intent must have been for "dice-roll" to be ignored. For that matter, ignore "nested" while we're at it.
Issues:
1) We do not know what might have been the current conception for future cards when the rule was added circa CRF 4. MELE was published a few months later.
2) Short-events cannot use passive conditions as you have defined them ("METW/MELE Companion: A passive condition causes an action to happen as stated on a card already in play."), as these cards are never in play. CoE #124 finally ruled "Even though the corruption checks from Greed are not triggered by a passive condition, they are treated that way for the purposes of timing." This is a rather inconsequential distinction from your statement, though.
3) The actual rule is that all effects in a chain are resolved from last to first. This has historically been interpreted to mean that new effects cannot be
added to a chain that has begun to resolve. This does not prevent non-action effects triggered by passive conditions from resolving outside of chains of effect (passive condition rules only state that
actions are declared in the next chain of effects... although the passive condition wordings are "action" biased). We know that not everything declared resolves within a chain of effects (e.g. active conditions, choosings made by players), and not every persistent effect works through passive conditions (e.g. corruption points, item modifiers, and other directed rule modifications).
4) This is personally my strongest disagreement. The CRF entries seem to me to be reinforcing the generic rules of the time for the very purpose of preventing players from playing
other cards:
METW wrote:Dice Roll Timing
Before a roll is made for combat or a check, cards may be played that will modify the result of the roll. ... This modified result is used to determine effects of the combat or check before any other actions are taken.
That is, Annotation 19 clarifies that body checks are NOT an exception to the Dice Roll Timing statement that cards may be played that will modify the result of the roll (even if no such cards exist), and the Body Check entry clarifies that body checks are NOT an exception to the Dice Roll Timing statement that the modified result of the roll is
distinct from determining the effects of the roll. If the intent of the CRF was to add additional allowances during the body check chain of effects than the generic Dice Roll Timing allowances, we might see that reflected in the MELE rules (either this Dice Roll Timing portion or perhaps the Body Check portion if it was meant to be an exclusive exception) published a few months later "with a refinement of language". Instead, we see the exact same language.
5) That intent could always have been
a possiblity regardless of the above, but the rules are as written and years of CoE rulings have upheld the greater restrictiveness.
Granted, Blow Turned has ambiguity about the adjective (state) vs. verb (event) of "wounded" such that I don't care to argue about it. "Successful" language has no such ambiguity---it is an adjective, and until a successful strike is resolved with a body check the strike continues to exist and be deemed successful. Your interpretation of the rules would allow Like The Crash of Battering Rams to be interpreted (immediately-resolved short event) to be playable after the strike roll is determined. As far as I know, such an interpretation has never been considered (as it needn't be if Annotation 19 stands as written).