Smoke Rings and Weigh All Things to a Nicety - targeting?

[Konrad Klar]

There is one reply per member in thread limit for Official Rulings section, but some topics may be discussed here without such restrictions.

There is a notion that Smoke Rings and Weigh All Things target a card in discard pile or sideboard.

Dark Minions: Smoke Rings
Rarity: Common, Precise: C2

Resource: Short-event

Bring one resource or character from your sideboard or discard pile into your play deck and shuffle. "Then Gandalf's smoke ring would go green and come back and hover over the wizard's head. ...and in the dim light it made him look strange and sorcerous."-Hob

The Lidless Eye: Weigh All Things to a Nicety
Rarity: Common, Precise: CB

Resource: Short-event

Bring one resource or character (including your Ringwraith) from your sideboard or discard pile into your play deck and shuffle. "But it was no orc-chieftain or brigand that led the assault upon Gondor."-LotRI

It may be helpful to compare the cards to An Unexpected Outpost.

Dark Minions: An Unexpected Outpost
Rarity: Common, Precise: C2

Hazard: Short-event

Bring one hazard from your sideboard or discard pile into you play deck and shuffle (up to two if Doors of Night is in play). "...in the high regions the West Wind still blew, but down on the stones behind the fences of the Black Land the air seemed almost dead, chill and yet stifling."-LotRVI

What if between declaration and resolution of the card Doors of Night will appear in play?
If the hazard to be shuffled into play deck is target, it is chosen at declaration. Additional hazard may not be chosen as part of main effect.

What if between declaration and resolution of the card Doors of Night will leave play?
There will be only one hazard to be shuffled into play deck from two chosen at declaration. On what basis it is decided which?

From CRF Rules by Term Target

"A target is an entity that an action is played out through. Entities are only targets of an action if the action specifies those entities by number and type. Note that «the foo» counts as specifying one «foo.»"

Smoke rings text:
Bring one (number) resource or character(type)

Weight all things to a Nicety
Bring one (number) resource or character(type)

The action "Bring from your sideboard to your play deck" is done through those cards, and with those cards that are specified by number and type and you need to choose them for the action to be done. They action don't affect an entire class of cards, but a specific number of those, and the only way to do that is through target them.

Only exception on this cards is that they specifically requires to choose entities that are not in play, so the requirement of the targets being in play at declaration is not required.

Entities are only targets of an action if the action specifies those entities by number and type.
Yes.
A figure is a square only if it has four sides. But mere four sided do not make some figure a square.
Many cards describe some objects using number and type. Are all the objects the targets?
Is "One minor or major item" target of Bounty of the Hoard? Is "one resource from your play deck or discard pile" target of Token of Goodwill?

Seems like a number and a type in description of object activates attention of targethunters regardless of remaining factors.
If a "want it as target" card is not in play, do not worry. It is just an exception. Who would care about such attributes of exception like explicit expression (e.g."Playable on an Undead hazard creature in your discard pile." in text of Exhalation of Decay, or playable on something otherwise forbidden, in general)?

[Bandobras Took]

Annotation 8: An action that requires a target is considered to have the active condition that the target be in play when the action is declared and when it is resolved. An action may not be declared if its target is not in play.

It is, by rule, impossible to *target* cards in the discard pile with an action. A given action may affect a card in the discard pile, but it does not target it, because targets must be *in play.*

[Konrad Klar]

A given action may affect a card in the discard pile, but it does not target it, because targets must be *in play.*

Aside from targeting.

A given action may operate on card(s).
If play deck becomes exhausted player may exchange up to 5 cards between sideboard and discard pile. Does it count as affecting them?
Shuffling deck, drawing them affects them?

[Bandobras Took]

Yes; anything that affects a card affects it. "Affect" is used in the rules to indicate that something happens to an entity without necessitating that the entity be targeted or that the effect be an action.

[Konrad Klar]

Thanks.
So Dark Tryst, Lordly Presence become problematic because a card drawn in result of them may be a resource of opposite alignment.

[Bandobras Took]

Yes, though I expect that an inability to avoid drawing the wrong type of card is sufficient to establish an exemption.

[Konrad Klar]

Shuffling of play deck affects of all cards in the play deck. In common meaning of a word "affecting".
I think that technically "affecting" has narrower meaning in this game.
If someone wants to operate with the term in its common meaning he will probably need many exemptions.

[Bandobras Took]

The two categories you have noted -- drawing and shuffling -- may have many instances, but are still only two categories. Are there others? I think "revealing cards from (source)" might also qualify.

[Konrad Klar]

You mean cases where action from some resource event accidentally manipulates card that happens to be a resource of opposite alignment?
Taking on hand (not necessarily from deck, see Eyes of Mandos, player may not opt to not choose one and to not putting it into hand if there is any card revealed).

Otherwise:
Transporting a card not in play between play deck, discard pile, sideboard, hand (in any direction).

[Bandobras Took]

I can't think of a transporting instance where the player doesn't have choice/control of what is transported, though. This is not the case for drawing and shuffling, and revealing random cards by definition does not allow for control.

[Konrad Klar]

For the reason I said "Otherwise:"
Anyway there is at least one case where a card is transported between hand and discard pile and the card and the event that causes it are accidentally of opposite alignments.
The event is The Riddle Game and the card is the minion Palantír of Orthanc. The winner gives the name "Palantír of Orthanc" not expecting that the Palantír of Orthanc in opponent's hand is minion version of the card.

The stance that a manipulating of cards not in play does not count as affecting them (which means that only cards in play may be affected) does not need any exemptions (explicit exceptions are still possible, as always).

EDIT:
"are of opposite alignments" -> "are accidentally of opposite alignments"

[Bandobras Took]

That makes sense to me.